I'm Not Dude!

[myusername]

i've only been skimming peoples responses to this... but my personal belief is that a police officer doesn't deserve respect just for wearing a badge and carrying a gun... a person who bullys 14 year old kids cause he can needs to get punched in the head... the sad truth of our society is that he can hide behind that badge and manhandle little kids... if that kid was my kid... i'd try to fight the cop... i'd try real hard... and unfortunately i'd go to jail... the kid may have been breaking the law... but he wasn't skateboarding anymore... the cop could have just said get lost... and went to deal with real criminals... but instead... (and i can't get over this) manhandles the kid and puts him to the ground... seriously wtf... he is just a bully, straight up, not a person that deserves any respect from anyone... if a cop wants my respect they should be out there trying to help people rather than pushing people smaller then them... no only smaller than them, but obviously oblivious to whats going on... that kid could have never expected a grown man to act like such a fool... calling someone dude is not disrespectful, and if you think it is wouldn't it make more sense to explain that in a civilized tone, than yelling it at the top of your lungs like a moron.... wooo glad i got that out of my symptom...

I echo your sentiments on this and watching that video made me think about how I would have felt and handled that situation, especially when I was a hot headed teenager! I hope now that I am a mature adult I would be able to roll with this guys aggression and keep my big mouth shut (whether I would be able to keep my frustration swallowed if he actually manhandled me like this poor kid is a harder question!) But I remember being that kids age and remember how much I despised being bullied and I could easily have ended up with a criminal record if I had met a policeman like Officer Dude! I know that if I were going to be definately charged with assualting a police officer at that age I would have thought to myself "I better get my money's worth then!"

That idiots attitude could have ended in that innocent boy having a criminal record and ruining that kids future employment prospects!

 

[jks9199]

That idiots attitude could have ended in that innocent boy having a criminal record and ruining that kids future employment prospects!

A few things worth noting...

First, the officer's response WAS NOT random. He addressed a group of kids, initially verbally from a distance. They failed to respond, and he approached. One became more confrontational than the others; the camera doesn't show, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was still standing on his skateboard. (I've been there, had exactly that happen, when I've told the group to stop, and one continues.)

Second, as I've said, his use of force was limited. I'm not rehashing it again; you can read the explanation earlier in the thread.

Third, it's not the cop's job to worry about a kid's future job prospects! It's the cop's job to enforce the law. There is so much wrong with the idea of having a cop worry about the future job prospects of a kid that I'm having trouble figuring out where to start. Yes, there is a time and place for using appropriate and reasonable discretion in handling kids -- but nearly every cop I know will tell you that one of the biggest reasons that we have increasing problems with juvenile delinquency is inadequate responses by the courts, precisely because the judges and intake officers are worrying about the "poor kid's future."

IF the kid is old enough to make his own decisions, he's old enough for those decisions to have consequences. The consequence must be significant enough to deter future problem behavior -- but balanced. For example, I worked a case where a bunch of middle school kids marked up some playground equipment, causing a couple of thousand dollars worth of damage. (By the way, skaters often cause this much or more damage.) In the course of my investigation, I came to the conclusion that this wasn't "youthful stupidity"; it was handled through a less formal, one-time (per person) option in our courts which does not produce a formal criminal record or arrest. On the other hand, a case where a single kid, only a few years older, was responsible for several graffiti incidents, each being well over $1000 dollars in damage, was handled formally, with felony charges. To the best of my knowledge, he has not re-offended.

And, again, I'm not giving the officer a pass. He handled this unprofessionally. His rant created a bad impression, and probably was ineffective. At the very least, he comes off looking bad. But... can any of the folks casting stones at him here say they've handled every situation in their life perfectly? Or have never lost their temper at kids?

 

[taitsechien]

And, again, I'm not giving the officer a pass. He handled this unprofessionally. His rant created a bad impression, and probably was ineffective. At the very least, he comes off looking bad. But... can any of the folks casting stones at him here say they've handled every situation in their life perfectly? Or have never lost their temper at kids?

