Police bodycam footage of thug resisting arrest goes viral

[weekev]

I think that the police officer informs her that she is under arrest for not signing the ticket and if she leaves then he has everything on tape, just set a court date for refusing the ticket and resisting arrest.

Click to shrink...

Fair enough. I can see why he'd want to make an example out of her though.

 

[hydrophilic attack]

american police seem to have a pattern of escalating things needlessly and this seems like an example of that. that said, it is far from the most egregious example i've seen and this woman acted in a really dumb way so she's certainly at fault as well. i do think america overall would be a lot more safe if cops were better trained to deëscalate situations like this, but that is not likely to happen when there's a relatively high chance that any random citizen is carrying a gun at any one point. another reason why y'all need to ban guns

 

[Deleted member 13188]

Cops in the rest of the world have laws that make the probability of civilians possessing a firearm and being unafraid to use it next to zero. It's by far not an apples to apples discussion on that very fact alone.

And there's absolutely a discussion to be had that changing that in America would go a long way to undoing the police being prone to draw a weapon or use force. But that's not the conversation anyone here is having, even though it's one no one would disagree with.

Click to shrink...

Some of us see it not as a white privilege issue first (yes WP 100% plays apart in every interaction) but as a Human Rights issue. So yeah I agree we probably are having two separate discussions.

You're Human Rights are not respected so why should hers? I completely see that (and from the outside it does look fucked) and there is no way any of us would say you are wrong and apologies if I talked down to you in that regard. The point that I shouldn't be in here in the first place on that issue is valid.

So yeah it has to be a WP issue for you first. The video is still gross IMO but no one wants to take away the problems with "Karen" because we see it as a HR problem; and I see how hard it is to separate that from WP if we even can at all. Whole situation is warped IMO and you are not wrong.

 

[weekev]

Some of us see it not as a white privilege issue first (yes WP 100% plays apart in every interaction) but as a Human Rights issue. So yeah I agree we probably are having two separate discussions.

You're Human Rights are not respected so why should hers? I completely see that (and from the outside it does look fucked) and there is no way any of us would say you are wrong and apologies if I talked down to you in that regard. The point that I shouldn't be in here in the first place on that issue is valid.

So yeah it has to be a WP issue for you first. The video is still gross IMO but no one wants to take away the problems with "Karen" because we see it as a HR problem; and I see how hard it is to separate that from WP if we even can at all. Whole situation is warped IMO and you are not wrong.

Click to shrink...

Just wanted to say I wish every discussion on this board dealt with nuanced discussion as openly and articulately as you just have. Not everything is always black and white (pun semi intended)

 

[Deleted member 6230]

american police seems to have a pattern of escalating things needlessly and this seems like an example of that. that said, it is far from the most egregious example i've seen and this woman acted in a really dumb way so she's certainly at fault as well. i do think america overall would be a lot more safe if cops were better trained to deëscalate situations like this, but that is not likely to happen when there's a relatively high chance that any random citizen is carrying a gun at any one point. another reason why y'all need to ban guns

Click to shrink...

Yeah, I'm not sure anyone is really arguing that we should take up in the streets and protest the mistreatment of Mildred. The issue I'm having is people in this thread openly celebrating the cop being abusive.

 

[DCPat]

I get the general consensus that the police officer went a too aggressive a too fast, but I do want to point out that I feel like the actions of people like this Karen are a part of the problem.

She even admitted something was wrong that should be fixed, but still made a big deal out of the fine. Holy shit, just accept the fine and respect the police officer. Treat other people how you want to be treated. I mean lets be honest, it's probably not the first time this officer went through this shit.

It's just a vicious circle at this moment.

 

[MoG EclipsE]

Lol I can tell that there's a lot of Americans in this thread. Where I live, they would have just said ok I'll send the ticket by mail then, and if it doesn't get paid or contested, it goes to collection and that's that. Never would this kind of escalation be required. The fact that many people here think that such violence for a traffic ticket is ok is ridiculous. But like I said, I guess that's American mentality for you.

 

[LastCaress]

I get the general consensus that the police officer went a too aggressive a too fast, but I do want to point out that I feel like the actions of people like this Karen are a part of the problem.

She even admitted something was wrong that should be fixed, but still made a big deal out of the fine. Holy shit, just accept the fine and respect the police officer. Treat other people how you want to be treated. I mean lets be honest, it's probably not the first time this officer went through this shit.

It's just a vicious circle at this moment.

Click to shrink...

I think almost everyone here agrees that she's an entitled person that is probably used to get things her way. Also, most people here agree that she should've signed the ticket and definitively should not have ran away. But the moment she runs away (for a traffic ticket) that becomes someone else's problem. Present the evidence (everything is on tape) in court and give her a serious fine, for a serious offence (resisting arrest).

 

[boontobias]

I feel like there's a strong connection between the longevity of this thread, and that "the word Karen is bigoted" thread that just got locked. Does y'a'l'l think privilege exists or no?

 

[F34R]

I feel like there's a strong connection between the longevity of this thread, and that "Karen is bigoted" thread that just got locked. Does this place think white privilege exists or no?

Click to shrink...

It absolutely does, even in the context of law enforcement. I can say that I had more white people talk back to me about me giving them a ticket, versus non-white people. If I had to put it in percentages, 50% white people would say something about getting the ticket, versus 1% non-white.

 

[Renna Hazel]

In that 10 seconds that people think the officer "jumped the gun" and "went too far" saying she was under arrest, she openly admitted that she considered the ticket illegitimate (which it blatantly wasn't) and wasn't going to pay it, admitting to further criminal action in the future. She practically did everything but declare herself a "sovereign citizen" or some shit like that. No amount of explaining what signing the ticket meant would or could retract that position. What could he have said that would have retracted her from that position of openly admitting to a future crime, precisely? If you legitimately can't answer that question that actually resolves the situation fully rather than just preventing police violence for the sake of that alone, it wasn't an over-reaction. Because you have to have a solution that resolves BOTH of those things.

"But she asked to sign after the fact, he should have let her!" Congrats, you just rewarded her privilege by allowing her to walk back her outright defiance and admission of a future crime only after she knew her "I want to speak to your manager" energy wasn't working in her favour, for allowing her to completely dictate the situation as if she has the absolute right to do so. Forgive some of us for not wanting to reward privilege, especially the white variety.

