http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/31202935/?GT1=43001 (http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/31202935/?GT1=43001)
QuoteBy Mike Celizic
TODAYShow.com contributor
updated 2 hours, 34 minutes ago
First there was the college student who gave the language the immortal phrase "Don't Tase me, bro!" before being zapped by police. Now, there's the 72-year-old great-grandmother who told a cop, "Go ahead. Tase me" — and got what she asked for.
Kathryn Winkfein was stopped for doing 60 mph in a 45 zone in her pickup truck on a highway near Austin, Texas. After Deputy Chris Bieze finished writing the ticket, he gave it to her and asked her to sign it.
Winkfein refused. Bieze insisted, saying he would have to arrest her if she didn't sign the ticket. When she wouldn't sign, he opened the door to the truck and told her to get out.
Differing accounts
This all happened around 2 p.m. on May 11. But it didn't become news until Winkfein told a local television station that she had been mistreated. The Travis County Constable's Office alleged that she had been argumentative and profane. She denied the charge, telling a local Fox News reporter, "I was not argumentative. I was not combative. Every bit of this is a lie."
In response, the constable's office released the dashboard video of the arrest, which shows Winkfein using vulgar language and daring Bieze to use his Taser. According to the time stamp on the dashboard video, it was at least seven minutes from when Bieze told the elderly woman to get out of her truck until he finally hit her with 50,000 volts of low-amperage electricity and she fell screaming to the ground.
Winkfein has not commented since the video was released. According to the local Fox station, she has hired an attorney.
When Bieze tells her to get out of her truck, Winkfein says, "Take me to jail. Go on and take me to jail."
"Step on out," the officer commands.
The woman gets out of the truck and walks along the side of the road, close to the fog line separating the shoulder from the traffic lane.
"Give me the [expletive] thing and I'll sign it," she tells Bieze, but the officer has already told her she is being arrested. When Winkfein strays close to the traffic lane, the officer pushes her onto the shoulder.
"You're gonna shove a 72-year-old woman?" Winkfein yells at him.
"If you don't step back, you're gonna be Tased," Bieze says.
That's when Winkfein said, "Go ahead. Tase me."
'I dare you'
Even then, Bieze did not use the Taser he had out and ready. He attempted to grab her, but Winkfein twisted away.
"Step back or you're gonna be Tased, ma'am," Bieze says again.
"I dare you," she said.
Winkfein then decided she was leaving and tried to walk back to her truck.
"I'm getting back in my car," she said.
"You're gonna be Tased," Bieze said, blocking her path.
"I'm getting back in my car," she insists.
"No, ma'am," he says.
That's when he finally fired the Taser and Winkfein went down screaming.
"Now put your hands behind your back!" Bieze orders the woman, who has fallen out of the picture. "Put your hands behind your back, or you're gonna be Tased again!"
Bieze finally took Winkfein into custody and charged her with resisting arrest.
Sgt. Maj. Gary Griffin of the Travis County, Texas, Constable's Office told NBC News that Bieze acted appropriately.
"He mitigated this event safely, effectively and efficiently. Nobody sustained any injury," Griffin said.
I haven't read the article yet, but the thought of it makes me laugh... i'm a bad person.
This could be Monkeybutt's mom.
Bitch got what she deserved.
Listen to the officer, people.
As trigger happy with this as they are with guns. When will the constitutonal right to carry tasers be amended into the Constitution? :P
G.
Quote from: Neil on June 10, 2009, 11:22:19 AM
Bitch got what she deserved.
Listen to the officer, people.
There may, indeed, be a time to dispute the officer's actions, but this was not it.
Some people need to have a tazemaker permanently installed, and this lady sounds like one of them.
Quote from: Grallon on June 10, 2009, 11:24:18 AM
As trigger happy with this as they are with guns. When will the constitutonal right to carry tasers be amended into the Constitution? :P
G.
Yeah he seemed in a rush to tase her... :mellow:
Dude should be ashamed of himself. Why would you need to tase a granny. He should have been nicer to her to start with. and if she got uppity, he could have outmuscled her I'd imagine. Or at least I hope that a police officer would be trained in dealing with cranky people of all ages. Cops should have patience... as much as she should have been more co-operative about something as lame as a speeding ticket (for going 45).
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on June 10, 2009, 11:29:46 AM
Dude should be ashamed of himself. Why would you need to tase a granny. He should have been nicer to her to start with. and if she got uppity, he could have outmuscled her I'd imagine. Or at least I hope that a police officer would be trained in dealing with cranky people of all ages. Cops should have patience... as much as she should have been more co-operative about something as lame as a speeding ticket (for going 45).
