Ferrari 458 Spider Runs Over NYPD officers foot, cop goes apesh!t

[Energy]

I will fail you not because it gives me satisfaction but because you clearly haven't read anything I posted and yet believe you are right and I am wrong. You think I have a cop overreacted attitude when in fact I am being as neutral as you believe yourself to be. You will notice that I never once called the cop a liar or that he was faking.

- First, the driver is wrong there's no doubting that. Your asking me if I would leave if an officer is ticketing me is completely pointless and makes no sense.
- The cop placed himself in that scenario as others have already mentioned.
- Once the car allegedly ran over his foot he can choose to react in several different ways, in this case he exploded with the result causing damage to the Ferrari and the cab as well as getting into a physical confrontation with the driver. All of which could have been avoided had he stayed calm.
- Next you will probably say, "so what if you were the cop what would you have done?" which is also pointless because I am not a cop, don't have their training, and am not a public servant held to higher standards.

[SumAznGuy]

Originally Posted by Energy

I will fail you not because it gives me satisfaction but because you clearly haven't read anything I posted and yet believe you are right and I am wrong. You think I have a cop overreacted attitude when in fact I am being as neutral as you believe yourself to be. You will notice that I never once called the cop a liar or that he was faking.

- First, the driver is wrong there's no doubting that. Your asking me if I would leave if an officer is ticketing me is completely pointless and makes no sense.
- The cop placed himself in that scenario as others have already mentioned.
- Once the car allegedly ran over his foot he can choose to react in several different ways, in this case he exploded with the result causing damage to the Ferrari and the cab as well as getting into a physical confrontation with the driver. All of which could have been avoided had he stayed calm.
- Next you will probably say, "so what if you were the cop what would you have done?" which is also pointless because I am not a cop, don't have their training, and am not a public servant held to higher standards.

Learn to read. I never said you said that. I'm asking you if you would leave to add to my point that the driver was wrong for trying to leave.
The cop placed himself in that scenario when he chose to become a cop. Or was it because he decided to give that guy a ticket? Or are we talking about him standing in front of the car to keep the driver from leaving?

The officer supposedly told the driver to stay on the sidewalk.
He stood in front/side of the car to keep the car from leaving. The driver chose to ignore this and tried to drive around the officer where supposedly the left front tire ran over the officer's foot.

Let's look at how much force was used in this situation. The driver in a car tried to drive around the officer. That person is considered not being co-operative. He supposedly runs over the officers foot. So you are basically saying the cop is supposed to open the door slowly and ask the driver to get out of the car and lay on the ground?

Let's look at your last point. So you are not a cop and never had any training whatsoever.
What would you do if while parking, I hit your car and do a lot of damage to the side of your car and then I proceed to try to leave.
If you said you'd go apeshit, pull me out of the car and give me an earfull, I wouldn't say you are over reacting.

Would it have been excessive force if the officer pulled out his gun and pointed it at the driver asking him to get out of his car. Oh right, you believe that was the better choice.

[Energy]

No you learn to read. I've already answered all your points.

What I would do doesn't matter exactly because I am not a cop and for the reasons I posted above. So one normal guy runs over another citizens foot. What does the injured foot guy do? Like I said before, he will probably act like an uncivilized cavemen and kick the guys car or something. That doesn't make it right. A better man would leave it and report it to the police instead of taking matters into their own hands. Why does everything have to be so eye for an eye?

A cop has other options. He can do what you said, open the door slowly and tell the driver to get out. Or he could pull out his handgun and tell the guy to get out. That is not excessive force. The cop is now creating a situation within his authority that shows he is in control where there does not have to be any damage or physical altercation.

[SumAznGuy]

Originally Posted by Energy

A cop has other options. He can do what you said, open the door slowly and tell the driver to get out. Or he could pull out his handgun and tell the guy to get out. That is not excessive force. The cop is now creating a situation within his authority that shows he is in control where there does not have to be any damage or physical altercation.

And farts smell like roses and there are 72 virgins waiting for you at the end of the tunnel.

You say you have no police training yet here you are critiquing them and what they should have or shouldn't have done.

[Energy]

Do you actually believe pulling out a gun has to result in any damage? If ever it will end the situation faster and in a more peaceful manner.

I think it's the shooting part that would cause damage. And it will never come to that unless the driver gets out and attacks the cop. Then that is just natural selection and I have nothing to say.

Do you have police training? Oh wait you don't. How can you say that what the cop did is proper procedure either?

[SumAznGuy]

Originally Posted by Energy

Do you actually believe pulling out a gun has to result in any damage? If ever it will end the situation faster and in a more peaceful manner.