And when you ask someone to place their hands behind them and they refuse to comply, what's "good police protocol" in that context precisely? What would cause someone to ask someone to do that, exactly? I'm sure most of you know the answer.

He had difficulty restraining her and had not frisked her for weapons, so... good on some of you for being willing to risk taking a bullet when an unruly and clearly defiant suspect used force to put distance between you and them, I suppose, but some folks aren't, SHOCK OF SHOCKS. Not gonna shame someone protecting the peace she obviously broke for considering their own safety when I get the privilege of not even having to consider it at all.


You only know she's unarmed due to hindsight, how lucky for you. Could you 100% say that's the case in the moment itself? With a woman who just created a police chase situation?


Wait, you think the mere act of arresting someone is violent? That's so much of a stretch.


Oh look, more making excuses. You'd have to be fucking braindead to think evading an arrest wouldn't turn out super-badly for you. Didn't know any better? Give me a break.



That's why I've been saying her white privilege is likely why this was merely an $80 ticket. But it seems apparent that reckless endangerment to other motorists is legit NBD to people in this thread. It's just her being "stupid" or "awful".


"Not knowing I'm committing a crime" is not a valid defence, but I see you're trying to defend her by saying it's her rightful expectation to be warned of her criminality before she commits it anyways. Despite the fact that, as a motorist, you are warned to maintain your vehicle and she ignored that for 6 months, so clearly she ain't interested in obeying the rules even when she's informed of them.



We're not on the first few pages anymore, those people have long since vanished and have no interest in your opinion on the subject. You're now just discussing with the rest of us, so orient your talking points accordingly.


The moment people here started saying "police brutality is wrong" from this case as a springboard, you're not saying it on a micro level, that is a macro conversation.



No, she explained how she believed the ticket was completely illegitimate in her eyes and how she had no intention of paying it. Admission of a future crime.
To state it again in this post, you're actively rewarding her privilege, entitlement and belief she is above the law by letting her walk back her open defiance and admission of intent to commit a future criminal act.

This part of the discussion baffles me. "We're not defending this woman", we hear over and over, but you're all so ready to openly reward her privilege, give her endless benefits of the doubt and/or openly paint her as a blameless victim who just merely refused to sign a ticket to diminish her disproportionate compounding of her criminality.

What the hell are people supposed to think of all this shit, precisely, if not that it's a defence of this woman? If we're going to stick to the narrative that folks aren't "defending her", then stick to that by ending these behaviours, please and thank you. It'll make the conversation a lot simpler.

Click to shrink...

Dude, what are you even talking about at this point? If it seems like people are defending Karen it's because you're saying shit like this than making baseless accusations off the BS you just said. You mentioned admission of intent to commit a future criminal act as a reason she should be punished. I'm going to address what you said, not to defend Karen, but to explain to you why what you said is stupid and why I'm not factoring it into my view on the cop going too far.

Her saying she isn't going to pay the ticket is not a crime, people have the right to challenge tickets in court and say this all the time. I do not think that response, from Karen or anyone else, warrants punishment. This is not because I want to reward her for flexing her privilege, it's because I don't think a cop should escalate a situation like that with anyone based on that comment.

So again, just so you're following, I'm addressing this because you mentioned it and think this action warrants punishment. This is not a defense of Karen, it's me stating that this precedent that cops should be punishing people for non-violent, mundane shit is wrong.

Now, as for her privilege, you seem very intent on punishing her for having it. As I've said many times in this thread, I think getting rid of white privilege should be done by giving that to the rest of us, not by stripping it from white people and hoping they're treated worse by the police. Yes, a minority would have been treated FAR worse, and that's why this is disturbing, a small incident where someone is upset with a ticket immediately leads to an arrest which gives the cop 100 percent of the leverage in said situation. The result for Karen was tame compared to what it would have been for someone else, but the dynamic that led to the arrest is the standard protocol for the police. They get annoyed and instead of trying to calm down a situation they escalate it, because cops win in that scenario 99.9 percent of the time.

Now I could say you defending this dynamic is defending police brutality and you're in favor of cops abusing minorities, thus putting you on the defensive for shit you didn't say, and then a response would seem like you're defending police misconduct, but lets both agree to not do shit like that and have a conversation without baseless accusations.

Even with the context of this situation I don't like how the cop handled it. This isn't saying the women didn't act poorly I just want people who we are trusting to carry lethal weapons to be better at handling situations like this with out needlessly escalating and resorting to violence in the end. I also don't like that we endlessly give the cops outs in situations like this. We expect more of fucking grocery store workers when dealing with asshole customers and they don't carry a gun and badge. If cops can do this to an old white lady (who did do really dumb shit) then they can do worse to Black people who've do way less.

Click to shrink...

This. This is all we're saying in this thread. We hold plenty of people to a much higher standard, teachers, parents, security guards, grocery store workers, etc. But when it comes to the cops, the group where an escalated situation goes in their favor almost 100 percent of the time, we shouldn't bother to hold them accountable for anything? No higher standard for this group? A group where, If a situation escalates with them, they can arrest me, taser me, assault me, shoot me, call for backup and have 12 other cops do those same things, ruin my life, etc. Whereas I can...annoy them for non compliance? Cops know this, and escalate things on purpose as soon as you're bothering them. With minorities they're bothered before the encounter occurs, so Karen had to push them more than normal, but still, I don't think we should celebrate or enable this behavior. Thus, I wont do it.

 

[Renna Hazel]

I feel like there's a strong connection between the longevity of this thread, and that "the word Karen is bigoted" thread that just got locked. Does y'a'l'l think white privilege exists or no?

Click to shrink...

Yes, we all think white privilege exists.

 

[Homekoro]

I can' t understand how evading arrest seemed like a good idea. The moment she fled the scene, in my mind, changed the whole situation. Like them or not, police have the authority to detain someone, by force if necessary.

Was force necessary in this case? Difficult to say for sure, but I refuse to ignore the fact that she would not comply with a reasonable ticket, given the condition of her vehicle, or that she tried to run away. I don't get enjoyment out of seeing that lady tackled and tasered, but I am certainly not outraged at the outcome of her actions.

