Lots of times when something like this could be handy, but with only three hours recording time, it will either over-write a lot of video that needed to be preserved, or not always be switched on when needed.
http://www.wirelessmobiledata.com/vidmic.pdf
New Jersey cops find a new way to collect cleavage shots on the beach:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0oP_pGJ1n4
Watch a creepy-eyed guy stumble through a video demonstration at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuAn0DlN0s0
quote:
Originally posted by patric
Lots of times when something like this could be handy, but with only three hours recording time, it will either over-write a lot of video that needed to be preserved, or not always be switched on when needed.
http://www.wirelessmobiledata.com/vidmic.pdf
New Jersey cops find a new way to collect cleavage shots on the beach:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0oP_pGJ1n4
Watch a creepy-eyed guy stumble through a video demonstration at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuAn0DlN0s0
Tulsa Police tried the lapel mic cameras about 6-7 months ago. They were okay. They worked well in the daylight but the nighttime (low light) picture wasn't good. The recording time was also an issue. We could never get over 5 hours. Either officers had to switch them on when they thought they needed them or go back to the division before the three hour mark to download.
Another issue was where officers should wear it. If you put it at the "V" of your shirt, the pictue was good during interviews ect but if you pulled your weapon and/or just got into a tactical/fighting stance, the camera would be recording to the right(or left if your left handed) of what you wanted to record. If you put the mic actually on your lapel, then it would usually record the sky or the horizon.
The best solution would be the cameras seen in the movie like "aliens" that the marines had. I think some soldiers use them now. They are right next to your eyes and see your line of sight. That way what you are looking at is recorded.
I think in a few years, these things will be the way to go for city police officers but the technology still has a ways to go.
Soon we will be able to implant a camera directly in the forehead of the officer. This technology will be very useful for teachers, surgeons, and blackjack dealers as well.
On a serious note, you would think the 3 hour storage issue could be resolved with memory sticks.
I just changed my post. The most we got it to go was 5 hours. I don't know the technical aspect of it. I'm sure they will improve it eventually.
quote:
On a serious note, you would think the 3 hour storage issue could be resolved with memory sticks.
Continuous recording would be about the only way to give such documentation credibility. I would be a bit stand-offish if I were a juror presented with video full of gaps as evidence.
I agree these particular cameras would not be the way to go.
that's ok, they don't have to have it recording all the time. My camera will get everything recorded.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
that's ok, they don't have to have it recording all the time. My camera will get everything recorded.
But you're cellphone camera could be a gun![:o)]
...at least that was the reason cited on TulsaNow for police not wanting you to use a cellphone, on the one-in-a hundred million-ish chance that the first cellphone-gun to make it to the North American continent just happens to show up in Tulsa Oklahoma...
(Kinda like me saying I dont want my daughter marrying a cop on the chance she could end up being Drew Peterson's fifth wife)[;)]
Im OK with police recording video at traffic stops as long as the public's right to do likewise is respected. Fair is fair.
A dashboard camera would have been handy in identifying the mysterious "white car" that caused a Tulsa police captain to drive his car into a light pole on the Sand Springs expressway at 3am Monday.
quote:
Originally posted by patric
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
that's ok, they don't have to have it recording all the time. My camera will get everything recorded.
But you're cellphone camera could be a gun![:o)]
...at least that was the reason cited on TulsaNow for police not wanting you to use a cellphone, on the one-in-a hundred million-ish chance that the first cellphone-gun to make it to the North American continent just happens to show up in Tulsa Oklahoma...
(Kinda like me saying I dont want my daughter marrying a cop on the chance she could end up being Drew Peterson's fifth wife)[;)]
Im OK with police recording video at traffic stops as long as the public's right to do likewise is respected. Fair is fair.
http://www.snopes.com/crime/warnings/cellgun.asp
I've seen pens that can fire a .22 (the rube was a barrel, the end came off, and the clicker was pulled back and released to fire the round). Clearly a metal pen would be passed through most security check points even at an airport. You could modify any number of items to fire a .22, the requirements to fire a round are really low.
We can't make rules on the most far extreme scenario, or the level of rules would be insurmountable. Plan for them, but don't turn every day occurrences into hell because of the possibility.
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
I've seen pens that can fire a .22 (the rube was a barrel, the end came off, and the clicker was pulled back and released to fire the round). Clearly a metal pen would be passed through most security check points even at an airport. You could modify any number of items to fire a .22, the requirements to fire a round are really low.
We can't make rules on the most far extreme scenario, or the level of rules would be insurmountable. Plan for them, but don't turn every day occurrences into hell because of the possibility.
Police officers know we can't go around all shift on your highest alert level. However, you should always be vigilant and on the lookout for anything suspicious. (like when someone keeps trying to point a pen or a cell phone at you.)
When you become complacent and think everything is routine, that is when you will be killed.
Everyone say a prayer for Deputy Sheriff William Howell Jr. He didn't make it home.
Deputy Sheriff William Howell Jr.
Orangeburg County Sheriff's Office
South Carolina
End of Watch: Saturday, May 3, 2008
Biographical Info
Age: 46
Tour of Duty: 16 years
Badge Number: Not available
Incident Details
Cause of Death: Gunfire
Date of Incident: Saturday, May 3, 2008
Weapon Used: Gun; Unknown type
Suspect Info: Not available
Deputy William Howell was shot and killed while responding to a domestic disturbance on Boyer Road at approximately 1:30 am. The male subject opened fire with a rifle, striking Deputy Howell in the neck.
The suspect was then run over and killed by his wife as he attempted to leave the home.
Deputy Howell had served with the Orangeburg County Sheriff's Office for 3 years and had served in law enforcement for a total of 16 years. He is survived by his wife and three sons.
Agency Contact Information
Orangeburg County Sheriff's Office
1520 Ellis Avenue
Orangeburg, SC 29115
Phone: (803) 531-4647
Please contact the Orangeburg County Sheriff's Office for funeral arrangements or for survivor benefit fund information.
Matthew D. Causey
Freedom is offered to you at the expense of the life, blood, sweat and tears of the U.S. Military.
quote:
When you become complacent and think everything is routine, that is when you will be killed.
You have a great point, and in that line of work you are absolutely correct. However, it is not your job (nor should it be) to weigh intrusiveness vs officer safety. I was merely suggesting that passing laws that would restrict cell phones in cars or other over reactions due to these extreme possibilities would not be wise.
I'm sorry to hear an officer died while trying to protect a person from abuse. The good news for society is the SOB that shot him got his in short order.
I appreciate your insight.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
you should always be vigilant and on the lookout for anything suspicious. (like when someone keeps trying to point a pen or a cell phone at you.)
I would be concerned about an individual imagining that everyone with a cellphone or pen in their hand is a threat.
quote:
Originally posted by patric
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
you should always be vigilant and on the lookout for anything suspicious. (like when someone keeps trying to point a pen or a cell phone at you.)
I would be concerned about an individual imagining that everyone with a cellphone or pen in their hand is a threat.
Of course you would. It's not your life on the line.
You should always be looking for non-verbal clues that may show someone's intent before they act.
A good rule is if the hair on the back of your neck starts to stand up, you should know that your subconscious is trying to tell you something is wrong. You just haven't picked up on it yet.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
you should always be vigilant and on the lookout for anything suspicious. (like when someone keeps trying to point a pen or a cell phone at you.)
quote:
Originally posted by patric
I would be concerned about an individual imagining that everyone with a cellphone or pen in their hand is a threat.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
Of course you would. It's not your life on the line.
You should always be looking for non-verbal clues that may show someone's intent before they act.
A good rule is if the hair on the back of your neck starts to stand up, you should know that your subconscious is trying to tell you something is wrong. You just haven't picked up on it yet.
But doesnt it indeed put my "life on the line" when someone has that extreme disposition?
A normal prudent person has no reasonable expectation to be shot because they have a pen or a phone in their hand in the normal course of the day. That this may be all it takes to tweak an officer into deadly force mode is a little disturbing.
quote:
Originally posted by patric
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
you should always be vigilant and on the lookout for anything suspicious. (like when someone keeps trying to point a pen or a cell phone at you.)
quote:
Originally posted by patric
I would be concerned about an individual imagining that everyone with a cellphone or pen in their hand is a threat.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
Of course you would. It's not your life on the line.
You should always be looking for non-verbal clues that may show someone's intent before they act.
A good rule is if the hair on the back of your neck starts to stand up, you should know that your subconscious is trying to tell you something is wrong. You just haven't picked up on it yet.
But doesnt it indeed put my "life on the line" when someone has that extreme disposition?
A normal prudent person has no reasonable expectation to be shot because they have a pen or a phone in their hand in the normal course of the day. That this may be all it takes to tweak an officer into deadly force mode is a little disturbing.
