North Carolina police brutally beat man for jaywalking

[Underseer]

Guess the race of the victim. Go on, guess!

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/07/us/asheville-police-beating-black-man.html

In case you don't want to watch the full 9 minute video, you can find edited portions in here:



So based on cosnervolibertarian arguments (which always use valid logic), we can now conclude that all cops are a bunch of disgusting savages unfit to participate in civilized society.

Statistically speaking, it is highly unlikely that the police involved in this will face anything more than a temporary slap on the wrists. One of the police resigned, but past incidents show that anyone who resigns or is fired over this will have no problem finding work as a police officer in another city.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Since conservatives generally praise cops and libertarians generally look down on them, what is the "conservolibertarian" argument?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Since conservatives generally praise cops and libertarians generally look down on them, what is the "conservolibertarian" argument?

Ask Ron Paul. Didn't he want to push back on some of civil rights act?

 

[fast]

Guess the race of the victim. Go on, guess!

Guessing isn't required once you know all the details leading up to the events that fail to justify the beating.

 

[Mumbles]

Since conservatives generally praise cops and libertarians generally look down on them, what is the "conservolibertarian" argument?

Ask Ron Paul. Didn't he want to push back on some of civil rights act?

Pretty sure this was Rand Paul - who, to be fair, is a strong opponent of police overreach in the US Senate.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Since conservatives generally praise cops and libertarians generally look down on them, what is the "conservolibertarian" argument?

Ask Ron Paul. Didn't he want to push back on some of civil rights act?

Pretty sure this was Rand Paul - who, to be fair, is a strong opponent of police overreach in the US Senate.

It's both libertarian conservatives. As to Jason's question, what happens when you mix the two, you get some pretty kooky beliefs, usually attacking the wrong people for perceived autocracy but also being unable to frame racism as anything other than the same struggles as the top of the hierarchies supported by conservatives. So, you'll hear huge terms being thrown around like police state, but directed at MIT campus police after the Boston marathon bombing, or referencing a school system because a white kid got suspended for refusing to leave an unsupervised classroom, ...

 

[zorq]

The police looked like they wanted to arrest the guy for jaywalking, but in NC, jaywalking is only an infraction at most and not a misdemeanor. What kind of asshole police officers arrest people for jaywalking?

Of course thanks to the 5 vs. 4 2001 USSC ruling, Atwater vs. Lago Vista, police apparently have the right to arrest and jail people for even the slightest infractions against the law only punishable by small fines and regardless of whether there is any indication of actual criminal activity. (infractions aren't considered criminal charges)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The police looked like they wanted to arrest the guy for jaywalking, but in NC, jaywalking is only an infraction at most and not a misdemeanor. What kind of asshole police officers arrest people for jaywalking?

Of course thanks to the 5 vs. 4 2001 USSC ruling, Atwater vs. Lago Vista, police apparently have the right to arrest and jail people for even the slightest infractions against the law only punishable by small fines and regardless of whether there is any indication of actual criminal activity. (infractions aren't considered criminal charges)

Tickets are actually an extremely simplified bail procedure. If you won't sign a ticket you get arrested.

And while jaywalking started this the actual cause here is resisting arrest.

 

[Arctish]

The police looked like they wanted to arrest the guy for jaywalking, but in NC, jaywalking is only an infraction at most and not a misdemeanor. What kind of asshole police officers arrest people for jaywalking?

Of course thanks to the 5 vs. 4 2001 USSC ruling, Atwater vs. Lago Vista, police apparently have the right to arrest and jail people for even the slightest infractions against the law only punishable by small fines and regardless of whether there is any indication of actual criminal activity. (infractions aren't considered criminal charges)

Tickets are actually an extremely simplified bail procedure. If you won't sign a ticket you get arrested.

And while jaywalking started this the actual cause here is resisting arrest.

The actual case here is cops escalated stopping a citizen over a minor infraction into beating and tazing him despite his being cooperative, aka police brutality.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The police looked like they wanted to arrest the guy for jaywalking, but in NC, jaywalking is only an infraction at most and not a misdemeanor. What kind of asshole police officers arrest people for jaywalking?