 

[Ploid 6.0]

I know white privilege exists, so much so that I avoid getting into conflicts with white people in the south because I will likely be seen as the trouble maker, or the wrong doer and will need a stack of quickly discernible evidence for a cop to see that maybe they shouldn't fly to the other person's defense so fast (which reminds me of a youtube video of a woman screaming "attack" and "rape" when a guy was walking close to her apartment area after he noticed she was looking at them with binoculars. Plot twist, his mom lives right above her apartment "that is my son as she looks over the balcony" that must have been awkward after that day).

I remember how restrained federal agents were with the militia that took over a federal building or something, or the Bundy sniper standoff against the FBI. Guy shoots up church? Oh ok, but we can at lest drop by McDonalds, he seems hungry. Meanwile, cop notice a black guy might have a knife on his belt!!? Let's give him the bumpy rough ride with no seatbelt uh... game (he died..., the good news is it was found out that the knife was legal, so he didn't break any laws at least).

I always grimace when I see people on the internet (not here of course) try to bring up arrest statistics to show black people are more likely to be criminals, because so many of them are arrested. They then ignore, or are conveniently ignorant to the fact that minority people are the ones cops prey on for easy arrests. If they are found to be wrong or a dirty cop by planting evidence for example, they will still get support from a majority somewhere. It kind of feel like betting against the house for the black person. Some will try to get them to confess to a crime they didn't do just to get a lesser sentence. They would likely be rounded up in a poor neighborhood for easy quotas to fill for profit prisons (poor by design, a history of disinvestment in redlined neighborhoods for example).

Boys will be boys works well for the white kid that got caught with weed, a judge would probably even say this shouldn't ruin their future if they get as far as a court appearance. A minority with weed? Target lock on enabled, send all the tactics and punishment at them gogogogo!

 

[Budi]

I can' t understand how evading arrest seemed like a good idea. The moment she fled the scene, in my mind, changed the whole situation. Like them or not, police have the authority to detain someone, by force if necessary.

Was force necessary in this case? Difficult to say for sure, but I refuse to ignore the fact that she would not comply with a reasonable ticket, given the condition of her vehicle, or that she tried to run away. I don't get enjoyment out of seeing that lady tackled and tasered, but I am certainly not outraged at the outcome of her actions.

Click to shrink...

My problem isn't so much even that the officer used force at all, I'm bothered by what kind of force it was. Pulling a gun and using a tazer, that was some "it's coming right for us!" bullshit. I can't believe for a second he felt threatened by this old lady kicking and screaming in the ground. I get that he was alone, so was she. If he has to rely on last resort tools to apprehend and old lady like that, he isn't fit to be police. Which is exactly the problem, US is full of people who should have no business being cops. Bunch of poorly trained racists. Police behaving like this should not be okay, it ain't gonna help any minority either when it's okay to do to the majority.

 

[Patapuf]

I can' t understand how evading arrest seemed like a good idea. The moment she fled the scene, in my mind, changed the whole situation. Like them or not, police have the authority to detain someone, by force if necessary.

Was force necessary in this case? Difficult to say for sure, but I refuse to ignore the fact that she would not comply with a reasonable ticket, given the condition of her vehicle, or that she tried to run away. I don't get enjoyment out of seeing that lady tackled and tasered, but I am certainly not outraged at the outcome of her actions.

Click to shrink...

It's an 80$ traffic ticket. It's pretty obvious that force is not necessary.

If the lady is unreasonable about it or runs away escalate the fine and send it to collections if she doesn't pay, or hell, summon her to court. That's plenty of consequences for behaving like she did.

Cops don't need to be brainless brutes that only know how to shoot stuff to do their job. And men that can't deal with an angry old lady without pulling their gun are in the wrong profession. That alone should be grounds for termination.

 

[____]

It would be interesting to see if people actually think mailing a ticket to someone's home AFTER they broke the law, cursed at, rolled window up then shut/lock the door on, displayed defiance to authority, then fled the scene of the crime, leading the police on a chase and further resisted arrest.... would be a viable and successful tactic for all Americans.

Or should the white glove service be best relegated to "old white women that can't possibly be a threat"?

 

[TheOMan]

It would be interesting to see if people actually think mailing a ticket to someone's home AFTER they broke the law, cursed at, rolled window up then shut/lock the door on, displayed defiance to authority, then fled the scene of the crime, leading the police on a chase and further resisted arrest.... would be a viable and successful tactic for all Americans.

Or should the white glove service be best relegated to "old white women that can't possibly be a threat"?

Click to shrink...

She had 6 months to fix it - surely someone should hand deliver her the ticket at the time and location of her choosing.

 

[purplemonkey111]

She had 6 months to fix it - surely someone should hand deliver her the ticket at the time and location of her choosing.

Click to shrink...

And we see more people absolving Karen of all responsibilities. Key word, "SHE HAD 6 MONTHS TO FIX IT". Why is it always someone else's fault and not her fault for her own action and inaction. When will people actually hold her accountable for her own actions? My guess...never, because she is white. So she is not responsible for anything. or in the words of the President of the United States "I don't take responsibilities at all"

Welcome to the No whites are responsible States of America.

What if Karen is not white, but another minority race? Should she also get the courtesy of driving away and not pay a fine? Because if it was me or any other minority race, guess what would happen.

We would get our cars impounded and have to find another way home. It's not white privilege, but lets just keep giving Karen "Not special treatment" and allow her to drive away, and talk to her at a more convenient time later.

As for focusing on getting the cops to do better. We have been saying that since forever, but it's only when the cop start treating Karen like a criminal that it's a issue. Not when minority were getting arrested for whatever charges the cop can think of. Not when minorities were getting killed while under arrest or in custody, not when police raided the wrong house, and shot up the occupant or burned a toddler with a flash grenade.

I know the police are fucked up, which is why I am wary of them whenever I encounter them. But I don't care about this case, because in this instance, she was not brutalized by the police. She was treated with an insane amount of leeway that I would never get if I try to do the same thing she did.

 

[____]

And we see more people absolving Karen of all responsibilities. Key word, "SHE HAD 6 MONTHS TO FIX IT". Why is it always someone else's fault and not her fault for her own action and inaction. When will people actually hold her accountable for her own actions? My guess...never, because she is white. So she is not responsible for anything. or in the words of the President of the United States "I don't take responsibilities at all"

Welcome to the No whites are responsible States of America.

What if Karen is not white, but another minority race? Should she also get the courtesy of driving away and not pay a fine? Because if it was me or any other minority race, guess what would happen.