As long as you don't try and stab, shoot, shock or otherwise harm me with your device(s) you will be fine. Besides, you are assuming that an officer would go directly to deadly force. We have all kinds of tools on our belts to use.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
quote:
Originally posted by patric
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
you should always be vigilant and on the lookout for anything suspicious. (like when someone keeps trying to point a pen or a cell phone at you.)
quote:
Originally posted by patric
I would be concerned about an individual imagining that everyone with a cellphone or pen in their hand is a threat.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
Of course you would. It's not your life on the line.
You should always be looking for non-verbal clues that may show someone's intent before they act.
A good rule is if the hair on the back of your neck starts to stand up, you should know that your subconscious is trying to tell you something is wrong. You just haven't picked up on it yet.
But doesnt it indeed put my "life on the line" when someone has that extreme disposition?
A normal prudent person has no reasonable expectation to be shot because they have a pen or a phone in their hand in the normal course of the day. That this may be all it takes to tweak an officer into deadly force mode is a little disturbing.
As long as you don't try and stab, shoot, shock or otherwise harm me with your device(s) you will be fine. Besides, you are assuming that an officer would go directly to deadly force. We have all kinds of tools on our belts to use.
If we can only be subjected to a little more police "obediance training", then we'll all just instantly crumple into a whining, whimpering ball, sucking our thumb, when a police man approaches.
The police don't like cell phones or digital cameras for obvious reasons:
An independent witness to their behavior.
So, of course the police are spreading cock-and-bull stories about "cell-phone camera guns".
So they have a flimsy but ready cover story for turning you into a brain-ventilated rag doll for recording their behavior.
Your honor, they smugly testify, I thought suspect Amadou Diallo was carrying a gun when we fired 41 rounds at the unarmed suspect who was trying to open his door.
Here's the actual story:
"The officers opened fire on Diallo and during the burst Officer McMellon fell down the steps, appearing to be shot. The four officers fired forty-one shots, hitting Diallo nineteen times. Investigation found no weapons on Diallo's body; the item he had pulled out of his jacket was not a gun, but a WALLET."
In March 2004, his survivors accepted a $3,000,000 settlement from NY City."
Oops; so sorry.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
quote:
Originally posted by patric
Lots of times when something like this could be handy, but with only three hours recording time, it will either over-write a lot of video that needed to be preserved, or not always be switched on when needed.
http://www.wirelessmobiledata.com/vidmic.pdf
New Jersey cops find a new way to collect cleavage shots on the beach:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0oP_pGJ1n4
Watch a creepy-eyed guy stumble through a video demonstration at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuAn0DlN0s0
Tulsa Police tried the lapel mic cameras about 6-7 months ago. They were okay. They worked well in the daylight but the nighttime (low light) picture wasn't good. The recording time was also an issue. We could never get over 5 hours. Either officers had to switch them on when they thought they needed them or go back to the division before the three hour mark to download.
Another issue was where officers should wear it. If you put it at the "V" of your shirt, the pictue was good during interviews ect but if you pulled your weapon and/or just got into a tactical/fighting stance, the camera would be recording to the right(or left if your left handed) of what you wanted to record. If you put the mic actually on your lapel, then it would usually record the sky or the horizon.
The best solution would be the cameras seen in the movie like "aliens" that the marines had. I think some soldiers use them now. They are right next to your eyes and see your line of sight. That way what you are looking at is recorded.
I think in a few years, these things will be the way to go for city police officers but the technology still has a ways to go.
A policehat or helmet mounting a Line-of-Sight video camera would protect both the police and the citizenry with documentation of the encounter.
Starting with Police SWAT teams, who seem to have the most propensity to escalate a situation into a citizen fatality.
Wonder why the U.S. Dept. of Injustice tracks POLICE deaths that occur in the Line of Duty, by cause, but seem curiously uninterested in tracking how and why the citizenry are killed by police.
Hmmmmmh?
[B)]
quote:
Originally posted by patric
A dashboard camera would have been handy in identifying the mysterious "white car" that caused a Tulsa police captain to drive his car into a light pole on the Sand Springs expressway at 3am Monday.
Probably fell asleep at the wheel.....
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
I've seen pens that can fire a .22 (the rube was a barrel, the end came off, and the clicker was pulled back and released to fire the round). Clearly a metal pen would be passed through most security check points even at an airport. You could modify any number of items to fire a .22, the requirements to fire a round are really low.
We can't make rules on the most far extreme scenario, or the level of rules would be insurmountable. Plan for them, but don't turn every day occurrences into hell because of the possibility.
Police officers know we can't go around all shift on your highest alert level. However, you should always be vigilant and on the lookout for anything suspicious. (like when someone keeps trying to point a pen or a cell phone at you.)
When you become complacent and think everything is routine, that is when you will be killed.
Everyone say a prayer for Deputy Sheriff William Howell Jr. He didn't make it home.
Deputy Sheriff William Howell Jr.
Orangeburg County Sheriff's Office
South Carolina
End of Watch: Saturday, May 3, 2008
Biographical Info
Age: 46
Tour of Duty: 16 years
Badge Number: Not available
Incident Details
Cause of Death: Gunfire
Date of Incident: Saturday, May 3, 2008
Weapon Used: Gun; Unknown type
Suspect Info: Not available
Deputy William Howell was shot and killed while responding to a domestic disturbance on Boyer Road at approximately 1:30 am. The male subject opened fire with a rifle, striking Deputy Howell in the neck.
The suspect was then run over and killed by his wife as he attempted to leave the home.
Deputy Howell had served with the Orangeburg County Sheriff's Office for 3 years and had served in law enforcement for a total of 16 years. He is survived by his wife and three sons.
Agency Contact Information
Orangeburg County Sheriff's Office
1520 Ellis Avenue
Orangeburg, SC 29115
Phone: (803) 531-4647
Please contact the Orangeburg County Sheriff's Office for funeral arrangements or for survivor benefit fund information.
Matthew D. Causey
Freedom is offered to you at the expense of the life, blood, sweat and tears of the U.S. Military.
Notice closely that the cause of death was NOT a cell phone camera.
Rather, it was reportedly a RIFLE.
And, notice the not-so-subtle Police Obedience Training that MH2010 helpfully provides the citizenry:
"However, you should always be vigilant and on the lookout for anything suspicious. (like when someone keeps trying to point a pen or a cell phone at you."
Of COURSE, they don't want a cell phone camera pointed at them.
They want to be GOD, and God does NOT want to answer to any witnesses.
I was wondering when you would show up. Get tired of trying to convince people that Kathy Taylor isn't really a Tulsa resident?
Stupid bear. Maybe you could get some "intelligence training".
Since you brought up Amadou Diallo, Did you know the officers were aquitted of all state charges and the Justice department refused to prosecute them.
Here are some links:
http://www.courttv.com/trials/diallo/verdict.html
http://www.courttv.com/trials/diallo/aftermath.html
http://www.courttv.com/archive/news/2001/0131/diallo_ap.html
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
I was wondering when you would show up. Get tired of trying to convince people that Kathy Taylor isn't really a Tulsa resident?
Stupid bear. Maybe you could get some "intelligence training".
Since you brought up Amadou Diallo, Did you know the officers were aquitted of all state charges and the Justice department refused to prosecute them.
Here are some links:
http://www.courttv.com/trials/diallo/verdict.html
http://www.courttv.com/trials/diallo/aftermath.html
http://www.courttv.com/archive/news/2001/0131/diallo_ap.html
Simple reason:
There is NO such legal concept as an "unjustified" police shooting.
As to a police prosecution by the U.S. Department of Injustice, pshaw.
Find an unjustified police shooting. Find: One. The legal concept doesn't exist.
I'm sure the four remorseful police plainclothes shooters that shot an innocent man 41 times, scoring only 19 hits, including one in the sole of his foot, felt really, really bad about the shooting.......
Scoring a miserable, less than 50% hit-rate, from 15' means much, much more time at the Police Firing Range.
Practice, practice......
P.S. Exactly HOW is a citizen supposed to surrender to the police when he being shot at 41 times, and hit 19 times?
How?
Sheriff Andy's precautions regarding Deputy Barney Fife come to mind: Give Barney ONE Bullet; but make him keep it in his pocket.....
[:O]
Here's a question:
Which would you prefer:
1) Officer incorrectly believes that he is in danger and shoots and kills an innocent citizen
or
2) Officer senses danger, but takes a fatal bullet while exercising discretion.
Some articles regarding police shootings, etc:
quote:
In case after case when a District police officer shot a citizen during the 1990s, the Metropolitan Police Department's investigations were riddled with errors and omissions that make it impossible to sort out why the officer fired and whether the shooting was legitimate.
The poorly documented investigations protected officers who may have wrongly shot citizens or lied about the incidents, while making it difficult for blameless officers to clear their names in the civil lawsuits that often follow police shootings, an examination by The Washington Post found. (article here (//%22http://www.streetgangs.com/topics/1998/111798dcpo3.html%22))
quote:
Authorities never challenged that preliminary conclusion, even when contradictory information emerged in the days and months that followed.
