Sig1Hunter

Graphics are noticeably better, IMO.

At the risk of hijacking this thread, I have to say that I staunchly disagree with you. If you do your research you will learn that the various pit bull type breeds (American Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Terrier, etc) are extremely loving and loyal companions. On the flip side, if the only research you rely upon is what the media feeds you... well then, you are TERRIBLY ignorant. These "nasty/ugly, mean and aggressive mutts" are a result of the way the have been trained and treated. You should check out the show "Dogtown" on the Discovery Channel and see how these dogs can be and have been rehabilitated and placed in loving homes. In the meantime, please think a bit before you post.

No, because you quoted and replied to his post to begin with. The mystery is deeper than ever!

Cary Harris - one of this years draft picks from USC

Now, where did that ignore button go....?

Which one is it? Good news from CB, or because CB is Ralph's waterboy it cannot be trusted?

or.... I can click the link on the front page and read the whole story. Easy choice.

Just when the flames were dying down, DC Tom retrieves his secret stash of jet fuel...

Come on, guys. That is vintage Jauron!

Very nice! Congrats! May his generation of Bills fans see less pain than ours.

Hmmmm...whats the best way to respond in a politically correct manner... Cops give other cops breaks on stuff - yes. Cops also give other professions breaks, as well. This includes nurses, firefighters/paramedics, and doctors. When bad stuff goes down, who is the group of people that is going to save the cop's life? The last thing I want after I've been shot and end up in the hospital is to see the face of a nurse that I just gave a 300 dollar speeding ticket to. Get my drift? Now, with criminal stuff, its not so easy. I'm not saying that it doesn't happen - it does (unfortunately). But infractions have room for discretion, while criminal violations don't. Oh, and just so you guys don't get your panties in too tight a wad, cops give regular folks breaks too...

If that was the case, then why didn't Bruce submit to the breath test? DWB will not make you register over a .08...

A big part of the case, IMO, is that in order to prove the DUI Manslaughter case the prosecution has to prove what is called "causation". It is simply not enough for Stallworth to have been legally intoxicated and killed someone. This would be easy to prove with only the blood results and the autopsy. The prosecution also has to prove that Stallworth caused the crash that killed the pedestrian. If the pedestrian was legally crossing the roadway in a marked crosswalk, this would also be relatively easy to prove. But, since the facts of the case (that we know of) show that the pedestrian was not crossing in the crosswalk, then causation falls partially on the pedestrian. Without causation of the manslaughter aspect of the offense, the state is left with simple DUI. The parties met in the middle, with a resolution that was appeasing to everyone involved - including the victim's family.

First of all, she wasn't tased because of the ticket. She was tased because she physically resisted the officer when he tried to handcuff her after she refused to sign the ticket and he told her she was under arrest. Secondly, I am not trying to jump all over anyone's posts. Your opinions are your opinions. I am merely attempting to give some of you guys a bit of insight on the topic. When we are educated we are able to form more well thought out opinions. When we form our opinions solely on what the media feeds us, this is the definition of ignorant. Like it or not, the public in general is ignorant on these facts. Yet, these same ignorant folks are the ones lambasting this police officer and calling him all kinds of names! Look back earlier in this thread to see what I am talking about. If you are taking offense to the word "ignorant", that was not my intent. Ignorance seems to carry a negative connotation, which it needs not. It just means that people don't know. Nothing wrong with not knowing...The problem is not knowing and then sitting in judgement while not trying to learn more. We are all ignorant about various topics. I happen to be a law enforcement officer by profession, so I know about these things and have practical, hands on experience. You probably don't. Likewise, I am probably ignorant on the topics of your career. If we ever have a discussion about that, and I show my ignorance I give you permission to call me on it! Thank you for your appreciation. I'm glad we can have debates while still having mutual respect. It seems to be a disappearing art, nowadays.

I see your point, but I think you are wrong. It goes back to the old phrase "Train how you fight, fight how you train". We don't train to take it easy on people on the offchance that we may have to take down grandma. When the fecal matter hits the oscillating rotator, we revert to how we were trained. If we trained to take it easy on people, we will take it easy on someone who needs not be taken lightly. This causes the death of law enforcement officers. When we take someone to the ground, they are taken to the ground. There is no such thing as a "go easy on them" move. My point about grandma being hurt stems from a likelihood that her bones and connective tissues are more fragile. Usually, when you slam a non compliant younger adult this is not the case. And, about pepper spray. Have you ever been pepper sprayed? Have you ever been tased? The effects of [epper spray are longer lasting than the taser. The tasers effects are done immediately afterward. The spray lasts for hours and hours, and requires medical attention. Spray causes severe irritation of the mucous membranes, including respiratory distress. Not to mention everyone in the area becomes exposed to the spray when it is deployed - this includes the officer. Additionally, in my experience, spray usually only makes the person more angry and willing to fight. I rarely see it actually de-escalate a situation. Do I want to be rolling around with anyone, grandma or not, on the side of the road when my eyelids are slammed shut and I am having a hard time breathing because of the spray? The short answer is no. The vast, vast, vast majority of documented deaths from the taser are a result of drug intoxication (specifically stimulant usage). The public, along with the media, try and try to dispute the taser. The vast majority of the public are uneducated about it, with the little education they do have coming from the media. As humans, we fear what we do not understand. PS - It absolutely turns my stomach to hear ignorant people monday morning quarterbacking a police officer doing his job. He had seconds to make decisions, and the public has days/weeks/months to tear them apart. I understand this is part of the job, and I accept it. I just wish that more members of the public understood before trying to stand in judgement of an officer that is doing his job.