We would get our cars impounded and have to find another way home. It's not white privilege, but lets just keep giving Karen "Not special treatment" and allow her to drive away, and talk to her at a more convenient time later.

As for focusing on getting the cops to do better. We have been saying that since forever, but it's only when the cop start treating Karen like a criminal that it's a issue. Not when minority were getting arrested for whatever charges the cop can think of. Not when minorities were getting killed while under arrest or in custody, not when police raided the wrong house, and shot up the occupant or burned a toddler with a flash grenade.

I know the police are fucked up, which is why I am wary of them whenever I encounter them. But I don't care about this case, because in this instance, she was not brutalized by the police. She was treated with an insane amount of leeway that I would never get if I try to do the same thing she did.

Click to shrink...

I think he or she was agreeing and the post was sarcasm.

She had 6 months to fix it - surely someone should hand deliver her the ticket at the time and location of her choosing.

Click to shrink...

Yup! She should also have the liberty to decide when (or even IF) she pays it once she loses in court.

 

[SilentPanda]

Going through the thread...
I have a question, some people are saying that the police should have told her that she would be arrested if she didn't sign the paper?

My question is...is that really need be explained?
Even here in Taiwan, if you don't follow police request for drunk test, you get arrested for not following lawful command of police officer, that's the only thing that happen, you follow and thing go on, you choose not to follow and you are arrest.

Unless you are a politician or know someone high up in the police force and call them, then they tell the officer to do other thing.

 

[TheOMan]

And we see more people absolving Karen of all responsibilities. Key word, "SHE HAD 6 MONTHS TO FIX IT". Why is it always someone else's fault and not her fault for her own action and inaction. When will people actually hold her accountable for her own actions? My guess...never, because she is white. So she is not responsible for anything. or in the words of the President of the United States "I don't take responsibilities at all"

Welcome to the No whites are responsible States of America.

What if Karen is not white, but another minority race? Should she also get the courtesy of driving away and not pay a fine? Because if it was me or any other minority race, guess what would happen.

We would get our cars impounded and have to find another way home. It's not white privilege, but lets just keep giving Karen "Not special treatment" and allow her to drive away, and talk to her at a more convenient time later.

As for focusing on getting the cops to do better. We have been saying that since forever, but it's only when the cop start treating Karen like a criminal that it's a issue. Not when minority were getting arrested for whatever charges the cop can think of. Not when minorities were getting killed while under arrest or in custody, not when police raided the wrong house, and shot up the occupant or burned a toddler with a flash grenade.

I know the police are fucked up, which is why I am wary of them whenever I encounter them. But I don't care about this case, because in this instance, she was not brutalized by the police. She was treated with an insane amount of leeway that I would never get if I try to do the same thing she did.

Click to shrink...

I was being deeply, deeply sarcastic, I thought it was obvious, but I guess it wasn't, LOL. Sorry.

 

[purplemonkey111]

I was being deeply, deeply sarcastic, I thought it was obvious, but I guess it wasn't, LOL. Sorry.

Click to shrink...

No problem, it's hard to tell tone from just text. But your sarcastic post didn't invalidate the dozens of other post that do try to absolve Karen of all responsibilities.

 

[Haint]

I'm not even sure card carrying Nazi's or hooded Klansmen would be happy or supportive of a grayheaded 65yo overweight black grandma getting dragged, tackled, drawn on, and tazered.

 

[RoninRay]

I'm not even sure card carrying Nazi's or hooded Klansmen would be happy or supportive of a grayheaded 65yo overweight black grandma getting dragged, tackled, drawn on, and tazered.

Click to shrink...

This just comes across like trying to be hyperbolic and edgy to make a point and instead just coming off insanely stupid. What world do you live in to have this take? Nazis and klansmen would kill ,torture , rape and shit on any old black person if they could get away with it. Then they would throw a full parade by dragging them from the back of their truck. Seriously what are you talking about?

 

[The Buffmuffin]

Thug in the title, very edgy. She definitely needed to be arrested for fleeing the scene but too much force was used.

 

[El-Suave]

After things escalated and she fled the scene anything is fair game, but issuing "arrests" so quickly surely must be a relic of the days of the Wild West.
America is weird, he seems to have her i.d. and if there's no reason to doubt that, that's enough to charge and fine her and follow the process without detaining anybody.

 

[Terrell]

The cop took it off the table before letting her know that he was gonna arrest her if she didn't sign it. He needed to communicate that before putting her under arrest. That could've made the difference in this situation seeing that she did agree to sign it after hearing that she was under arrest.

Click to shrink...

No, she took it off the table the moment she declared she wouldn't pay the ticket in any context. And it's entirely a hypothetical that it would have changed anything about the situation.

The woman did more to escalate, for sure. She's an idiot. but I hold the cop to a higher standard. The cop matched her tone at the start and instead of trying to deescalate he escalated it.

Click to shrink...

Even with the context of this situation I don't like how the cop handled it. This isn't saying the women didn't act poorly I just want people who we are trusting to carry lethal weapons to be better at handling situations like this with out needlessly escalating and resorting to violence in the end. I also don't like that we endlessly give the cops outs in situations like this. We expect more of fucking grocery store workers when dealing with asshole customers and they don't carry a gun and badge. If cops can do this to an old white lady (who did do really dumb shit) then they can do worse to Black people who've do way less.

Click to shrink...

She's not just an "idiot", she's a danger to other motorists the moment that she admitted she hadn't fixed it and had no intention to do so except on HER terms and on HER timeline.

Since we're all so OK with using hypotheticals for this instance:

What do you think happens if she fled, was allowed to keep driving and caused a vehicular accident? Is that an acceptable outcome? Do you not believe, in a highly-litigious America, that the police officer/department would not be held partly liable for just allowing her to flee the scene in that situation?

In the video the woman did agree to sign after hearing she was about to be arrested. So clearly she was interested in obeying the rules IF SHE WAS INFORMED beforehand. But in this case the cop was too late and he wanted to arrest her already. Which is why he didn't do his duty to de-escalate.

Click to shrink...

And here we have an assumption of what her behaviour would be in an alternate world, thinking that she only agreed to sign the ticket because she didn't know the consequences until after the fact, instead of it being because she wasn't getting her way. I know which one seems the more likely conclusion to come to from her behaviour alone.
You are allowing HER to dictate the terms of the interaction, as she tried to through the entire process.

The violence was him tazing her, which came as a result of him deciding to put her under arrest.