Far from an egregious exception, the Chicago Police Department's handling of the Ware case fits a pattern of officials rushing to clear officers who shoot civilians, an eight-month Tribune investigation found.
The inquiry, which reviewed available records for more than 200 police shooting cases over the last decade, found that these cursory police investigations create a separate standard of justice and fuel the fear among some citizens that officers can shoot people with impunity.
In at least a dozen cases, police shot civilians in the back or from behind. But in the Ware case, as in many other police shootings, it took a civil suit for the troubling details of the case to emerge publicly. (article here (//%22http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/specials/chi-071205cops-htmlstory,0,4405016.htmlstory%22))
quote:
So far in 2008, there have been nine people shot by officers of the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office. While Shorstein said all the cases he has investigated were justifiable, that does not mean he believes they were all necessary.
"My findings of justifiable homicides are not findings of approval or acceptance of the shootings," Shorstein said.
Under the law, justifiable means an officer has reason to believe the shooting was necessary to protect himself, Shorstein said. (article here (//%22http://www.news4jax.com/news/15902914/detail.html%22))
quote:
Originally posted by CoffeeBean
Here's a question:
Which would you prefer:
1) Officer incorrectly believes that he is in danger and shoots and kills an innocent citizen
or
2) Officer senses danger, but takes a fatal bullet while exercising discretion.
Definitely, choice #2.
Why?
We pay police to take some risks. And, they get a giant heaping of societal positive stroking.
They are NOT paid to be trigger-happy, oppressors.
Year end and year out, it is not police that have the most dangerous public service jobs.
It is firemen.
About 50 police were killed in the "line of duty "for the most recent measured year.
Approximately 1/2 that number is due to gunfire.
How many civilians were killed by police during the same time period?
NOBODY knows. Sorry, that handy little statistic is not captured by the U.S. Dept. of Injustice.
Wonder WHY?
quote:
Originally posted by Friendly Bear
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
I was wondering when you would show up. Get tired of trying to convince people that Kathy Taylor isn't really a Tulsa resident?
Stupid bear. Maybe you could get some "intelligence training".
Since you brought up Amadou Diallo, Did you know the officers were aquitted of all state charges and the Justice department refused to prosecute them.
Here are some links:
http://www.courttv.com/trials/diallo/verdict.html
http://www.courttv.com/trials/diallo/aftermath.html
http://www.courttv.com/archive/news/2001/0131/diallo_ap.html
Simple reason:
There is NO such legal concept as an "unjustified" police shooting.
As to a police prosecution by the U.S. Department of Injustice, pshaw.
Find an unjustified police shooting. Find: One. The legal concept doesn't exist.
I'm sure the four remorseful police plainclothes shooters that shot an innocent man 41 times, scoring only 19 hits, including one in the sole of his foot, felt really, really bad about the shooting.......
Scoring a miserable, less than 50% hit-rate, from 15' means much, much more time at the Police Firing Range.
Practice, practice......
P.S. Exactly HOW is a citizen supposed to surrender to the police when he being shot at 41 times, and hit 19 times?
How?
Sheriff Andy's precautions regarding Deputy Barney Fife come to mind: Give Barney ONE Bullet; but make him keep it in his pocket.....
[:O]
An unjustified police shooting is called Homicide, manslaughter, Shooting with Intent to kill, AWDW ect.
As far as unjustified police shootings, there are many. Just google it and you will see officers prosecuted and found guilty.
The newest study I found was conducted by Dr. Aveni. Dr. Aveni spent more than 6 months dissecting material from major departments, including Los Angeles County (LAC) New York City, Baltimore County (MD), Miami, Portland (OR) and Washington (DC).
The study showed that
"while it has long been believed that officers overall have a dismal 15-25 per cent hit probability in street encounters, suggesting truly poor performance under the stress of a real shooting situation. Actually, this figure, while essentially true in the aggregate, is markedly skewed by certain shooting variables.
During a 13-year span, the Baltimore County PD, which Aveni regards as one of the best trained in the country, achieved an average hit ratio of 64 per cent in daylight shootings-not ideal, but clearly much better than commonly believed. In shootings that occurred in low-light surroundings, however, average hits dropped to 45 per cent, a 30 per cent decline. The data from Los Angeles County (LAC) reveals a somewhat comparable 24 per cent decline.
Until this research, performance has never been accurately matched to lighting conditions, even though as many as 77 per cent of police shootings are believed to occur under some degree of diminished lighting. Some departments tally "outdoor" versus "indoor" shootings, but most appear not to precisely differentiate between low-light and ample-light events, despite the preponderance of shootings during nighttime duty tours.
A multiple-officer shooting, in which more than one officer fires during a deadly force engagement, has an even greater influence on hit probability, Aveni discovered.
According to the LAC data, when only one officer fired during an encounter, the average hit ratio was 51 per cent. When an additional officer got involved in shooting, hits dropped dramatically, to 23 per cent. With more than 2 officers shooting, the average hit ratio was only 9 per cent--"a whopping 82 per cent declination," Aveni points out.
Multiple-officer shootings, Aveni told Force Science News, are three times more likely to involve suspects with shoulder weapons than single-officer shootings. This tends to "increase the typical stand-off distance," he says. Many of these confrontations also embody fast-changing, chaotic and complex circumstances. These factors, Aveni believes, help explain the negative impact on accuracy.
Aveni also discovered a correlation between multiple-officer shootings and number of rounds fired.
With LAC shootings involving only one officer, an average of 3.59 police rounds were fired. When 2 officers got involved, the average jumped to 4.98 rounds and with 3 officers or more to 6.48. "The number of rounds fired per officer increases in multiple-officer shootings by as much as 45 per cent over single-officer shootings," Aveni says.
Again, he judges distance to be a likely factor. "A higher volume of fire may be used to compensate for the lower hit ratio as distance increases," he speculates. He believes the highly violent nature these events often present may be influential, too. Anecdotally bunch shootings appear to encompass "many of the barricaded gunman scenarios, drawn-out foot and vehicular pursuits, subjects experiencing violent psychotic episodes, gang attacks and encounters involving heavily armed suspects," such as the infamous FBI Miami shootout and the North Hollywood bank robbery street battle.
"Emotional contagion," where officers fire merely because others are shooting, is almost certainly an element of at least some multiple-officer shootings, Aveni concedes. But the extent of this assumed influence is difficult if not impossible to document. Certainly the claim, sometimes made after high-profile group shootings, "that cops are firing their weapons empty in panic, is not supported by the facts," he stresses."Here is an article about how suspects can be shot in the back.
http://www.forcescience.org/articles/shotinback.pdf
Here is an article about police shootings
http://www.forcescience.org/articles/tellingthetruth.pdf
Here is a study about police shootings and citizen behaviors.
http://www.forcescience.org/articles/shotsfired.pdf
Here is a study about the reaction times in lethal force encounters.
http://www.forcescience.org/articles/tempestudy.pdf
quote:
Originally posted by Friendly Bear
quote:
Originally posted by patric
A dashboard camera would have been handy in identifying the mysterious "white car" that caused a Tulsa police captain to drive his car into a light pole on the Sand Springs expressway at 3am Monday.
Probably fell asleep at the wheel.....
Kinda suspected something like that when every cop in the county didnt drop everything and race to rescue him. I still think continuous dashcams would do more good than harm.
quote:
Originally posted by patric
quote:
Originally posted by Friendly Bear
quote:
Originally posted by patric
A dashboard camera would have been handy in identifying the mysterious "white car" that caused a Tulsa police captain to drive his car into a light pole on the Sand Springs expressway at 3am Monday.
Probably fell asleep at the wheel.....
P
Kinda suspected something like that when every cop in the county didnt drop everything and race to rescue him. I still think continuous dashcams would do more good than harm.
Policemen frequently work a lot of overtime, either on the job, or moonlighting at a second job (using our police cruiser and our fuel to rent his/her badge out after workhours for extra pay).
He was probably just tired.
What's he gonna say: "I fell asleep at the wheel".
or,
"A white car ran me off the road."
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
quote:
Originally posted by Friendly Bear
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
I was wondering when you would show up. Get tired of trying to convince people that Kathy Taylor isn't really a Tulsa resident?
Stupid bear. Maybe you could get some "intelligence training".
Since you brought up Amadou Diallo, Did you know the officers were aquitted of all state charges and the Justice department refused to prosecute them.
Here are some links:
http://www.courttv.com/trials/diallo/verdict.html
http://www.courttv.com/trials/diallo/aftermath.html
http://www.courttv.com/archive/news/2001/0131/diallo_ap.html
Simple reason:
There is NO such legal concept as an "unjustified" police shooting.
As to a police prosecution by the U.S. Department of Injustice, pshaw.
Find an unjustified police shooting. Find: One. The legal concept doesn't exist.
I'm sure the four remorseful police plainclothes shooters that shot an innocent man 41 times, scoring only 19 hits, including one in the sole of his foot, felt really, really bad about the shooting.......
