Thou Shalt Not Fear Monger

J

Janeille

The Force is Strong With This One
Hi All---
Here is the situation (this did actually happen earlier tonight) and I am wondering about your perspectives on the matter.

OK- So I am having a conversation with my new friend. She is a rather outgoing personality, seems to say what is on her mind, and does not seem to have many inhibitions. She is also not scared to say what she wants, and will voice her opinion if her situation isn't favorable.

So, She is telling me about her traffic incident last week. This is her story: She was going 58 in a 55, about to reach the sign that says "40 MPH" and promptly gets pulled over. The cop she is dealing with pulled her over for speeding 58 in a 40, but before she reaches the 40--- he was waiting at the sign. The friend becomes frustrated, and gives the cop "attitude," saying "You know you pulled me over before I reached the 40" to which he replies "You were still going 58 in a 55, I want your license and registration" to which my friend gives a comment like, "You know I'll contest this in court." She looks for her registration, can't find it, and tells the cop "I can't find my registration, this is a stupid pull-over, and you aren't going to win at court" to which the cop says "I was just going to give you a warning, but I am rethinking it, holler if you find the registration."

She finds the registration, calls the cop over, gives him the registration, and as he's walking away, makes an audible comment about him being an "a-hole " (though she tells me the whole name)

The situation ends that she only gets a warning, but is feeling good that she stood up to the cop.

So here is my delema----
I am hearing this, and I think to myself "Gosh, they taser people for less than that!"

I say to my friend, "Good for you for standing up, but they taser people these days!" By warning my friend the taser-ings that happen these days, am I fear mongering? Or, am I trying to protect my friend?

There seems to be two kinds of basic logic- "If you argue, then you will get tased" or "If you warn people of the world they live in, then you contribute via word of mouth to the fear-state that the PTB are trying to accomplish"

Who am I helping here?

So, I ask thy fellow forum posters thine opinion on the matter
 
Well, if a friend told me this story, I would have pointed out how foolish it is to give a cop "attitude" -- PERIOD. It's simply a fact that they are far less likely to give you a ticket if you are polite and reasonable, and far more likely to be strictly "by the book" if you treat them rudely and disrespectfully. That's not corruption, that's just human nature. Most cops are human just like the rest of us and have a certain amount of "discretion" in how they apply the law, so it's just stupid to go out of your way to get on the wrong side of that discretion. Your friend could have "stood up for herself" without resorting to the behaviour and language she did, though it doesn't sound as though she would have had a leg to stand on in court -- like the cop said, even if she hadn't technically hit the 40 zone yet, she was still speeding in the 50 zone. The girl was driving too fast and got busted.

Now, on the taser issue: Although we've certainly been seeing an alarming number of cases where people are being tasered (sometimes lethally) when the situation does not call for it, I can't say I recall any report of someone being tasered in a traffic-ticket situation for simply "mouthing off" to a cop. So by warning your friend that "they taser people these days" in relation to her particular situation does seem a little over the top and outside the parameters of probability.

Plus your generalized "they taser people these days" does not take into account all of the other factors that are likely to lead to a "taser incident", most of which I suspect do not apply to your friend -- i.e. police SEEM* to be more likely to taser individuals who are:

- black or latino
- young
- male
- in a lower-class neighbourhood
- do not speak English well
- "disadvantaged" in some way

In other words, if your friend was a young black man living in a poor neighbourhood, driving a beat-up car, and did not speak English very well, and behaved as your friend did in a traffic-ticket situation -- well, let's say the behaviour would be a lot more "high risk" in relation to how he might be treated by a policeman. But a young, well-dressed, articulate white woman driving a nice car in a decent area? Well, let's just say it ain't THOSE "people" that "they taser these days"....


___________________________

* no, i don't have statistics re the race/age/income etc of taser victims; that's just my impression from the numerous taser-incident reports I have read....
 
SOTT has run three motorist-related taserings: http://www.SOTT.net/articles/view/147290; ditto 144583; ditto 144157. The last was a motorist who refused to sign a traffic ticket.

Diabetics in a coma have been tasered, pregnant women have been tasered, hancuffed women have been tasered, men holding newborns have been tasered etc, ad nauseum, etc. Links can be provided.

Anyone can be tasered these days, it seems.
 
Janeille said:
I say to my friend, "Good for you for standing up, but they taser people these days!" By warning my friend the taser-ings that happen these days, am I fear mongering? Or, am I trying to protect my friend?
Click to expand...
Well knowledge protects. You're giving her knowledge that she can use to protect herself. You're not telling her to be afraid of cops, just to keep in mind what has been going on and act appropriately with respect to that knowledge so she doesn't get herself hurt. Even if the truth is scary it's still the truth, and we can never solve a problem if we don't acknowledge and understand it.

Fear mongering is when you lie about threats that aren't real, like terrorism.

