excessive force?

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/broward/sfl-cpepper03may03,0,5990525.story?coll=sfla%2Dnews%2D broward

let's see how this debate pans out.:)

Yes, it was justified and heres why:

1. She was resisting arrest. The dude asked her to put her hands behind her back 3 times, after she tried to walk away from him. Not to mention she was stupid enough to swear at the cop and threaten him.

2. He WARNED her that he would pepper spray her should she not comply. Its not like she was innocent. He gave her plenty of chances to finish things peacefully.

3. He was doing his job. He was specifically sent there in order to stop jaywalking and hand out tickets for offenses. The little girl obviously had a "Im not going to get that ticket" attitude and decided she didnt need to hear what the cop had to say.

I think she got what she had coming to her. Try walking away, swear and threaten a police officer resist arrest, even when warned of being sprayed in the eyes. Hmm, I wonder why she was sprayed. In the case of that little girl, well, sounds to me like someone had an extra bowl of bitchflakes that morning.:rolleyes:

Good on the police officer.

He was there doing his job, he didn't do anything wrong. She was causing trouble and resisting arrest, and he gave her fair warning. It's totally her fault that happened, and good on the cop for doing that. Then next time all the other cocky 12 year olds might think twice about trying to do something similar.

You don't listen to an officer, you deserve to be more then peppersprayed.

sarujin

I'm all for questioning authority, but that kid had it coming to her.

The mother said "Even if she was cursing him out, that still doesn't give him the right to spray her".

But it does. The girl was assaulting an officer and resisting arrest. Those are the exact circumstances pepper spray was designed for, situations where the officer needs to use force but no to the point where they should draw their side-arm.

I think it was an excessive use of force becuase the victim was a little kid. They don't know what they are doing. They're not old enough to form mature thoughts and be conscientious about their actions.

For me, as a kid I remember doing so many stupid stuff when I was twelve years old, that today I would find completely absurb and objectionable.

Yes the cop warned multiple times, but at twelve years old you just don't have the experience necessary to realize that you are not "invincible" and exempt from punishment. Yes, Im sure the kid realized that there were going to be repurcussions for her actions, but I don't think she was mature enough to understand the magnitude and severity of the consequences.

Force should be the last option when resolving a situation especially if there are children involved. By trying to save the girl's life (by teaching her that jaywalking is dangerous) with pepperspray is in my opinion teaching the wrong lesson. The pepperspray didn't teach her not to jaywalk, it instead taught her that cops are brutal tyrants and that whenever she gets in trouble with an authority figure she can just run home to mommy and daddy to get the situation resolved. But, then again I wasn't there so I don't know the details. Maybe, the cop tried absolutely every avenue before reverting to force.

I think that a line must be drawn somewhere as to the amount of force a cop is allowed to inflict depending on the age. I also think the parents of such misbehaving children should also be peppersprayed for raising such an insulent misguided child.

But on a more personal note, if I were in that cop's shoes I would have whipped out the pepperspary, the baton, and then some.....:badass: ......stupid little brat:smoker2: j/k.

But, then again I wasn't there so I don't know the details. Maybe, the cop tried absolutely every avenue before reverting to force.

Thats the impression that I got from the article. The cop seemed to go through every possible alternative and then gave the kid multiple warnings about using the pepperspray before diong so, and the fact that there was 100 kids cricled around.

Originally posted by rsxer45
I think it was an excessive use of force becuase the victim was a little kid. They don't know what they are doing. They're not old enough to form mature thoughts and be conscientious about their actions.


Did you even read the part where it said that she was cussing out the officer? Did you read the part where it said she kept trying to walk away from the officer and threatened him? Im sorry, but she obviously knew what she was doing. She was pissed off that she got caught and she didnt feel she had to take the fine. The little bitch deserved it, kid or no kid. Her parents obviously dont know how to parent if their daughter of 12 years thinks she can talk back to and threaten an officer of the law for a small think such as jaywalking.