Is this for real? :unsure:
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on June 10, 2009, 11:29:46 AM
Dude should be ashamed of himself. Why would you need to tase a granny. He should have been nicer to her to start with. and if she got uppity, he could have outmuscled her I'd imagine. Or at least I hope that a police officer would be trained in dealing with cranky people of all ages. Cops should have patience... as much as she should have been more co-operative about something as lame as a speeding ticket (for going 45).
She was going 60, and uncooperative. He could have roughed her up by forcing her to comply, let her go, or shot her with a tazer. Of those options, clearly the third was the best. At her gae, using physical force is likely to break something.
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on June 10, 2009, 11:29:46 AM
Dude should be ashamed of himself. Why would you need to tase a granny. He should have been nicer to her to start with. and if she got uppity, he could have outmuscled her I'd imagine. Or at least I hope that a police officer would be trained in dealing with cranky people of all ages. Cops should have patience... as much as she should have been more co-operative about something as lame as a speeding ticket (for going 45).
If he tried to subdue her and ended up breaking the cranky womans wrist on hip he'd be shit out of luck.
Quote from: Grallon on June 10, 2009, 11:24:18 AM
As trigger happy with this as they are with guns.
Actually, it seems that he was in no hurry to use his weapon. Surely someone like you must know that disobediance to the law can never be tolerated. Force must be used.
Quote from: grumblerThere may, indeed, be a time to dispute the officer's actions, but this was not it.
Indeed. If you feel the ticket was unjust, and you've failed to talk your way out of it, go to your court date. Hell, you can usually get the ticket overturned or reduced just for showing up and making an argument.
The idea that she should have free reign to ignore the law just because she's old is nonsense. And given that the alternative was beating her, and even then the officer showed a great deal of restraint, I think this couldn't have been handled better. We also know, thanks to the videotape, that the woman is a liar.
Quote from: Neil on June 10, 2009, 12:05:50 PM
The idea that she should have free reign to ignore the law just because she's old is nonsense. And given that the alternative was beating her, and even then the officer showed a great deal of restraint, I think this couldn't have been handled better. We also know, thanks to the videotape, that the woman is a liar.
:yes:
It pains me greatly but I gotta side with the cop.
:rolleyes: yeah nothing could happen by tazering an old lady with however many thousands of volts either.
Tell that to Poles scared to emigrate to Canada now. Maybe she was just a cranky old bag who deserved what she got. maybe buddy cop was an asshole also. There are no winners in this situation except the imaginary people the old lady didn't run over because she got pulled over.
Now there will be a big stink about tazers yet again.
Dude should have shot her in the leg.
Stupid Tazers.
I think we need to teach cops the vulcan grip thing. Then they can just pinch granny's nerve and have her take a nap.
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on June 10, 2009, 12:09:03 PM
:rolleyes: yeah nothing could happen by tazering an old lady with however many thousands of volts either.
Tell that to Poles scared to emigrate to Canada now. Maybe she was just a cranky old bag who deserved what she got. maybe buddy cop was an asshole also. There are no winners in this situation except the imaginary people the old lady didn't run over because she got pulled over.
So your response is to reference a very different event and talk about hypothetical actions that supposedly don't occur on the tape...and on the flipside we have an old woman who clearly lied about her role in the matter. Hmm...
Quote from: Grey Fox on June 10, 2009, 12:09:04 PM
Dude should have shot her in the leg.
:yes: And put a couple more rounds into her head once she lay on the ground.
Quote from: garbon on June 10, 2009, 12:11:50 PM
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on June 10, 2009, 12:09:03 PM
:rolleyes: yeah nothing could happen by tazering an old lady with however many thousands of volts either.
Tell that to Poles scared to emigrate to Canada now. Maybe she was just a cranky old bag who deserved what she got. maybe buddy cop was an asshole also. There are no winners in this situation except the imaginary people the old lady didn't run over because she got pulled over.
So your response is to reference a very different event and talk about hypothetical actions that supposedly don't occur on the tape...and on the flipside we have an old woman who clearly lied about her role in the matter. Hmm...
how clear is it she lied? I don't believe the cop's version anymore than hers. All I'm saying is that it seems excessive to taze an old lady, no matter how annoying she might be. If I use a little hyperbole, well this is languish. get over it.
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on June 10, 2009, 12:09:03 PM
:rolleyes: yeah nothing could happen by tazering an old lady with however many thousands of volts either.