Scoring a miserable, less than 50% hit-rate, from 15' means much, much more time at the Police Firing Range.
Practice, practice......
P.S. Exactly HOW is a citizen supposed to surrender to the police when he being shot at 41 times, and hit 19 times?
How?
Sheriff Andy's precautions regarding Deputy Barney Fife come to mind: Give Barney ONE Bullet; but make him keep it in his pocket.....
[:O]
An unjustified police shooting is called Homicide, manslaughter, Shooting with Intent to kill, AWDW ect.
As far as unjustified police shootings, there are many. Just google it and you will see officers prosecuted and found guilty.
The newest study I found was conducted by Dr. Aveni. Dr. Aveni spent more than 6 months dissecting material from major departments, including Los Angeles County (LAC) New York City, Baltimore County (MD), Miami, Portland (OR) and Washington (DC).
The study showed that "while it has long been believed that officers overall have a dismal 15-25 per cent hit probability in street encounters, suggesting truly poor performance under the stress of a real shooting situation. Actually, this figure, while essentially true in the aggregate, is markedly skewed by certain shooting variables.
During a 13-year span, the Baltimore County PD, which Aveni regards as one of the best trained in the country, achieved an average hit ratio of 64 per cent in daylight shootings-not ideal, but clearly much better than commonly believed. In shootings that occurred in low-light surroundings, however, average hits dropped to 45 per cent, a 30 per cent decline. The data from Los Angeles County (LAC) reveals a somewhat comparable 24 per cent decline.
Until this research, performance has never been accurately matched to lighting conditions, even though as many as 77 per cent of police shootings are believed to occur under some degree of diminished lighting. Some departments tally "outdoor" versus "indoor" shootings, but most appear not to precisely differentiate between low-light and ample-light events, despite the preponderance of shootings during nighttime duty tours.
A multiple-officer shooting, in which more than one officer fires during a deadly force engagement, has an even greater influence on hit probability, Aveni discovered.
According to the LAC data, when only one officer fired during an encounter, the average hit ratio was 51 per cent. When an additional officer got involved in shooting, hits dropped dramatically, to 23 per cent. With more than 2 officers shooting, the average hit ratio was only 9 per cent--"a whopping 82 per cent declination," Aveni points out.
Multiple-officer shootings, Aveni told Force Science News, are three times more likely to involve suspects with shoulder weapons than single-officer shootings. This tends to "increase the typical stand-off distance," he says. Many of these confrontations also embody fast-changing, chaotic and complex circumstances. These factors, Aveni believes, help explain the negative impact on accuracy.
Aveni also discovered a correlation between multiple-officer shootings and number of rounds fired.
With LAC shootings involving only one officer, an average of 3.59 police rounds were fired. When 2 officers got involved, the average jumped to 4.98 rounds and with 3 officers or more to 6.48. "The number of rounds fired per officer increases in multiple-officer shootings by as much as 45 per cent over single-officer shootings," Aveni says.
Again, he judges distance to be a likely factor. "A higher volume of fire may be used to compensate for the lower hit ratio as distance increases," he speculates. He believes the highly violent nature these events often present may be influential, too. Anecdotally bunch shootings appear to encompass "many of the barricaded gunman scenarios, drawn-out foot and vehicular pursuits, subjects experiencing violent psychotic episodes, gang attacks and encounters involving heavily armed suspects," such as the infamous FBI Miami shootout and the North Hollywood bank robbery street battle.
"Emotional contagion," where officers fire merely because others are shooting, is almost certainly an element of at least some multiple-officer shootings, Aveni concedes. But the extent of this assumed influence is difficult if not impossible to document. Certainly the claim, sometimes made after high-profile group shootings, "that cops are firing their weapons empty in panic, is not supported by the facts," he stresses."
Here is an article about how suspects can be shot in the back.
http://www.forcescience.org/articles/shotinback.pdf
Here is an article about police shootings
http://www.forcescience.org/articles/tellingthetruth.pdf
Here is a study about police shootings and citizen behaviors.
http://www.forcescience.org/articles/shotsfired.pdf
Here is a study about the reaction times in lethal force encounters.
http://www.forcescience.org/articles/tempestudy.pdf
VERY interesting links.
I didn't realize that ammunition companies advertised in police journals about the efficacy of their EXPLOSIVE bullets.
Advertised to cause maximim fragmentation and wounding/death to anyone hit with an explosive bullet.
Curiously, the Geneva and Hague Conventions have OUTLAWED such bullets as hollow-point, exploding, or frangible for the use in military small arms.
Yet, the same military small arms are used by our Police to blow GIANT holes in suspects.
Ouch. A sucking chest wound, caused by one of these bullets, makes a yawning wound the size of a canteloupe. That's gotta really hurt.
You'd think our Police would at least adher to the Geneva and Hague Conventions with regards to treatment of their fellow citizens.
[:O]
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
quote:
Originally posted by Friendly Bear
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
I was wondering when you would show up. Get tired of trying to convince people that Kathy Taylor isn't really a Tulsa resident?
Stupid bear. Maybe you could get some "intelligence training".
Since you brought up Amadou Diallo, Did you know the officers were aquitted of all state charges and the Justice department refused to prosecute them.
Here are some links:
http://www.courttv.com/trials/diallo/verdict.html
http://www.courttv.com/trials/diallo/aftermath.html
http://www.courttv.com/archive/news/2001/0131/diallo_ap.html
Simple reason:
There is NO such legal concept as an "unjustified" police shooting.
As to a police prosecution by the U.S. Department of Injustice, pshaw.
Find an unjustified police shooting. Find: One. The legal concept doesn't exist.
I'm sure the four remorseful police plainclothes shooters that shot an innocent man 41 times, scoring only 19 hits, including one in the sole of his foot, felt really, really bad about the shooting.......
Scoring a miserable, less than 50% hit-rate, from 15' means much, much more time at the Police Firing Range.
Practice, practice......
P.S. Exactly HOW is a citizen supposed to surrender to the police when he being shot at 41 times, and hit 19 times?
How?
Sheriff Andy's precautions regarding Deputy Barney Fife come to mind: Give Barney ONE Bullet; but make him keep it in his pocket.....
[:O]
An unjustified police shooting is called Homicide, manslaughter, Shooting with Intent to kill, AWDW ect.
As far as unjustified police shootings, there are many. Just google it and you will see officers prosecuted and found guilty.
The newest study I found was conducted by Dr. Aveni. Dr. Aveni spent more than 6 months dissecting material from major departments, including Los Angeles County (LAC) New York City, Baltimore County (MD), Miami, Portland (OR) and Washington (DC).
The study showed that "while it has long been believed that officers overall have a dismal 15-25 per cent hit probability in street encounters, suggesting truly poor performance under the stress of a real shooting situation. Actually, this figure, while essentially true in the aggregate, is markedly skewed by certain shooting variables.
During a 13-year span, the Baltimore County PD, which Aveni regards as one of the best trained in the country, achieved an average hit ratio of 64 per cent in daylight shootings-not ideal, but clearly much better than commonly believed. In shootings that occurred in low-light surroundings, however, average hits dropped to 45 per cent, a 30 per cent decline. The data from Los Angeles County (LAC) reveals a somewhat comparable 24 per cent decline.
Until this research, performance has never been accurately matched to lighting conditions, even though as many as 77 per cent of police shootings are believed to occur under some degree of diminished lighting. Some departments tally "outdoor" versus "indoor" shootings, but most appear not to precisely differentiate between low-light and ample-light events, despite the preponderance of shootings during nighttime duty tours.
A multiple-officer shooting, in which more than one officer fires during a deadly force engagement, has an even greater influence on hit probability, Aveni discovered.
According to the LAC data, when only one officer fired during an encounter, the average hit ratio was 51 per cent. When an additional officer got involved in shooting, hits dropped dramatically, to 23 per cent. With more than 2 officers shooting, the average hit ratio was only 9 per cent--"a whopping 82 per cent declination," Aveni points out.
Multiple-officer shootings, Aveni told Force Science News, are three times more likely to involve suspects with shoulder weapons than single-officer shootings. This tends to "increase the typical stand-off distance," he says. Many of these confrontations also embody fast-changing, chaotic and complex circumstances. These factors, Aveni believes, help explain the negative impact on accuracy.
Aveni also discovered a correlation between multiple-officer shootings and number of rounds fired.
With LAC shootings involving only one officer, an average of 3.59 police rounds were fired. When 2 officers got involved, the average jumped to 4.98 rounds and with 3 officers or more to 6.48. "The number of rounds fired per officer increases in multiple-officer shootings by as much as 45 per cent over single-officer shootings," Aveni says.
