Police Drag Unarmed Man Out of Car

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Sounds like a stupid right for the police to have.

No, it's quite a reasonable right. I mean, if the police have to confirm you are who you are how else are they going to do it? I mean, they could also take you to the station and take your fingerprints to compare against the national database. But that would be stupid.

Weirdly enough, I actually agree with you on something that to US people seems like "police state".

My opinion is based on "somebody knows, so why not government". Telcos know exactly where your phone is, any time it's turned on. Google clearly knows as well, so let's be frank: so does government. Google is relatively ethical, it admits to knowing where you are. Does anyone really believe they could hide it from government?

OK, so why not remove the loophole? Turning your phone off might just mean you don't want to be bothered, but that phone can handle that: taking messages without making a peep nor lighting up. Phones have become so essential that now, leaving the house without your phone, or having it turned off, is very probably because you're up to no good. Doing something illegal, or something that might lead to a crime later. The truly innocent have nothing to hide: they document everything they do (sometimes crimes, which is a bit funny: sure I snorted some coke, you're telling me that's a crime?). While people like me who consider crime quite often, am always cautious not to give away intentions or anything that might later turn out to be motive or method of a crime. I've been like that since I was a child, and learnt the amoral lesson "it's OK if you don't get caught" well people like me will have to be rounded up to have the Location Chip shot into our thigh-bones.

So it goes. Letting the private sector get more and more information on us (including location data for most of us), while government is denied even the location data, is simply a transfer of power from our democratically elected governments, to a capitalist machine that clearly cares less for any of us than government does. Information is power. Pathetic qualms about the government stake in that growing base of power, is fear of the lesser evil.

[Dumb Ideologies]

[Doublechecks if police motto is "Preact and trounce"]

[Nobel Hobos 2]

[Doublechecks if police motto is "Preact and trounce"]

Overt Crap Tan Setee (Settee is spelled wrong, best I can do)

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Sounds like a stupid right for the police to have.

No, it's quite a reasonable right. I mean, if the police have to confirm you are who you are how else are they going to do it? I mean, they could also take you to the station and take your fingerprints to compare against the national database. But that would be stupid.

No, unless someone is reasonably suspected of having committed a crime then there’s literally no reason for police to go around “show me your papers”-ing everyone.

[Purpelia]

Weirdly enough, I actually agree with you on something that to US people seems like "police state".

My opinion is based on "somebody knows, so why not government". Telcos know exactly where your phone is, any time it's turned on. Google clearly knows as well, so let's be frank: so does government. Google is relatively ethical, it admits to knowing where you are. Does anyone really believe they could hide it from government?

OK, so why not remove the loophole? Turning your phone off might just mean you don't want to be bothered, but that phone can handle that: taking messages without making a peep nor lighting up. Phones have become so essential that now, leaving the house without your phone, or having it turned off, is very probably because you're up to no good. Doing something illegal, or something that might lead to a crime later. The truly innocent have nothing to hide: they document everything they do (sometimes crimes, which is a bit funny: sure I snorted some coke, you're telling me that's a crime?). While people like me who consider crime quite often, am always cautious not to give away intentions or anything that might later turn out to be motive or method of a crime. I've been like that since I was a child, and learnt the amoral lesson "it's OK if you don't get caught" well people like me will have to be rounded up to have the Location Chip shot into our thigh-bones.

So it goes. Letting the private sector get more and more information on us (including location data for most of us), while government is denied even the location data, is simply a transfer of power from our democratically elected governments, to a capitalist machine that clearly cares less for any of us than government does. Information is power. Pathetic qualms about the government stake in that growing base of power, is fear of the lesser evil.

We are definitively NOT in agreement. There is a giant difference between allowing someone to know your location at all times and allowing someone to confirm you are not Spongebob Squarepants in a situation where they are already interacting with you for a good reason. What you describe is exactly why we in Europe have GDPR and other data protection legislation so that Google can't get and use that data either.

No, it's quite a reasonable right. I mean, if the police have to confirm you are who you are how else are they going to do it? I mean, they could also take you to the station and take your fingerprints to compare against the national database. But that would be stupid.

No, unless someone is reasonably suspected of having committed a crime then there’s literally no reason for police to go around “show me your papers”-ing everyone.