Well.....on the other side, if she had been allowed to get away with being abusive to a police officer when she is 12, God only knows what she would think she would be able to get away with when she is 18.....
or however much older.
Hopefully she has learnt her lesson now and will think twice next time.

Originally posted by ILike2DriveCars


Did you even read the part where it said that she was cussing out the officer? Did you read the part where it said she kept trying to walk away from the officer and threatened him? Im sorry, but she obviously knew what she was doing. She was pissed off that she got caught and she didnt feel she had to take the fine. The little bitch deserved it, kid or no kid. Her parents obviously dont know how to parent if their daughter of 12 years thinks she can talk back to and threaten an officer of the law for a small think such as jaywalking.

Cussing doesn't make you a mature and conscientious adult. My whole point was that she would not understand the consequences of such actions due to her age and lack of experience. But, like I said before we don't know the whole situation. I wish the article would expand more on the witness's description of the crowd. Why were 100 children in street at that time? That seems like an awfully big number. Very strange, probably the witness was exaggerating. But, anyway there are so many other things the cop could have done. As ridiculous as it sounds, he could have called for backup to quiet the "100 children" and safely subdue little girl. the sheer number of cops might have scared all the rioting children (or maybe the cop didn't have time to call). I can't understand why the cop would use pepperspray. Pepperspray is meant to defend the police officer, not to inflict punishment (that is for the courts). Why did the police officer need to defend himself against a twelve year old girl?????? Even if she gave the cop a few slaps or kicks, Im sure it wouldn't hurt that bad. There has to be another way to go about this.

It wasnt about self defense. She wasnt cooperating with the officer and he told her that he wanted her to put her hands behind her back 3 times and even used a verbal warning that he would use pepperspray should she not comply.

rsxer45

I have seen 12 year olds start riots, would you argue they were too young to know what they were doing?
They were throwing petrol bombs at police vehicles......


Any child, teenager or adult that verbally or physically assualts a police or army officer and then tries to hide behind their age has a problem.
Not only that, if you are argueing that she was too young to know better, then her parents are at fault as they should definitely have taught her better!!

Originally posted by ILike2DriveCars
It wasnt about self defense. She wasnt cooperating with the officer and he told her that he wanted her to put her hands behind her back 3 times and even used a verbal warning that he would use pepperspray should she not comply.

But why USE pepperspray in the first place? Its a twelve year old girl for christ's sake. It doesn't matter if the cop gave a warning about the use of force? That particular form of force doesn't seem justified in the first place.

Does non-cooperation automatically dictate the use of pepperspray? How do we know for sure that this was the cop's only option? What seems likley to me is that the cop probably got pissed at the girl who was bitching at him and through a blind fit of anger and annoyance, he decided to douse the kid with pepperspray. That is my take of the situation.

Originally posted by freakray
rsxer45

I have seen 12 year olds start riots, would you argue they were too young to know what they were doing?
They were throwing petrol bombs at police vehicles......


Any child, teenager or adult that verbally or physically assualts a police or army officer and then tries to hide behind their age has a problem.
Not only that, if you are argueing that she was too young to know better, then her parents are at fault as they should definitely have taught her better!!

Whoa you are completely misunderstanding me? I not trying to say just because a kid is twelve, they are all sweathearts who love their mother, don't swear, and are always polite to authority figures. I am saying that kids do things that they don't realize is stupid. These children all know what they are doing but they don't see the stupidity in their actions. With age comes experience and the ability to realize how dumb they were as a child. It a shame that there are kids nowadays that are starting riots, bringing guns to school, and even walking into restaurants and blowing themselves up. Do I hold them accountable? Absolutlely, but I feel for them more than I would were it an adult in the same situation becuase they do not have the years of experience to understand such things (though age doesn't necessarily bring about wise decisions). That's why I favor showing these kids some leniency.

Originally posted by ILike2DriveCars
Yes, it was justified and heres why:

1. She was resisting arrest. The dude asked her to put her hands behind her back 3 times, after she tried to walk away from him. Not to mention she was stupid enough to swear at the cop and threaten him.

2. He WARNED her that he would pepper spray her should she not comply. Its not like she was innocent. He gave her plenty of chances to finish things peacefully.