I've handled alot of things badly in my life... but i teach kids karate... and if i were to ever lose my temper like that at kids... i'd lose my job... and maybe even get sued... i totally understanding losing your temper... but if its your a job... and your a public figure like a cop... you better be ready to hold you temper... and be ready to be scrutinized, and held accountable, for your actions... if a police officer wants my respect they bette respect that they are a public figure that can't go around freaking out at little kids... and i would argue his force on that kid was in no way reasonable... he outweighed him by at least X2... he put the kid all the way to the ground... and the kid obviously was not a threat... he was completly lucid when officer dude grabbed a hold of him, with no intent of fighting back...

 

[myusername]

A few things worth noting...

First, the officer's response WAS NOT random. He addressed a group of kids, initially verbally from a distance. They failed to respond, and he approached. One became more confrontational than the others; the camera doesn't show, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was still standing on his skateboard. (I've been there, had exactly that happen, when I've told the group to stop, and one continues.)

Second, as I've said, his use of force was limited. I'm not rehashing it again; you can read the explanation earlier in the thread.

Third, it's not the cop's job to worry about a kid's future job prospects! It's the cop's job to enforce the law. There is so much wrong with the idea of having a cop worry about the future job prospects of a kid that I'm having trouble figuring out where to start. Yes, there is a time and place for using appropriate and reasonable discretion in handling kids -- but nearly every cop I know will tell you that one of the biggest reasons that we have increasing problems with juvenile delinquency is inadequate responses by the courts, precisely because the judges and intake officers are worrying about the "poor kid's future."

IF the kid is old enough to make his own decisions, he's old enough for those decisions to have consequences. The consequence must be significant enough to deter future problem behavior -- but balanced. For example, I worked a case where a bunch of middle school kids marked up some playground equipment, causing a couple of thousand dollars worth of damage. (By the way, skaters often cause this much or more damage.) In the course of my investigation, I came to the conclusion that this wasn't "youthful stupidity"; it was handled through a less formal, one-time (per person) option in our courts which does not produce a formal criminal record or arrest. On the other hand, a case where a single kid, only a few years older, was responsible for several graffiti incidents, each being well over $1000 dollars in damage, was handled formally, with felony charges. To the best of my knowledge, he has not re-offended.

And, again, I'm not giving the officer a pass. He handled this unprofessionally. His rant created a bad impression, and probably was ineffective. At the very least, he comes off looking bad. But... can any of the folks casting stones at him here say they've handled every situation in their life perfectly? Or have never lost their temper at kids?

I'm sorry but a few points need to be addressed here. Firstly, nobody is suggesting that the cops approach was random what we are suggesting is that the aggression was. The criticism is of his aggressive approach not the fact that he approached the kids in the first place.

Second you say that his use of force was limited! He had no need and therefore no right to invade that boys personal space and yet he did so in a very uncontrolled and angry fashion. What I witnessed on that video does not appear as reasonable force and is certainly not proportianate to the situation so therefore the amount of force was excessive rather than limited! What that bully did was assault a child.


Thirdly, I feel that you have misunderstood or taken out of context my original comment "That idiots attitude could have ended in that innocent boy having a criminal record and ruining that kids future employment prospects!". I am not suggesting for a second that a part of a cops priorities should be considering how an offenders resume will look after being charged!

What I was getting at was that the officer in question (and only the officer in question) was so aggressive and so absolutely, fundementally wrong that if that boy had retaliated and kicked out as he was being manhandled he would have ended up with a criminal record through a situation that need not have happened and only happened due to the very poor skills and attitude of the officer in that clip.

And finally to answer your question: "But... can any of the folks casting stones at him here say they've handled every situation in their life perfectly? Or have never lost their temper at kids?"

No I have not handled every situation in my life correctly but I can say hand on heart that I have never abused a position of authority like the thug in that clip. I am a trained mental health nurse who has worked in secure units and on challenging behaviour wards. I am no stranger to dealing with people who push boundaries.

