Posted on 07/04/2014 12:27:26 PM PDT by equalator
A California trooper has been filmed brutally beating a woman on the side of a highway - but authorities claimed he simply stopped her for her own safety.
A passing motorist recorded the unidentified California Highway Patrol officer as he punched the woman at least 11 times in the head along the 10 Freeway in Los Angeles on Tuesday.
On the video uploaded to YouTube, the woman can be seen trying to protect herself by putting up her hands but she does not appear to resist the trooper.
'The most animalistic, most brutal way to subdue someone is to pound someone's head into the concrete with really big blows to the head,' witness David Diaz told ABC7
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
You’re just a bundle of contrafactual selfrighteousness, aren’t you? Worse than contrafactual, really, you are afactual. Facts mean nothing to you, literally. You don’t know or care how many punches were struck, or how many I said were struck. Whatever serves the purpose is fine with you. As a physicist, by training and inclination if not profession, as I like to say, facts matter to me. So I’m not on your wavelength.
And you’re a bundle of “atta boy” for abuse by a cop.
Face it, he had better options available and didn’t use them.
Punching someone in the face once you have them on the ground is not compliance pain.
No matter how much you want it to be.
Checking back in on this and you still defend this abuse of authority by this officer? I have family in LE that would sincerely be all over this as completely wrong. Would you like this to happen to your wife, your daughter, your mother, your niece???? Do you truly believe this was the appropriate response from this officer? Truly? If you do you are a brownshirt, jackboot loving criminal in my book.
At least we know who the collaborators will be if and when Obama gets his police state fully functional.
After all, it’d be by the book and legal like donchaknow.
*barf*
The people excusing this behavior simply amaze me.
They’d have applauded kristalnacht.
I've explained this. He was trying to cuff her. "Having her on the ground" was not the goal, you see. This was merely a step. The next step was to get her on her stomach and cuff her hands behind her back, but he couldn't do it because ... she was resisting! ... can you dig? can you grok? can you expand your mind into realms beyond your own political agenda ... Oh! I didn't think so!
You have your own little reality ( shared by millions ) where "having her on the ground" amounts to some kind of moral neutrality with which he should have been satisfied, kind of like our mideast policy, I guess. Well, the CHP officer had not been informed of this. Whose fault is that? He proceeded agressively, by the book, by the doctrine, towards the goal of cuffing the "suspect", if that's the generic term. And as I've stated, he achieved this goal within seconds.
So now, what? Millions, tens or hundreds of millions, in lawsuits? Riots? Dozens dead? OK. More fun news.
Oh yes, that justifies the punching!
No, it doesn’t.
She was on the ground, you compelling someone to roll over.
And that is not done by punching them into submission.
Why do you think cops grab your thumb to pull your hand behind you to cuff you?
Who are you the God of Cops? "Punching is a taught tactic", right? Why else would a cop be punching if not to obtain submission? It's allowed! It's taught! Wake up and smell the coffee!
” Who are you the God of Cops? “Punching is a taught tactic”, right?”
Not here.
They teach compliance pain.
That means grips, grapples, and pins.
Dummy there had her on the ground, all he needed to do was get her to roll over.
Instead he decided it was mma facepunch time.
You keep trying to excuse this abuse.
One wonders what your motives are.
My only motive is objective understanding. I can perceive from the video that the cop took down the "suspect" with some difficulty, was subsequently not able to cuff her, then applied a series of punches, in volleys of 4, then 3, as I see them, and then was able to cuff her, according to procedure, with apparently no harm done.
From here, Irrationality takes over, and my motives are beside the point.
What difficulty?
He knocked her down, sat on her, and went pay per view on her face.
Once he had her down, grab thumb, twist, and compel to roll!
Simple.
So simple my sister can do it.
I think you have lost your case as soon as you are arguing technique. Suppose CHP doctrine differs from yours? More than a likelihood!
BING!
You lost the second you said he was outclassed by the woman, and admitted to having lost with post 286.
But hey, you like excessive force being used against women.
Its all legal and by the book supposedly.
Hint: he did not have to punch her despite your obvious enjoyment of same.
Besides, you argued technique with your “its approved” statement.
So by your logic in this post...you lost on that point too.
Only because she's black...
Maybe.
The one jackboot cheerleader had more drool than usual.
Those who have held real power in their hands shy away from using it.
Those who have usurped or fantasised over it ,can’t wait to “try it out”.
That is very true.
And the actions of the Einsatzgruppen[s].
I wonder what the updated version of aktion t4 will be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.