Why I don't blindly trust authority
As many of you know, I have a strong problem with appeals to authority. Here's an example of why:
posted by P-Dog @ 7:36 AM
6 comments
PruDogBlog
A blog about Cycling, Politics, Life and Economics. Endorsements for PruDogBlog: "My advice. Don't read this blog. Oh, and instead of writing or reading a blog...go train!" - RS Seattle
6 Comments:
Happy T-day to the PruFam. Missed you on the Leschi ride this a.m., but the Stungunners got compliments. Noticed that you've got LFG Stangelor riding in a torn kit. Couldn't you at least start him off in an intact pair of shorts?
C'mon Stoked, comment on the video! Not bikes, err, shorts, er whatever.
And c'mon pru-dog. The only thing the cop did wrong was not taser him twice. And this comes from someone who not only has problems w/ Authority, but Utah as well.
Um, the officer was not getting any type of cooperation from the beginning. Plus, how was he supposed to know the driver would not try to jump him when started to walk past? If I was the officer, I would have done the same thing.
Moral of story? If the officer asks you to do something, such as sign for a ticket, just do it.
And by the way, an officer can arrest you and not be required read you anything unless he is going to question you right then and there.
Miranda rights are only required prior to any questioning outside of your biographical information and when you are placed in a "custodial" situation. The thought that they have to read them to you at arrest time comes from our pop culture. This being the case, most officers will Mirandize you right away just to get it over with.
Also keep in mind that if you do not acknowledge that you understand the rights (i.e. stay silent), it does not necessarily mean you have waived your rights.
Are you guys idiots or what?
The poor driver was asking for an explantion as to why he was being pulled over for speeding when the 40mph sign was just prior to him being pulled over. I think I would've done the same thing. So the officer asks him to spet outside the vehicle - to which the driver complied. Then the driver walks back & is pointing at the 40mph sign as the officer is then demanding that he place his hands behind his back. This is the first WTF? moment for this driver.
Before you can say donut the cop has his tazer drawn & repeating his demands. Another WTF? moment.
The mistake here is that the driver starts to walk away toward his SUV & this is where the cop cannot tolerate this guy any further for asking questions & fires his tazer in yet another WTF? moment for the driver.
This is not your typical "to protect and serve" peace officer. This man has a problem with his own self-importance as well as control and authority issues. He imbelishes his version of what happened to the other officer to suit his side of the story. All the while the driver is bewilderd as to what he has done wrong. A better explanation from the officer in the first place would've prevented all this from happening.
I can only say that karma has a way of evening the playing field.
Well here's a couple points I think may be lost in viewing.
1. The Tazee became uncooperative after the officer refused to tell him why he had been pulled over (or, notice, show him the front side of the form he ordered the tazee to sign). The officer only said "you were going kind of fast".
2. We can intuit that the reason the officer pulled him over was for speedning. But, he did so before the sign (he mentions a previous sign which, by the way, turned out not to exist according to the reports I read).
3. The officer ordered him to sign the form, which the Tazee does not have to do.
4. The officer does have to explain to the Tazee that signing the form is not an admission of guilt.
5. The officer then lied about what happened to the 2nd officer.
You do not have to obey any arbitrary instruction a police officer gives you. It has to be in the context of law enforcement and the tazee (justly) asked what context the officer had for pulling him over and the officer did not respond.
The core thing to remember is the officer had no justification to pull him over to begin with.
While I respect and admire the decision to join law enforcement, it is a decision.. Is it dangerous? Sure. Is it stressful? hell yah.
But that's the job. It is not our job as citizens to do whatever a cop tells us cause they have more physical power (specifically the tazer).
Which is why I put this under "problems with appeal to authority". The root issue here is that the citizen did not due what the guy with the tazer wanted. The guy with the tazer provided no justification beyond having a tazer for demanding what he did.
Can we get a team issued tazer to race with (I don't think USAC has any rules specifically prohibiting it)?
Post a Comment
<< Home