It does not excuse his actions but it shows they're not as unreasonable as was presented. This isn't a case of a cop responding to words with fists. It's a case of a cop responding to force with force--which is what they're trained to do.
You think cops are trained to escalate? To respond to crowding with punches?
That is reprehensible behavior and that you make excuses for it and provide him cover is revolting.
These are rhetorical questions, of course, because you have demonstrated in discussion after discussion after dicussion that you DO think that not only are they justified in exponential escalation, that they should be
trained to make that their reaction and that the people who vow to Serve and Protect have your
approval to do so.
It’s a simultaneously childish and monstrous response; “you hit me, I’ll hit you 10 times harder.” Is a bullies’ maxim to intimidate and destroy without any effort to either serve or to protect.
It is deplorable.
I do feel he used more force than needed in the situation, though--taking her down and cuffing her would have been enough.
“Taking her down,” huh? How wonderfully
manly of you.
And what a horrible, violent world you build.
I repeat - if this cop has a wife, someone should check on her because there is no way on this earth that what we saw was his first punch ever.
And frankly, anyone who finds that kind of behavior justified - I ask that we check on their wife, as well.
It is monstrous and inexcusable to either do that or to supprt it as something citizens should expect.
I wouldn't expect any cop to simply ignore it. Striking a cop will almost always end badly.
She did not strike him, but here you are escalating “it will almost always end badly”
Why.
WHY THE FUCK WOULD IT?
Why on earth would we want to promote a violent society where cops are trained to escalate and “make it end badly?” Why would we feel safe around anyone who cheers that on? Who makes excuses for that violence, who promotes it and justofoes it and glorifies it?
