Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
And the other kids don't flank him or fight him until after he laid hands on the kid.

So again, to continue my unanswered question for the past 24 hours: should kids just let adults grab them and drag them because an adult said "I'm a cop"?

Depends. Is the guy saying it a cop?

If not, well there are laws against it.

If so, well there are laws against slamming the guy.

Which is the whole point you seem to be ignoring and that D-usa keeps bringing up.
From everything said/shown...he doesn't flash a badge and he isn't uniformed. Just told the kids he's a cop, grabbed one of them, and then the whole thing went to hell.

In no way, shape, or form should any LEO be trying to pull crap like this without identifying themselves properly. And given the fact that there have been instances of serial killers, rapists, et al using the "I'm a cop" line...not flashing a badge while out of uniform just screams "I don't need to do anything properly" on the part of this officer.

Common fething sense would dictate that if you're going to use the "I'm a cop" line, as a fething police officer, you would at least know that you should have your badge or ID visible. But common fething sense would also dictate to a police officer not to be manhandling kids and drawing a gun on them for "trespassing".

He did not draw a gun on them for trespassing. He drew the gun because he had been hit a couple times and was then flanked by a kid who reached for something.

 RiTides wrote:
Well, that's where we differ then, clearly. I once had an adult I barely knew physically put their hands on my shoulder to keep me in place as a as a HS freshman. I was surrounded by my friends, as well, and felt he was out of line. Instead, we all waited until the incident was over, I told my parents, they looked him up and dealt with it.

To say kids should just attack an adult like that is 100% the wrong message, imo. Look at the video, it's a nice neighborhood, broad daylight, he's not taking him to a car or something... they were standing on the sidewalk. Yes, he wss probably way out of line, but to say yes, the kids SHOULD attack him is just nuts, imo.

Ah well, like I said, I just wonder where all the moderates have gone in discussions like this. The more I think about it, the more harshly I'd punish the police officer, but to say the kids acted correctly given what we see in the video (and not a hypothetical "what if your friend is being abducted") is just mind boggling to me.

I would imagine that in a school, surrounded by responsible adults who have authority over you, in a situation where the adult restraining you is likely calm, I would feel differently than in a street with an angry guy doing so.

 d-usa wrote:

 RiTides wrote:
Well, that's where we differ then, clearly. I once had an adult I barely knew physically put their hands on my shoulder to keep me in place as a as a HS freshman. I was surrounded by my friends, as well, and felt he was out of line. Instead, we all waited until the incident was over, I told my parents, they looked him up and dealt with it.

To say kids should just attack an adult like that is 100% the wrong message, imo. Look at the video, it's a nice neighborhood, broad daylight, he's not taking him to a car or something... they were standing on the sidewalk. Yes, he wss probably way out of line, but to say yes, the kids SHOULD attack him is just nuts, imo.

Ah well, like I said, I just wonder where all the moderates have gone in discussions like this. The more I think about it, the more harshly I'd punish the police officer, but to say the kids acted correctly given what we see in the video (and not a hypothetical "what if your friend is being abducted") is just mind boggling to me.

I would imagine that in a school, surrounded by responsible adults who have authority over you, in a situation where the adult restraining you is likely calm, I would feel differently than in a street with an angry guy doing so.

Guy in this incident was pretty calm until the kids attacked him. He seemed more than willing to hold the kid until uniformed cops showed up. And it wasn't really 'in a street', it was in his own yard...

 RiTides wrote:
Well, that's where we differ then, clearly. I once had an adult I barely knew physically put their hands on my shoulder to keep me in place as a freshman in high school. I was surrounded by my friends, as well, and felt he was out of line. Instead, we all waited, I told my parents, they looked him up and dealt with it.

Which is fine and dandy, provided the adult wasn't trying to bring you into their home.

To say kids should just attack an adult like that is 100% the wrong message, imo. Look at the video, it's a nice neighborhood, broad daylight, he's not taking him to a car or something... they were standing on the sidewalk. Yes, he was probably way out of line, but to say yes, the kids SHOULD attack him is just nuts, imo.

Nobody is saying what the kids did is 100%, absofethinglutely what people should do.

What is being said is that why in the hell should the kids take the guy at his word that he's a cop? If they knew him or had run-ins with him before or this was some kind of long-standing thing with him trying to keep these particular kids off his lawn or they commonly threatened him knowing he was a cop, that dramatically changes the way this whole situation would be viewed. But nothing I have seen suggests that is the case.

