Army officer sues Virginia police over violent traffic stop

[TGS]

This is intended to prevent situations where regular people panic and escalate unwittingly. (And people do tend to panic when you point guns at them.) It's not some silver bullet that's going to make sovereign felon magically compliant. It gives you the option to better determine which category the driver falls in without putting yourself, your career or the driver at unnecessary risk.

I'm not sure what your law enforcement training taught you, or even what might be a trend throughout other curriculums...but mine taught me that drawing a firearm on felony stops is for officer safety so that you're minimizing being behind the 8-ball incase someone wants to fight it out. It's not for compliance. Indeed, we were even taught that drawing a firearm early strictly as a form of compliance is a generally bad idea.

Even if we had drones to conduct stops, a felony stop would still be correctly performed by drawing your firearm and methodically removing the occupants of the vehicle at gunpoint. People can still shoot you through your windshield when you pull up behind them.

Were you taught in the academy or follow-on training that drawing your firearm on felony stops was for compliance as opposed to officer safety?

[BehindBlueI's]

Stephanie, I need to say that I absolutely despise how you're framing this.

Escalated encounters between any person and police can end up with either the cop or the subject in the morgue. Yet, people still purposely pull that stuff just to get their fame. I don't know if you knew this, but people of all races provoke situations with cops and attack cops all the time thinking it'll work out okay, regardless of the fact that people who do such have a tendency to lose and end up in jail, injured, or in an exceedingly small amount of cases.....dead.

Agreed.

Four officers on my department have been killed in the line of duty since I've been here. All four were killed by black male suspects. Is that relevant to the discussion? It would appear to not be.

[jh9]

I'm not sure what your law enforcement training taught you, but mine taught me that drawing a firearm on felony stops is for officer safety so that you're minimizing being behind the 8-ball incase someone wants to fight it out. It's not for compliance.

Even if we had drones to conduct stops, a felony stop would still be correctly performed by drawing your firearm and methodically removing the occupants of the vehicle at gunpoint. People can still shoot you through your windshield when you pull up behind them.

Were you taught in the academy or follow-on training that drawing your firearm on felony stops was for compliance as opposed to officer safety?

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic with the "law enforcement training" bit or not? I'm not a cop. But as Joe Citizen I feel like I've got some skin in the game. Is that not permitted?

[HCM]

There's a whole subculture on YouTube, including sovereign citizens and 1st amendment auditors, that do this for fun and (presumably) profit. He repeated many of the same lines those folks use, and he was quick to position his cell phone camera in just the right place. He looked like he knew what he was doing. In fact, I don't think he was afraid, because he calmly took his phone out and put it on the dash. I didn't really see much fear in his face, and that is a common thing that the YouTubers say to stall the cops.

Yes. The 1st Amendment "auditing" is very profitable. I'm familiar with more than one that quit jobs paying over $75k per year to do "auditing" full time because it was more profitable.

While the term "sovereign citizen" tends to make people think of old white farmers in the Midwest like Gordon Kahl, that is (and always was) only a small slice of those adhering to the ideology. The Moorish Nation / Washita Nation being one example.

[TGS]

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic with the "law enforcement training" bit or not? I'm not a cop. But as Joe Citizen I feel like I've got some skin in the game. Is that not permitted?

Sure, skin in the game, but you are speaking pretty authoritatively about TTPs that you apparently have no training or understanding in. I figured you were law enforcement with the statement's you're making.

As I said, we don't draw our firearms as a form of compliance on felony stops, and generally not as a form of compliance anyway. We draw firearms for officer safety, to make it harder for you to kill us.

[Stephanie B]

The "he was looking for a payday" line of thought makes hardly any sense to me. What marginally-sane Black man would provoke a situation with armed cops, knowing full well that escalated encounters between Black men and cops can end with the one who wasn't a cop on a slab in the morgue?

Stephanie, I need to say that I absolutely despise how you're framing this.

Escalated encounters between any person and police can end up with either the cop or the subject in the morgue. Yet, people still purposely pull that stuff just to get their fame. I don't know if you knew this, but people of all races provoke situations with cops and attack cops all the time thinking it'll work out okay, regardless of the fact that people who do such have a tendency to lose and end up in jail, injured, or in an exceedingly small amount of cases.....dead.

Yet they still do it. You're amazed that anyone would think people would pick confrontations with cops, and I'm amazed that you're so detached from reality to be ignorant to how often people do it, even in situations where any rational person would assess it to be a losing proposition.

This isn't about race. Black men do not get shot more often than white men simply due to their race, this has been very well documented and the studies discussed on this forum; the rate at which a particular demographic gets shot is commensurate to the dominant demographic in a given area committing crime. I abhor that you're insinuating getting shot by cops is a situation unique to black men. You are perpetuating racism by keeping this myth alive.

You do understand, don't you, that I was writing that from the perspective of the guy in the car? You do understand, I hope, that the perception is that Black guys get shot more often by cops than white guys? (Ask Philandro Castile about that.)

But hey, if you're going to accuse me of racism and try to shut me down, fine. I'll happily show myself out.

[luckyman]

Jesus Christ, talking about mistakes being made on both sides...

I read the entirety of the thread until I got caught up, and then actually viewed the recording.

Based on the conversation i read I was very empathetic with how Gyro F16 was viewing things. I heard a lot of viewpoint from others here on how the officers were coming at things appropriately given the info they had. From my perspective it was sounding like from the Lt’s perspective he was also acting rationally, given he “knew” he wasn’t breaking any laws, and having the news tell him over and over about how often “his kind” gets mistreated and even killed by the police. I believe from his viewpoint it was completely rational to wait until he got to a public place to pull over, and the fact that he pulled over in such a public place should have been partially factored into the police response.

But then I watched the video... I understand he was probably both scared and affronted at the same time. When he was first sticking his hands out the window and getting conflicting orders I felt for him. And I really had a big problem with the officer’s response of “you should be scared”.

But dang, who in their right mind would think that most of the Lt’s responses were going to actually help the situation? It felt more willfully obstinate to me than anything else. And the fact that he was an Lt made that worse for me; sure they weren’t in his chain of command but I would have hoped there was just a tiny bit of a default tendency to obey orders.

I don’t know; I never seem to lose my analytical nature under stress, maybe I just can’t relate as well as I should to people whose brains shut down under stress.

[TGS]

You do understand, don't you, that I was writing that from the perspective of the guy in the car?

No, that wasn't apparent to me (nor a few other people, it seems). You claiming that you were simply writing from his perspective doesn't seem very genuine either, given your jab at the end.

And, it still doesn't account for the fact that people pick confrontations all the time with cops. Feel free to come visit Earth any time you wish and see for yourself.

[Hambo]

What marginally-sane Black man would provoke a situation with armed cops, knowing full well that escalated encounters between Black men and cops can end with the one who wasn't a cop on a slab in the morgue?

It doesn't surprise me to see that written, but it does surprise me to see it written by you.

[HCM]

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic with the "law enforcement training" bit or not? I'm not a cop. But as Joe Citizen I feel like I've got some skin in the game. Is that not permitted?

So, the drone thing, at least at this point, is "good idea fairy" thinking similar to the suggestion in another thread that cops utilize right side drive cars so they can be closer to the curb to talk to pedestrians. Regardless of all the normal concerns in relation to right hand drive cars in a left hand drive country, the person who posted that did not understand that talking to pedestrians while seated in your vehicle is an officer safety concern which is discouraged.

Many non LEOs think that the lack of visible / properly displayed license plate is solely an administrative / traffic issue.

However, when a LEO sees a vehicle without a plate (or in this case one that could not be seen in night time road conditions) they see two likely possibilities:

1) Traffic issue with a person whose plate was lost or stolen;

or

2) A stolen vehicle or someone who intentionally took their plate off to avoid ID of their vehicle because they are committing serious violent crimes.

You can't assume one or the other. While 1 is common, proceeding on that assumption alone is a how LEOs get hurt and/or killed.

How a subject reacts / behaves in response to contact is usually the first indicator whether you are dealing with a 1 or a 2.