Click to shrink...

No, it came as a result of her fleeing the scene of the arrest. Nothing even remotely violent occurred until she did that. Can we please stop with the omissions that diminish the situation that led to the final outcome? It's tiring.

People are doing it on basically every page of this thread.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, I'm not sure anyone is really arguing that we should take up in the streets and protest the mistreatment of Mildred. The issue I'm having is people in this thread openly celebrating the cop being abusive.

Click to shrink...

Since we're all eager to say that we can be against police violence and this woman's behaviour simultaneously, even as people diminish the situation in her favour, perhaps we can extend the courtesy to some of them that they can both appreciate and feel a sense of celebratory relief at a rare instance where a person's privilege was (eventually) disregarded without allegedly being in favour of police violence.

This is, of course, suggesting they stuck around to acknowledge your admonishment of their celebration, which seems pretty unlikely.

Some of us see it not as a white privilege issue first (yes WP 100% plays apart in every interaction) but as a Human Rights issue. So yeah I agree we probably are having two separate discussions.

You're Human Rights are not respected so why should hers? I completely see that (and from the outside it does look fucked) and there is no way any of us would say you are wrong and apologies if I talked down to you in that regard. The point that I shouldn't be in here in the first place on that issue is valid.

So yeah it has to be a WP issue for you first. The video is still gross IMO but no one wants to take away the problems with "Karen" because we see it as a HR problem; and I see how hard it is to separate that from WP if we even can at all. Whole situation is warped IMO and you are not wrong.

Click to shrink...

I know you and I came to loggerheads earlier in the thread, but I appreciate the reflective nature of the conversation you are engaging in with this post, so thanks, first of all. And it deserves the courtesy of expansion, because you got real close to hitting the nail on the head.

It's not even that I don't respect her human rights because mine aren't or haven't been, it's that I believe, in creating a situation from her privilege, the physicality of the event cannot outweigh her culpability, since her privilege is more far-reaching that I think many are giving credence to and well beyond this incident. I'll come back to that later.

Even I agree that it all could have been handled differently, though I disagree with the fact that it shouldn't have escalated, just that it should have escalated in a different direction that maybe, but unlikely, would have prevented violence AND properly addressed the situation. Being a danger to other motorists, when she disputed the validity of the $80 ticket (which I'm shocked was even been an option in the first place, as far as I am concerned, and is part of how her privilege benefitted her at the outset), he should have gone back to the cruiser under the guise of conferring with his superiors and called for another officer and a tow truck to impound the vehicle and have someone to escort her home so he could continue his patrol. Even if I feel that's more courtesy than she deserved, it brings the situation to a satisfactory conclusion for everyone. The arrest was ultimately born of feeling a need to handle the situation entirely on his own (the "old West sheriff" mentality or some such), but I imagine the situation would have played out entirely the same from that point, anyways, since she was dead-set on having no culpability in her own behaviour. It's tough to say either way, though; any alternative solution may have come to the same conclusion, we can never be sure, thanks in part to her behaviour.
But yes, in the grand scheme, I view it from the scope of what's more of a pressing issue.

And that seems to be the crux of the situation, that we all put a different level of disgust or weight on the actions of each party in this interaction. Some seem to find the violence more distasteful, others her privilege. We all agree both are awful things (or those of us still bothering to visit the thread, anyways), but where we place weight on them differs dramatically. And you are correct, that can be informed by our own experiences and understandings of the world.

From my perspective, while I am not a victim of white privilege or racial profiling, I have been a victim of cishet privilege and queer profiling, which has its own uniquely tangled and awful history with the police (most commonly in the form of dismissal and negligence, like the serial killer prowling Toronto for gay men of colour to murder and the police not intervening despite multiple requests, but also a past and current history of physical and sexual violence, albeit on a MUCH smaller scale than that experienced by people of colour). But I will always, ALWAYS, stand up against privilege (and its steadfast companion, profiling) in any form as a result of my frame of reference, knowing it quite literally just barely grazed my life and it horrified me to my bones. I will be like this until the day I die, for my sake and for the sake of anyone else who is a victim of it. Standing in full and complete solidarity ain't always easy, since I was tempted to walk away from the thread numerous times, but it's necessary.

Another point of disagreement is the belief that you can separate privilege from human rights or consider them distinct, when by the nature of it in North America, they are inseparable.
The use of force by police and its dehumanizing effect were born of privilege, where white/cishet people allowed the militarization of the police, the lack of accountability and the racially-charged war on drugs and/or turned a blind eye to its violent excesses, because the effects of these actions regularly do not effect them personally. You can't separate that, they are in complete tandem with one another, one begat the other and endlessly feed each other. This is why it is such an issue in places like North America to start with and not in others. Hell, the US gun culture that would make even a level-headed cop who doesn't profile concerned for his safety in this scenario is born from the same thing, where white gun violence is diminished by police and the press to continue the fetishization of "from my cold dead hands" liberty that only white people get to revel in, while we gun down people who don't have one under unreasonable suspicion.

Saying this is a human rights situation first and foremost is, from this frame of reference, being more aggrieved by the symptom than by the cause, in a rare instance where the effects of privilege miraculously backfired on an unintended victim. It's not even a discussion of political affiliation as some suggest, privilege transcends partisanship in North America. Let's be super realistic about this: a woman behaving like she's above the law and who thinks those laws should apply only to her selective and dictated sensibility is almost 100% a contributor to the violence she withstood, either passively or aggressively.

Those that know of the violence born of privilege and who fight against it aren't going to do ANY of what she did, not wanting to see the monster privilege has made first-hand. Hence why black parents give "the talk", passed down from every generation since their ancestors arrived as slaves. It's also what informed my mother's fearing for my safety when I came out in the 90s. Most parents who actually love their children don't know how to properly communicate to their LGBTQ kids that their privilege can be erased in an instant or that their already-present danger is compounded, so many LGBTQ people unfortunately end up learning that in the worst possible way. My mother was thankfully not one of those parents and explained it quite aptly: "You can't trust anyone or anything outside these walls is going to protect you or have your best interests at heart anymore, not even the law". She scared me, because especially at that time in the place we lived, I needed to be a little scared.
Ignorance of the entirely expected outcome in this circumstance, of the matter of fact about how modern policing in North America is conducted, can thus only be claimed by the privileged, by those who created it in the first place. It comes from an assumption that there should be different tiers of consideration by the police based on race and identity. The accidental deconstruction of that thanks to the policeman's actions is why this thread got to where it is now and why some seem to forget why this violence exists when it hasn't been used against its usual target.