It's significantly less damaging than hitting her with a nightstick.
QuoteTell that to Poles scared to emigrate to Canada now.
1. They're not welcome.
2. Maybe they shouldn't do crimes. Stomping around like an asshole is a good way to get tazed. That particular Pole got what he deserved.
3. If they can't learn English, they should go to hell.
QuoteI think we need to teach cops the vulcan grip thing. Then they can just pinch granny's nerve and have her take a nap.
Better yet, why don't we teach cops magical stasis spells that hold the evil person completely immobile? That way, they don't even have to touch the evil person at all?
When you get tazed, it's because you've done something wrong. Every time.
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on June 10, 2009, 12:20:05 PM
how clear is it she lied? I don't believe the cop's version anymore than hers. All I'm saying is that it seems excessive to taze an old lady, no matter how annoying she might be. If I use a little hyperbole, well this is languish. get over it.
The videotape. It's mentioned in the article.
oh well then. Obviously you are right Neil. No cop has ever abused his authority or taser.
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on June 10, 2009, 12:23:38 PM
oh well then. Obviously you are right Neil. No cop has ever abused his authority or taser.
It was nice of Neil to give you that out. :hug:
Quote from: garbon on June 10, 2009, 12:24:57 PM
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on June 10, 2009, 12:23:38 PM
oh well then. Obviously you are right Neil. No cop has ever abused his authority or taser.
It was nice of Neil to give you that out. :hug:
He's a big softie at heart... but don't tell anyone.
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on June 10, 2009, 12:23:38 PM
oh well then. Obviously you are right Neil. No cop has ever abused his authority or taser.
Naturally. I am invariably right, and My positions are right because they are Mine.
I suggest you conform your way of thinking to My own.
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on June 10, 2009, 12:29:05 PM
He's a big softie at heart... but don't tell anyone.
I wouldn't have been so kind. :blush:
Hahahahahaa!! :XD: The video is brilliant!
Quote from: ElectroGrannyShe denied the charge, telling a local Fox News reporter, "I was not argumentative. I was not combative. Every bit of this is a lie."
Quotethe constable's office released the dashboard video of the arrest, which shows Winkfein using vulgar language and daring Bieze to use his Taser. According to the time stamp on the dashboard video, it was at least seven minutes from when Bieze told the elderly woman to get out of her truck until he finally hit her with 50,000 volts of low-amperage electricity and she fell screaming to the ground.
Oops. Granny should know that there is almost always video these days. What a dumbass.
Quote from: Palisadoes on June 10, 2009, 03:13:02 PM
Hahahahahaa!! :XD: The video is brilliant!
The best part of it is that the newsgirl at the end is trying to make the old woman into some kind of plucky hero. As if the idea of the equality of the sexes needs more of a beating.
Granny was a bitch, she was in the wrong, deserved the ticket, deserved the arrest, but still couldn't he have just cuffed her?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 10, 2009, 03:58:16 PM
Granny was a bitch, she was in the wrong, deserved the ticket, deserved the arrest, but still couldn't he have just cuffed her?
More or less what I was thinking. I guess I'm a bit old-fashioned, but tazing an old woman, however much smack she talked, doesn't sit right.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 10, 2009, 03:58:16 PM
Granny was a bitch, she was in the wrong, deserved the ticket, deserved the arrest, but still couldn't he have just cuffed her?
It doesn't look like Granny would go down easy. Would you rather he tased her, or dragged her to the ground and but his knee into her back while he got the cuffs out?
sometimes there's no winning for a cop, unfortunatly.
The video is priceless. I was impressed he waited as long as he did before tasing her. I think police use of force should be heavily scrutinized, but in this case the guy handled the situation about as good as he could have without risking her safety and his own. While cuffing her may have been an option, keep in mind that scuffling around near a crowded highway can get someone killed pretty quickly.
Quote from: HVC on June 10, 2009, 04:14:34 PM
and but his knee into her back while he got the cuffs out?
sometimes there's no winning for a cop, unfortunatly.
I haven't seen the video (dialup). Is she a real warhorse?
Quote from: Lndhand on June 10, 2009, 04:14:42 PM
While cuffing her may have been an option, keep in mind that scuffling around near a crowded highway can get someone killed pretty quickly.
And, there was scuffling in the various times that she tried to run back to her car. I couldn't make it out in the video but at one point he's grabbing her and then she starts to dart back and something drops out of his hands.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 10, 2009, 04:18:10 PM
Quote from: HVC on June 10, 2009, 04:14:34 PM
and but his knee into her back while he got the cuffs out?
sometimes there's no winning for a cop, unfortunatly.
