What's wrong with this picture

I am wondering how exactly this incident authorizes law enforcement to use deadly force

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/uva-girl-water-beer-jail-181104442.html

dafaq?
they pulled a gun?

They didn't use deadly force.  They jumped on the car and pulled a gun.  That's common practice in the US for the police when a potential threat emerges (not jumping on the hood), whether it be someone getting belligerent or someone behind the wheel of a car (which can be used to either injure/kill an officer or escape).  Now, the officers are fools for one, not knowing La Croix is sparkling water (I've had it, it's something I can have on extreme rarities, it's just not my taste) and for surrounding a damn college student, a woman no less, in plain clothes which I can almost guarantee going through her mind was that she was either going to be raped, mugged, or killed.  I'd have hit the gas too, not gonna lie.  Especially when showing what they called "unidentifiable" badges.

What's going to happen is either they'll drop those charges, or she'll go to court about it.  What will happen, guaranteed, is that police department is going to re-evaluate their rules and procedures on undercover agents now.

They had the duty to stop her, seeing as how you're not allowed to buy beer until you're 21 in the US which means, if she had beer, that she either used a fake ID or the store straight up broke the law.  Both of which are felonies.  So it's their job to investigate that.  However, the way they went about actually handling the issue was an epic fail.  Sounds like rookie mistakes to me.

-Crenshaw

Crenshaw, i do not believe what i read here, are you even listening/reading?

They pulled a GUN!
Because someone bought a drink!
You pull a gun if you intend to use it.
This IS deadly force!

Its not like two of them walking just straight up to them goin like: "Good afternoon, ladies. Officer Smith, local police in civil, may i see your IDs, please? Oh, that is water? Sorry, my bad, i've mistaken it with beer. Have a nice day."

So they where ready to shoot some underaged girls because of not even positively identified beer and you say this is common practise?

Oh land of the free...

Law enforcement must use minimum amount of force necessary, up to and including deadly force ( deadly force is defined as serious bodily harm, and or death) By drawing his weapon and pointing it at the suspect, the officer demonstrated intent, capability, and opportunity, which is deadly force. By their actions alone, all six officers escalated a situation beyond all reason or control (and just went full on retarded) over a misdemeanor. Even if the girl had bought beer, she would have been fined, given a few hours of community service. The store would have been fined and had their liquor license revoked. It is because of the actions of the officers that the DA dropped the charges incurred after first contact.

No, they pulled a gun because the people in the car started it up in order to open the windows.  Nobody died, therefore it wasn't deadly force.  It is standard police procedure.  It's called Stand Your Ground and it's a law we have in the US that protects policemen and citizens.  When either are threatened, they have the right to pull weapons and if necessary use them until the situation is defused.

You mistook my statement, entirely.  It's common practice to pull a weapon when the officer is threatened, they do it all the time.  They do it during traffic stops if the person behind the wheel isn't complying or acting suspicious.  They do it when you are belligerent and can't get you on the ground.  There were people in this car, whom of which the officers had no idea what they were doing, they could very well have been getting an AK47 out from down on the dash for all the officers knew and they are trained NOT to take that chance.  They'll even brandish a weapon on you if you hold something in their direction that looks like a gun or held like a gun would just under the pre-emption that you have a gun.  That's how the officers in the US are trained.

We have 350 million people in this country.  They do NOT take chances with that kind of thing especially with the type of crime they sometimes have to deal with.  Being as how we have more weapons per capita than any nation on the planet, you know, fight fire with fire and all that.  The actual instance where they actually get into a shootout with a suspect is minuscule at the very best, but it's better to train your officers to pre-empt those efforts than to explain to their family why they waited there and got shot.  The officers don't fire unless they have an absolute need to.

Do they accidentally shoot people?  Yes.  Are humans perfect?  No.

Am I listening, you ask?  I've lived in this country my entire life.  I know how the police are trained here.  It's different than in Germany.  And like I said earlier, the officers could have easily went about this differently and they failed at addressing the situation properly.  They should've clearly identified themselves beforehand but what's in the past is in the past.  They used their training when the situation got tense (even if they're the ones who made it that way).

You took my statement and completely twisted it.  I never once said pulling a weapon on an underage college student for buying water was common practice.  I said how they handled the situation (in terms of jumping on the hood and using the gun to get compliance from the suspect in this case) is common practice.

But something, all things considered, tells me that explaining this isn't going to make a difference because no matter how much I try to educate people about how things work in the US they just don't seem to want to accept that.

Police Academy's definition of the use of Deadly Force

"Objective Reasonableness"
In order for a case of deadly force to be considered justified, the Supreme Court has applied a standard of "objective reasonableness" to balance the rights of officers and civilians. According to JRank, an officer may use deadly force in apprehending a felony suspect if innocent bystanders are in danger, if a delayed arrest could cause injury or death to others or if the suspect committed the crime using deadly force.

They may use deadly force or threaten it if a delayed arrest could cause injury or death to others.

The people in the car started it which the officers would easily say based on the experiences a lot of people have with problem traffic stops implied they were going to run, which usually implies doing whatever they can to get away.  Including running down officers, damaging property, running down bystanders, etc.

Are police and laws perfect?  No.  Some people might even say it's downright crazy, but that's how we've been doing things in the country for the last 100 years.  It really is nothing new.  People are now just bringing it more to light, you know with the internet and all that and the proliferation of information.  But that's another topic for another day.


-Crenshaw

The implication in the news story is that the firearm was drawn before the car was started.

Preemptive action. Police do it all the time and that would be their argument if it went to court. Our justice system and police system is great, but far from perfect. Humans are the only random thing in the universe and if it was easy to predict and read them like a book, there wouldn't be issue like this. Unfortunately, that isn't the case.

-Crenshaw

Pre emptive action is the last excuse of a desperate system. The equivalent would be similar to cops having through authority to randomly detain and search all African Americans since they have the highest rate of criminals per race

Please do not insult my police system. If you can't have a discussion without throwing insults then respectfully bow out of it. These people go out there and attempt to make the country a better place, much often to the risk of their own lives.

"Desperate" system? This system has been in place for decades and has worked for decades whether or not people like it. Welcome to America. We're not Canada, we're not Germany, we're not the UK, we're not Russia, China, India, Israel, Botswana. We're the US. This is how things are over here. People look at it in disgust but it's just how things are. It's how things have been. It's not like this happened over night. It's not like our police were happy-go-lucky "hey you got beer, have a great day!" to "GIVE ME THAT DAMN BOX" and then pulls a gun on you. Not to mention, it's Virginia and they have several party schools around there and I wouldn't be surprised if on a regular basis they get problem offenders, especially from the college population who thinks they're untouchable, at least now in this generation.

But let's look at this from the officer's standpoint - you haven't any idea (and neither do I) what was going through their mind. You have no idea if the officers thought the teens would gun the car into the officers, swerve to hit them, pull out a shotgun and start shooting. Have you ever tried to calm a situation with a friend and someone else? You remember that little nervous twinge you had? Imagine doing that with a car of people you don't even know, and have no idea if they have murderous intentions or not. People ARE like that on occasions. See, if they had the beer, and it was indeed beer, there's a chance those people in the car would just bolt in any attempt they can to get away from the police. It happens all the time in this country and people think that's funny over here but it's really not. People get hurt when they do that even for something as small as having beer underage.

Preemptive action is taken in lieu of something happening first. In this case, the officers were putting their foot down BEFORE The people had the option to run, and they STILL RAN. Even after the officer jumped on the hood and the other pulled the gun. Don't get me wrong, they had good reason as the cops were out of uniform, but still. Even after some of the cops shouted that they were police and showed badges. The students were scared out of their wits, yes, that's human nature. But it isn't the officer's fault they didn't take the time to pay attention. Imagine if those students were indeed breaking the law, or what if they had heroin or marijuana in the car? Do you think for one second they'd think twice about potentially running over a cop to get away?

Just watch the show "Cops" on youtube or something about America's men and women of law enforcement. That stuff happens, all the time. And it's dangerous.

You might not like it or think it's downright a violation of rights, someone from Europe might not like it, but that's just how things are. In fact, if I were to go to Europe or Canada, I might think their police are ridiculous for not doing enough. It's all a matter of culture and how you're raised.

I for one, salute them on their vigilance. Even if, in a case such as this, it should've went about much differently.

-Crenshaw

So you're basically making 4 points.

1. You're not American, so you're not allowed to criticize our things.
Well I'm not Jewish either, but I'm pretty sure I can say that the Holocaust was a bad thing.

2. Officers should always just assume everybody is a bad guy.
Isn't innocence assumed until proven guilty? Officers have to have just cause to detain an individual (asking for ID, searching bags, etc). My knowledge of the legal system may be a bit off, but I'd assume that "Hey that person looks young, and they're carrying a blue cardboard box." is not just cause for the attack they carried out.

3. Everybody should bend their knee to the whim of the law.
 Being American, I'd assume you'd have some self-respect for the preservation of liberty. While many police officers do indeed do an amazing job in helping others and their community, a large portion of them are corrupt, abusive, and downright mentally ill.

4. The cops were doing the right thing, except in this case where they weren't.
There is no "wrong but right" argument available when it comes to the freedom of a citizen. If you in any way jeopardize that, than you jeopardize the entire integrity of your national values. Police have a duty to protect citizens, not attack them.

Also, I'm not "insulting" your system, but commenting on the process by which that system is used. If you want to attach aggression to that, than you're free to do so.

Just watch the show "Cops" on youtube or something about America's men and women of law enforcement. That stuff happens, all the time. And it's dangerous.

Alternatively, youtube "American police abuse". That stuff happens, all the time. And it's dangerous.

1.  Never said that.  I'm saying I understand it better than you.

2.  No one was arrested, so Innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply here.  In fact, she was innocent, the officers wanted to check the box because "La Croix" does sound like some kind of fancy alcohol, the kids chose to run.

3.  Just co-operate with the police.  This whole thing could've easily been avoided if they just shown the cops the box of water.  Again, number 3 would've been hard to do when you walk up on a group of people in plain clothes like you're going to mug them.

4.  I never said the cops were doing the right thing.  I said they were acting on their training when they did what they did.  Walking up on a group of citizens like that as a group of 6 or however many they were without clearly calling themselves out was a stupid move, I said this 2 or 3 times already.  But pulling their weapon and jumping on the hood to deter them from running is in their training.

Nothing the cops did was infringing on their civil liberties.  Police can't search you or your property unless they suspect you of committing a crime.  They thought the girl had beer.  Being underage that's a crime and they can check for that.  Just like if they pull you over on a traffic stop and see your eyes red from smoking marijuana, they can search your car under premise of that (marijuana is illegal here currently UNLESS you have a doctors order).

The cops can put you in jail for a night for minor infractions (traffic violations, domestic disturbances, etc) while they sort out the paper work and let the situation defuse.  It's not uncommon here.  Again, it might seem, to people out of country that it is infringing on civil liberties, but it's really not, it's run of the mill.

Now if the police were to just pull them over on the road and say "I think you have beer in there, let me search your car" then THAT is illegal.  Or if they come to your house and say they want to search it for marijuana, that's illegal, unless of course they have a permit from a judge, probable cause.  If they don't have probable cause, they can't search you.  In the case of the La Croix, it was probable cause that it was beer.  Seeing as how they were just coming up to inquire about it, there isn't a problem.  If they came to her house and demanded that she let them check it, that's a different story.

It's treading a line.  Example, I can carry a gun out in plain day, and our constitution states a cop can't come up and search me, take my weapon, etc. because it's written in the constitution.  I can just stand there all day and repeat the phrase "What crime have you suspected me of committing" or something along that and there's nothing they can do about it.  But if I were, for example, to walk around drinking out of a brown glass bottle out in public, they can stop me and inquire to what I am drinking (I'm not sure about other countries, but a majority of beer bottles in America are brown), because public intoxication is a misdemeanor and if i'm walking around chugging beer in broad daylight, they can say that.

Basically, what they did was okay.  But, the officer's stupid approach to the situation and the group of teens panic mode just put the situation somewhere it didn't need to be.  All in all, it was dumb and that police department will probably re-evalute their undercover/plain clothes operating procedures, especially if the media makes a big deal of it.

Let me sum up my position:  I never said what the police did in terms of the situation was correct.  I said they acted upon their training, which was correct but how they went about addressing the situation was not correct.  In fact, it was stupid and they should be disciplined accordingly.  Depending on the situation, police are allowed to inquire about your being (carrying suspicious items such as brown bottles or things in this case that look like alcohol) but that doesn't mean they can search you.  If you don't want to show them, you don't have to show them until they get a warrant from a judge.  But in this case, the teens panicked and tried to run, that gave them probable cause that they're trying to hide something, even if that isn't the case.

All in all, it wasn't even the water that caused this.  The water caused the police to come over with its fancy name of La Croix.  The teens beginning to panic caused the officers to suspect something was up, in the sense they jumped on the car and tried to hold the "suspects' there.  Then they ran and got caught by a cop further down the road.  Really, no one was at fault here and the teens will probably not have to pay the 2500 fine on grazing the officers though they might.

If you want me to be blunt about my own people:  The generation now has no idea about their rights.  Literally.  No idea.  I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't know they could just tell the police to leave them alone.  But that's a generational issue, nothing the police can control.

Let's make no mistake however, that article just gave you the bare bones.  We have no idea what was actually said, what actions were taken, and so forth.  Until we get all the facts, we really can't say anything about the situation.

-Crenshaw

The majority of what you said was so.redundant and backwards I am literally mentally unable to comprehend how you breath without the assistance of a machine.

She was arrested:

"Daly apologized when she realized who they were, Chapman said, but agents arrested Daly and charged her with two counts of assaulting a law enforcement officer and one count of eluding police—each carrying a maximum penalty of five years in prison and $2,500 in fines. "

sm4rtiez wrote:The majority of what you said was so.redundant and backwards I am literally mentally unable to comprehend how you breath without the assistance of a machine.

Locking this topic.  That blatant attack on my character regardless of how you see my position was completely uncalled for.  I never once insulted you in anything I said, but of course you took it upon yourself to insult me.

As Socrates once said:  "When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser."

Allow me to point you in the direction of the clan rules you agreed to when you joined NwA:  https://nwa-clan.darkbb.com/t7-forum-rules-apply-to-all?highlight=rules

Particularly rules number 5 and 6.

I'm all for having debates about America and the way we do things but once you stoop to personal attacks you lose your right to have an input on a subject.  Consider that your first warning in regards to the forum rules being breached.

Seeing as how you lost your input on this subject, I am not going to dignify your last statement with a response.

Have a wonderful day.

-Crenshaw