3. He was doing his job. He was specifically sent there in order to stop jaywalking and hand out tickets for offenses. The little girl obviously had a "Im not going to get that ticket" attitude and decided she didnt need to hear what the cop had to say.

I think she got what she had coming to her. Try walking away, swear and threaten a police officer resist arrest, even when warned of being sprayed in the eyes. Hmm, I wonder why she was sprayed. In the case of that little girl, well, sounds to me like someone had an extra bowl of bitchflakes that morning.:rolleyes:
Everything I would have said ILike2DriveCars already said. That girl deserves what she got, maybe now she'll have learned to not only repect law enforcement but to respect her elders as well.

Personally- I say good on the officer- he is there to see that he law is enforced- the girl chooses not to go by these rules- policeman tries everything he can girl is still a bitch- he gives her a lesson- she cries crocodile tears :rolleyes:

As most may already know, I dont like cops and I don't trust them. However, when an officer makes it clear what he wants done, its best to listen to him. That little girl (if you call 130 lbs+ "little") should have known better. She may not be old enough to know all the ramifications of her actions, but that doesn't allow her to run roughshod all over the guy.

Kudos for the cop on this one.

Damn! 134 pounds is big for a 6th grade girl. Must have been one of those loud, obnoxious, fatass, big mouth kids. What he did was justified. He was able to maintain control by doing so, amd that is one of the key ingredients for a successful cop: Having control.

What seems likley to me is that the cop probably got pissed at the girl who was bitching at him and through a blind fit of anger and annoyance, he decided to douse the kid with pepperspray. That is my take of the situation.

I doubt he did it in a "blind fit of anger". The fact that he gave the kid multiple warnings disproves that.

As for why use pepperspray at all? If I was the cop I sure as hell wouldn't want to goto the court date if I had "touched" the girl. Lawyers are ruthless and will use anything nowadays. The other alternatives were the baton and the gun. out of those three the pepperspray is the most humane and the least likely to do lasting damage.

Originally posted by CAptynCrunch


I doubt he did it in a "blind fit of anger". The fact that he gave the kid multiple warnings disproves that.

As for why use pepperspray at all? If I was the cop I sure as hell wouldn't want to goto the court date if I had "touched" the girl. Lawyers are ruthless and will use anything nowadays. The other alternatives were the baton and the gun. out of those three the pepperspray is the most humane and the least likely to do lasting damage.

Why couldn't he just given her a warning and then walk away? No violence, and plus you don't have to mess with the parents. After all it was only a minor offence (though it can have serious consequences). He warned her already that corssing the highway was dangerous and she didn't listen...so I don't think much else will get through to her...not even the pepperspray.

The fact that he didn't walk away made me believe he did it in a "blind fit of anger." Im still going to stick to my conviction that pepperspray was not the best way to resolve the situation.

But, honestly, its hard to say much of anything about the right way to go about things without having been there in person to witness what was going on.

Anyone else agree with me? Geez it looks Im all alone. BTW, I understand everyone else's arguments that they have posed against me and I have taken them to heart. Its not like Im discounting all of your views or anything. It is just that I don't agree and im not convinced. So let's agree to disagree on this one.

Taranaki, you started the thread so what are your thoughts?

since i wasn't there this is what i think

well i think that when she openly defied him....she blew her chances of getting a warning....and since there were so many kids, why not make an example....i would pepper-spary her also b/c if she was putting up a fight for a ticket imagine trying to put cuff on her.....i think he did his job to the best of his abilities...any other situation i would have no problem slubbing her:devil: ....but i'm sure he knew how this would look as far as arresting a 12yr old, but looked past that in order to do his job........obviously the parents of this 12yr old taught their daughter no respect outside of the home or either it was peer pressure....either way...i'd flog her and her parents:lol2:

Originally posted by BLU CIVIC
i'd flog.... her parents:lol2:

I agree :devil:.