Again, he judges distance to be a likely factor. "A higher volume of fire may be used to compensate for the lower hit ratio as distance increases," he speculates. He believes the highly violent nature these events often present may be influential, too. Anecdotally bunch shootings appear to encompass "many of the barricaded gunman scenarios, drawn-out foot and vehicular pursuits, subjects experiencing violent psychotic episodes, gang attacks and encounters involving heavily armed suspects," such as the infamous FBI Miami shootout and the North Hollywood bank robbery street battle.
"Emotional contagion," where officers fire merely because others are shooting, is almost certainly an element of at least some multiple-officer shootings, Aveni concedes. But the extent of this assumed influence is difficult if not impossible to document. Certainly the claim, sometimes made after high-profile group shootings, "that cops are firing their weapons empty in panic, is not supported by the facts," he stresses."
Here is an article about how suspects can be shot in the back.
http://www.forcescience.org/articles/shotinback.pdf
Here is an article about police shootings
http://www.forcescience.org/articles/tellingthetruth.pdf
Here is a study about police shootings and citizen behaviors.
http://www.forcescience.org/articles/shotsfired.pdf
Here is a study about the reaction times in lethal force encounters.
http://www.forcescience.org/articles/tempestudy.pdf
MH2010:
You're absolutely going to LOVE this very, very recent video taken of about 20 Philadelphia police officers beating, clubbing, and kicking the living Shi'te out of three supine, compliant suspects.
Suspects.
Notice that the Police German Shepard is under better control than the City of Brotherly Love's Men in Blue.
Good Doggy. Sit. Roll-over.
Better get your emotions under control B4 clicking on this link.
It's red hot.
Have a towel handy just in case........
It's so exciting; I just can't hide it.....
They're about to lose control and I'll bet you'll LIKE it.
Really, you're gonna LOVE this......
My personal favorite is the policeman swinging his steel baton 4-5 times AFTER the supine prisoner is completely cuffed and compliant. Then, his associate, the color-coordinated Man in Blue with clip-on Tie. decides to stomp the supine suspect's testicles into jelly.
DAMN those pesky video cameras.......There OUGHT to be a Law. The TV helicopter video camera could have been mistaken for the ubiqitous Cell Phone Camera Gun.
Sure, the police beating was just an Anomaly.....Nothing to see here.
Just MOVE on.
http://video.news.sky.com/skynews/video?videoSourceID=1315206&flashURL=feeds/skynews/latest/flash/beating_u8559_070508.flv[:O][:O]
Sorry pooh bear....
I've already seen the video. All of the officers invovled were suspended and will face criminal charges. Which is exactly what would happen if a bunch of civilians did the same thing. What exactly would you want done to them? Shot on the spot? They lost control and went beyond the scope of their duties and will be prosecuted for it.
The bullets are legal for civilian and police use.
Police use the ammo largely to the reduced risk of bystanders being hit by over-penetrating or ricocheted bullets, and the increased speed of incapacitation.
You should probably go back to the Mayor Taylor thread now.
Not that it excuses the behavior of the officers but I guess it should also be noted that the Philly officers are a little stressed out as a result of the killing Sergeant Stephen Liczbinski
Sergeant Stephen Liczbinski
Philadelphia Police Department
Pennsylvania
End of Watch: Saturday, May 3, 2008
Biographical Info
Age: 39
Tour of Duty: 12 years
Badge Number: 486
Incident Details
Cause of Death: Gunfire
Date of Incident: Saturday, May 3, 2008
Weapon Used: Rifle; AK-47
Suspect Info: Shot and killed
Sergeant Stephen Liczbinski was shot and killed while responding to a bank robbery call at approximately 11:30 am.
Three men dressed in female Muslim garb had robbed a Bank of America on Aramingo Avenue. Sergeant Liczbinski encountered the suspects on East Schiller Street and stopped their car. As he exited his patrol car, a suspect opened fire with an AK-47, striking Sergeant Liczbinski several times. Several citizens who witnessed the incident rushed to assist Sergeant Liczbinski, wrapping his wounds in an effort to stop the bleeding. Sergeant Liczbinski told them "tell my wife I love her", before he fell into unconsciousness. Another officer and a citizen carried Sergeant Liczbinski into a patrol car and he was transported to a local hospital, where he died from his wounds.
The suspects continued to flee, but crashed their vehicle. Two suspects fled and a third suspect stole another vehicle, but was shot and killed by responding K-9 officers. One suspect was arrested the following day and an arrest warrant was issued for a third suspect.
Sergeant Liczbinski had served with the Philadelphia Police Department for 12 years. He is survived by his wife and three children.
Agency Contact Information
Philadelphia Police Department
One Franklin Square
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Phone: (215) 686-1776
Please contact the Philadelphia Police Department for funeral arrangements or for survivor benefit fund information.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
Not that it excuses the behavior of the officers but I guess it should also be noted that the Philly officers are a little stressed out as a result of the killing Sergeant Stephen Liczbinski
Sergeant Stephen Liczbinski
Philadelphia Police Department
Pennsylvania
End of Watch: Saturday, May 3, 2008
Biographical Info
Age: 39
Tour of Duty: 12 years
Badge Number: 486
Incident Details
Cause of Death: Gunfire
Date of Incident: Saturday, May 3, 2008
Weapon Used: Rifle; AK-47
Suspect Info: Shot and killed
Sergeant Stephen Liczbinski was shot and killed while responding to a bank robbery call at approximately 11:30 am.
Three men dressed in female Muslim garb had robbed a Bank of America on Aramingo Avenue. Sergeant Liczbinski encountered the suspects on East Schiller Street and stopped their car. As he exited his patrol car, a suspect opened fire with an AK-47, striking Sergeant Liczbinski several times. Several citizens who witnessed the incident rushed to assist Sergeant Liczbinski, wrapping his wounds in an effort to stop the bleeding. Sergeant Liczbinski told them "tell my wife I love her", before he fell into unconsciousness. Another officer and a citizen carried Sergeant Liczbinski into a patrol car and he was transported to a local hospital, where he died from his wounds.
The suspects continued to flee, but crashed their vehicle. Two suspects fled and a third suspect stole another vehicle, but was shot and killed by responding K-9 officers. One suspect was arrested the following day and an arrest warrant was issued for a third suspect.
Sergeant Liczbinski had served with the Philadelphia Police Department for 12 years. He is survived by his wife and three children.
Agency Contact Information
Philadelphia Police Department
One Franklin Square
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Phone: (215) 686-1776
Please contact the Philadelphia Police Department for funeral arrangements or for survivor benefit fund information.
When police order suspects to lay on the ground, do they realize they are going to star in a Police Stomp Dance?
What was really morbidly fascinating to watch in the Philadelphia Police Stomp Dance was it was so well correographed.
Like it was either very well Well-Rehearsed, or they had played the Stomp-Dance Gig together many, many times before.....
Do they teach the Stomp-Dance routine at their Police Academies?
Hmmmmmh?
Oh, and from your description, I take it the three stomped-on/clubbed/beaten suspects had NOTHING to do with the bank robbery/police shooting?
Nothing at all?
[:O]
Actually, most of the police officers were ineffective with their strikes. If you want to see an effective mob beating you should watch the Reginald Denny beating video from the 1992 L.A. riots. Reginald barely survived it. The piece of concrete and the cinder block were brutal. Sometimes people do bad things.
And like I said before, they were out of control and beyond the scope of their authority. They will be prosecuted for their actions.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
Actually, most of the police officers were ineffective with their strikes. If you want to see an effective mob beating you should watch the Reginald Denny beating video from the 1992 L.A. riots. Reginald barely survived it. The piece of concrete and the cinder block were brutal. Sometimes people do bad things.
And like I said before, they were out of control and beyond the scope of their authority. They will be prosecuted for their actions.
Too bad for Mr. Denny that there were no police around to protect him.
Wonder if any of the LA rioters that beat him nearly to death were ever found or prosecuted?
The TV networks were the leading contributor to the riots. They showed over and over and over again the video of Rodney King's beating in conjuction with the LA Policemen's acquittal in State Court of all charges.
I never saw the TV networks televise the entire film they'd captured of the Rodney King episode.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
Actually, most of the police officers were ineffective with their strikes. If you want to see an effective mob beating you should watch the Reginald Denny beating video from the 1992 L.A. riots. Reginald barely survived it. The piece of concrete and the cinder block were brutal. Sometimes people do bad things.
And like I said before, they were out of control and beyond the scope of their authority. They will be prosecuted for their actions.
The Philadelphia police are also notorious for giving prisoners "The Nickel Ride".
What's that?
Prisoners hand-cuffed behind their backs are transported unrestrained in the back of police vans.
The police driver intentionally slams on the brakes, or swerves erratically, and the un-belted prisoner goes flying.
Several are now Paraplegics due to Spinal Cord injuries suffered why transporting the prisoner.
Here's some details:
Rides in Police Vans Injure Suspects
Philadelphia -
"At least 20 suspects riding in the back of police vans in recent years suffered injuries ranging from a severed spinal cord to a broken tailbone, reflecting a long-standing tradition of officers using erratic driving to deal with apparently difficult suspects, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported.