Of course thanks to the 5 vs. 4 2001 USSC ruling, Atwater vs. Lago Vista, police apparently have the right to arrest and jail people for even the slightest infractions against the law only punishable by small fines and regardless of whether there is any indication of actual criminal activity. (infractions aren't considered criminal charges)

Tickets are actually an extremely simplified bail procedure. If you won't sign a ticket you get arrested.

And while jaywalking started this the actual cause here is resisting arrest.

While being harassed by the cops because of jaywalking, the technical reason he was beaten because he refused to sign something, hence he is arrestable, hence he refused to be arrested as well, hence beating.

See clearly, the police are in the right here. It is a shame that he just didn't walk in a crosswalk. It seems such a shame such a minor infraction leads to getting beaten.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Since when do people get tickets for jaywalking? Unless they are also doing something much more, like harassing motorists or laying down on the highway or something like that? I have seen police officers jaywalk. I have jaywalked beside them as they did so.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Since when do people get tickets for jaywalking? Unless they are also doing something much more, like harassing motorists or laying down on the highway or something like that? I have seen police officers jaywalk. I have jaywalked beside them as they did so.

It's usually just an excuse to stop and search someone who's doing something suspicious, like being a black man in public.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The police looked like they wanted to arrest the guy for jaywalking, but in NC, jaywalking is only an infraction at most and not a misdemeanor. What kind of asshole police officers arrest people for jaywalking?

Of course thanks to the 5 vs. 4 2001 USSC ruling, Atwater vs. Lago Vista, police apparently have the right to arrest and jail people for even the slightest infractions against the law only punishable by small fines and regardless of whether there is any indication of actual criminal activity. (infractions aren't considered criminal charges)

Tickets are actually an extremely simplified bail procedure. If you won't sign a ticket you get arrested.

And while jaywalking started this the actual cause here is resisting arrest.

The actual case here is cops escalated stopping a citizen over a minor infraction into beating and tazing him despite his being cooperative, aka police brutality.

Cooperative?

He was being fake cooperative--telling them to do what you want, but not doing his part of the situation.

- - - Updated - - -

Since when do people get tickets for jaywalking? Unless they are also doing something much more, like harassing motorists or laying down on the highway or something like that? I have seen police officers jaywalk. I have jaywalked beside them as they did so.

It depends on the situation. Jaywalk safely and the cops are unlikely to care. Jaywalk either dangerously or in a fashion that disrupts traffic and you're liable to get a ticket.

 

[ronburgundy]

The actual case here is cops escalated stopping a citizen over a minor infraction into beating and tazing him despite his being cooperative, aka police brutality.

Cooperative?

He was being fake cooperative--telling them to do what you want, but not doing his part of the situation.

True. He did not want to cooperate in being targeted for his race with a bullshit fine that he cannot afford. The cops then made it worse by trying to arrest him (which they could and should have chosen not to do), which was another unjust act he didn't want to cooperate with so he fled, then when they caught him, they beat him beyond any reasonable level required for competent cops to subdue him.
That beating had nothing to do with subduing him but is proven by the officers own threats to be a premeditated act of planned criminal assault.
As the cop is chasing him: "You know what's funny is you're gonna get f---ed up hardcore!"

The cop is a criminal that should be in prison, beyond any reasonable doubt.


So, it is false to say he was beaten simply for jaywalking. It is accurate to say "Man needless beaten by incompetent and racist cops for not agreeing to be racially targeted and extorted for a bullshit charge."

Jaywalk safely and the cops are unlikely to care. Jaywalk either dangerously or in a fashion that disrupts traffic and you're liable to get a ticket.

Or, safely jaywalk on an empty street at 3am on your way home from work and cops won't care, unless your black.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

True. He did not want to cooperate in being targeted for his race with a bullshit fine that he cannot afford. The cops then made it worse by trying to arrest him (which they could and should have chosen not to do), which was another unjust act he didn't want to cooperate with so he fled, then when they caught him, they beat him beyond any reasonable level required for competent cops to subdue him.