Bingo! now the discussion is taking an interesting turn.So..it's 2.45pm,the kid is on her way home from school,has a run-in with a cop and threatens to kick him in the nuts.Acrowd of other kids has gathered around the incident,and the cop decides that he's likely to get into strife if he uses physical force to arrest her.He's backed into a corner in as far as he has started to deal with the offence and she has escalated it into something more serious.

Calling for backup in a situation like this would be hard.How do you explain to your colleagues that you need assistance to detain a 12 year old girl.....?

Clearly,the current PC attitudes towards sexuality are to as much to blame as anything else.Had it been a 12 year old male,he would have undoubtedly have been grabbed and handcuffed.I think that the school is as much to blame as anyone,it is their responsibility to ensure that students arrive and depart from the premises in a safe and orderly manner.Obviously,the school was failing in this duty on a regular basis,because the officer in question " was there specifically to stop children from jaywalking and to protect them from getting hit by cars.
The fact that the incident was witnessed by so many other students,and yet the officer appears to have had no support speaks volumes about the attitude of students in general towards authority.It's far too easy to blame the parents,the girl is clearly old enough to know right from wrong,and it is perfectly reasonable for parents to assume that their 12-year old children understand simple laws and the consequenses of not obeying them.This girl learnt the hard way that while the current trend towards political correctness might give her an unfair advantage in some situations,the police have a job to do,and if you try to escalate a dispute with them rather than accept their authority,they will match that escalation by whatever means neccesary to take control of the situation.

Originally posted by rsxer45


The fact that he didn't walk away made me believe he did it in a "blind fit of anger." Im still going to stick to my conviction that pepperspray was not the best way to resolve the situation.


That statement from you has me intrigued.......you expect a police officer to walk away because somebody is breaking the law and blatantly disobeying him?
Man, will you be my lawyer?
Next time a cop wants to give me a ticket and I am going to fight like a man possessed and hope the cop will walk away.....if not, you can say he arrested me in a fit of rage, not in his capacity of enforcing the law.

Could you imagine if the police walked away every time a crime was being commited because they were being dis-obeyed and they were getting frustrated?
I believe what you are saying this officer should have done, walking away, would be what will ultimately result in a completely lawless society.

I have lived in a society where there is almost no regard for the law, and where a good proportion of the police force are corrupt or just going through the motions, when you have lived in that situation, I think you would understand that what this police officer did was correct and the best thing he could have done.

Originally posted by freakray


That statement from you has me intrigued.......you expect a police officer to walk away because somebody is breaking the law and blatantly disobeying him?
Man, will you be my lawyer?
Next time a cop wants to give me a ticket and I am going to fight like a man possessed and hope the cop will walk away.....if not, you can say he arrested me in a fit of rage, not in his capacity of enforcing the law.

Could you imagine if the police walked away every time a crime was being commited because they were being dis-obeyed and they were getting frustrated?
I believe what you are saying this officer should have done, walking away, would be what will ultimately result in a completely lawless society.

I have lived in a society where there is almost no regard for the law, and where a good proportion of the police force are corrupt or just going through the motions, when you have lived in that situation, I think you would understand that what this police officer did was correct and the best thing he could have done.

Very much agreed. why on earth would he walk away from his JOB? He was doing what he was supposed to. I said it before and Ill say it again. THE BITCH DESERVED WHAT SHE GOT.

Originally posted by freakray


That statement from you has me intrigued.......you expect a police officer to walk away because somebody is breaking the law and blatantly disobeying him?
Man, will you be my lawyer?
Next time a cop wants to give me a ticket and I am going to fight like a man possessed and hope the cop will walk away.....if not, you can say he arrested me in a fit of rage, not in his capacity of enforcing the law.

Could you imagine if the police walked away every time a crime was being commited because they were being dis-obeyed and they were getting frustrated?
I believe what you are saying this officer should have done, walking away, would be what will ultimately result in a completely lawless society.

I have lived in a society where there is almost no regard for the law, and where a good proportion of the police force are corrupt or just going through the motions, when you have lived in that situation, I think you would understand that what this police officer did was correct and the best thing he could have done.