Officers call the long-standing ritual a "nickel ride," a term dating to the days when amusement-park rides cost 5 cents. Rookie officers learn about it as "part of your street training," said Norman A Carter Jr, a retired Philadelphia police corporal.
Although the city has paid more than $2.3 million to settle lawsuits filed by the arrestees, none of the officers has been disciplined for intentionally subjecting passengers to wild rides, the newspaper reported in early Sunday editions. The city has also been slow to deploy potentially safer vehicles, the paper said. Two people were permanently paralysed in city police vans. Most of the 20 victims had clean records and were arrested on minor charges, such as talking back or arguing with police.
"That wagon changed a lot," said Gino Thompson, a father of 11 paralysed from the waist down. "I can't play football with my kids. I can't play basketball. I was a gymnast, a singer, a dancer. I did it a1l."
Thompson, 40, was arrested in 1994 after a drunken argument with a girlfriend. He now relies on a wheelchair. The city paid $600,000 to settle his lawsuit. The newspaper found 19 similar cases, but reported that they probably represent a fraction of all wagon injuries.
Current and former officers say the erratic driving, in which the officer makes sharp turns, accelerates quickly or slams the brakes, is often falsely attributed to traffic, bad roads or a sudden stop made to avoid an animal.
James B Jordan, a lawyer who worked as the police department's in-house corruption monitor from 1996 through 1999, said officers use the "nickel ride" to assert control. "What better way to show who's in control than stopping at a light and slamming on the brakes, knowing that they're going to go flying?" Jordan asked. "And maybe the prisoner was yelling, and maybe this will shut him up."
Police Commissioner John F Timoney said he was not aware that officers would intentionally injure prisoners during transport. "Such behaviour - if it does exist - certainly isn't condoned by myself or anybody else in this department," Timoney said. "We are making efforts, as much as humanly possible, to reduce the number of incidents where prisoners get hurt in the back of these vans," he said.
Chief Inspector Frank M Pryor, head of the police department's patrol operations, said "nobody did anything about" the rough rides 30 years ago, but insists times have changed. "If we see that happen, we're on it now," Pryor said.
Eleven of the 20 cases found by the newspaper, however, were never investigated by the department's Internal Affairs division. Of the other nine incidents, the department suspended one officer for three days for infractions that occurred after the wagon ride, not for the injury itself. The other eight resulted in no sanctions.
Some cities have phased out wagons or added safety restraints and padding, but only 10 of Philadelphia's 86 wagons have these safety features. The other vehicles which transport tens of thousands of suspects per year, have a compartment made of fiberglass and plastic with narrow benches.
Calvin Saunders was transported in such a van in 1997 when he was arrested for driving a stolen car. During the ride, he was propelled from his seat and rammed his head against a wall. Now a quadriplegic, Saunders cannot feed, bathe or dress himself. The city paid him a $1.2 million settlement to help cover his lifetime medical care."
Source: The Sunday Star-Ledger (Morris County NJ edition) 3 June 2001 from the Associated Press.
quote:
Originally posted by Friendly Bear
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
Actually, most of the police officers were ineffective with their strikes. If you want to see an effective mob beating you should watch the Reginald Denny beating video from the 1992 L.A. riots. Reginald barely survived it. The piece of concrete and the cinder block were brutal. Sometimes people do bad things.
And like I said before, they were out of control and beyond the scope of their authority. They will be prosecuted for their actions.
The Philadelphia police are also notorious for giving prisoners "The Nickel Ride".
What's that?
Prisoners hand-cuffed behind their backs are transported unrestrained in the back of police vans.
The police driver intentionally slams on the brakes, or swerves erratically, and the un-belted prisoner goes flying.
Several are now Paraplegics due to Spinal Cord injuries suffered why transporting the prisoner.
Here's some details:
Rides in Police Vans Injure Suspects
Philadelphia -
"At least 20 suspects riding in the back of police vans in recent years suffered injuries ranging from a severed spinal cord to a broken tailbone, reflecting a long-standing tradition of officers using erratic driving to deal with apparently difficult suspects, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported.
Officers call the long-standing ritual a "nickel ride," a term dating to the days when amusement-park rides cost 5 cents. Rookie officers learn about it as "part of your street training," said Norman A Carter Jr, a retired Philadelphia police corporal.
Although the city has paid more than $2.3 million to settle lawsuits filed by the arrestees, none of the officers has been disciplined for intentionally subjecting passengers to wild rides, the newspaper reported in early Sunday editions. The city has also been slow to deploy potentially safer vehicles, the paper said. Two people were permanently paralysed in city police vans. Most of the 20 victims had clean records and were arrested on minor charges, such as talking back or arguing with police.
"That wagon changed a lot," said Gino Thompson, a father of 11 paralysed from the waist down. "I can't play football with my kids. I can't play basketball. I was a gymnast, a singer, a dancer. I did it a1l."
Thompson, 40, was arrested in 1994 after a drunken argument with a girlfriend. He now relies on a wheelchair. The city paid $600,000 to settle his lawsuit. The newspaper found 19 similar cases, but reported that they probably represent a fraction of all wagon injuries.
Current and former officers say the erratic driving, in which the officer makes sharp turns, accelerates quickly or slams the brakes, is often falsely attributed to traffic, bad roads or a sudden stop made to avoid an animal.
James B Jordan, a lawyer who worked as the police department's in-house corruption monitor from 1996 through 1999, said officers use the "nickel ride" to assert control. "What better way to show who's in control than stopping at a light and slamming on the brakes, knowing that they're going to go flying?" Jordan asked. "And maybe the prisoner was yelling, and maybe this will shut him up."
Police Commissioner John F Timoney said he was not aware that officers would intentionally injure prisoners during transport. "Such behaviour - if it does exist - certainly isn't condoned by myself or anybody else in this department," Timoney said. "We are making efforts, as much as humanly possible, to reduce the number of incidents where prisoners get hurt in the back of these vans," he said.
Chief Inspector Frank M Pryor, head of the police department's patrol operations, said "nobody did anything about" the rough rides 30 years ago, but insists times have changed. "If we see that happen, we're on it now," Pryor said.
Eleven of the 20 cases found by the newspaper, however, were never investigated by the department's Internal Affairs division. Of the other nine incidents, the department suspended one officer for three days for infractions that occurred after the wagon ride, not for the injury itself. The other eight resulted in no sanctions.
Some cities have phased out wagons or added safety restraints and padding, but only 10 of Philadelphia's 86 wagons have these safety features. The other vehicles which transport tens of thousands of suspects per year, have a compartment made of fiberglass and plastic with narrow benches.
Calvin Saunders was transported in such a van in 1997 when he was arrested for driving a stolen car. During the ride, he was propelled from his seat and rammed his head against a wall. Now a quadriplegic, Saunders cannot feed, bathe or dress himself. The city paid him a $1.2 million settlement to help cover his lifetime medical care."
Source: The Sunday Star-Ledger (Morris County NJ edition) 3 June 2001 from the Associated Press.
If the problem was that bad, why didn't the city install cameras in the vans. Evidently the city believed it was not warranted. Either the injuries were a result of legitimate problems during transport or because of something else besides drivers hitting the brakes.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
quote:
Originally posted by Friendly Bear
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
Actually, most of the police officers were ineffective with their strikes. If you want to see an effective mob beating you should watch the Reginald Denny beating video from the 1992 L.A. riots. Reginald barely survived it. The piece of concrete and the cinder block were brutal. Sometimes people do bad things.
And like I said before, they were out of control and beyond the scope of their authority. They will be prosecuted for their actions.
The Philadelphia police are also notorious for giving prisoners "The Nickel Ride".
What's that?
Prisoners hand-cuffed behind their backs are transported unrestrained in the back of police vans.
The police driver intentionally slams on the brakes, or swerves erratically, and the un-belted prisoner goes flying.
Several are now Paraplegics due to Spinal Cord injuries suffered why transporting the prisoner.
Here's some details:
Rides in Police Vans Injure Suspects
Philadelphia -
"At least 20 suspects riding in the back of police vans in recent years suffered injuries ranging from a severed spinal cord to a broken tailbone, reflecting a long-standing tradition of officers using erratic driving to deal with apparently difficult suspects, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported.
Officers call the long-standing ritual a "nickel ride," a term dating to the days when amusement-park rides cost 5 cents. Rookie officers learn about it as "part of your street training," said Norman A Carter Jr, a retired Philadelphia police corporal.
Although the city has paid more than $2.3 million to settle lawsuits filed by the arrestees, none of the officers has been disciplined for intentionally subjecting passengers to wild rides, the newspaper reported in early Sunday editions. The city has also been slow to deploy potentially safer vehicles, the paper said. Two people were permanently paralysed in city police vans. Most of the 20 victims had clean records and were arrested on minor charges, such as talking back or arguing with police.
