No context nor backstory - just shows the police officer on top of her - i.e. "a clear case of police brutality on a black person".
This is the backstory/context you will barely see - I saw it somewhere on TV but can't find the whole video (vs the "convenient" clip of the end of result of the police officer on top of her).
She was at Tootsies - she got into argument with the staff over her dinner - apparently it got so bad the club had to alert the police (you know it has to be bad when a club resorts to a police-call b/c they usually try to avoid this as to not make their club look as haven for issues/trouble - on top of that Tootsies is a large corporate club w/ plenty of security) - with all this the club still had to get the police involved w.r.t. this woman.
Another vid shows (which I can't find since apparently the part of the officer is what everyone wants to show) - anyway a longer version of the vid shows the police asking her to get out of her car - she refuses - the officer opens the car-door to get her out of her car - she starts physically fighting the police officer - he takes her down - she still is fighting - that is when you see the vid that you see of him trying to restrain her. Additionally - during a separate incident months apart, this same lose-canon black-chick had gotten in a car accident - the police shows up and asks her to sit on the curve while they sort things out - she refuses and starts being belligerent towards the police - she ends up getting arrested (this is all a separate incident).
So this is the series of events as I saw described somewhere else on TV of which for some reason I can't find the clip for:
1) she causes issues at Tootsies that are bad enough for the club to get the police involved
2) the officer asks her to get out of her car
3) she refuses
4) the cop opens her car door to take her out of her car
5) she starts fighting the cop
6) the cop takes her down
7) she still doesn't comply
8) she's tased to get her to comply/under-control (and this is the only part the complicit media wants you to see)
9) end result - the cop gets fired *and* gets charged with assault
So - in our "current normal" - if a black person does something wrong and the police are called - it's up to the black person to decide if he/she will comply; not up to the police - if the cop asks the person to get out of the car, he/she doesn't have to comply - if the person want to leave - sure - let them leave - i.e. the person committing the offense, especially if they are black, get to decide whether they comply or not.
This is not an example of "police brutality" - this is another example of violent-thugs that don't respect nor fear the police (let alone anyone else) and are loose-cannons that will even fight the police - so going-forward, the thugs have free-reign and it will be up to law-abiding citizens to fend for themselves against violent-thugs b/c you won't be able to count on the police b/c they will not come when a thug is threatening you, or a violent mob.
I saw a clip of a guy stopped for driving erratically. He does not stop until he is at mama's house. The cops get the guy out of the car no issue, but now neighbors and family, including his mother, are yelling and cursing and crowding in on the cop. because of the hostile crowd they end up having 7-8 more cops show up. The guy they pulled over is totally calm and cooperative.
The mother is yelling to her son to "fight back and try to run. If they chase you or grab you we have it recorded and we will get a lot of money from the city."
Then I'm sure the only part of the video shown on the news: the crowd yelling at the cops and punching the cop cars, screaming why it takes 8 cops with guns to detain this guy (who is still acting like a saint). He's a child! Why are you harassing a black child. He's only 15! (he was also about 6-2 and 230 and looked like an NFL linebacker). And why is he driving at 15?
So this was posted on some agitator site calling for all the police at the scene to be fired and charged with assault. the crazy thing is they never had to anything with the guy. So making a traffic stop and calmly detaining the cooperative driver should now be grounds for throwing the cops in jail. The only people escalating the scene were the crowd with the smartphones.
@skibum, in Atlanta after the crap with the guy at Wendy's, for the week after the officers were fired and charged, virtually no arrests were made in the city. The stats were down on the order of 95%.
Good post Papi. This so called reporting goes all the way back to the Rodney King arrest years ago when the media constantly bombarded us with that endless few second loop of the cops taking King down. They made it look like the cops were wailing on him for an eternity when in fact it was a few seconds because Rodney resisted and in the end their biased agenda pushing reporting led to half of LA getting burned down when the cops were acquitted.
I can only wish that the people behind this agenda to turn us against each other end up facing a group of thugs with ill intentions and no cops there to bail them out. Of course the odds of that happening are slim because of their privileged seclusion from the facts and practicalities of the real world mean they won't be in that type of environment.
"... I can only wish that the people behind this agenda to turn us against each other end up facing a group of thugs with ill intentions and no cops there to bail them out. Of course the odds of that happening are slim because of their privileged seclusion from the facts and practicalities of the real world mean they won't be in that type of environment ..."
LOL - from what I heard on TV - 3 of the council-members that voted to defund the Minneapolis police department, they themselves asked for personal protection - but not from the dangerous police of course - but private-security around the clock to the tune of $4500/day of course funded by the tax-payer - makes sense to me - actually I don't find this one-bit egregious nor ironic in our current "new normal" - no matter how crazy it sounds, it's not crazy enough - "get your popcorn ready".