I haven't seen the video (dialup). Is she a real warhorse?
She was, shall we say, difficult. :D
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 10, 2009, 04:18:10 PM
I haven't seen the video (dialup). Is she a real warhorse?
Ditto me.
From the description given, though, the cop was 100% in the right. There's nothing saying civil disobedience can only be committed by 20-somethings in leather jackets.
And seriously, who's stupid enough to lie about a traffic stop anymore? They've ALL got dashcams.
This is fucked up. Tazing should be used against dangerous perps who cannot be subdued by normal means, not anyone who is uncooperative.
Texans :rolleyes:
Quote from: HVC on June 10, 2009, 04:14:34 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 10, 2009, 03:58:16 PM
Granny was a bitch, she was in the wrong, deserved the ticket, deserved the arrest, but still couldn't he have just cuffed her?
It doesn't look like Granny would go down easy. Would you rather he tased her, or dragged her to the ground and but his knee into her back while he got the cuffs out?
sometimes there's no winning for a cop, unfortunatly.
She was not dangerous, nor there was a suspicion she was guilty of any crime, other than disobeying what the policeman told her. I suppose her identity could have been easily identified from any ID, or barring that, her car's license plates. We hire humans (who, supposedly have brains), rather than dogs or mindless robots as cops, so they should be able to assess that.
In this case, she should have been charged with whatever the felony/misdemeanor that is, but there was no need to stop her physically - even if she went home freely, they would have easily found her.
Poles :rolleyes:
I bet Marcin wouldn't be crying if she'd have called the officer a fag or something. :P
He'd be like YES, taze the bitch! more voltage!
Quote from: Martinus on June 10, 2009, 05:34:11 PM
She was not dangerous, nor there was a suspicion she was guilty of any crime, other than disobeying what the policeman told her. I suppose her identity could have been easily identified from any ID, or barring that, her car's license plates. We hire humans (who, supposedly have brains), rather than dogs or mindless robots as cops, so they should be able to assess that.
In this case, she should have been charged with whatever the felony/misdemeanor that is, but there was no need to stop her physically - even if she went home freely, they would have easily found her.
Psst, Marti... in the US, disobeying an officer is an arrestable offense.
Quote from: Martinus on June 10, 2009, 05:34:11 PM
She was not dangerous, nor there was a suspicion she was guilty of any crime, other than disobeying what the policeman told her. I suppose her identity could have been easily identified from any ID, or barring that, her car's license plates. We hire humans (who, supposedly have brains), rather than dogs or mindless robots as cops, so they should be able to assess that.
In this case, she should have been charged with whatever the felony/misdemeanor that is, but there was no need to stop her physically - even if she went home freely, they would have easily found her.
The cop did not know that she was not dangerous (she certainly was behaving as though she may have been drunk) and she had just been caught committing a crime (contrary to your assertion that there was no "suspicion she was guilty of any crime"), so the factors you used to reach a judgement are both clearly bogus on the face of them. Good thinkin' there, Tex.
Quote from: grumbler on June 10, 2009, 05:40:01 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 10, 2009, 05:34:11 PM
She was not dangerous, nor there was a suspicion she was guilty of any crime, other than disobeying what the policeman told her. I suppose her identity could have been easily identified from any ID, or barring that, her car's license plates. We hire humans (who, supposedly have brains), rather than dogs or mindless robots as cops, so they should be able to assess that.
In this case, she should have been charged with whatever the felony/misdemeanor that is, but there was no need to stop her physically - even if she went home freely, they would have easily found her.
The cop did not know that she was not dangerous (she certainly was behaving as though she may have been drunk) and she had just been caught committing a crime (contrary to your assertion that there was no "suspicion she was guilty of any crime"), so the factors you used to reach a judgement are both clearly bogus on the face of them. Good thinkin' there, Tex.
What crime was she caught committing?
Quote from: DontSayBanana on June 10, 2009, 05:39:09 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 10, 2009, 05:34:11 PM
She was not dangerous, nor there was a suspicion she was guilty of any crime, other than disobeying what the policeman told her. I suppose her identity could have been easily identified from any ID, or barring that, her car's license plates. We hire humans (who, supposedly have brains), rather than dogs or mindless robots as cops, so they should be able to assess that.
In this case, she should have been charged with whatever the felony/misdemeanor that is, but there was no need to stop her physically - even if she went home freely, they would have easily found her.