"That wagon changed a lot," said Gino Thompson, a father of 11 paralysed from the waist down. "I can't play football with my kids. I can't play basketball. I was a gymnast, a singer, a dancer. I did it a1l."
Thompson, 40, was arrested in 1994 after a drunken argument with a girlfriend. He now relies on a wheelchair. The city paid $600,000 to settle his lawsuit. The newspaper found 19 similar cases, but reported that they probably represent a fraction of all wagon injuries.
Current and former officers say the erratic driving, in which the officer makes sharp turns, accelerates quickly or slams the brakes, is often falsely attributed to traffic, bad roads or a sudden stop made to avoid an animal.
James B Jordan, a lawyer who worked as the police department's in-house corruption monitor from 1996 through 1999, said officers use the "nickel ride" to assert control. "What better way to show who's in control than stopping at a light and slamming on the brakes, knowing that they're going to go flying?" Jordan asked. "And maybe the prisoner was yelling, and maybe this will shut him up."
Police Commissioner John F Timoney said he was not aware that officers would intentionally injure prisoners during transport. "Such behaviour - if it does exist - certainly isn't condoned by myself or anybody else in this department," Timoney said. "We are making efforts, as much as humanly possible, to reduce the number of incidents where prisoners get hurt in the back of these vans," he said.
Chief Inspector Frank M Pryor, head of the police department's patrol operations, said "nobody did anything about" the rough rides 30 years ago, but insists times have changed. "If we see that happen, we're on it now," Pryor said.
Eleven of the 20 cases found by the newspaper, however, were never investigated by the department's Internal Affairs division. Of the other nine incidents, the department suspended one officer for three days for infractions that occurred after the wagon ride, not for the injury itself. The other eight resulted in no sanctions.
Some cities have phased out wagons or added safety restraints and padding, but only 10 of Philadelphia's 86 wagons have these safety features. The other vehicles which transport tens of thousands of suspects per year, have a compartment made of fiberglass and plastic with narrow benches.
Calvin Saunders was transported in such a van in 1997 when he was arrested for driving a stolen car. During the ride, he was propelled from his seat and rammed his head against a wall. Now a quadriplegic, Saunders cannot feed, bathe or dress himself. The city paid him a $1.2 million settlement to help cover his lifetime medical care."
Source: The Sunday Star-Ledger (Morris County NJ edition) 3 June 2001 from the Associated Press.
If the problem was that bad, why didn't the city install cameras in the vans. Evidently the city believed it was not warranted. Either the injuries were a result of legitimate problems during transport or because of something else besides drivers hitting the brakes.
I don't live in Philadelphia, the City of Brotherly Love.
I live in the Banana Republic of Tulsa. I've never heard we have THIS problem. Apparently, Tulsa prisoners are merely transported in our police cars, which have padded seats, padded doors, and maybe even seat belts.
Luckily, I've never had nor want the opportunity to sit in the back seat of a TPD cruiser.
Phila. has long history of bad city government under long-serving former Mayor John Street. A bevy of their public officials have been charged with Federal crimes, and sent to prison.
Several quotes attributed to Mr. Street may help frame the quality of his city government:
"The Brothers Are Running The City", John Street uttered this quote right before the murder rate hit an all time high and his best friend was arrested.
" I'm not guilty; I'm Just Black And That Is Why They Are After Me", was the campaign slogan he used to rally supporters with in his successful second term reelection after rumours of corruption in city govt. reached city hall
As to WHY the Philadelphia police vans did not have restraints, it is obvious that the police knew exactly what they were doing, when they purposely slammed on the brakes to send a prisoner, handcuffed behind their backs, flying across the van because they were not belt-restrained in the van.
They had a long, long history of prisoners injured while being transported, going back 30 years.
And, being handcuffed BEHIND their backs, the prisoner had no way of holding on during their Journey to Jail.
As to motivation, psychological studies all the way back to Zimbardo show that when people in authority can abuse a prisoner without consequence, that the prisoner will be abused, with escalating levels of severity of violence.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
Sorry pooh bear....
I've already seen the video. All of the officers invovled were suspended and will face criminal charges. Which is exactly what would happen if a bunch of civilians did the same thing. What exactly would you want done to them? Shot on the spot? They lost control and went beyond the scope of their duties and will be prosecuted for it.
The bullets are legal for civilian and police use.
Police use the ammo largely to the reduced risk of bystanders being hit by over-penetrating or ricocheted bullets, and the increased speed of incapacitation.
You should probably go back to the Mayor Taylor thread now.
Actually, only a Sergeant and 5 officers have been removed from street duty. The remainder? TBA.
Back to the police use of explosive ammunition:
The Hague Convention of July 1899 specificially prohibits use of this type of ammunition in warfare:
"The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core, or is pierced with incisions."
If the purpose of shooting a suspect is to disable them from endangering the police or public, a full metal jacket bullet should suffice.
The purpose of these explosive bullets is to increase the likelihood of inflicting a horrendous wound, and death. That's why they were outlawed in 1899.
Maybe the police can someday afford the citizenry the same degree of protection that the Taliban or Iraqi insurgents are afforded from the use of explosive small arms ammunition.
Remember, the person being shot is still a suspect.
Amadou Diallo was a SUSPECT, shot at 41 times; 19 hits.
wonder if the NYC plainclothes officers needed to use hollow-point or explosive ammunition on Diallo.
Overkill?
I can shed a little light on the hollow point/explosive bullet debate. In undergrad I took a course in international conflicts that was offered by my University's ROTC college. This was our interpretation of it based on comments made at the convention as well as the Colonels take on it:
From a practical standpoint killing an enemy soldier is bad business. If you wound him such that he can no longer fight he is no longer a threat to you AND his comrades in arms have to deal with him. When removed from the field his nation has to exhaust resources to see to his well being. During a conflict, this is a net LOSS to the wellbeing of that nation (harsh, but cold hard truth). So risk of wounding the soldier to such an extent that he can still fight is worth it given the added cost if he survives but can not fight.
Also as a practical application military engagements use larger and/or higher velocity projectiles form a great distance and have the ability to rapidly fire repeated rounds usually with the support of many more men. Thus, the threat of a wounded man continuing the fight before he can be reengaged, should the need arise, is minimal.
Additionally, combatants in war in 1899 were not there voluntarily. It was considered unfair (beneath civilized countries) to go to extremes and kill some poor bastard who happened to live in Prussia now who was being forced to fight Poland (who used to control his territory). Through no fault of their own, these men were in harms way, poor them. Though they still sent them off to fight...
Conversely, a criminal is presumably being shot at on his own accord. There is no sympathy for the devil and thus, the risk of enabling him to be wounded such that he could still resist is not offset by any practical nor moral obligations. Meanwhile, there is a substantial risk to officer in engaging a suspect (who very well may be on drugs/crazy) that a single round from a handgun will not incapacitate the suspect. That risk is concurrent with a risk to the public of the suspect himself as well as the travel of a FMJ round.
As an aside, the 1899 convention also banned gas attacks and "bombing from the air." That seems odd to me since gas was not a weapon nor air travel even possible at the time. Both were, of course, readily ignored when they became viable.
The pertinent part of the Convention of 1868 which was adopted by the Hague Convention in 1899:
quote:
Considering that the progress of civilization should have the effect of alleviating as much as possible the calamities of war:
That the only legitimate object which States should endeavour to accomplish during war is to weaken the military forges of the enemy;
That for this purpose it is sufficient to disable the greatest possible number of men;
That this object would be exceeded by the employment of arms which uselessly aggravate the sufferings of disabled men, or render their death inevitable;
As far as hollow points go, I keep two differant types of hollows and then a general metel jacket. In a situation in which there are others around beside the person you are shooting at, this comes in handy. While the expanding, and fracturing bullets cause more damage to the person you shooting, it is less likely to exit the person and hit another. i.e. someone breaks into my house, I shoot them, if I have the normal full metal jackets, there is a good chance that not only will it exit the person I shot, but could go through a couple of sheet rock walls and hit someone else, like one of my kids. If I use a fragmenting round (the one I primarly keep loaded), then it is highly unlikely to exit the person, and a missed shot has trouble going through a couple of panels of sheetrock, thus decreasing the chance of me accidently causing harm to one of my kids while trying to protect them. While I would rather not have the situation come up at all, if it does, I want to protect my kids to the best of my abilities, even if it means causing extensive damage to the person that I am protecting them from. This same logic applies to law inforcement applications. A hollow point is far less likely to cause callateral damage then a full metal jacket. So tell me bear, if you have someone ready to kill you, and he is between you and the cop, and the cop has to shoot him to save you, which round would you rather him have loaded?
quote:
Originally posted by custosnox
As far as hollow points go, I keep two differant types of hollows and then a general metel jacket. In a situation in which there are others around beside the person you are shooting at, this comes in handy. While the expanding, and fracturing bullets cause more damage to the person you shooting, it is less likely to exit the person and hit another. i.e. someone breaks into my house, I shoot them, if I have the normal full metal jackets, there is a good chance that not only will it exit the person I shot, but could go through a couple of sheet rock walls and hit someone else, like one of my kids. If I use a fragmenting round (the one I primarly keep loaded), then it is highly unlikely to exit the person, and a missed shot has trouble going through a couple of panels of sheetrock, thus decreasing the chance of me accidently causing harm to one of my kids while trying to protect them. While I would rather not have the situation come up at all, if it does, I want to protect my kids to the best of my abilities, even if it means causing extensive damage to the person that I am protecting them from. This same logic applies to law inforcement applications. A hollow point is far less likely to cause callateral damage then a full metal jacket. So tell me bear, if you have someone ready to kill you, and he is between you and the cop, and the cop has to shoot him to save you, which round would you rather him have loaded?