As an example, I have had a man with borderline personality disorder screaming in my face telling me what horrendous things he was going to do to my girlfriend if he were to get out! He wasn't physically attacking me so I did not take him to the floor as that would have constituted unreasonable force and would not have been proportianate to the level of threat. I verbally de-esculated the man and verbally enforced boundaries 2 hours later when he had settled down. I behaved like that because I was a professional. Every day, from the moment I walked onto the ward, I was a mental health nurse first and foremost and therefore behaved as a professional person should.

The same should be the case for Officer Dude! The moment he puts on that badge and those shorts he should be in the professional mindset. From the look of that clip and the other one concerning the art student it is clear that this is not the case. He is a walking abuse of authority and a danger to the public and his colleagues. There is no excuse for his behaviour.

 

[Sukerkin]

I'm sorry to those that have been enjoying judging Officer Dude, especially those of English extraction but I fundamentally do not agree with your stance.

I am not necessarily now addressing the specific actions under discussion because, in the wider scheme of things, they are not relevant; they are exemplars of an officer whose taken enough nonsense on any given day (more than once it seems) and left bleeding-heart-liberalism behind for a few minutes.

What is relevant is the self-deluding 'Entitlement Culture' that has sprung up first in Amerca and now here.

In America it is understandable because of the Constitution but here in Britain? I am astounded to hear members of my own society speaking in the way they have in this thread. Tez I can understand because she speaks from a professional, military police, background. But for other 'common' subjects!

Myusername your profile does not mention your age but I'm guessing you're very young? In fact did I imagine reading you saying you were 17? Regardless, please assume that I'm assuming you were not of cognisant age during the miners strike of the early '80's (forgive me if I'm wrong)?

Do not be fooled by the ever-so-soft approach that has been taken since then. Do not think that just because you protest your 'rights' that you actually have any.

Do I think that this is a 'good thing'? No, not really; but it is a realistic way to approach the subject.

Here in Britain we have no more 'rights' than the Crown decides we're allowed. Law enforcement is not for 'our' (the working class) benefit but for that of the property owners. The soft approach will last for just as long as the masses do not present a problem. If it becomes in the vested interests of the ruling classes to revert to an earlier standard of policing, the sort that gave us the Tolpuddle Martyrs, don't get in the way.

My guess is that shortly we shall be seeing a much more 'right wing' (in the totalitarian sense) backlash to the current lawless lack of appropriate respect (aka fear) of the ruling classes. If we can rein in the idiocy of those who only think of their own rights and not those of others we may have a chance of forstalling this.

If we continue down the route of the "Eastenders" culture of "I can do what I want, no matter how argumentative or how it inconveniences others" then we shall shortly see a dissolution of the society we managed to cobble together in the aftermath of two world wars.

People should think less of themselves and more of their fellows otherwise you will find that the fantasies of Big Brother (Orwell not Channel 4) are all too real.

 

[Sukerkin]

My apologies for the somewhat less than coherent phrasing and dramatised wording of my post above. It was very late and I was trying to be brief whilst addressing quite a broad issue.

I don't think I succeeded terribly well in making my point and I hope that it's not read as being too argumentative. I also hope I haven't de-railed the thread by speaking about a topic that is parallel to the OP i.e. the purpose and nature of day-to-day policing.

 

[myusername]

I'm sorry to those that have been enjoying judging Officer Dude, especially those of English extraction but I fundamentally do not agree with your stance.

I am not necessarily now addressing the specific actions under discussion because, in the wider scheme of things, they are not relevant; they are exemplars of an officer whose taken enough nonsense on any given day (more than once it seems) and left bleeding-heart-liberalism behind for a few minutes.

What is relevant is the self-deluding 'Entitlement Culture' that has sprung up first in Amerca and now here.

In America it is understandable because of the Constitution but here in Britain? I am astounded to hear members of my own society speaking in the way they have in this thread. Tez I can understand because she speaks from a professional, military police, background. But for other 'common' subjects!