Psst, Marti... in the US, disobeying an officer is an arrestable offense.
Not sure how this is relevant. I find the police response fucked up. Only because it was sanctioned by your laws, it does not make it right. :huh:
Quote from: Martinus on June 10, 2009, 05:40:52 PM
What crime was she caught committing?
Reckless driving (15+ mph over the speed limit).
Quote from: grumbler on June 10, 2009, 05:45:29 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 10, 2009, 05:40:52 PM
What crime was she caught committing?
Reckless driving (15+ mph over the speed limit).
That sounds more like a misdemeanor/driving regulation violation than a crime, but it could be a translation/language issue.
That's a Virginia thing. Reckless driving is indeed a crime, and Virginia has a notoriously low threshold and notoriously high fines for it. I don't think in any other state 15+ is reckless driving.
Quote from: Martinus on June 10, 2009, 05:40:52 PM
What crime was she caught committing?
The cop was issuing her a citation for driving 60 in a 45 mph zone, which is speeding as well as careless or reckless driving in some jurisdictions. Since she refused to cooperate, her disobeying the officer resulted in an arrestable misdemeanor and her attempts to get out of
that were resisting arrest, which is a felony.
Basically, it didn't start as a big deal, but she dug herself into a legal hole.
Quote from: Martinus on June 10, 2009, 05:45:17 PM
Not sure how this is relevant. I find the police response fucked up. Only because it was sanctioned by your laws, it does not make it right. :huh:
In what way did the police response fuck up, to the extent that her disobediance of police instrctions is "irrelevant?"
Dunno about Poland, but in the US, if a person refuses to follow the law, they can be arrested. If they resist arrest, then the minimum force necessary to subdue them is authorized. Tazing was clearly a better alternative to a physical altercation, which would have been the only other way to get her cuffed (both because the physical alteration was far likelier to injure the perp, and because the perp would also then have a chance to injure the officer and, at the least, get assault added to the resisting arrest charges).
By US standards, the cop did things right, from what I can see. Poland may have different standards, but this cop wasn't in Poland.
Quote from: DGuller on June 10, 2009, 05:49:18 PM
That's a Virginia thing. Reckless driving is indeed a crime, and Virginia has a notoriously low threshold and notoriously high fines for it. I don't think in any other state 15+ is reckless driving.
I thought we had 15+ reckless driving in NJ until recently. :unsure:
Quote from: Martinus on June 10, 2009, 05:47:18 PM
That sounds more like a misdemeanor/driving regulation violation than a crime, but it could be a translation/language issue.
Agree, could be language differences, but the definition is irrelevant. The officer had all the authority needed to pull her over. He she obeyed the law that required her to acknowledge the ticket, she would have driven on without further incident. She chose to escalate this stop into an arresting offense, not the cop.
Quote
Martinus says:
could you please stop responding to my posts on Languish? I'm rather tired of your trolling, thanks
Stephen says:
I'm afraid I cannot accomodate your request.
If you're going to post foolish things, I'm going to call you on it.
Martinus says:
then I am not going to talk to you anymore
Quote from: grumbler on June 10, 2009, 05:51:45 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 10, 2009, 05:45:17 PM
Not sure how this is relevant. I find the police response fucked up. Only because it was sanctioned by your laws, it does not make it right. :huh:
In what way did the police response fuck up, to the extent that her disobediance of police instrctions is "irrelevant?"
Dunno about Poland, but in the US, if a person refuses to follow the law, they can be arrested. If they resist arrest, then the minimum force necessary to subdue them is authorized. Tazing was clearly a better alternative to a physical altercation, which would have been the only other way to get her cuffed (both because the physical alteration was far likelier to injure the perp, and because the perp would also then have a chance to injure the officer and, at the least, get assault added to the resisting arrest charges).
By US standards, the cop did things right, from what I can see. Poland may have different standards, but this cop wasn't in Poland.
And I can express my opinion that I think it's fucked up, just as I can express my opinion that running over student protesters with tanks is fucked up, even though probably in line with Chinese law.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on June 10, 2009, 05:54:48 PM
I thought we had 15+ reckless driving in NJ until recently. :unsure:
I recall reading that it's 20+, and only if you've been involved in an accident. However, I can't find anything on the Internet to confirm this. If 15+ is an automatic reckless driving in NJ, then there isn't an innocent person driving on the Garden State Parkway.