I also see a lot of "holding police to higher standards". Privilege has made the policeman's actions into the standards, where this is an aberration of it not doing what it's intended to. My hope for a change in those standards in my lifetime has all but disappeared, especially for the United States of America. It's merely the world we live in and I can never be ignorant of it.

We, as a general rule, don't have the tools to discuss issues situations like this at the best of times, where there's 2 clear instigators, 2 clearly bad people or groups, because it's hard to find compassion via our collective humanity with people who clearly do not share it. But in this situation, we have an added wrinkle, in that one of these 2 bad people has been allowed to exist by the other, either passively or aggressively. It makes finding that sense of compassion extremely more difficult. It's an oppressor having their own weapon of oppression used against them.

When people say that folks need to find a better outlet for their outrage towards police brutality, that's where it's coming from.

And I don't think any more needs to be said on the subject, so I'm going to retire from posting in here now.

 

[Patapuf]

It would be interesting to see if people actually think mailing a ticket to someone's home AFTER they broke the law, cursed at, rolled window up then shut/lock the door on, displayed defiance to authority, then fled the scene of the crime, leading the police on a chase and further resisted arrest.... would be a viable and successful tactic for all Americans.

Or should the white glove service be best relegated to "old white women that can't possibly be a threat"?

Click to shrink...

Of course... around here we get all fines via invoice anyway. If you don't pay it goes to collection and/or court. That tends to be deterrent enough.

I'm surprised so many in this thread think it's ok for policemen to beat up citizens just because they "defy authority". and that an 80$ traffic ticket warants having a gun shoved in your face.

Is police only using force proportional to the threat not a concept you want applied in policing? Let's say this car is a danger to the public and can under no circumstances continue to be on the road. Forceful action is needed. You don't tase the driver. You confiscate the car.

And if the driver flees who cares? She'll come back crawling if she wants the car back. And pay the fine.

 

[M. Wallace]

Holy wall of text for a Karen.

 

[purplemonkey111]

After things escalated and she fled the scene anything is fair game, but issuing "arrests" so quickly surely must be a relic of the days of the Wild West.
America is weird, he seems to have her i.d. and if there's no reason to doubt that, that's enough to charge and fine her and follow the process without detaining anybody.

Click to shrink...

And we're back to the Karen Defense force absolving her of all responsibilities and giving her special treatments again.

And don't tell me letting her drive away and arresting her at her house at a more convenient time is not special treatment.

As for following the process? You mean the part where he ask her to sign the ticket and she refused? Or is it the part where he asked her to step out of her vehicle and she also refused? Or is it the part where he placed her under arrest for disobeying a lawful order and she again refused?

Or is it the part where she chose to flee from the officer after being placed under arrest? Or is it when he ordered her to get out of her car a second time after she attempted to flee? Or when he forced her out and told her to get restrained and she kicked him? Or when he ordered her to lay on the ground and she refused so he pulled out his taser to tase her?

Which process are you talking about?

 

[Spikematic]

She was nuts, but man, American cops need to chill out.

 

[MegaManTrigger]

Are you even reading the post you quoted? I'm not talking about giving a second chance after she fled. I'm talking about communicating more properly before attempting to arrest someone.

Click to shrink...

Yes I did read the post, you're still making the silly assumption that communicating that was going to change anything with how defiant she was. The law makes it very clear that the moment you refuse to sign the ticket, the officer has the right to arrest you. Most Americans understand this principle especially when pulled over by the cop. He's not obligated to constantly remind her of what her actions entail. Least of all not when she's fleeing and resisting arrest.

Like at some point you need to stop being obtuse and realize that this was driven by her irresponsibility and stubbornness. And people need to stop giving her more privilege than she already has. People of colour get treated far worse than she ever has.

 

[spineduke]

No, she took it off the table the moment she declared she wouldn't pay the ticket in any context. And it's entirely a hypothetical that it would have changed anything about the situation.



She's not just an "idiot", she's a danger to other motorists the moment that she admitted she hadn't fixed it and had no intention to do so except on HER terms and on HER timeline.

Since we're all so OK with using hypotheticals for this instance:

What do you think happens if she fled, was allowed to keep driving and caused a vehicular accident? Is that an acceptable outcome? Do you not believe, in a highly-litigious America, that the police officer/department would not be held partly liable for just allowing her to flee the scene in that situation?


And here we have an assumption of what her behaviour would be in an alternate world, thinking that she only agreed to sign the ticket because she didn't know the consequences until after the fact, instead of it being because she wasn't getting her way. I know which one seems the more likely conclusion to come to from her behaviour alone.
You are allowing HER to dictate the terms of the interaction, as she tried to through the entire process.



No, it came as a result of her fleeing the scene of the arrest. Nothing even remotely violent occurred until she did that. Can we please stop with the omissions that diminish the situation that led to the final outcome? It's tiring.



Since we're all eager to say that we can be against police violence and this woman's behaviour simultaneously, even as people diminish the situation in her favour, perhaps we can extend the courtesy to some of them that they can both appreciate and feel a sense of celebratory relief at a rare instance where a person's privilege was (eventually) disregarded without allegedly being in favour of police violence.

This is, of course, suggesting they stuck around to acknowledge your admonishment of their celebration, which seems pretty unlikely.



I know you and I came to loggerheads earlier in the thread, but I appreciate the reflective nature of the conversation you are engaging in with this post, so thanks, first of all. And it deserves the courtesy of expansion, because you got real close to hitting the nail on the head.

It's not even that I don't respect her human rights because mine aren't or haven't been, it's that I believe, in creating a situation from her privilege, the physicality of the event cannot outweigh her culpability, since her privilege is more far-reaching that I think many are giving credence to and well beyond this incident. I'll come back to that later.