On the contrary. Every time that the police has any cause to interact with someone they also by definition have cause to confirm that person they are interacting with is who they claim to be. Say for example I was reporting a crime. They need to confirm I am who I say I am so that they can contact me later as a witness. Or if I was in a routine traffic stop. They need to confirm I am who I say I am and that this is indeed my car and not something I stole. Or if they are going door to door interviewing people in relation to some crime or another. Again, they need to know who I actually am. Without an ID I might as well say I am Spongebob Squarepants and they can't prove me wrong.

And if they don't have some good official reason to interact with you to begin with than they won't ask you for your papers because they won't be interacting with you to begin with. A police officer is newer going to just randomly accost you on the street for no reason.

[The Two Jerseys]

Let me guess the part of the traffic stop that isn't on the video: the police pulled the car over, came to the window to speak to the driver, this guy starts mouthing off even though he has nothing to do with the traffic stop, cop says "Okay smartass, you want to insert yourself into a situation that's none of your business? Let's see your ID then.", he refuses to comply with a lawful order and gets yanked out of the car for his effort, am I in the ballpark here?

[Albrenia]

Let me guess the part of the traffic stop that isn't on the video: the police pulled the car over, came to the window to speak to the driver, this guy starts mouthing off even though he has nothing to do with the traffic stop, cop says "Okay smartass, you want to insert yourself into a situation that's none of your business? Let's see your ID then.", he refuses to comply with a lawful order and gets yanked out of the car for his effort, am I in the ballpark here?

I mean, the guy certainly seems like he's a smartass from the video. A bit of a dumbass too, to be honest.

Apparently he's allowed to deny a request for his ID since he's not the driver though, but they somehow recognised him as someone with warrants on them, so they probably could ask him for it based on that.

*shrug*

Seems complex and stupid, as far as situations go.

[Andsed]

Let me guess the part of the traffic stop that isn't on the video: the police pulled the car over, came to the window to speak to the driver, this guy starts mouthing off even though he has nothing to do with the traffic stop, cop says "Okay smartass, you want to insert yourself into a situation that's none of your business? Let's see your ID then.", he refuses to comply with a lawful order and gets yanked out of the car for his effort, am I in the ballpark here?

This is about as far from the ballpark one can get seeing as it is baseless speculation. And even if he was being a smartass and mouthing, that does not change the fact the cops jumped to force way to quickly, and secondly he had a right to refuse to show his ID(as someone posted in this thread passengers are allowed to refuse to show their IDś in a traffic stop) so the cops really had no basis demanding to see his ID and then arresting him like.

And honestly focusing on the actual situation is short sighted. This incident is another demonstration of the disturbing trend of police escalating situations with force when its not necessary.

[Picairn]

well it wouldn't have happened had he just simply pulled out his ID. Why does everyone need to disobey the police if they say let me see your ID just do it because your not doing yourself or anyone any favors by resisting which he was by say no and telling the officers there's no need to investigate him. it's not over reach in this instance plus why is this on TMZ of all places now this sounds more like a grab for fame and money from a potential suit then actual police over reach.

"hE sHoULd HaVe ObEyEd."
Would you do the same if a cop asked to search your house without a warrant?

[The Two Jerseys]

Let me guess the part of the traffic stop that isn't on the video: the police pulled the car over, came to the window to speak to the driver, this guy starts mouthing off even though he has nothing to do with the traffic stop, cop says "Okay smartass, you want to insert yourself into a situation that's none of your business? Let's see your ID then.", he refuses to comply with a lawful order and gets yanked out of the car for his effort, am I in the ballpark here?

This is about as far from the ballpark one can get seeing as it is baseless speculation. And even if he was being a smartass and mouthing, that does not change the fact the cops jumped to force way to quickly, and secondly he had a right to refuse to show his ID(as someone posted in this thread passengers are allowed to refuse to show their IDś in a traffic stop) so the cops really had no basis demanding to see his ID and then arresting him like.

And honestly focusing on the actual situation is short sighted. This incident is another demonstration of the disturbing trend of police escalating situations with force when its not necessary.

It's more plausible than "evil road pirates harassing innocent travelers", seeing as how the video omits literally the entire traffic stop up to the point they start dragging him out of the car.