WaterfowlForum.Net

R. Chapman wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/07/05/video-shows-officer-punching-woman-on-la-freeway/

shouldn't have made fun of boot lips short stature. She had it coming.

quacknstack6 wrote:

R. Chapman wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/07/05/video-shows-officer-punching-woman-on-la-freeway/

shouldn't have made fun of boot lips short stature. She had it coming.

Stay out of it. This is obviously Rex trying to bait Olly....obviously. Ok, maybe it's meant for Juice box too. They have similar views on police brutality.

QH's Paw wrote:

quacknstack6 wrote:

R. Chapman wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/07/05/video-shows-officer-punching-woman-on-la-freeway/

shouldn't have made fun of boot lips short stature. She had it coming.

Stay out of it. This is obviously Rex trying to bait Olly....obviously. Ok, maybe it's meant for Juice box too. They have similar views on police brutality.

I'm bored and have nothing better to do currently, how ya been mike?

quacknstack6 wrote:

QH's Paw wrote:

quacknstack6 wrote:

R. Chapman wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/07/05/video-shows-officer-punching-woman-on-la-freeway/

shouldn't have made fun of boot lips short stature. She had it coming.

Stay out of it. This is obviously Rex trying to bait Olly....obviously. Ok, maybe it's meant for Juice box too. They have similar views on police brutality.

I'm bored and have nothing better to do currently, how ya been mike?

Awesome, how about you?
My daughter and son in law are here visiting for the weekend and they brought my horse trailer up with a horse. i'm gonna get to start riding again.

QH's Paw wrote:

quacknstack6 wrote:

QH's Paw wrote:

quacknstack6 wrote:

R. Chapman wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/07/05/video-shows-officer-punching-woman-on-la-freeway/

shouldn't have made fun of boot lips short stature. She had it coming.

Stay out of it. This is obviously Rex trying to bait Olly....obviously. Ok, maybe it's meant for Juice box too. They have similar views on police brutality.

I'm bored and have nothing better to do currently, how ya been mike?

Awesome, how about you?
My daughter and son in law are here visiting for the weekend and they brought my horse trailer up with a horse. i'm gonna get to start riding again.

Cant complain, living the dream I suppose. Getting stuff ready for duck season coming up. Gotta get the boat ready, build a blind and get a couple more things for the lady before season starts up.

Is she gonna hunt with you this season?

QH's Paw wrote:Is she gonna hunt with you this season?

She will attempt too depends on how cold it gets this year.

quacknstack6 wrote:

QH's Paw wrote:Is she gonna hunt with you this season?

She will attempt too depends on how cold it gets this year.

If she even attempts to hunt with you she's a keeper.

QH's Paw wrote:

quacknstack6 wrote:

QH's Paw wrote:Is she gonna hunt with you this season?

She will attempt too depends on how cold it gets this year.

If she even attempts to hunt with you she's a keeper.

Hell she killed her first deer last year shortly before the NCH. Went turkey hunting with me this year several times, although didn't grasp the concept of sitting still out in the open. Duck hunting will be a little different for her but we will be able to swing it hopefully.

R. Chapman wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/07/05/video-shows-officer-punching-woman-on-la-freeway/

In Los Angeles County, there are Federal injunctions still, to the best of my knowledge......I think that they have taken the phrase "To Protect and Serve" off the side of the city and county cars and replaced it with "We Treat You Like A King". (I was less than a half a block away from where the riots started in '92 the Saturday before it started it was a dark area.)

From the Fox News Video, I notice the officer is wearing his tough guy gloves and has his tough guy haircut. The CHP is a very large organization and shit happens, not every officer is perhaps what we might like but that is true with every organization or group within society. The video doesn't look good for the CHP but there hasn't been an investigation and the histrionics on the news broadcast certainly do nothing to promote evenhandedness in the minds of the viewers. It looks bad but I say wait and see. Please don't think that I condone police brutality but until an investigation has been completed it isn't time to get up in the air.

In my opinion, should the officer be found to have acted out of line, he should be fired, arrested and tried and so should his supervisors.

Why his supervisors?

Yeah why his supervisors. On my fire engine if the driver wants to do something dumb like not stop at an intersection when we are running code to clear it and he hits a car and kills someone I should lose my job because yelling STOP STOP STOP STOP will make the engine stop. That's absolutely a ridiculous statement Ron.

Feelin' Fowl wrote:Why his supervisors?

His supervisors because they set the tone for his division/department. Not every law enforcement operation is the same, and in large law enforcement organizations, not every department is the same. Some hire and promote LEO's that look and act like the Arian Brotherhood, some departments are pretty much into public relations and community goodwill, some are left wing radical and some are to the right of Attila the Hun.

When something happens that is completely off the charts, often it is because behavior leading up to the incident is tolerated or encouraged by the supervisors. In even handed departments, hot heads are either retrained or gotten rid of. In macho-man departments, the conservative/compassionate are gotten rid of or quit.

I am not saying that the officer in the video is wrong, but rather, wait for the investigation. Should the investigation show that the officer is using excessive force, then it is my guess that this behavior is tolerated by his supervisors.

Why prosecute the supervisors you ask? How about because they haven't done a good job supervising, they are clueless about the mental stability of their troops, they encourage the excessive use of force as common practice? These are the reasons to go after the supervisors. If the supervisors don't know that they have a loose cannon under their supervision then they should be charged with lack of supervision because there is no law against being completely fucking stupid.

Olly wrote::popcorn:

Just a spectator this time?

Seems like a lot of assumptions, RonE.

No chance that it was a one time thing? The supervisors had to know that it was coming? I'm sure the supervisors only have 1 officer so that the supervisor has a chance to observe their subordinate at all times during every shift.

Ron, you wrote way too much, can you break it down into one paragraph? Thanks.