I think it's the shooting part that would cause damage. And it will never come to that unless the driver gets out and attacks the cop. Then that is just natural selection and I have nothing to say.

Do you have police training? Oh wait you don't. How can you say that what the cop did is proper procedure either?

Let's see. Pull your side arm out in a public area where there are lots of people around you. Yes, the situation get's resolved much faster.
You know what happens when you pull out your side arm in a public area with a lot of people?

[Energy]

Originally Posted by SumAznGuy

And when did I say I don't?

Let's see. Pull your side arm out in a public area where there are lots of people around you. Yes, the situation get's resolved much faster.
You know what happens when you pull out your side arm in a public area with a lot of people?
http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m0r86g0RNr1qa1zvj.jpg

Ok I'm losing you... so you agree that the situation will be resolved quickly and with no damage. Then what's the problem?

Shit just got real??? What does that even mean?

So you said the situation is resolved and yet you still expect shit to get real? Real as in no commotion and you have the guy, everybody just goes back to whatever they were doing before and this doesn't explode over the internet? Sounds good to me.

[GLOW]

shit just got real - meaning once you introduce the fire-arm in to the situation, a lot can happen with a gun added to the mix, and the situation would have been elevated to another level. i would think the officer would only want to pull out his pistol when absolutely necessary especially with a bunch of bystanders near by. at least that's my opinion, i'm not a cop so i don't know what an officer's protocols are.

[Energy]

Tough one, the situation can get better and it can also get worse. Pulling out your gun doesn't mean you have to use it though. Any sensible person will know that the cop is serious unless that person has a death wish. And a rich playboy will likely not risk injury or his life for that. Think of all the money he can't enjoy if he's dead.

[GLOW]

in the heat of the moment the ferrari guy might not have thought of the consequences like that....

i can picture him getting out of his car and doing the come at me bro

[Energy]

Lol well he deserves to get shot then.

[Great68]

Originally Posted by SumAznGuy

: This is clearly seen in the video.
I don't know where you get the cop has an attitude. I just don't see it.
:

Are you watching the same fucking video I am?

If the cop was acting with true professionalism he simply would have verbally told the owner to stay put, and then warned that by not doing so he could take further action for obstruction.

I saw no such warning in this video.

Instead the cop chose the confrontational asshole approach of standing in front of the car in a "what you gonna do now" approach, goading (Maybe your pea brain did not understand this word in my previous post, definition: Provoke or annoy (someone) so as to stimulate some action or reaction.) the Ferrari owner.

That key difference in how the situation could have been handled is what separates the good cops from the bad ones.

[knight604]

[Not really racist!]

wow he finally posts...

thread revival

[Energy]

Originally Posted by Great68

Are you watching the same fucking video I am?

If the cop was acting with true professionalism he simply would have verbally told the owner to stay put, and then warned that by not doing so he could take further action for obstruction.

I saw no such warning in this video.

Instead the cop chose the confrontational asshole approach of standing in front of the car in a "what you gonna do now" approach, goading (Maybe your pea brain did not understand this word in my previous post, definition: Provoke or annoy (someone) so as to stimulate some action or reaction.) the Ferrari owner.

That key difference in how the situation could have been handled is what separates the good cops from the bad ones.

Exactly.

Originally Posted by Not really racist!

wow he finally posts...

thread revival

Yup and I'm not impressed. He obviously spent more time failing people instead of reading and thinking. He just made me repeat myself over and over again and his rebuttals are a complete fail. Nothing new was added and he is just grasping at straws trying to make his point sound even a little bit convincing.

[Spectre_Cdn]

Originally Posted by Energy

I will fail you not because it gives me satisfaction but because you clearly haven't read anything I posted and yet believe you are right and I am wrong.

what's right and wrong about these posts that occurred before SumAznGuy finally posted in this thread?




le fail-retaliation

[Energy]

Well if he's going to randomly fail every single post I make without reading or saying anything then what's stopping me from doing the same thing?

But you'll see that we were finally able to talk about this with no BS fails. That's how it should have been in the first place but he took his time not reading and thinking.

[Marco911]

Originally Posted by dangonay

^ And how would the police officer be able to determine who the registered owner of the vehicle is without checking the registration papers? That requires access to the vehicle. A license plate isn't enough without some documentation to show that it actually belongs to the vehicle itself.

Sorry, this makes no sense whatsoever. A cop could have wrote out that ticket for a car that is parked. There is no requirement for either a driver, or the registration papers. Did you see the cop asking the driver for his D/L or or registration papers? NO. He wanted to write out his little ticket and place it on the windshield of the car.

Some say he could call it in, but that takes way more time than simply looking at some papers. If he takes the plate down and lets the driver leave, what happens when he later runs the plate and finds it didn't belong to the car (it was stolen). Then what?