Once again, you have misinterpretted what I was saying. I never said that cops in all situations should walk away and ignore criminal actions whenever they feel like. there is no way in hell that i would advocate anarchy. What I was saying is that given the situation in which a young committed a minor offence while disobeying an officer, one way to resolve the situation is to walk away. Spraying the kid with pepperspray in my opinion will not teach the kid that jaywalking is dangerous given that she has already been so ignorant of cop's previous warnings. Either way the message was not going to get through. Pepperspraying would not resolve the situation, it would only bring legal worries to police officer.

Here's an analogy. Let's say that you are a parent and one day you find your kid playing with a knife. And let's say that your child is a snotty, petulent little bastard who never listens to anything you say. You yell, scream, ground the kid, removes his toys etc... but he still doesn't listen. You give him some minor slaps but he still remians stubborn. You think for moment and believe that the only way to resolve the situation is to give the kid one hell of ass whoopin. Do you risk child abuse charges by beating the kid senseless? Walking away will definitely not solve this situation but then again what will? Either way nothing will work so why use the pepperspray in the first place. It will just get you into trouble. Im not saying that walking away is the best solution to the problem but neither is pepperspray. Sure, he would be doing his job by pepperspraying the kid, but he might not have that job tomorrow if the parents win their lawsuit. There is no easy, clear cut way to go about this.

There really is no good way to resolve this situation because the girl appears to be very thickheaded. Given that, neither walking away nor the pepperspray would in my opinion convey the message to the girl that jaywalking is illegal and should not be practiced. Therefore, rather than risky a legal battle with the parents, I would probably just walk away after warning her the first time that jaywalking is wrong because there would be nothing I could to resolve the situation. Its honestly a tough call. If I were the cop I would like to enforce the law (with pepperspray). But, if this entails breaking the law (with a possible excessive use of force) I would think twice about actually whipping out the pepperspray. Its tough to decide how far to go to enforce when the perpetrator is a child.

Once again though, I would like to clarify that you cannot extend my arguments towards all situations involving all other types of crime in which the perpetrator is an adult. That is ridiculous and that was never my intention. I am speaking only of this situation at hand.

Originally posted by rsxer45


Once again, you have misinterpretted what I was saying. I never said that cops in all situations should walk away and ignore criminal actions whenever they feel like.


I am sorry if I misunderstood you, unfortunately we are only able to read what the other person types and hope to deduce what is meant.

Did you ever think what may have happened had the officer walked away, considering that there were supposedly '100' children in the vicinity?
Would that not have set a precedent?

You would then have 101 children thinking they can blatantly disobey the law instead of one 12 year old who thinks she knows better, not only that, those 101 children would also think that if they were abusive to a police officer, they would get away with it and the cop would back down.
Would that not be leading towards anarchy in its own right?

Like I said before, I have lived in a society that has police officers ignoring criminal actions, until you have lived in that kind of society, you are not going to appreciate what living in a lawful society really means.

Originally posted by ILike2DriveCars


Very much agreed. why on earth would he walk away from his JOB? He was doing what he was supposed to. I said it before and Ill say it again. THE BITCH DESERVED WHAT SHE GOT.

As Taranaki pointed, kids are but a by product of their environment and their parents. She was raised in such a manner that respect for authority figures was not instilled into her mind. Is this her fault that this happened to her or her parents' fault? or even her school's fault? Im not trying to imply that just because she is a child she does not think for herself. Im sure she understood right from wrong, but at her age I don't think she understood the big picture of WHY some things are right and some things are wrong? She is not off the hook but does she really DESERVE what she got if her parents and her environment did not teach her the proper values to live by in today's society? I personally feel sorry for her. When a person becomes an adult, and they commit acts such as these, that is when I stop feeling sorry for them...because then they should have the ability to discern for themselves (independently) the morality of legality of their actions. Though when I say "adult", I don't refer to a specific magical age.

Originally posted by freakray
[BDid you ever think what may have happened had the officer walked away, considering that there were supposedly '100' children in the vicinity?
Would that not have set a precedent?