Myusername your profile does not mention your age but I'm guessing you're very young? In fact did I imagine reading you saying you were 17? Regardless, please assume that I'm assuming you were not of cognisant age during the miners strike of the early '80's (forgive me if I'm wrong)?

Do not be fooled by the ever-so-soft approach that has been taken since then. Do not think that just because you protest your 'rights' that you actually have any.

Do I think that this is a 'good thing'? No, not really; but it is a realistic way to approach the subject.

Here in Britain we have no more 'rights' than the Crown decides we're allowed. Law enforcement is not for 'our' (the working class) benefit but for that of the property owners. The soft approach will last for just as long as the masses do not present a problem. If it becomes in the vested interests of the ruling classes to revert to an earlier standard of policing, the sort that gave us the Tolpuddle Martyrs, don't get in the way.

My guess is that shortly we shall be seeing a much more 'right wing' (in the totalitarian sense) backlash to the current lawless lack of appropriate respect (aka fear) of the ruling classes. If we can rein in the idiocy of those who only think of their own rights and not those of others we may have a chance of forstalling this.

If we continue down the route of the "Eastenders" culture of "I can do what I want, no matter how argumentative or how it inconveniences others" then we shall shortly see a dissolution of the society we managed to cobble together in the aftermath of two world wars.

People should think less of themselves and more of their fellows otherwise you will find that the fantasies of Big Brother (Orwell not Channel 4) are all too real.

I must admit it has taken me a little while to compose myself after reading the above post as I could not help but feel a little patronised! Though reading your apologetic post afterwards it is clear to me you were not intentionally being argumentative and also reading some of your other posts on this forum it is clear that you are a gentleman and I could very well have taken it the wrong way.

However, just to clarify I am not 17 years old but I am 28 (not that age has any real importance on this issue).

I would also like to add that my opinions on aggressive, assertive and passive behaviour, professional conduct and the use of reasonable force are informed by my being a qualifed mental health nurse who has worked in forensic settings, challenging behaviour wards and most recently in a drug and alcohol detox centre.

I am very experienced in de-esculating aggressive behaviour and maintaining safe boundaries in difficult circumstances. I am experienced in control and restraint and the management of conflict. I am very aware of the ethical implications of being in a position of authority and what constitutes abuse of authority as the patients under my care in the mental health field were detained under the mental health act. In addition, currently on the detox ward we have a rolling program of group work that teaches social and life skills to our patients and I regularly run the assertiveness group amongst others.

Although I acknowledge that the roles of a policeman and a mental health nurse differ in numerous ways I feel that they should share a similar skill set specifically in the area of effective communication. The officer debated demonstrates a complete lack of communication skills and presents with no awareness of the effects of aggression and as such poses a threat to society and his colleagues. His actions are unprofessional and as a professional he deserves to be held accountable for them and if that means a suspension (hopefully leading to dismissal) and to be publically critisised and ridiculed on internet forums so be it!

In regards to your assertion that the officers specific actions are not relevant on this thread because they are just "exemplars of an officer whose taken enough nonsense on any given day (more than once it seems) and left bleeding-heart-liberalism behind for a few minutes." I could not disagree more. From what I read of the original post it was an invitation for people to view the clip and then pass comment and discuss what they saw. I am afraid it is yourself only that has plumped for the idea that "Entitlement Culture" is the only real issue that needs to be discussed.

Your views on that subject itself appear a little confused and apathetic to say the least! I think it would be a real shame if everybody shared the viewpoint that one should just accept the status quo and never question authority! You mentioned the Tolpuddle martyrs almost as a warning never to speak up for your rights when in fact they are a symbol and inspiration of the reasons why we should! The Tolpuddle Martrys managed to change things (although at a personal cost). If it were not for trade unionism we would not enjoy many of the rights we do today.