Call it in as a car running stolen plates, perhaps? If the offenses are to be served on the REGISTERED OWNER of the vehicle, rather than who happens to be driving the vehicle at the time, the driver of the vehicle is under no obligation to stay, provide his d/l, or the car's registration papers while the officer is writing out his ticket.

[SumAznGuy]

Originally Posted by Energy

Yup and I'm not impressed. He obviously spent more time failing people instead of reading and thinking. He just made me repeat myself over and over again and his rebuttals are a complete fail. Nothing new was added and he is just grasping at straws trying to make his point sound even a little bit convincing.

Originally Posted by Energy

Tough one, the situation can get better and it can also get worse. Pulling out your gun doesn't mean you have to use it though. Any sensible person will know that the cop is serious unless that person has a death wish. And a rich playboy will likely not risk injury or his life for that. Think of all the money he can't enjoy if he's dead.

You claim you have no police training and yet you are here giving your 2 cents on what you think the cop should have done. Look at Glow's response and then look your response. He gave a very good response to what I meant when shit just got real and here you are down playing it with it can go either way.

Just think about it for a sec, the police have protocols set in place for the amount of force they are allowed to use based on the given circumstance.
This is a fact, no some crazy shit that I just made up in my mind.

Originally Posted by Great68

Are you watching the same fucking video I am?

If the cop was acting with true professionalism he simply would have verbally told the owner to stay put, and then warned that by not doing so he could take further action for obstruction.

I saw no such warning in this video.

Instead the cop chose the confrontational asshole approach of standing in front of the car in a "what you gonna do now" approach, goading (Maybe your pea brain did not understand this word in my previous post, definition: Provoke or annoy (someone) so as to stimulate some action or reaction.) the Ferrari owner.

That key difference in how the situation could have been handled is what separates the good cops from the bad ones.

Again, what video are you watching? I see an officer standing in front of the car to block the car while he continued to write a ticket. I see no gestures with his hands to "goad" the driver or challenge the driver to run him over.
I agree with the last sentence though. He should have asked the driver to step out of the vehicle and possibly restrain him when he got into it the car and started it up.

But I would have expected better from you than to do such personal attacks.

[nabs]

[Energy]

Originally Posted by SumAznGuy

You claim you have no police training and yet you are here giving your 2 cents on what you think the cop should have done. Look at Glow's response and then look your response. He gave a very good response to what I meant when shit just got real and here you are down playing it with it can go either way.

Just think about it for a sec, the police have protocols set in place for the amount of force they are allowed to use based on the given circumstance.
This is a fact, no some crazy shit that I just made up in my mind.

You too are giving your own 2 cents on what the cop should have done even if you also have no police training. His use of force in this case was not justified either.

And again you are missing the point... Pulling out his handgun is just one other option he has instead of overreacting. Also drawing gun =/= using gun. Any reasonable person will listen right away unlike in that other thread where the guy had a knife and was high.

[SumAznGuy]

Originally Posted by Energy

You too are giving your own 2 cents on what the cop should have done even if you also have no police training. His use of force in this case was not justified either.

And again you are missing the point... Pulling out his handgun is just one other option he has instead of overreacting. Also drawing gun =/= using gun. Any reasonable person will listen right away unlike in that other thread where the guy had a knife and was high.

Please explain why you think him pulling the guy out of the car and taking him to the ground is not justified use of force?

Let's forget that the car was a Ferarri and a taxi was damaged in the process of pulling the driver out of the car. Just the act of pulling the driver out of the car because the driver did not obey orders and supposedly ran over the officer's foot when the driver tried to drive around the officer.

[Energy]

Originally Posted by SumAznGuy

Please explain why you think him pulling the guy out of the car and taking him to the ground is not justified use of force?

Because the driver could have done that himself the result being no damage to any property and no need for direct physical confrontation. Just because the cop can pull him out doesn't mean he needs to.

Originally Posted by SumAznGuy

Let's forget that the car was a Ferarri and a taxi was damaged in the process of pulling the driver out of the car. Just the act of pulling the driver out of the car because the driver did not obey orders and supposedly ran over the officer's foot when the driver tried to drive around the officer.

You cannot just simplify it like that. The car could be a Civic instead of a Ferrari and it doesn't change anything because its the principle of the matter that is at stake. And we cannot just leave that out because that is a direct effect of what the cop did.

Why do you think pulling him out and taking him to the ground is justified while also taking into account the effects of that action in this case?

[SumAznGuy]

Originally Posted by Energy

Because the driver could have done that himself the result being no damage to any property and no need for direct physical confrontation. Just because the cop can pull him out doesn't mean he needs to.