I disagree. You are assuming they targeted him for being black rather than for jaywalking in a way that was a problem. And letting him go certainly isn't the answer--if you let people go like this the law becomes all but meaningless.

That beating had nothing to do with subduing him but is proven by the officers own threats to be a premeditated act of planned criminal assault.
As the cop is chasing him: "You know what's funny is you're gonna get f---ed up hardcore!"

I do agree they used too much force. That's not the same as saying they shouldn't have used force, though.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

True. He did not want to cooperate in being targeted for his race with a bullshit fine that he cannot afford. The cops then made it worse by trying to arrest him (which they could and should have chosen not to do), which was another unjust act he didn't want to cooperate with so he fled, then when they caught him, they beat him beyond any reasonable level required for competent cops to subdue him.

I disagree. You are assuming they targeted him for being black rather than for jaywalking in a way that was a problem.

3 AM? Was he jaywalking across a limited access highway? Otherwise... what could possibly be the "problem"?

And letting him go certainly isn't the answer...

Jebus, thank goodness you don't have children!

That beating had nothing to do with subduing him but is proven by the officers own threats to be a premeditated act of planned criminal assault.
As the cop is chasing him: "You know what's funny is you're gonna get f---ed up hardcore!"

I do agree they used too much force. That's not the same as saying they shouldn't have used force, though.

Because...?

That was rhetorical. We know you love the use of force by police, for even the most egregious of violations like jaywalking and not like being accosted because of jaywalking.

 

[Elixir]

You are assuming they targeted him for being black rather than for jaywalking

Oh come on Loren... just one favor for me, pretty please? Find a single case of a white man being beaten up by cops for jaywalking. Then I'll shut up.

I do agree they used too much force.

Wut? I suspect they only had the man's welfare in mind - so they made sure THAT wouldn't happen again. At least they didn't summarily shoot him, but if he had tried to run... who knows?

 

[Mumbles]

Or, safely jaywalk on an empty street at 3am on your way home from work and cops won't care, unless your black.

This part is key - there's virtually no risk, and many of these roads aren't set up in easy grids with convenient crosswalks anyway.

Now, putting aside the fact that most jaywalking laws are bullshit to begin with, harassing someone for crossing a clearly safe road, and then physically attacking him for...putting himself in danger, apparently, is just plainly stupid. And the Jim Crow - era arrest for "resisting arrest" just adds to the problems.

 

[laughing dog]

I do agree they used too much force. That's not the same as saying they shouldn't have used force, though.

True. It is also not saying that the police had no business stopping the man for jaywalking and then escalating the situation.

 

[ronburgundy]

True. He did not want to cooperate in being targeted for his race with a bullshit fine that he cannot afford. The cops then made it worse by trying to arrest him (which they could and should have chosen not to do), which was another unjust act he didn't want to cooperate with so he fled, then when they caught him, they beat him beyond any reasonable level required for competent cops to subdue him.

I disagree. You are assuming they targeted him for being black rather than for jaywalking in a way that was a problem.

As you said, cops won't bother with jaywalkers unless the context makes it problematic. This was 3am and the video shows no one else is around and no cars on that road other than the second cop car that arrived. So the only possible thing that would have made it a problem is the guys skin color.

And letting him go certainly isn't the answer--if you let people go like this the law becomes all but meaningless.

They should have let him go with a warning once they assessed that he wasn't the criminal they had assumed from his skin color. And if it was absurd to have arrested him in the first place, then chasing him and using force to do so makes it doubly absurd. Letting him run would not make any law meaningless, except idiot laws that shouldn't exist and should never result in arrests in the first place.

That beating had nothing to do with subduing him but is proven by the officers own threats to be a premeditated act of planned criminal assault.
As the cop is chasing him: "You know what's funny is you're gonna get f---ed up hardcore!"

I do agree they used too much force. That's not the same as saying they shouldn't have used force, though.

They engaged in premeditated criminal assault that had nothing do with putting him in custody. They should be in prison and banned for life from law enforcement.