Quote from: Martinus on June 10, 2009, 05:58:52 PM
And I can express my opinion that I think it's fucked up, just as I can express my opinion that running over student protesters with tanks is fucked up, even though probably in line with Chinese law.
Well, you can, indeed, make absurd judgements based on facts which you make up yourself, but that doesn't mean you won't get called on them, even if simple logic and informed opinion are apparently not much valued in Poland.
This is the kind of line of argumentation, btw, which makes pretty much everyone doubt you really are a lawyer who hangs with the "movers and shakers" of the world. :lol:
It is rather frightening that some people, somewhere in Europe actually pay for his services. :P
Quote from: DGuller on June 10, 2009, 06:06:55 PM
I recall reading that it's 20+, and only if you've been involved in an accident. However, I can't find anything on the Internet to confirm this. If 15+ is an automatic reckless driving in NJ, that there isn't an innocent person driving on the Garden State Parkway.
And pretty much everyone in Virginia! :lol:
But whether or not the woman was accused of reckless driving, and whether or not she was guilty of a "crime" or a mere "violation of the traffic laws," the cop had the right to stop her, and certainly the grounds to suspect he should not let her get back on the road right away. The attitude that she was displaying would certainly look to a lot of copa like drunken belligerence.
Quote from: Jaron on June 10, 2009, 06:10:49 PM
It is rather frightening that some people, somewhere in Europe actually pay for his services. :P
Not if they are services as, say, a plumber or a chef. Marti could be excellent at any number of things that don't require logical thought and reasoning.
After watching the video my sister laughed and said "she totally had it coming".
Old people shouldn't be allowed to drive.
Quote from: Jaron on June 10, 2009, 06:10:49 PM
It is rather frightening that some people, somewhere in Europe actually pay for his services. :P
Actually many of my clients are US-based.
What confuses me is why she was required to sign the ticket. Here at least you don't have to sign, are just served it. For certain things though (generally arrestable offences) if you don't sign you don't get released from custody.
Quote from: Barrister on June 10, 2009, 06:52:29 PM
What confuses me is why she was required to sign the ticket. Here at least you don't have to sign, are just served it. For certain things though (generally arrestable offences) if you don't sign you don't get released from custody.
Our strange ways confuse and frighten you.
Quote from: Barrister on June 10, 2009, 06:52:29 PM
What confuses me is why she was required to sign the ticket. Here at least you don't have to sign, are just served it.
Here we sign.
Quote from: Barrister on June 10, 2009, 06:52:29 PM
What confuses me is why she was required to sign the ticket. Here at least you don't have to sign, are just served it. For certain things though (generally arrestable offences) if you don't sign you don't get released from custody.
My hunch is you have to sign to avoid the "but I never got the ticket your honor" situations.
:huh: NJ is also no-sign. I think this might be a jurisdiction to jurisdiction thing, since they all print different tickets.
Sounds like it was handled as well as possible, given the situation. I would much rather have the cop tase her than have to read an article about a cop beat-up an old lady, maybe breaking her hip.
If you are going to be an asshat when dealing with a cop expect to get tased or hit, whether you are right or wrong.
Quote from: Martinus on June 10, 2009, 05:45:17 PM
Not sure how this is relevant. I find the police response fucked up. Only because it was sanctioned by your laws, it does not make it right. :huh:
That's because, as a homosexual, you have no stake whatsoever in an orderly society, built on laws. You have no real interest in building a lasting edifice. You're just here to go.
Hopefully, AIDS will make you go sooner rather than later.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on June 10, 2009, 07:09:34 PM
:huh: NJ is also no-sign. I think this might be a jurisdiction to jurisdiction thing, since they all print different tickets.
I live right next to a speed trap, so I frequently see the lights flashing and the car being pulled over. I've only observed one time someone being ticketed, and in that case the driver just took her ticket and drove off. I guess it's a NJ thing.
Quote from: grumbler on June 10, 2009, 06:13:11 PM
Not if they are services as, say, a plumber or a chef. Marti could be excellent at any number of things that don't require logical thought and reasoning.
Maybe he relies on something like the Chewbacca Defense Johnny Cochrane used in South Park?
Quote from: Barrister on June 10, 2009, 06:52:29 PM
What confuses me is why she was required to sign the ticket. Here at least you don't have to sign, are just served it. For certain things though (generally arrestable offences) if you don't sign you don't get released from custody.
By signing the ticket, as Yi notes, the driver is acknowledging receipt of it. Gets rid of "I didn't know about it." I cannot think of a good reason why a jurisdiction would
not want the receiver of the ticket to sign.