The driver gave up this option when he decided to drive around the officer and the car made contact with the officer.

Again, I bring back the would you drive around an officer if he stepped out of the bushes to pull you over scenario.

In this case, he hopped into his car and started it up. At that point, and only that point the officer should have asked the driver to get out of the car. The officer decided to step in front of the car to keep the driver from driving away.

And this is based on not knowing the officer had asked the driver to wait on the sidewalk which was not recored in the video, in which case it meant he was given a warning already.

You cannot just simplify it like that. The car could be a Civic instead of a Ferrari and it doesn't change anything because its the principle of the matter that is at stake. And we cannot just leave that out because that is a direct effect of what the cop did.

Why do you think pulling him out and taking him to the ground is justified while also taking into account the effects of that action in this case?

Hind sight is always 20/20. The driver disregarded instructions and attempted to drive away while the officer was clearly standing in front of the car. While it is unfortunate the taxi was damaged in the extraction process, you also have to think about the officer's safety as well.

http://vancouver.ca/police/assets/pd...procedures.pdf

Section 1.2 Use of force. Give this a read and then come back here and let us know if you change your opinion about using the gun.

[Energy]

Originally Posted by SumAznGuy

The driver gave up this option when he decided to drive around the officer and the car made contact with the officer.

Again, I bring back the would you drive around an officer if he stepped out of the bushes to pull you over scenario.

In this case, he hopped into his car and started it up. At that point, and only that point the officer should have asked the driver to get out of the car. The officer decided to step in front of the car to keep the driver from driving away.

I don't understand why you keep asking me what I would do when that has nothing to do with this. What the driver did is wrong and nothing will change that. Would I do what he did? Maybe I would and maybe I wouldn't.

Excellent, you are now pointing out an earlier chance when this could have been settled before escalating. The officer could have asked the driver to get out of the car instead of just standing there and writing the ticket. Moving in front of the car (if the driver even noticed) is already provoking the driver as others have mentioned in this thread. Its like the cop is saying, "Yeah, now what you going to do?"

Originally Posted by SumAznGuy

Hind sight is always 20/20. The driver disregarded instructions and attempted to drive away while the officer was clearly standing in front of the car. While it is unfortunate the taxi was damaged in the extraction process, you also have to think about the officer's safety as well.

http://vancouver.ca/police/assets/pd...procedures.pdf

Section 1.2 Use of force. Give this a read and then come back here and let us know if you change your opinion about using the gun.

I'm sure you know that gun regulations are very different in the US and in Canada but I'll indulge you. And what officer safety are you talking about? If ever the car even made contact with the officer's foot it would have been the tire meeting his boot and not even going over it.

Spoiler!

THIS PROCEDURE IS CURRENTLY UNDER REVIEW. MEMBERS ARE DIRECTED TO FOLLOW THEIR SBOR
TRAINING INSTRUCTIONS REGARDING THE REPORTING OF USE OF FORCE.
POLICY

PROCEDURE
Firearms/Lethal Force
1. Members may discharge their firearms if it is reasonable and necessary to do so and in accordance with the
protections and authorizations provided by Section 25 of the Criminal Code (Canada).
2. The seriousness of the offence does not in itself justify the use of firearms in the pursuit of suspects, unless:
a. the member is, or is about to be, or has been fired upon, or the suspect has already killed or wounded
someone;
b. the member is satisfied nothing less than deadly force will stop the fugitive or prevent their escape;
and
c. the lives or safety of innocent persons will not be jeopardized.
3. Members shall not discharge a firearm at a vehicle in an attempt to disable it. Members are justified with using
an appropriate level of force, including deadly force, against the occupant(s) of a vehicle if it is to prevent
grievous bodily harm or death to himself or herself or another person, and it is the least violent means
available.
4. The discharge of a firearm as a warning shot is prohibited.

Again and again you seem to equate drawing a gun to using a gun. You'll notice that this literature you brought up specifically talks about the "discharge" of a firearm. The sight and threat of a handgun should be enough to get the driver to comply. And again, if he does not comply then that is the driver's doing and then we would be arguing a completely different point.

Also, the handgun isn't the issue here. That was merely one suggested alternative that could have resulted in a better ending. My point is there are other ways the officer could have handled this situation - others have pointed out other options in this thread and you pointed out as well an opportunity where the cop had a chance to talk to the driver when he started the car.

The idea you are not understanding is that there are alternatives had the cop stayed calm.

You seem to believe that what the cop did was perfectly fine, am I right? I believe that this could have been handled differently, with more professionalism and restraint.

I don't think either of us is budging so we can just agree to disagree.