Posted on 06/15/2015 11:33:06 AM PDT by redreno
A blind man in Arkansas sustained a back injury after being assaulted by Little Rock police who failed to identify themselves before lying about the incident.
After missing the bus from his job at Lighthouse for the Blind on June 1, Eric Wilson was walking home when he was approached by police and ordered to walk over to them.
Wilson is legally blind and says that he can only see shadows. He complied, despite not knowing if he was about to be robbed or about to be confronted with actual police officers as they did not identify themselves.
(Excerpt) Read more at photographyisnotacrime.com ...
I don't think anyone is implying that all cops do beat up blind guys. But all cops are not saints. There is a tiny minority of police who beat up blind guys, shoot fleeing suspects in the back, blow away 12 year olds in parks, and what have you. So sites like this do provide balance between those who say the police are never wrong and reality.
“Link is a hate-cop site”
Unless they change their ways, soon every site will be a “hate-cop” site...
I take it from the name of the site that they are advocating for our right to video and photograph the cops out there.
Seems like a decent cause to me.
Later
Donna, the video, like most, is ample evidence in my mind to say these two cops should be fired and thrown in jail. My dad was a cop and if I saw a video of him doing this to a blind guy, or any of the other stuff we see pop up almost daily, I’d be the first to say throw him in jail and throw away the keys. Yes, there are good cops and they don’t get the press that a bad cop does. That’s the breaks but no excuse to not pursue a bad cop like a rabid dog.
Then we should all get body cams and all crime could be handled according to recorded evidence.
We'll just vote online and the pretty women can be let go.
Right you are.
If you think that PINAC is a “hate-cop site,” then you and I likely have very different ideas of what “hate” is. And about the nature of civilian-government interactions, for that matter.
So many come backs on that. But true, a beautiful face and smile can get away with murder just as easily as someone with lots of money.
But video never lies. And in this case, it is police dashcam video. In regards to police, their role is "protect and serve". Any hint that they are not deserves zero tolerance. And sorry, too many years of police getting away with murder, of them lying to protect their brethren. Time for some much needed sunshine. Let the innocent cops prove it.
Besides, as a father of twin 7 year old boys, I would like to be able to tell them to trust a cop since the bad ones are fired and/or in jail. Right now, can't say trust them. Instead, its a complicated explanation that there are good and bad cops, do not trust them. Heck, were my father not retired, I wouldn't trust him either. Sad but true.
Stupid cops never learn. Drag the suspect behind the car. No video.
Are you sure?
It looks more like a "Let's Expose What Bad Cops Are Doing" site.
There's a world of difference between the two.
You seem to have forgotten the rules on FR when it comes to any discussion regarding law enforcement.
Rule 1, the most important, is that you must take the media reports, and whatever story is being told by the local “activits”, lawyers, etc. at face value. This is tricky, as this is the exact opposite of how every other story is discussed.
Rule 2, a close corollary of rule 1, is that we must always assume the male fides of the police. Context does not matter: start with the presumption that the local copper dealing with whatever call or observational stop he’s working is a “JBT”, or at least incompetent.
Rule 3, in any use of force situation, we must never hold the suspect, er, citizen to any standard of civilized behavior. In other words, resisting arrest is a perfectly reasonable course of action for an individual to take if, in that person’s sole judgement, the arrest is unreasonable or unwarranted.
Rule 4 is the simplest. Any use of force by the police is either excessive, illegal, or unreasonable. In other words, if it looks bad, it is bad, and no other information or investigation is needed.
A quick look around the website for the most obvious signs of it being biased yields this gem...
Donna, I think you are right. The site can't be trusted.
Good post.
Video is revealing just how common all this stuff is, and often it shows cops being in groups, and totally casual about such things, including agreeing to frame people.
Here are a couple of things that we can all agree on.
One is, if a good person is a law enforcement officer, then he would try to stop, and/or report crimes and abuses, beat downs, bad shootings, and frame ups, and planting of evidence, and police theft from homes and businesses, etc.
The second is that cops don’t do that, it is almost unheard of, but yet we see them on video.
Where are those good cops, and at what point do we see that an industry is so corrupt, that it doesn’t seem to have any internal checks and balances among it’s members who join, that the best of the good guys within that line of work, are themselves so corrupt, that “good” means witnessing everything, but remaining silent for your entire career?
Would a pro-cop site ever publish this article?
Bias ain’t just one way. We need to hear the good and the bad and not ignore either. That’s what liberals do. We have to praise the good and crush the bad. And the good cops ought ot be right there crushing the bad cops because it’s an undeserved reflection on them.
I see, documenting and publicizing police misbehaviour is now “cop hate” in your opinion.
I did find a new nick for naughty cops and their supporters there, mind you: CopRoaches. I think that is politer than “Copsucker”.
Did you see any misbehaviour by police in any of the videos, or are the violent and unconstitutional aggressions of the police all okay in your book? Or did you not deign to watch what was documented there?
PINAC has a very severe bias, but the video they find often shows that that there is often a problem.
It’s a web site that stands up for the rights of photographers NOT to be harassed and falsely arrested by the police for taking photos in public areas.
It’s not a “hate cop” site.
“There is a tiny minority of police who...”
The “tiny minority” part is debatable. Besides, no matter how tiny the minority, if the majority cover for them, then they are complicit. That’s how they apply the law to us commoners, anyway.
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.