Feelin' Fowl wrote:Seems like a lot of assumptions, RonE.

No chance that it was a one time thing? The supervisors had to know that it was coming? I'm sure the supervisors only have 1 officer so that the supervisor has a chance to observe their subordinate at all times during every shift.

If you've never had to supervise a group of people than you will probably not understand where Ron is coming from. While its only the military, I still have 8 people that I write evaluations for. I know exactly which ones are the jokers and whatnot as does everyone else, including the new troops who have only been there a short amount of time.

I'm sure Flint knows his workers pretty well too and can judge them with pretty good accuracy. Point being EVERYONE knows who the hotheads/trouble makers are that they work with. Its up to the supervisors to fix or dispose of them.

Eric Haynes wrote:

Feelin' Fowl wrote:Seems like a lot of assumptions, RonE.

No chance that it was a one time thing? The supervisors had to know that it was coming? I'm sure the supervisors only have 1 officer so that the supervisor has a chance to observe their subordinate at all times during every shift.

If you've never had to supervise a group of people than you will probably not understand where Ron is coming from. While its only the military, I still have 8 people that I write evaluations for. I know exactly which ones are the jokers and whatnot as does everyone else, including the new troops who have only been there a short amount of time.

I'm sure Flint knows his workers pretty well too and can judge them with pretty good accuracy. Point being EVERYONE knows who the hotheads/trouble makers are that they work with. Its up to the supervisors to fix or dispose of them.

I currently have 43 people under me. Like I said...assumptions.

If proven that the officer was out of line, prove that it wasn't a one time lack of judgment. Your best guy has never had a bad day?

Yup and the quiet ones never ever do anything wrong. You can tell who your hot heads are and you can't do something instantly about it either. It takes time it takes paperwork someone has to screw up a bunch. For those who say I supervise and I know my people ok you might know them but wait for the time that someone you know just snaps and fucks up real good then we will see how much you agree with a supervisor being fired too.

dude needs to learn to throw a proper punch..

other than that, this is what gets me..

he is wearing SAP gloves and can not KO the bitch. he is alone so escalation of force works a bit differently here.. its beat her ass till she stops fighting/can't fight , help arrives, or he puts a bullet in her.

If someone is on top of me, whaling away, the one thing I am NOT going to do is STOP fighting back. That's just crazy talk.

assateague wrote:If someone is on top of me, whaling away, the one thing I am NOT going to do is STOP fighting back. That's just crazy talk.

kinda a loss-loss situation ain't it..

though i doubt the cop just said to him self,"hey, i'm just gonna beat the hell out of this bitch". SAP gloves and no KO make me think drugs.

Yeah, it pretty much is. Although I will say that if it gets to this point, unless the woman just turned and came out swinging (which very well could have happened, we don't know), the cop generally fucked something up along the way, drugs or not.

Feelin' Fowl wrote:

Eric Haynes wrote:

Feelin' Fowl wrote:Seems like a lot of assumptions, RonE.

No chance that it was a one time thing? The supervisors had to know that it was coming? I'm sure the supervisors only have 1 officer so that the supervisor has a chance to observe their subordinate at all times during every shift.

If you've never had to supervise a group of people than you will probably not understand where Ron is coming from. While its only the military, I still have 8 people that I write evaluations for. I know exactly which ones are the jokers and whatnot as does everyone else, including the new troops who have only been there a short amount of time.

I'm sure Flint knows his workers pretty well too and can judge them with pretty good accuracy. Point being EVERYONE knows who the hotheads/trouble makers are that they work with. Its up to the supervisors to fix or dispose of them.

I currently have 43 people under me.

I'm just going to let this one go.

capt1972 wrote:

Feelin' Fowl wrote:

Eric Haynes wrote:

Feelin' Fowl wrote:Seems like a lot of assumptions, RonE.

No chance that it was a one time thing? The supervisors had to know that it was coming? I'm sure the supervisors only have 1 officer so that the supervisor has a chance to observe their subordinate at all times during every shift.

If you've never had to supervise a group of people than you will probably not understand where Ron is coming from. While its only the military, I still have 8 people that I write evaluations for. I know exactly which ones are the jokers and whatnot as does everyone else, including the new troops who have only been there a short amount of time.

I'm sure Flint knows his workers pretty well too and can judge them with pretty good accuracy. Point being EVERYONE knows who the hotheads/trouble makers are that they work with. Its up to the supervisors to fix or dispose of them.

I currently have 43 people under me.

I'm just going to let this one go.

I hear ya Capt., I thought it was an awfully slow pitch too.

3legged_lab wrote:Just a spectator this time?

What the hell are you talking about?

Olly wrote:

3legged_lab wrote:Just a spectator this time?

What the hell are you talking about?

Haha. You know.

QH's Paw wrote:

capt1972 wrote:

Feelin' Fowl wrote:

Eric Haynes wrote:

Feelin' Fowl wrote:Seems like a lot of assumptions, RonE.

No chance that it was a one time thing? The supervisors had to know that it was coming? I'm sure the supervisors only have 1 officer so that the supervisor has a chance to observe their subordinate at all times during every shift.

If you've never had to supervise a group of people than you will probably not understand where Ron is coming from. While its only the military, I still have 8 people that I write evaluations for. I know exactly which ones are the jokers and whatnot as does everyone else, including the new troops who have only been there a short amount of time.

I'm sure Flint knows his workers pretty well too and can judge them with pretty good accuracy. Point being EVERYONE knows who the hotheads/trouble makers are that they work with. Its up to the supervisors to fix or dispose of them.

I currently have 43 people under me.

I'm just going to let this one go.

I hear ya Capt., I thought it was an awfully slow pitch too.

Pffftt! I'll rephrase...I currently supervise 43 people.