Even I agree that it all could have been handled differently, though I disagree with the fact that it shouldn't have escalated, just that it should have escalated in a different direction that maybe, but unlikely, would have prevented violence AND properly addressed the situation. Being a danger to other motorists, when she disputed the validity of the $80 ticket (which I'm shocked was even been an option in the first place, as far as I am concerned, and is part of how her privilege benefitted her at the outset), he should have gone back to the cruiser under the guise of conferring with his superiors and called for another officer and a tow truck to impound the vehicle and have someone to escort her home so he could continue his patrol. Even if I feel that's more courtesy than she deserved, it brings the situation to a satisfactory conclusion for everyone. The arrest was ultimately born of feeling a need to handle the situation entirely on his own (the "old West sheriff" mentality or some such), but I imagine the situation would have played out entirely the same from that point, anyways, since she was dead-set on having no culpability in her own behaviour. It's tough to say either way, though; any alternative solution may have come to the same conclusion, we can never be sure, thanks in part to her behaviour.
But yes, in the grand scheme, I view it from the scope of what's more of a pressing issue.

And that seems to be the crux of the situation, that we all put a different level of disgust or weight on the actions of each party in this interaction. Some seem to find the violence more distasteful, others her privilege. We all agree both are awful things (or those of us still bothering to visit the thread, anyways), but where we place weight on them differs dramatically. And you are correct, that can be informed by our own experiences and understandings of the world.

From my perspective, while I am not a victim of white privilege or racial profiling, I have been a victim of cishet privilege and queer profiling, which has its own uniquely tangled and awful history with the police (most commonly in the form of dismissal and negligence, like the serial killer prowling Toronto for gay men of colour to murder and the police not intervening despite multiple requests, but also a past and current history of physical and sexual violence, albeit on a MUCH smaller scale than that experienced by people of colour). But I will always, ALWAYS, stand up against privilege (and its steadfast companion, profiling) in any form as a result of my frame of reference, knowing it quite literally just barely grazed my life and it horrified me to my bones. I will be like this until the day I die, for my sake and for the sake of anyone else who is a victim of it. Standing in full and complete solidarity ain't always easy, since I was tempted to walk away from the thread numerous times, but it's necessary.

Another point of disagreement is the belief that you can separate privilege from human rights or consider them distinct, when by the nature of it in North America, they are inseparable.
The use of force by police and its dehumanizing effect were born of privilege, where white/cishet people allowed the militarization of the police, the lack of accountability and the racially-charged war on drugs and/or turned a blind eye to its violent excesses, because the effects of these actions regularly do not effect them personally. You can't separate that, they are in complete tandem with one another, one begat the other and endlessly feed each other. This is why it is such an issue in places like North America to start with and not in others. Hell, the US gun culture that would make even a level-headed cop who doesn't profile concerned for his safety in this scenario is born from the same thing, where white gun violence is diminished by police and the press to continue the fetishization of "from my cold dead hands" liberty that only white people get to revel in, while we gun down people who don't have one under unreasonable suspicion.

Saying this is a human rights situation first and foremost is, from this frame of reference, being more aggrieved by the symptom than by the cause, in a rare instance where the effects of privilege miraculously backfired on an unintended victim. It's not even a discussion of political affiliation as some suggest, privilege transcends partisanship in North America. Let's be super realistic about this: a woman behaving like she's above the law and who thinks those laws should apply only to her selective and dictated sensibility is almost 100% a contributor to the violence she withstood, either passively or aggressively.

Those that know of the violence born of privilege and who fight against it aren't going to do ANY of what she did, not wanting to see the monster privilege has made first-hand. Hence why black parents give "the talk", passed down from every generation since their ancestors arrived as slaves. It's also what informed my mother's fearing for my safety when I came out in the 90s. Most parents who actually love their children don't know how to properly communicate to their LGBTQ kids that their privilege can be erased in an instant or that their already-present danger is compounded, so many LGBTQ people unfortunately end up learning that in the worst possible way. My mother was thankfully not one of those parents and explained it quite aptly: "You can't trust anyone or anything outside these walls is going to protect you or have your best interests at heart anymore, not even the law". She scared me, because especially at that time in the place we lived, I needed to be a little scared.
Ignorance of the entirely expected outcome in this circumstance, of the matter of fact about how modern policing in North America is conducted, can thus only be claimed by the privileged, by those who created it in the first place. It comes from an assumption that there should be different tiers of consideration by the police based on race and identity. The accidental deconstruction of that thanks to the policeman's actions is why this thread got to where it is now and why some seem to forget why this violence exists when it hasn't been used against its usual target.

I also see a lot of "holding police to higher standards". Privilege has made the policeman's actions into the standards, where this is an aberration of it not doing what it's intended to. My hope for a change in those standards in my lifetime has all but disappeared, especially for the United States of America. It's merely the world we live in and I can never be ignorant of it.

We, as a general rule, don't have the tools to discuss issues situations like this at the best of times, where there's 2 clear instigators, 2 clearly bad people or groups, because it's hard to find compassion via our collective humanity with people who clearly do not share it. But in this situation, we have an added wrinkle, in that one of these 2 bad people has been allowed to exist by the other, either passively or aggressively. It makes finding that sense of compassion extremely more difficult. It's an oppressor having their own weapon of oppression used against them.

When people say that folks need to find a better outlet for their outrage towards police brutality, that's where it's coming from.

And I don't think any more needs to be said on the subject, so I'm going to retire from posting in here now.

Click to shrink...

I was about done with this thread, but thanks for that well typed out post. You nailed what was bothering me with the general direction of this thread.

 

[Deleted member 13188]

No, she took it off the table the moment she declared she wouldn't pay the ticket in any context. And it's entirely a hypothetical that it would have changed anything about the situation.



She's not just an "idiot", she's a danger to other motorists the moment that she admitted she hadn't fixed it and had no intention to do so except on HER terms and on HER timeline.

Since we're all so OK with using hypotheticals for this instance:

What do you think happens if she fled, was allowed to keep driving and caused a vehicular accident? Is that an acceptable outcome? Do you not believe, in a highly-litigious America, that the police officer/department would not be held partly liable for just allowing her to flee the scene in that situation?


And here we have an assumption of what her behaviour would be in an alternate world, thinking that she only agreed to sign the ticket because she didn't know the consequences until after the fact, instead of it being because she wasn't getting her way. I know which one seems the more likely conclusion to come to from her behaviour alone.
You are allowing HER to dictate the terms of the interaction, as she tried to through the entire process.



No, it came as a result of her fleeing the scene of the arrest. Nothing even remotely violent occurred until she did that. Can we please stop with the omissions that diminish the situation that led to the final outcome? It's tiring.