Same with his predecessor Bloomberg who wants to disarm the public yet runs around with armed security. Those types remind me of the time many years ago when someone broke in to Jane Fonda's and Tom Hayden's home and Hayden grabbed his pistol.
When the media heard that they asked Jane about her anti gun stance and her reply was basically "that's for other people, not us".
Deblasio is a POS - plain and simple. He has set the city back significantly since taking office. He thought he could move to national politics - and he failed - so he’s stinking up NYC again.
If you watch the old movie Taxi Driver - it provides a reasonable view of the city 40 years ago. It was a toilet - a big unflushed steaming toilet. It took years to clean it up.
When looking at many of the police involved violence situations - one thing seems common - and it’s the victim was doing something either questionable or illegal. Did the victim/criminal deserve to die - no. The police are in place to enforce laws. They aren’t social workers or babysitters. If a law is being broken - they must step in.
This recent garbage about having a social worker along on calls is stupid and useless. The headlines are largely from the liberal left - like with Eric Garner - as he was selling illegal cigarettes on the street - and didn’t comply. If he put his hands up and handed over the cigarettes and money - it wouldn’t have been the same situation. The choke hold was wrong - but Garner was the size of a buffalo!
"... This recent garbage about having a social worker along on calls is stupid and useless ..."
I'm gonna play devil's-advocate - I actually think it'd be a good idea to augment police with such folks, but not replace police w/ them - IMO it's too much to ask for a 20-something y/o cop to both be an expert in policing *and* psychology - with a combo of police and social-workers, one can have a good-cop/bad-cop scenario and perhaps be better able to deescalate situations via social-workers but have cops there in case that does not resolve the situation and the person decides to not comply in the end or it's a danger no matter what.
Papi I think that would work more in theory than in practice. If you have a cop and a social worker on the call - and things escalate - my preference is to have two cops. If you can deal with a criminal before they are hopped up on drugs - and they haven’t already scrambled their brains with meth or crack - that’s different. But cops don’t know exactly what they will be thrown into until they arrive usually - and then they’ve got a guy the size of Warren Sapp pumped full of horse steroids ready to dismember you with his hands.
"... The woman can be heard yelling at the officer “what are you going to do?” as she gets in his face ..."
The woman is a ghetto black chick - she get's in the officer's face who is also black - she gets an inch from his face and tells him "why he's acting white" and challenges the officer telling him "what you gonna do" - totally f'ing disrespectful and ghetto - the black-cop looses it and and slaps her - yeah, "he should have kept his cool" - but the guy is human - the ghetto bitch totally instigated the situation and of course now the officer is fired and possibly facing charges - one more example that in this "current normal" thugs can do what they want and anyone that reacts against them is the one being gone after:
The actual video is halfway down the page where the it says "Billy Corben":
I'd like to are the police help America celebrate Independence Day by goving these coties what they want: freedom from cops. Call in sick. Take unplanned vacation. Sit in your squad car and play soduko and watch tiktok, I don't fucking care; but let these people eat each other alive for 2-3 days. Then they may realize that mJor cities are better off with cops than without them.
25 comments
Latest
No context nor backstory - just shows the police officer on top of her - i.e. "a clear case of police brutality on a black person".
This is the backstory/context you will barely see - I saw it somewhere on TV but can't find the whole video (vs the "convenient" clip of the end of result of the police officer on top of her).
She was at Tootsies - she got into argument with the staff over her dinner - apparently it got so bad the club had to alert the police (you know it has to be bad when a club resorts to a police-call b/c they usually try to avoid this as to not make their club look as haven for issues/trouble - on top of that Tootsies is a large corporate club w/ plenty of security) - with all this the club still had to get the police involved w.r.t. this woman.
Another vid shows (which I can't find since apparently the part of the officer is what everyone wants to show) - anyway a longer version of the vid shows the police asking her to get out of her car - she refuses - the officer opens the car-door to get her out of her car - she starts physically fighting the police officer - he takes her down - she still is fighting - that is when you see the vid that you see of him trying to restrain her. Additionally - during a separate incident months apart, this same lose-canon black-chick had gotten in a car accident - the police shows up and asks her to sit on the curve while they sort things out - she refuses and starts being belligerent towards the police - she ends up getting arrested (this is all a separate incident).