As for the Big Brother reference and the clarification that you meant the George Orwell novel 1984 and not the low brow channel 4 TV format I must say that I found that part of your post the most patronising! However, considering the differences we obviously have in our views on the need to challenge authority and defend our rights perhaps a more damning Orwellian reference you could throw at me would be Animal Farm that serves to highlight the futility of socialism!

Sorry for the rant but that post just got under my skin a little! Like I said at the beginning, your other posts seem to reflect that you are a gentleman and patronising me may not have been your initail intention.

Cheers Mark

 

[Errant108]

I'm from Baltimore, where this incident took place.

The officer used force on a subject who was not under arrest and therefore not resisting arrest and was not a threat to the officer or those around him. He has been suspended.

Crime is a huge problem in Baltimore. We have one of the highest murder rates in the country. We have innocent young women being nearly beaten to death on public buses. The heroin problem in Baltimore is an epidemic. If anyone has watched HBO's "The Wire", that's literally how it is in Baltimore, without exagerration.

There is no justification for this officer's behavior...against a skateboarder. A skateboarder.

Not a drug dealer.

Not a gang banger.

Not a thug.

A smart *** kid on a skateboard.

 

[Sukerkin]

I'm very sorry Myusername, it really just goes to show what I've often said about text fora as a means of communication, especially for serious issues - it's terrifyingly easy to have what you typed be read in a way very different to what you intended .

I'm glad that you realised that I didn't set out to patronise or insult and I would've been better not to mention your username at all, for it makes it seem as if everything that follows it is addressed directly at you (particularly when my use of what I meant as plural "you" reads like singular "You") :blush:.

Apologies once more, especially as I didn't even manage to complete or phrase well the thought that arose when I read the read the last paragraph in your post above mine i.e. that abuse of authority has been much more extreme in the recent past than what we (hear about) these days.

That's why I mentioned age {and I got you confused with someone else too there :double blush:} as having been out and about during those scary times really brought home the point about the general public only having those rights we're permitted.

I hope we can put aside my manifestly poor writing of last night, I was exhausted and the lack of coherence is embarassing - as is the lack of self-critique of what I wrote before posting.


You're quite correct in pointing out that I'm not really talking about the behaviour of the officer in these incidents but a different issue.

You're also correct in saying that I lifted from the run of posts in the thread, rather than the video, a sense of 'Entitlement Culture' and spoke to that rather than the video.

I can also see, properly re-reading what my own words actually were rather than what I thought I was saying, why another would get the impression I was espousing that we should just accept a 'police state' rather than resisting it. What I was blathering towards (and not quite getting to the point) is that an overly vigorous reaction to 'small scale' bad policing could serve as a trigger for an authoritarian backlash.

Reading my Tolpuddle Martyrs paragraph, I can't believe I made such a hash of what I meant to say! As you say, I was referencing it as a 'warning' from the past but in the sense that if those in power decide on a course of action, then protest which obstructs that course will result in quite fearsome reaction. In such cases the route of protest has to be tangential if those protesting are not to be violently silenced. Given the longer term outcome of what happened in Tolpuddle, it was a bad example anyway .

The Miners Strike would actually have been a better one to highlight, as for all the protests and strong public support, we still failed to prevent the destruction of the NUM and the industry itself. As a student at the time, I did support them in what small practical ways I could manage (a picket here, a few quid there) so I think that our views are perhaps closer than the exchange in the past few posts would suggest.

Regardless, it is really something to talk about in another thread rather than here, so I wont bang the drum any further. I've only 'run on' somewhat here, rather than in a PM, because I believe that public apologies are best when you've upset someone and are genuinely contrite - most especially when you also want to clarify what you meant (I'm still having trouble with that bit ).

Cheers

Mark

 

[myusername]

I'm very sorry Myusername, it really just goes to show what I've often said about text fora as a means of communication, especially for serious issues - it's terrifyingly easy to have what you typed be read in a way very different to what you intended .

Thank you very much for the apology Sukerkin you are a true gent! You are spot on about the dangers of text based communication! I can see a little clearer as to what you were talking about now in your original post. :asian:

Thank you again,
Mark