Since we're all eager to say that we can be against police violence and this woman's behaviour simultaneously, even as people diminish the situation in her favour, perhaps we can extend the courtesy to some of them that they can both appreciate and feel a sense of celebratory relief at a rare instance where a person's privilege was (eventually) disregarded without allegedly being in favour of police violence.

This is, of course, suggesting they stuck around to acknowledge your admonishment of their celebration, which seems pretty unlikely.



I know you and I came to loggerheads earlier in the thread, but I appreciate the reflective nature of the conversation you are engaging in with this post, so thanks, first of all. And it deserves the courtesy of expansion, because you got real close to hitting the nail on the head.

It's not even that I don't respect her human rights because mine aren't or haven't been, it's that I believe, in creating a situation from her privilege, the physicality of the event cannot outweigh her culpability, since her privilege is more far-reaching that I think many are giving credence to and well beyond this incident. I'll come back to that later.

Even I agree that it all could have been handled differently, though I disagree with the fact that it shouldn't have escalated, just that it should have escalated in a different direction that maybe, but unlikely, would have prevented violence AND properly addressed the situation. Being a danger to other motorists, when she disputed the validity of the $80 ticket (which I'm shocked was even been an option in the first place, as far as I am concerned, and is part of how her privilege benefitted her at the outset), he should have gone back to the cruiser under the guise of conferring with his superiors and called for another officer and a tow truck to impound the vehicle and have someone to escort her home so he could continue his patrol. Even if I feel that's more courtesy than she deserved, it brings the situation to a satisfactory conclusion for everyone. The arrest was ultimately born of feeling a need to handle the situation entirely on his own (the "old West sheriff" mentality or some such), but I imagine the situation would have played out entirely the same from that point, anyways, since she was dead-set on having no culpability in her own behaviour. It's tough to say either way, though; any alternative solution may have come to the same conclusion, we can never be sure, thanks in part to her behaviour.
But yes, in the grand scheme, I view it from the scope of what's more of a pressing issue.

And that seems to be the crux of the situation, that we all put a different level of disgust or weight on the actions of each party in this interaction. Some seem to find the violence more distasteful, others her privilege. We all agree both are awful things (or those of us still bothering to visit the thread, anyways), but where we place weight on them differs dramatically. And you are correct, that can be informed by our own experiences and understandings of the world.

From my perspective, while I am not a victim of white privilege or racial profiling, I have been a victim of cishet privilege and queer profiling, which has its own uniquely tangled and awful history with the police (most commonly in the form of dismissal and negligence, like the serial killer prowling Toronto for gay men of colour to murder and the police not intervening despite multiple requests, but also a past and current history of physical and sexual violence, albeit on a MUCH smaller scale than that experienced by people of colour). But I will always, ALWAYS, stand up against privilege (and its steadfast companion, profiling) in any form as a result of my frame of reference, knowing it quite literally just barely grazed my life and it horrified me to my bones. I will be like this until the day I die, for my sake and for the sake of anyone else who is a victim of it. Standing in full and complete solidarity ain't always easy, since I was tempted to walk away from the thread numerous times, but it's necessary.

Another point of disagreement is the belief that you can separate privilege from human rights or consider them distinct, when by the nature of it in North America, they are inseparable.
The use of force by police and its dehumanizing effect were born of privilege, where white/cishet people allowed the militarization of the police, the lack of accountability and the racially-charged war on drugs and/or turned a blind eye to its violent excesses, because the effects of these actions regularly do not effect them personally. You can't separate that, they are in complete tandem with one another, one begat the other and endlessly feed each other. This is why it is such an issue in places like North America to start with and not in others. Hell, the US gun culture that would make even a level-headed cop who doesn't profile concerned for his safety in this scenario is born from the same thing, where white gun violence is diminished by police and the press to continue the fetishization of "from my cold dead hands" liberty that only white people get to revel in, while we gun down people who don't have one under unreasonable suspicion.

Saying this is a human rights situation first and foremost is, from this frame of reference, being more aggrieved by the symptom than by the cause, in a rare instance where the effects of privilege miraculously backfired on an unintended victim. It's not even a discussion of political affiliation as some suggest, privilege transcends partisanship in North America. Let's be super realistic about this: a woman behaving like she's above the law and who thinks those laws should apply only to her selective and dictated sensibility is almost 100% a contributor to the violence she withstood, either passively or aggressively.

Those that know of the violence born of privilege and who fight against it aren't going to do ANY of what she did, not wanting to see the monster privilege has made first-hand. Hence why black parents give "the talk", passed down from every generation since their ancestors arrived as slaves. It's also what informed my mother's fearing for my safety when I came out in the 90s. Most parents who actually love their children don't know how to properly communicate to their LGBTQ kids that their privilege can be erased in an instant or that their already-present danger is compounded, so many LGBTQ people unfortunately end up learning that in the worst possible way. My mother was thankfully not one of those parents and explained it quite aptly: "You can't trust anyone or anything outside these walls is going to protect you or have your best interests at heart anymore, not even the law". She scared me, because especially at that time in the place we lived, I needed to be a little scared.
Ignorance of the entirely expected outcome in this circumstance, of the matter of fact about how modern policing in North America is conducted, can thus only be claimed by the privileged, by those who created it in the first place. It comes from an assumption that there should be different tiers of consideration by the police based on race and identity. The accidental deconstruction of that thanks to the policeman's actions is why this thread got to where it is now and why some seem to forget why this violence exists when it hasn't been used against its usual target.

I also see a lot of "holding police to higher standards". Privilege has made the policeman's actions into the standards, where this is an aberration of it not doing what it's intended to. My hope for a change in those standards in my lifetime has all but disappeared, especially for the United States of America. It's merely the world we live in and I can never be ignorant of it.

We, as a general rule, don't have the tools to discuss issues situations like this at the best of times, where there's 2 clear instigators, 2 clearly bad people or groups, because it's hard to find compassion via our collective humanity with people who clearly do not share it. But in this situation, we have an added wrinkle, in that one of these 2 bad people has been allowed to exist by the other, either passively or aggressively. It makes finding that sense of compassion extremely more difficult. It's an oppressor having their own weapon of oppression used against them.

When people say that folks need to find a better outlet for their outrage towards police brutality, that's where it's coming from.

And I don't think any more needs to be said on the subject, so I'm going to retire from posting in here now.

Click to shrink...

I appreciate the thought and effort that went into your reply; thanks for sharing it.