You would then have 101 children thinking they can blatantly disobey the law instead of one 12 year old who thinks she knows better, not only that, those 101 children would also think that if they were abusive to a police officer, they would get away with it and the cop would back down.
Would that not be leading towards anarchy in its own right?
[/B]

I see what you are saying and that is exactly why it is a really tough call. Will the pepperspray set a good precedent and teach the kid's not to jaywalk or will it further promote the stereotype amongst the kids of a "Rodney King--beating" cop?

Maybe after walking away, the cop could have came back to the school and spend a day in the classroom promoting healthy saftey behavior around streets and highways thereby eliminating the precedent.

Also the cop instead could also have asked a teacher or fellow classmate about the identity of that girl and then visit the girl at her house and have a chat with her parents. He did not have to pepperspray her.

like i mentiond b4...i wasn't there so this is my guess


100 kids were ther so i presume that they were egging her on or she had friends there she wanted to impress....either way, peer pressure imo played a major role into her little outbreak....but the officer was doing his job and like mos kids...they learn from example...if he would have walked away....wouldn't have set a very good example....in her arest it may not have set a very good example but it got the point across that if u break the law or challenge an officer's authority...there will be consequenses :greenchai

I basically agree with what was said before in the cop's defense, walking away is simply not an option. Regardless of age, if you threaten a cop you are in for trouble--in most places I believe that threatening a cop to his face is grounds for immediate arrest. The law is not negotiable. If you break it, you break it, and it is not the cop's job to decide when to enforce it. He was put out there to stop kids from jaywalking. Period. That's what he needs to do. I don't see why he should walk away simply because the kid objected to getting the ticket. I mean, c'mon, that just doesn't fly. If you tell an officer you don't want a ticket, guess what? You're still gonna get it, regardless of how much you cuss. And if you refuse to accept a ticket, well, then you get arrested. If you resist arrest, then the officer will use force. That's just the way it is. The law is the law and the law says tough shit.

As has been mentioned before, pepper-spray was really the best option for the cop. Potentially damaging weapons such as the club or gun are definitly not necessary, and unfortunately laying your hands on a twelve year old girl would no doubt bring some sort of assault charge against the officer, so pepper-spray was his best option. One thing young kids pick up on very well is finding the exact lines of what they can get away with. Walking away would just teach all the kids around (however many there actually were) that if you are rude enough to a cop you can get away scott-free.

As for the parents, while I agree they are probably largely at fault, I don't see how that is really an issue for the officer. The parents are to be dealt with after the fact, they have no bearing on and are completely removed from the situation as presented to the officer. If someone breaks the law, it is not the officer's job to decide on the spot as to what the underlying cause of the transgression was. That is for the courts to decide later. The issue is not whether she deserved it or not, the issue is whether or not it was justified. The girl DESERVES a better upbringing, but if she doesn't obey the law, then that is just tough luck, the courts can decide what to do with the parents. The cop can only be justified in regards to the situation he was put into, and the parents simply weren't a part of that.

is it possible to change my vote ?

I think it was justified. Some of those delinquents need some dicipline

Originally posted by NSX-R-SSJ20K
is it possible to change my vote ?



done.....:D

Where's the undecided vote box? We don't live in a black and white world taranaki, where you are either for us or against us. Enough with the satire though..

I think for the mere fact that it's a 12 year old girl jaywalking, pepperspray wasn't necessary. Police have other means of detainment. It is, however, a sick sad world we live in when the politically correct people get their way so much that a cop can't tackle and arrest a 12 year old girl without fear of a lawsuit. Putting myself in the shoes of the cop, I would say fuck it, and tackle the girl to the ground and detain her. That would have got the surrounding kids attention more than blasting her with pepperspray.

I'll take on 100 12 year old kids if they don't agree that this little girl needed to ride home in the back of a squad car. It might have taught her a lesson, but, then again, it might have made her hate cops. I'm undecided.

I do know that I'd be pissed if I got a fucking ticket for jaywalking. Maybe he should have just let the girl get hit by a car.. That would have taught her.