Janeille said:
There seems to be two kinds of basic logic- "If you argue, then you will get tased"
Click to expand...
That's not always true, the devil is in the detail. There are ways to "argue" without being confrontational, but you must "read" the specific situation and do your best to see what is a safe thing to say and what is not. So if you say "if you argue you will be tased" like an absolute, since it's not true, that would be fear mongering to an extent, osit. The devil is in the details.

Janeille said:
or "If you warn people of the world they live in, then you contribute via word of mouth to the fear-state that the PTB are trying to accomplish"
Click to expand...
I don't think you don't contribute to fear state, you contribute to knowledge. It's not fear mongering unless there's lies involved. The PTB want fear-based helplessness. Ideally they probably just want ignorance. But if word slips out that all is not well, they can go so far as to reveal some scary truths and then suggest there's nothing that can be done and it's the only way things can be. It is not the truth that makes this fear mongering, it is the lie slipped in together with it. Just my 2 cents, hope that helps.

As for tasing, which is one of the results of the pathocracy, there is definitely a solution, but that solution is not arguing with cops in the way that your friend did (I think she was really lucky he didn't get pissed off). That only exacerbates the problem.
 
Janeille, in stating that they taser people for less these days, you are actually pointing out a truth. (as bedower has shown with the links he posted). And it could possibly be a truth that your friend may need to understand.

I have a feeling that your friends replay of the events may be slightly embellished, due to the fact that she feels she spoke up to an officer and still pulled away with only a warning, and is feeling empowered by that. It may very well be to her best interest that this fact be pointed out, however fearful it may sound. She may not get so lucky next time.

It also appears that she was pulled over by an officer that did not take her 'questioning of his authority' personally. I mean really if you want to make a police officer laugh, just tell them that you will contest the ticket in court. They are getting paid to stand in front of the Judge (overtime even, if it is their day off), dressed in uniform as an officer 'sworn to uphold the law'. In a case of your word against theirs, who do you think will win? In the event that you hire a good attorney and the ticket is thrown out of court, no sweat off their back. (Just make sure you don't get pulled over by the same officer again, as they may check your tag light, your tail lights, the depth of your tire tread, etc.!!)

The truth is that 'Anyone can be tasered these days'. Turn your back on a police officer and you can be shot, or they can let loose the k-9 on you, or taser you for 'fleeing and eluding' (as that is considered a felony) , regardless of being guilty or innocent of a crime. In 99% of these cases, the officer will be cleared by an Internal Investigation, and the only recourse for the family of the victim will be in civil court. And if they win there then the Police Department may resort to damage control by 'letting the officer go' and claiming that in the future they will employ more stringent hiring standards or whatever other form of BS the situation may require, and then on with business as usual. In other words, even the officer will be personally sacrificed for the benefit of the pathological whole.

So, it seems that the person who may feel they are taking a stand for 'citizen's rights' when they choose to battle an officer who is in reality only a sacrificial pawn in the implementation of the 'Police State', will only become a scapegoat and be somehow used in it's promotion. The saying 'pick your battles' comes to mind.

What I find funny about this particular incident that your friend describes is this... By law, here where I am from, the court won't prosecute a speeding ticket within 5 mph of the posted speed. So the officer would not even bother with writing a ticket for 58 in a 55. However, if your friend would have pulled over a few feet further along, just within the 40 mph posted area, or not have been aware and said maybe something like 'sorry officer I did not realize that I was in the posted 40mph area' (which would be an admission close enough for horseshoes or hand grenades) he may have written her a ticket for 58 in a 40. And she would be paying close to $300.00 to the county for her speeding infraction. So what would appear to her as 'Yeah, I stood up to the Law and only got a warning', may in fact be a case of non sufficient probable cause with an 'oh well I will get her next time!' thrown in for good measure.

And taking this scenario one step further, if upon finding her registration, she innocently attempted to step out of her vehicle to show this to the officer, after 'demonstrating an argumentative attitude' the officer could very easily have tasered her 'in fear for his personal safety'... Anyone can be tasered these days...
 
PepperFritz,

Sincere apologies. 'View' should be 'show'. Full links:

http://www.SOTT.net/articles/show/147290-Minnesota-Man-Dies-After-State-Troopers-Use-Taser

http://www.SOTT.net/articles/show/144583-Taser-probe-Trooper-acted-reasonably

http://www.SOTT.net/articles/show/144157-Video-Driver-tasered-for-refusing-to-sign-ticket

To the examples above can be added an 11-year old girl.

Hope these links work.
 
Not all policemen are bad guys. I personally know some great citizens who are cops and they believe in their jobs. They are not on power trips. I personally knew one policeman who was shot dead during a traffic stop.

Speeding is dangerous. Speeding is against the law for good reason.