Ah well, like I said, I just wonder where all the moderates have gone in discussions like this. The more I think about it, the more harshly I'd punish the police officer, but to say the kids acted correctly given what we see in the video (and not a hypothetical "what if your friend is being abducted") is just mind boggling to me.

There's not really ground for "moderation" in a case like this.

A guy, who is supposed to be a law enforcement officer--someone who is actually supposed to be trained to deescalate situations just like this and in many cases engage these kids not just with a firearm but with words--chose to "detain" one of the kids, then pulled a gun on them when the other kids took umbrage to the fact he's dragging around one of the kids.

The situation would be bad if it were a non-cop doing this, but it becomes a drastically different thing when it's a cop doing it.

 CptJake wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
And the other kids don't flank him or fight him until after he laid hands on the kid.

So again, to continue my unanswered question for the past 24 hours: should kids just let adults grab them and drag them because an adult said "I'm a cop"?

Depends. Is the guy saying it a cop?

If not, well there are laws against it.

If so, well there are laws against slamming the guy.

Which is the whole point you seem to be ignoring and that D-usa keeps bringing up.
From everything said/shown...he doesn't flash a badge and he isn't uniformed. Just told the kids he's a cop, grabbed one of them, and then the whole thing went to hell.

In no way, shape, or form should any LEO be trying to pull crap like this without identifying themselves properly. And given the fact that there have been instances of serial killers, rapists, et al using the "I'm a cop" line...not flashing a badge while out of uniform just screams "I don't need to do anything properly" on the part of this officer.

Common fething sense would dictate that if you're going to use the "I'm a cop" line, as a fething police officer, you would at least know that you should have your badge or ID visible. But common fething sense would also dictate to a police officer not to be manhandling kids and drawing a gun on them for "trespassing".

He did not draw a gun on them for trespassing. He drew the gun because he had been hit a couple times and was then flanked by a kid who reached for something.

The kids fought him because they were physically being attacked by an adult.

But maybe if he threw popcorn at their friend rather than grabbing him, they would have been justified in fighting back.

Seriously, this is you a couple threads over:

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/718974.page?userfilterid=4402

That's what's mind blowing to me. Is this just because some random guy said the magic words of "I'm a cop" with nothing at all to pack that up?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CptJake wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 RiTides wrote:
Well, that's where we differ then, clearly. I once had an adult I barely knew physically put their hands on my shoulder to keep me in place as a as a HS freshman. I was surrounded by my friends, as well, and felt he was out of line. Instead, we all waited until the incident was over, I told my parents, they looked him up and dealt with it.

To say kids should just attack an adult like that is 100% the wrong message, imo. Look at the video, it's a nice neighborhood, broad daylight, he's not taking him to a car or something... they were standing on the sidewalk. Yes, he wss probably way out of line, but to say yes, the kids SHOULD attack him is just nuts, imo.

Ah well, like I said, I just wonder where all the moderates have gone in discussions like this. The more I think about it, the more harshly I'd punish the police officer, but to say the kids acted correctly given what we see in the video (and not a hypothetical "what if your friend is being abducted") is just mind boggling to me.

I would imagine that in a school, surrounded by responsible adults who have authority over you, in a situation where the adult restraining you is likely calm, I would feel differently than in a street with an angry guy doing so.

Guy in this incident was pretty calm until the kids attacked him. He seemed more than willing to hold the kid until uniformed cops showed up. And it wasn't really 'in a street', it was in his own yard...

And why should any kid let any adult grab him?

I'm just going to start telling kids "I'm a cop" and then pull out my gun when they start fighting me.

 CptJake wrote:

He did not draw a gun on them for trespassing. He drew the gun because he had been hit a couple times and was then flanked by a kid who reached for something.

He's a cop. He shouldn't have been doing any of this gak and he knew it.

It's really that simple. Really. None of the "Oh he had been hit a couple of times and flanked by a kid who reached for something" is relevant.

Why is it not relevant?
Because if he wasn't being a massive twit, he wouldn't have to be worried about "being flanked by a kid who reached for something".

 Kanluwen wrote:

 RiTides wrote:

Ah well, like I said, I just wonder where all the moderates have gone in discussions like this. The more I think about it, the more harshly I'd punish the police officer, but to say the kids acted correctly given what we see in the video (and not a hypothetical "what if your friend is being abducted") is just mind boggling to me.

There's not really ground for "moderation" in a case like this.

A guy, who is supposed to be a law enforcement officer--[u]someone who is actually supposed to be trained to deescalate situations just like this and in many cases engage these kids not just with a firearm but with words[u]--chose to "detain" one of the kids, then pulled a gun on them when the other kids took umbrage to the fact he's dragging around one of the kids.

The situation would be bad if it were a non-cop doing this, but it becomes a drastically different thing when it's a cop doing it.

Here is how I would handle this with the dang kids whose dogs crap in my yard, if I really felt that strongly about this:

- Take a picture of the kids to identify them down the line.
- Go outside to talk to them.
- Identify myself as an LEO while showing them my credentials.
- Let them leave, since that fixes the whole "trespassing" thing.
- If they refuse, come back, or get mouthy, go back inside and call 911 to get uniformed cops who belong to this jurisdiction on scene to handle it. I have their picture and the police can identify them if needed, even if they are gone.

Tada: nobody is fighting, nobody is in any danger, I successfully got to pull the "I'm a LEO, respect my authority" card, and I got one more bullet to play at the range with rather than aerating my yard with it.

d-usa,

That's exactly how he should have handled it, we totally agree on that.

What we seem to disagree on is you (unlike Kanluwen above) saying the kids acted as they SHOULD have (your post in response to my question).

Imo, they absolutely did not, and that's where the disconnect comes in... I am against the proliferation of violence in this country as much as anyone, but that also means I think it's important to recognize that the kids acted out of line - everybody escalated the situation. While the adult should rightfully bear most of the responsibility, the kids are not innocent here, either.

I do wish you would stop linking to a completely separate thread - if you want to have a general discussion about the behavior people have when they are carrying guns, that's worth having, but most of us were trying to discuss this particular incident and what should have happened, etc.

Anyway, like I said earlier I think the adult is mostly to blame, so at this point maybe we're just splitting hairs . I'll bow out as I meant to, earlier...

I don't really think they should physically attack him, but I don't have any problems with them fighting back either.

Do kids not have a right to defend themselves against a much larger and angry adult?

 RiTides wrote:
D-usa, the opposite question can also be asked - should kids team up to attack an adult (who has identified himself as a police officer, no less) who is holding onto their friend's collar, or should they just wait there with him and call the police themselves?

As noted above, he isn't moving until they start attacking him. I still think he handled it terribly, but your question is a "yes/no", when the answer should be "neither acted as they should have in that situation".

You are right, however the kids are just a bunch of naughty kids while the adult is supposedly a mature, well-trained law enforcement operative. People ought to be able to expect better behaviour from him.

My understanding is that the OD LAPD cop had already called for police, and was detaining the kid who had threatened to shoot him until the uniformed police arrived. The kid obviously didn't want to wait for the police, and that is when things turned physical. Cue cameras.

Demanding the kid wait for the police is something that any citizen can do, placing the kid under citizen's arrest. And any reasonably necessary amount of force can be used (by anyone, citizen, officer, or otherwise) in order to detain that person.

The Officer grabbing the kid's backpack is entirely in line with that, using minimal necessary force in order to detain the kid.

The kids escalated which is why they were charged.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
My understanding is that the OD LAPD cop had already called for police, and was detaining the kid who had threatened to shoot him until the uniformed police arrived. The kid obviously didn't want to wait for the police, and that is when things turned physical. Cue cameras.

Demanding the kid wait for the police is something that any citizen can do, placing the kid under citizen's arrest. And any reasonably necessary amount of force can be used (by anyone, citizen, officer, or otherwise) in order to detain that person.

The Officer grabbing the kid's backpack is entirely in line with that, using minimal necessary force in order to detain the kid.

The kids escalated which is why they were charged.

And whipping out the gun and discharging it, potentially killing a kid over a lawn? Is that OK? Are you seriously going to tell us all here that that pig was in the right?

The kid said he would sue him. The pig heard shoot him. He heard what he wanted to hear as an excuse to whip out the gun.

I can understand some idiot kids acting like idiots, even if they did wrong.

I cannot understand, nor accept, a trained police officer acting like that. Someone already said it here, so I won't elaborate further, but if you allow a bunch of kids to troll you to the point you end up firing a gun (intentionally or not) then you're not fit to be a cop, end of story.

Would someone really feel safe if such a cop were to be patrolling around their 'hood?

@FWC - go say "I'm going to shoot you" to a cop, and see where it goes. Later on, you can claim that you said "sue", but you'll be detained and taken to the station, first.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
@FWC - go say "I'm going to shoot you" to a cop, and see where it goes. Later on, you can claim that you said "sue", but you'll be detained and taken to the station, first.

Wouldn't it be more apt to go up to a police officer and say "I'm going to sue you" in order to see how many mishear it for shoot?

But then again, I'm from the UK where the police officer would probably look at me funny and ask me if everything was alright if I were to say I was going to shoot him without having any visible weapon. Simply because most people who are planning to shoot someone do not announce it before they even draw their weapon.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
My understanding is that the OD LAPD cop had already called for police, and was detaining the kid who had threatened to shoot him until the uniformed police arrived. The kid obviously didn't want to wait for the police, and that is when things turned physical. Cue cameras.

Demanding the kid wait for the police is something that any citizen can do, placing the kid under citizen's arrest. And any reasonably necessary amount of force can be used (by anyone, citizen, officer, or otherwise) in order to detain that person.

The Officer grabbing the kid's backpack is entirely in line with that, using minimal necessary force in order to detain the kid.

I believe that is battery.

No it isnt, you can perform a citizens arrests and use non deadly force in order to detain someone for a crime.
Including Breach of Peace, or Threats, which was what many of these kids where doing. But it doesnt matter, because a cop,even off duty, has the ability to arrest and detain you until Uniformed police arrived. Guy was in the right until the gun was drawn, even the, being surrounded and assaulted, I think he was justified until the ND happened.
Imagine if this same scene played out, but with a uniformed officer.
Because, as one cop told me, you are always on duty.

The only thing that went wrong for the cop was the accidental discharge. When the other kid flanked him and went for a concealed weapon, the officer was fully justified in drawing his weapon.

Yeah but the "HURR DURR ALL COPS BAD" narrative is too prevalent as of late sadly

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Yeah but the "HURR DURR ALL COPS BAD" narrative is too prevalent as of late sadly

That, and certain people commenting ignorantly without even watching the videos...

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
No it isnt, you can perform a citizens arrests and use non deadly force in order to detain someone for a crime.
Including Breach of Peace, or Threats, which was what many of these kids where doing. But it doesnt matter, because a cop,even off duty, has the ability to arrest and detain you until Uniformed police arrived. Guy was in the right until the gun was drawn, even the, being surrounded and assaulted, I think he was justified until the ND happened.
Imagine if this same scene played out, but with a uniformed officer.
Because, as one cop told me, you are always on duty.

The line between "citizen arrest" and battery / kidnapping is thin. This is not advised.

 Frazzled wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
No it isnt, you can perform a citizens arrests and use non deadly force in order to detain someone for a crime.
Including Breach of Peace, or Threats, which was what many of these kids where doing. But it doesnt matter, because a cop,even off duty, has the ability to arrest and detain you until Uniformed police arrived. Guy was in the right until the gun was drawn, even the, being surrounded and assaulted, I think he was justified until the ND happened.
Imagine if this same scene played out, but with a uniformed officer.
Because, as one cop told me, you are always on duty.

The line between "citizen arrest" and battery / kidnapping is thin. This is not advised.

Yeeeah, you can only use so much force to detain a person for a citizens arrest. He crossed way over that line. A citizens arrest does not mean you can do whatever you want to stop a person for a small infraction.

So yes it is, hotsauceman1.

Further, as you are not a police officer, you are not shielded by legally or politically if you didn't have the needed minimum legal justification.

Further (even further baby!) case law and statute have determined that resisting a police officer is bad. if someone grabs someone else, there is no presumption there absent other color of law. Some "citizen" grabbing another citizen on the street sets up a very interesting situation when the citizen being grabbed tazes him right in the baby maker.

Whatever happened to stranger danger? We teaching kids to listen to anybody who says they are a cop without providing any sort of identification these days?

I don't think they were listening to him, which is why he went on power trip and escalated.

 Frazzled wrote:
I don't think they were listening to him, which is why he went on power trip and escalated.

Oh I agree. I am just wondering why people are thinking they should have listened to him at all.

Just some crazy dude yelling at them and telling them he is a cop.

No one ever listens to me when I stand on my lawn yelling.

That's because you have no pants on.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
That's because you have no pants on.

And you're standing in your back lawn, Fraz. You need to go out to the front