Jump to content

Hammond Police Taser an uncooperative man


Recommended Posts

Obviously the idiots in the car weren't right. Last I checked, complying with the police wasn't optional.

 

Settling lawsuits doesn't have anything to do with who is right or wrong, innocent or guilty. We just 'settled' with a ex-salesman, who didn't sell squat for over a year, for a $25K severance, primarily because he lived in CA and we didn't want to spend the time, hassle and money to fight him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously the idiots in the car weren't right. Last I checked, complying with the police wasn't optional.

 

Settling lawsuits doesn't have anything to do with who is right or wrong, innocent or guilty. We just 'settled' with a ex-salesman, who didn't sell squat for over a year, for a $25K severance, primarily because he lived in CA and we didn't want to spend the time, hassle and money to fight him.

Which is a huge problem. We went through that a couple of times - it's a bad precedent to set. It got so bad that we ended up closing our California office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a note: I really dig Alfonzo. One can only imagine the number of people calling him Uncle Tom for not falling in line with the progressive position on all things black.

 

No, you are right... Until your loony azz gets on the progressive kick again. I am progressive and think that Alfonzo rocks! More AA's should listen to his message!

 

Obviously the idiots in the car weren't right. Last I checked, complying with the police wasn't optional.

 

 

Exactly... As a citizen, one can only go so far when playing in the cops "playground." People lack common sense and self-preservation.

 

Dude had a warrant out for his arrest. Why they hell not get his life in order first!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Chicago Tribune article:

But police, in their statement, said officers "who make legal traffic stops are allowed to ask passengers inside of a stopped vehicle for identification and to request that they exit a stopped vehicle for the officer’s safety without a requirement of reasonable suspicion.

 

While the police are allowed to ask a passenger to provide identification the passenger is under no legal obligation to provide identification. The police statement is a lie by omission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Chicago Tribune article:

 

 

While the police are allowed to ask a passenger to provide identification the passenger is under no legal obligation to provide identification. The police statement is a lie by omission.

Not to mention that asking them to "leave the vehicle" doesn't make the officer safer. It's actually the opposite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Not to mention that asking them to "leave the vehicle" doesn't make the officer safer. It's actually the opposite.

 

That's what I always thought.

 

Anyway, dude had a warrant out for him. He wasn't going home... Why do they think the people in this sitiation can dictate what happens? Simply buckle up and there is no problem. Yet, dude is not keeping his house in order (warrant) and then clueless about seat belts and still they want to play: "My mother is dieing route."

 

Too bad the hospital they were going to was across the line in Illinois. If the hospital was in Indiana (say St. Margaret's in Hammond), the Indiana cop should have given them a police escort to the hospital, then busted them on down right there by writing the woman a ticket. They would have then asked the guy to show ID when stepping out... He would have been hauled away there.

 

How the hell is a Hammond, Indiana cop just going to let them go to the hospital... Again, in another state. That's letting a guy that has a warrant slip away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...