That's a pretty unlikely hypothetical.
How about having our Police use ammunition that is at least sanctioned by the august bodies of the Hague and Geneva conventions regarding Small Arms ammunition?
Reason being:
With police increasingly militarized in the U.S., wearing Battle-Rattle, carrying U.S. military Full-Auto Assault Rifes, U.S. military Kevlar Helmets, driving armored cars and APC's, knocking down doors with No-Knock warrants like we do in the Sunni Triangle on an hourly basis, etc., then I feel it is BEST that the civilians be protected by only Full-Metal Jacketed bullets.
I think the police are about as likely to shoot me by accident anyway, so let's use a more humane bullet.
Mr. Bell in NYC was shot at 50 times for DWB (Driving While Black), and Mr. Diallo in NYC shot at 41 times (for Jumping out of his shoes when yelled out to "Freeze" outside his door by 4 plainclothes policemen).
I hardly think it mattered if Hollow-Points or FMJ were used.
They were ventilated like Swiss Cheese.
Again, just how does a Suspect offer to Surrender when they are being shot at 41 times?
In the Bell case, one policeman even reloaded his 15 round magazine, and emptied the 2nd one, too.
FB, what was wrong with my analysis and citation to actual text of the document? Like it or not, those reason are pretty sound and reflect the thought process that caused the rules to go into effect. If you refuse to address the underlying concerns, it's really a non-issue from here on out.
quote:
Originally posted by Friendly Bear
I'm glad it's YOU and not ME insulting about 1/2 of humanity.
Does the term "Manners" have any meaning to you?
None the less, I take the opprobrium as praise, given my naturally SWEET disposition, and FRESH perspective for bringing useful discussion to this exalted Forum.
Thanks again.
[^]
Which half is he insulting? I'd like to verify the half to which I belong.
quote:
Originally posted by Townsend
quote:
Originally posted by Friendly Bear
I'm glad it's YOU and not ME insulting about 1/2 of humanity.
Does the term "Manners" have any meaning to you?
None the less, I take the opprobrium as praise, given my naturally SWEET disposition, and FRESH perspective for bringing useful discussion to this exalted Forum.
Thanks again.
[^]
Which half is he insulting? I'd like to verify the half to which I belong.
Which half.
The BETTER half, of course.
[:X]
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
FB, what was wrong with my analysis and citation to actual text of the document? Like it or not, those reason are pretty sound and reflect the thought process that caused the rules to go into effect. If you refuse to address the underlying concerns, it's really a non-issue from here on out.
Your Analysis is fine by me.
I just wish I was treated with the same degree of civility by my own GOVERNMENT as those afforded protection by the Geneva Convention, and protected by the Hague Convention.
Would that really be TOO much to ask?
Namely, the use of bullets, be they explosive, hollow-point, or saboted, should NOT be permitted against civilians by police personnel.
I feel the same way about CS Gas. The UN has classified it as a poison gas.
Our police and FBI still use it.
Witness the 1993 Branch Davidian Cook-out, Baby Barbeque and Wienie Roast.
How many CS Penetrator Rounds did the FBI actually fire at the Branch Davidian Church?
Uh-Oh,
Pooh bear is about to start talking about the black helicopters! I think the ignore button is about to be pushed....
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
Uh-Oh,
Pooh bear is about to start talking about the black helicopters! I think the ignore button is about to be pushed....
Isn't the Tulsa PD police helicopter painted black?
Hmmmmh? Must mean.....
It FLIES mostly at NIGHT!
Concerned? No, just concerned for basic humanity for Suspects.
You can ignore.
Like can we get the same treatment by my own Government as required under the Geneva Conventions and the Hague Conventions as soldiers and POW's of other countries get in Time of War.
Didn't someone declare a War on Drugs?
Really a non-issue to me. Cops shoot to kill, they are trained to. And I'm OK with that. Everyone knows the rules
When things are done wrong it is tragic, but in spite of my mistrust of a police state I still think they are inherently a force for good and the vast majority of people shot by police had it coming. When cops purposefully misbehave they should be hung out to dry, there is no such thing as a "mistake" when you beat someone or shoot someone in the back posing no threat. Abuse of power is the worst crime in my book and I hold state officials (including officers) to a higher standard than most.
So I disagree with your conspiracy theories, but stay vigilant. If Mel Gibson has taught us anything it's that eventually nut jobs get one right. [:P]
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
Really a non-issue to me. Cops shoot to kill, they are trained to. And I'm OK with that. Everyone knows the rules
When things are done wrong it is tragic, but in spite of my mistrust of a police state I still think they are inherently a force for good and the vast majority of people shot by police had it coming. When cops purposefully misbehave they should be hung out to dry, there is no such thing as a "mistake" when you beat someone or shoot someone in the back posing no threat. Abuse of power is the worst crime in my book and I hold state officials (including officers) to a higher standard than most.
So I disagree with your conspiracy theories, but stay vigilant. If Mel Gibson has taught us anything it's that eventually nut jobs get one right. [:P]
The difficulty of supporting charges of Police Misconduct are several fold, but briefly they are:
1) The police are not INDEPENDENT to investigate themselves. They control the investigation of a "crime", including when they are the perpetrators of the crime.
2) Prosecutors are reluctant from alienating the police because without their support, they cannot really do their jobs as Prosectors.
3) We seldom have the kind of evidence as we saw in the Rodney King beating or the Philly Police Stomp Dance. If the police become aware they are being videotaped by a civilian, they attempt to take the videotape away as "evidence" of their crime.
4) The police are largely a male fraternity, with "bonding" from their first day at the Academy all the way through to their Union Dues each pay period. The Blue Wall of Silence is more than a Uniform. It's a way of life.
5) While esprit de corps is important, due to the increased trend of militarization of the police fostered by the War on Drugs, it has created a strong "Us-vs.-Them" mentality.
6) Friendly Bear is more like Julia Roberts than Jerry Fletcher.
[:X]
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
Sorry pooh bear....
I've already seen the video. All of the officers invovled were suspended and will face criminal charges. Which is exactly what would happen if a bunch of civilians did the same thing. What exactly would you want done to them? Shot on the spot? They lost control and went beyond the scope of their duties and will be prosecuted for it.
The bullets are legal for civilian and police use.
Police use the ammo largely to the reduced risk of bystanders being hit by over-penetrating or ricocheted bullets, and the increased speed of incapacitation.
You should probably go back to the Mayor Taylor thread now.
Oh, come-on now. The police use hollow-point, expanding and explosive bullets to inflict the maximum, gruesome wound, in the HOPE of killing the person being shot.
Then, if there's any question about the propriety of the shooting, it's the policeman's word against a Dead Man's body.
Policeman's word nearly always prevails.
[:P]
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
quote:
Originally posted by patric
Lots of times when something like this could be handy, but with only three hours recording time, it will either over-write a lot of video that needed to be preserved, or not always be switched on when needed.
http://www.wirelessmobiledata.com/vidmic.pdf
New Jersey cops find a new way to collect cleavage shots on the beach:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0oP_pGJ1n4
Watch a creepy-eyed guy stumble through a video demonstration at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuAn0DlN0s0
Tulsa Police tried the lapel mic cameras about 6-7 months ago. They were okay. They worked well in the daylight but the nighttime (low light) picture wasn't good. The recording time was also an issue. We could never get over 5 hours. Either officers had to switch them on when they thought they needed them or go back to the division before the three hour mark to download.
Another issue was where officers should wear it. If you put it at the "V" of your shirt, the pictue was good during interviews ect but if you pulled your weapon and/or just got into a tactical/fighting stance, the camera would be recording to the right(or left if your left handed) of what you wanted to record. If you put the mic actually on your lapel, then it would usually record the sky or the horizon.
The best solution would be the cameras seen in the movie like "aliens" that the marines had. I think some soldiers use them now. They are right next to your eyes and see your line of sight. That way what you are looking at is recorded.
I think in a few years, these things will be the way to go for city police officers but the technology still has a ways to go.
Looks like Oologah police are also getting portable video units: VIDMICs
Here's the article:
http://www.newson6.com/global/story.asp?s=8303713