Sucks that he had to taze her, but she asked for it, in both action and words.
Quote from: lustindarkness on June 10, 2009, 08:23:04 PM
Sucks that he had to taze her, but she asked for it, in both action and words.
:yes:
"if your mom doesn't bother to take the cigarette out of her mouth before she tells the cop who pulled her over to 'kiss my ass', you might be a redneck" :)
The officer followed the continuum of force appropriately.
Just because she's a senior makes her no less dangerous. Those cranky bitches can bite.
And for all you asshats with ZOMG WHY DINT HE JUS PUT TEH CUFFS ON HER, you don't put your hands on people unless you absolutely have to, for both the officer's safety and the suspects.
Never mind the possible injuries involved in a scuffle, the last thing you want to do is wrestle with someone at a traffic stop, have her slither out, run into traffic and get plowed by a passing semi.
Then there's more paperwork.
Since the elderly are completely useless, he should have been able to use her disobedience as an excuse to skip the taser phase and go right to the .45 round into the back of the head phase. :)
Quote from: Barrister on June 10, 2009, 06:52:29 PM
What confuses me is why she was required to sign the ticket. Here at least you don't have to sign, are just served it. For certain things though (generally arrestable offences) if you don't sign you don't get released from custody.
As a traffic stop is a form of arrest, your signature is your acknowledgement that you will appear in court. If not, we can always have that paperwork filled out at the station, and YOU DONT WANT THAT DO YOU?
Quote from: grumbler on June 10, 2009, 05:40:01 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 10, 2009, 05:34:11 PM
She was not dangerous, nor there was a suspicion she was guilty of any crime, other than disobeying what the policeman told her. I suppose her identity could have been easily identified from any ID, or barring that, her car's license plates. We hire humans (who, supposedly have brains), rather than dogs or mindless robots as cops, so they should be able to assess that.
In this case, she should have been charged with whatever the felony/misdemeanor that is, but there was no need to stop her physically - even if she went home freely, they would have easily found her.
The cop did not know that she was not dangerous (she certainly was behaving as though she may have been drunk) and she had just been caught committing a crime (contrary to your assertion that there was no "suspicion she was guilty of any crime"), so the factors you used to reach a judgement are both clearly bogus on the face of them. Good thinkin' there, Tex.
If I had not actually met him in person, I would really doubt that Marty is really a lawyer.
Quote from: grumbler on June 10, 2009, 05:51:45 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 10, 2009, 05:45:17 PM
Not sure how this is relevant. I find the police response fucked up. Only because it was sanctioned by your laws, it does not make it right. :huh:
In what way did the police response fuck up, to the extent that her disobediance of police instrctions is "irrelevant?"
Dunno about Poland, but in the US, if a person refuses to follow the law, they can be arrested. If they resist arrest, then the minimum force necessary to subdue them is authorized. Tazing was clearly a better alternative to a physical altercation, which would have been the only other way to get her cuffed (both because the physical alteration was far likelier to injure the perp, and because the perp would also then have a chance to injure the officer and, at the least, get assault added to the resisting arrest charges).
By US standards, the cop did things right, from what I can see. Poland may have different standards, but this cop wasn't in Poland.
It also sounds like there may have been some concern for her own safety - this is all happening on the side of the road, with cars driving by at (presumably) 45mph. Her running around, and him having to chasse and subdue her is likely to put her life in danger.
Tazing is a MUCH safer method of subduing the unruly elderly than actually physically grabbing them. I think it is becoming common in old folks homes as well.
Quote from: Berkut on June 11, 2009, 08:53:52 AM
If I had not actually met him in person, I would really doubt that Marty is really a lawyer.
Mind you, he's a corporate lawyer. Situations involving public order are entirely beyond his understanding of law or public policy.
Quote from: Berkut on June 11, 2009, 08:56:25 AM
Tazing is a MUCH safer method of subduing the unruly elderly than actually physically grabbing them. I think it is becoming common in old folks homes as well.
marti disagrees, noting that "Tazing should be used against dangerous perps who cannot be subdued by normal means" and that therefor the cop should have physically assaulted her to subdue her.
The fact that Marti's opinion is based on ignorant hysteria and yours on facts makes them, at best, equally valid by languish rules.
Quote from: grumbler on June 11, 2009, 09:06:10 AM
Quote from: Berkut on June 11, 2009, 08:56:25 AM
Tazing is a MUCH safer method of subduing the unruly elderly than actually physically grabbing them. I think it is becoming common in old folks homes as well.
marti disagrees, noting that "Tazing should be used against dangerous perps who cannot be subdued by normal means" and that therefor the cop should have physically assaulted her to subdue her.
The fact that Marti's opinion is based on ignorant hysteria and yours on facts makes them, at best, equally valid by languish rules.
Nah, as we have seen from Strix's raving about his new found love for unions, opinions based on facts, logic, and actual knowledge are worthy of only derision. Marty, much like Strix, has me beat cold.
Well, in times like this I always return to that quote of Abraham Lincoln: "A granny tazed is better than a tranny glazed."
Quote from: Berkut on June 11, 2009, 08:56:25 AM
It also sounds like there may have been some concern for her own safety - this is all happening on the side of the road, with cars driving by at (presumably) 45mph. Her running around, and him having to chasse and subdue her is likely to put her life in danger.
Stop using fancy French words <_<
Quote from: derspiess on June 11, 2009, 09:18:05 AM
Stop using fancy French words <_<
If you can't stand the heat, get out of the cuisine.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 11, 2009, 05:30:29 AM
And for all you asshats with ZOMG WHY DINT HE JUS PUT TEH CUFFS ON HER, you don't put your hands on people unless you absolutely have to, for both the officer's safety and the suspects.
Never mind the possible injuries involved in a scuffle, the last thing you want to do is wrestle with someone at a traffic stop, have her slither out, run into traffic and get plowed by a passing semi.
Then there's more paperwork.
THANK YOU. I've been wanting to say that since Marti got started, but I didn't feel like having Queenie calling me "pompous" for the umpteenth time. <_<
Quote from: Berkut on June 11, 2009, 08:56:25 AM
Tazing is a MUCH safer method of subduing the unruly elderly than actually physically grabbing them. I think it is becoming common in old folks homes as well.
When did the authorities start commonly tazing people in old folk's homes? :huh:
Here's a quick question: do the cops have to ask the elderly if they have a pacemaker before tasing them?
Quote from: Malthus on June 11, 2009, 09:37:56 AM
When did the authorities start commonly tazing people in old folk's homes? :huh:
When crime went down, and cops became bored.
Great. In the usual Languish manner, we have gone from the discussion of whether a particular incident showed justified restraint by the cop, to an endorsement of tazing the elderly on general principles. :D
Quote from: Malthus on June 11, 2009, 09:37:56 AM
Quote from: Berkut on June 11, 2009, 08:56:25 AM
Tazing is a MUCH safer method of subduing the unruly elderly than actually physically grabbing them. I think it is becoming common in old folks homes as well.
When did the authorities start commonly tazing people in old folk's homes? :huh:
I am not sure I would call people who work in old folks homes "authority", but I bet they like it.
And really, a light jolt, to "get their attention" is a lot more humane than the alternatives.
Quote from: DGuller on June 11, 2009, 09:40:32 AM
Quote from: Malthus on June 11, 2009, 09:37:56 AM
When did the authorities start commonly tazing people in old folk's homes? :huh:
When crime went down, and cops became bored.
I think cops just wandering into old folks home and zapping old people because they are bored might be some kind of human rights violation. We should check with Russia on that.
I think tazing is soft. I think first response with the elderly should be knee-capping, and maybe a few shots to the kidneys as well. That will make them behave. You have to start off tough, or they will think they can get away with too much. Tough love, people, tough love.
Quote from: Malthus on June 11, 2009, 09:43:47 AM
Great. In the usual Languish manner, we have gone from the discussion of whether a particular incident showed justified restraint by the cop, to an endorsement of tazing the elderly on general principles. :D
I can think of several Languishites that need to be tazered regularly. Then thrown into a ditch and buried alive.
Hmmm. Since clearly tazing is not torture, can we use that as an "enhanced interrogation technique"?
Quote from: Berkut on June 11, 2009, 09:46:12 AM
Quote from: Malthus on June 11, 2009, 09:37:56 AM
Quote from: Berkut on June 11, 2009, 08:56:25 AM
Tazing is a MUCH safer method of subduing the unruly elderly than actually physically grabbing them. I think it is becoming common in old folks homes as well.
When did the authorities start commonly tazing people in old folk's homes? :huh:
I am not sure I would call people who work in old folks homes "authority", but I bet they like it.
And really, a light jolt, to "get their attention" is a lot more humane than the alternatives.
I'd bet you'd call them "God" if they wanted you to, if you were 80 and they had the authority to taze you as they felt best. :D