Your friend is going 58 mph in a 55 mph zone when she is just about to reach a 40 mph zone. What is she going to do when she crosses that zone? Slam on her brakes? Where's her sense of humility? Where's her sense of responsibility? Where is her sense of respect for a policeman who may just be doing his job of protecting her and other drivers?

Then she calls the policeman, who she has just met, who is doing his job, an a__hole after he patiently waits for her to find her registration? And she's complaining to you about her inconvenience. She's arrogant, and, yes, she's lucky she didn't get worse treatment.

Thou shalt not fearmonger, but I'm gonna do it anyway: Watch out for your new friend.
 
bedower said:
Hope these links work.
Click to expand...
Thanks, yes they did.

While those two incidents involved "traffic" situations -- and clearly did NOT call for the use of a taser -- they involved citizens doing more than just "mouthing off" to the cop. The poster's friend was rude and disrespectful, but did not in any way fail to cooperate and comply with what the cop asked her to do.

So, I stand by my original statement: "I can't say I recall any report of someone being tasered in a traffic-ticket situation for simply 'mouthing off' to a cop".
 
I would have to disagree strongly with your original statement, by which you stand, there pepperfritz.

When one sees a very clear, irrefutable pattern of behavior among power-possessing beings - it is incredibly unintelligent to not pay attention and act accordingly.

Seeing the 'signs' means extrapolating current behavior outward into the direction it is heading. In this day and age, to call a policeman an as*hole for no reason whatsoever is stupid - pure and simple.

Janeille did, what I would consider, to be the correct thing. Would you consider getting tasered for not signing a traffic ticket reasonable behavior on the policeman's part?

You seem to be engaging in legalistic thinking so that you can maintain that you are 'right' - much as you did in this thread - http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=8896.msg64063#msg64063 -- when the fact of the matter is that it is wholly within reason to think that mouthing off to a policeman could get one tasered - right now - in America.

It seems to all depend on which type of policeman you 'mouth off' to - is it the normal policeman doing his job and dealing with people verbally abusing him all day without striking out - OR - is it the 'other' kind that is becoming much more common?

Personally, I think the fact that this woman called the policeman an a*shole is completely unacceptable on every level - and that she's quite lucky that he was the 'normal' type. As far as Janeille mentioning the 'taser factor' to her friend - it seems in line with simply telling the truth. fwiw.
 
anart said:
Would you consider getting tasered for not signing a traffic ticket reasonable behavior on the policeman's part?
Click to expand...
No, obviously not. As I stated in my most recent post:

"...those two incidents involved "traffic" situations -- and clearly did NOT call for the use of a taser...."
 
PepperFritz said:
No, obviously not. As I stated in my most recent post:

"...those two incidents involved "traffic" situations -- and clearly did NOT call for the use of a taser...."
Click to expand...
Yet you think it was 'over the top' for Janeille to tell her friend that people get tased now?


And is there a reason you chose to only respond to this one sentence of my post?
 
I think the expression, "err on the side of caution," applies here, which means that not only is it extremely unwise to call a cop an a-hole, it is also perfectly normal to warn someone you really care about against that type of behavior, and try to make them aware of the environment they're living in. Doing that is what I'd call the enlightened self interest of a person with empathy, who is not trying to rob someone of their sense of empowerment, but trying to protect them from needless suffering.

There are situations that call for humility, and if we are not prepared to play that role when necessary, we might as well kiss our lives in 3D goodbye. Evil is no respecter of persons. When met, it must be acknowledged for what it is. The problem is learning how to truly see. If we were to cower every time we were confronted with unethical behavior, we would become more and more disempowered. On the other hand, one shouldn't let small victories give one a false sense of security.
 
Anart:

Okay, I get it now. The lightbulb finally went on in Pepperfritz's head.

My initial response to you was going to be this:

Anart said:
Yet you think it was 'over the top' for Janeille to tell her friend that people get tased now?
Click to expand...
What I actually said was: "...warning your friend that "they taser people these days", in relation to her particular situation, does seem a little over the top and outside the parameters of probability". The key phrase is "in relation to her particular situation". I wish I could say that I no longer think that, and that you have convinced me to think otherwise. However, that would not be honest on my part, as I would only be trying to appease you, so that you would not think that I am being "contrary", "legalistic", and a person who has a need to be "right". Right now it is still my considered opinion.
Click to expand...
However, I realize now that within the context of Janeille's original question, my "considered opinion" was pretty useless. She asked: "By warning my friend the taser-ings that happen these days, am I fear mongering? Or, am I trying to protect my friend?" My response did not really address that question, and only served to needlessly muddy the waters. For that I apologize to Janeille. Clearly her motivation was to protect her friend, and by expressing her concerns she was obviously not in any way "fear mongering". As Miss Insness stated, "I think the expression, 'err on the side of caution,' applies here."

My response to Janeille's post was self-indulgent, self-important, and in the end, simply noise. Thank you for helping me to see that. I will endeavour to be more externally considerate in future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom