[delacoert]

I'm glad this poor excuse for a "law enforcement officer" didn't have three seconds to size up my intentions (or yours on those of anyone else).

It's obvoius to me that you and I don't have the same perspective on law enforcement imperitives during a felony stop, nor the reasons for the procedures they follow. Neither do we have the same perspective on the duties of an officer providing backup, which the Cookeville officers where clearly doing.

Looking at the video, Officer Hall is totally focused and provided backup in a professional manner. The problem was that it shouldn't have been a felony stop, but that wasn't his fault, as I have discussed earlier. It was also not his fault that the dog got out of the car and ran toward him. IMO, the THP Lt. could have forseen the dog problem and should have shut the car door.

His thought processes are defective.

Only if his was omniscient.

[FreedomCalls]

Looking at the video, Officer Hall is totally focused and provided backup in a professional manner.

No one has answered my earlier question about his choice of the shotgun in the first place. What was he intending on doing with a 12-gauge shotgun during a traffic stop? Was he intending on blasting off someone's head? Is it routine for a policeman to point a 12-gauge shotgun around at people at no more than a 10-foot distance when they have been pulled over on the highway?

[FreePaul]

I listen to a police scanner a fair amount of the time. Officers are frequently asked to stop vehicles for activites which they did not witness. The officers almost always ask why they are stopping the vehicle, what crimes were involved, and who reported the crime. The officers have a responsibility to know what they are doing and why for their own protection as well as for the protection of those they stop. The "just following orders" excuse fell out of favor over fifty years ago. Maybe it is making a comeback in some areas.