Here's a little law enforcement lesson for you, PTP. LEOs follow what is called a "use of force matrix". This determines at which level of resistance certain forms of control can be used. What the old lady did here is called "active physical resistance". She used muscle groups to resist the officer (pushing him away, walking away, etc). Even under the most liberal agency policies, the taser is a warranted response to this type of resistance. Some agencies allow it to be used at the "passive physical resistance" level. Next, refusing to sign a citation IS A CRIME in most states, including Texas. By her refusing to sign the ticket, even after he told her that it wasn't an admission of guilt, she committed a crime. Now, he has informed her that she is under arrest. Regardless of if she is in handcuffs at this point, she is under arrest. Her sudden change of heart ("give me the bleeping ticket. I'll sign it") doesn't matter. What happens when a bank robber walks into a bank and sticks a gun in someone's face while demanding money. The cops show up and bust the guy. He says "oh, I didn't mean it". Does he get let go? She made the choice, he arrested her, and now its too late to go back. As has been pointed out numerous times, the taser is the best option in this case. Physical techniques that could have been employed by the officer would have undoubtedly resulted in injury to the woman. As LEOs, we don't train to not hurt someone else. We train to keep ourselves from getting hurt. Regardless of what you think, PTP, putting a non-compliant individual in cuffs (old, young, short, fat, etc) is much tougher than you think. She would have ended up proned on the ground with her face in the dirt, no doubt. This is the best way to make sure that he wasn't doing the Texas two-step with her on the side of a busy highway. Lastly, I am glad that you don't make my agency's policy. I could not do my job if I had to be in imminent physical danger before I could employ a non-lethal tool such as the taser. BTW - When someone presents a weapon, they are probably going to end up shot by the po-po. I know this is appalling to those of you who are the "why don't you talk to them first" type...

"Clearly..."

The audio clip is on the front page of the site - lower left corner of the page under "Sporting News Radio". Check it out!

You mean the guy dressed up like a box of popcorn? Noooooooooooooo....

Great post. I agree for the most part. The only part I debate is the part about "bad police work". In cases like these, the police are hitched to what the victim says and what the victim wants. Its a sad state of affairs, but thats the way it works in these cases. If the victim is willing to sign a sworn statement that the incident happened, and then identifies the person who did it, the cops have to go with that. Everything else, I agree 100% with. And, to those who keep saying that the ID is bad because it occurred several months later: read the report. The arrest was made 2 months later - the ID occurred that night. Instead of making the arrest on the spot (which they probably could have), the police decided to run the evidence through the court system first. A judge issued a warrant for McIntyre's arrest, and it was served when he was arrested. Now, back to your regularly scheduled petty argument...

As long as you wanna have your kids enrolled in the 50th ranked state in the country for education - come on down! Oh, and our economy is going down the crapper faster than the rest of the country.

And usually in full uniform.

Maybe because being a cop nowadays is a wee bit different than "back in the day"? I've pulled my weapon (please, no sarcastic comments!) more times than I would like, on the job. Was it because I had every intention of using it? Yes, it was - as a response if a deadly threat presented itself. Do cops always have to wait for the weapon to be displayed before they react? Common sense says no! Its all too easy for everyone to sit back, with knowledge of facts obtained afterwards, and judge the officer based upon facts he knew at the time. In this case, the woman jumps out of the car, refuses to obey the numerous verbal commands of the officer and he draws his weapon. I see no problem with that. At that point in time, he has no idea what her intentions are. Or, even if she is acting as a decoy so the driver can attack. He could have, if he wanted to, gone hands on at that point. He chose not to. To me, its when tensions relax, and the matter starts to come in to focus, where the officer really screwed up. I have a sneaky suspicion that he backed himself into a corner during the initial encounter with the "tough talk", that he couldn't back down and do what I believe he knew to be the right thing to do. He felt he had to keep being the tough cop. Its hard to flip that switch, guys. Trust me. One minute, you are concerned that something seriously amiss is going on, the next you are asked to change gears and be compassionate, kind, and caring.

While I agree that the cop seemed like a jerk, I definitely will not fault him for pulling his weapon on someone that gets out of the car on their own, and then refuses numerous verbal commands to get back in the car, put their hands on the car, etc. THIS is how cops get killed. See: Oakland.

Actually, a lot of people don't understand... the trained law enforcement officer can easily determine impaired or nervous. The "eye test" is usually the one that shows the difference. Of course, if you are dealing with jacknut LEO who has no clue as to what he is doing, all bets are off.