So this is the series of events as I saw described somewhere else on TV of which for some reason I can't find the clip for:
1) she causes issues at Tootsies that are bad enough for the club to get the police involved
2) the officer asks her to get out of her car
3) she refuses
4) the cop opens her car door to take her out of her car
5) she starts fighting the cop
6) the cop takes her down
7) she still doesn't comply
8) she's tased to get her to comply/under-control (and this is the only part the complicit media wants you to see)
9) end result - the cop gets fired *and* gets charged with assault
So - in our "current normal" - if a black person does something wrong and the police are called - it's up to the black person to decide if he/she will comply; not up to the police - if the cop asks the person to get out of the car, he/she doesn't have to comply - if the person want to leave - sure - let them leave - i.e. the person committing the offense, especially if they are black, get to decide whether they comply or not.
This is not an example of "police brutality" - this is another example of violent-thugs that don't respect nor fear the police (let alone anyone else) and are loose-cannons that will even fight the police - so going-forward, the thugs have free-reign and it will be up to law-abiding citizens to fend for themselves against violent-thugs b/c you won't be able to count on the police b/c they will not come when a thug is threatening you, or a violent mob.
The mother is yelling to her son to "fight back and try to run. If they chase you or grab you we have it recorded and we will get a lot of money from the city."
Then I'm sure the only part of the video shown on the news: the crowd yelling at the cops and punching the cop cars, screaming why it takes 8 cops with guns to detain this guy (who is still acting like a saint). He's a child! Why are you harassing a black child. He's only 15! (he was also about 6-2 and 230 and looked like an NFL linebacker). And why is he driving at 15?
So this was posted on some agitator site calling for all the police at the scene to be fired and charged with assault. the crazy thing is they never had to anything with the guy. So making a traffic stop and calmly detaining the cooperative driver should now be grounds for throwing the cops in jail. The only people escalating the scene were the crowd with the smartphones.
I can only wish that the people behind this agenda to turn us against each other end up facing a group of thugs with ill intentions and no cops there to bail them out. Of course the odds of that happening are slim because of their privileged seclusion from the facts and practicalities of the real world mean they won't be in that type of environment.
LOL - from what I heard on TV - 3 of the council-members that voted to defund the Minneapolis police department, they themselves asked for personal protection - but not from the dangerous police of course - but private-security around the clock to the tune of $4500/day of course funded by the tax-payer - makes sense to me - actually I don't find this one-bit egregious nor ironic in our current "new normal" - no matter how crazy it sounds, it's not crazy enough - "get your popcorn ready".
When the media heard that they asked Jane about her anti gun stance and her reply was basically "that's for other people, not us".
If you watch the old movie Taxi Driver - it provides a reasonable view of the city 40 years ago. It was a toilet - a big unflushed steaming toilet. It took years to clean it up.
When looking at many of the police involved violence situations - one thing seems common - and it’s the victim was doing something either questionable or illegal. Did the victim/criminal deserve to die - no. The police are in place to enforce laws. They aren’t social workers or babysitters. If a law is being broken - they must step in.
This recent garbage about having a social worker along on calls is stupid and useless. The headlines are largely from the liberal left - like with Eric Garner - as he was selling illegal cigarettes on the street - and didn’t comply. If he put his hands up and handed over the cigarettes and money - it wouldn’t have been the same situation. The choke hold was wrong - but Garner was the size of a buffalo!
I'm gonna play devil's-advocate - I actually think it'd be a good idea to augment police with such folks, but not replace police w/ them - IMO it's too much to ask for a 20-something y/o cop to both be an expert in policing *and* psychology - with a combo of police and social-workers, one can have a good-cop/bad-cop scenario and perhaps be better able to deescalate situations via social-workers but have cops there in case that does not resolve the situation and the person decides to not comply in the end or it's a danger no matter what.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/v…
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/…
"... The woman can be heard yelling at the officer “what are you going to do?” as she gets in his face ..."
The woman is a ghetto black chick - she get's in the officer's face who is also black - she gets an inch from his face and tells him "why he's acting white" and challenges the officer telling him "what you gonna do" - totally f'ing disrespectful and ghetto - the black-cop looses it and and slaps her - yeah, "he should have kept his cool" - but the guy is human - the ghetto bitch totally instigated the situation and of course now the officer is fired and possibly facing charges - one more example that in this "current normal" thugs can do what they want and anyone that reacts against them is the one being gone after:
The actual video is halfway down the page where the it says "Billy Corben":
https://miami.cbslocal.com/2020/07/01/mi…
Are you trying to say the media isn't forthright when reporting a story???
BLASPHEMY!
The color-coding indicates the political-party running the particular city (blue = Democrat; gray = Independent; red = Republican).
Graph shows almost all the cities with the most violent crime are ran by Dems (blue).
I’m only joking about a color coded graph being racist! Lol!