Police arrest Mesa County clerk who promoted Trump’s false election claims

Tina Peters was filmed kicking leg toward officer and likely faces charges.

Read the whole story

 

[Chemical Tribe]

Her real “crime” was making full clone backups of the voting machine computers, before an “update” was installed by the voting machine company, which ended up wiping out the logs from the 2021 election, which is a violation of the law requiring the conservation of all voting records for 22 months following an election. That “update” was promoted by the Democrat secretary of state who is now pressing charges. Was this a cover-up that was thwarted resulting in retaliation?

Found another Nazi.

Presenting an alternative view doesn't equate to someone being a Nazi. Frankly, it's terrifying that you are using the word Nazi in this context, and that you've been upvoted this much. Nazis were real and committed genocide. That isn't a word to toss around with someone who shares a different view of an incident online. It's extremely uncouth.

Found yet another Nazi.

Get a life dude.

They never deny it. So fucking funny.

 

[KGFish]

So how long before she is somehow tied to Jewish space lasers....via the bagel shop!

Obviously: without a good Schmear the Lasers won't focus!

Science question. Does clarified butter focus the JSLs better, or is normal butter good enough?

I think clarified butter is required for the Indian Space Lasers. From my experience, JSLs develop extraneous exhaust gases when dealing with butter.

 

[Z1ggy]

Can someone explain to outside person why americans are so violent towards police?
This seems to be universal american trait across all social classes from "street types" to upper class persons like that lady in article.
I doubt any police officer in any country has ever changed his/her mind about arresting if suspect kicked police officer.

Please tell me what "street types" means.

use non coded words so everyone can understand.

 

[ColdWetDog]

I'm pretty sure resisting arrest and assaulting a police officer are against the law.

Not to defend her in any possible way with regards to her conspiracy nonsense or recording illegally, but the standards for “resisting arrest” are so flexible (and low) that they’re often abusive. I don’t think it’s impossible to actually have resisting arrest, but flailing/kicking/etc without any actual harm is what helps justify use of force in situations that do not need it.

I’ve seen people charged with “resisting arrest” for flexing and pulling away from officers. I’ve seen it for simply dropping their weight because they don’t want to be arrested. Nobody harmed, just making the lives of officers a little harder.

And I’ve seen people tazed for those things. And then the tazing used as proof that force was needed to subdue them.

We should all want a little higher standard to want a charge of resisting arrest. If you’ve never been forcibly tackled and had your arms forced behind you, it’s not a pleasant thing. There’s natural fight or flight and it’s hard to contain in the heat of the moment when someone starts grabbing you.

Nothing excuses her overall choices in life, but something that de minimus should not be treated a serious threat or criminal action.

In this case, the police didn't treat it as a serious threat. But resist she did, and I don't think you'd find a jury anywhere that would disagree after seeing the video.

Not only did she physically resist arrest, she tried to hide the iPad that was the subject of the warrant. All captured on police video. From the GJ Sentinel:

Print

The Mesa County District Attorney’s Office filed formal charges against Clerk Tina Peters late Wednesday, a day after she was arrested at a downtown Grand Junction business when a search warrant was being executed to retrieve her iPad.

Peters also has been advised that she must turn herself in to face misdemeanor charges of obstructing a police office and obstructing government operations. That is based on an alleged attempt to kick law enforcement officers who were attempting to detain her. Both charges come with fines and possible jail times.

Peters was arrested after she resisted Grand Junction Police while four of its officers were assisting the Mesa County District Attorney’s Office in executing the search warrant, which was intended to find evidence that Peters had improperly video recorded a court hearing for her chief deputy, Belinda Knisley, on Monday.

After being accused of violating court procedure during that hearing, Peters allegedly told District Judge Matthew Barrett, who is presiding over the Knisley case, that she was not recording. A deputy prosecutor and court reporter, however, said they witnessed it, according to the search warrant. As a result, prosecutors requested and received approval from a judge to seize the iPad.
A CHAOTIC SCENE

When they tried to do so, however, Peters resisted and attempted to hide the electronic device from police, including passing it to another person under a table at Main Street Bagels, according to her arrest affidavit. She later has claimed the iPad did not belong to her.

“DA investigators continued to try and locate an iPad and were speaking with a male, (redacted), asking if he had the iPad,” the partly redacted affidavit reads, which was filed by Grand Junction Police officer Vaughn Soderquist. “DA investigator (Robert) Heil was focused on (redacted name) as he was preventing access to the table by the DA investigators. The iPad DA investigators were trying to seize for the search warrant was being passed around between patrons who were seated at the table. I addressed (redacted) and asked him to put his cup of coffee down and turn around. As I approached (redacted), the female subject stopped between me and (redacted), obstructing my access to him.”

Further she is wailing and moaning that the 'stole her keys' and thus are depriving her of all manner of constitutional liberties when the police noted that they typically take anything out of the hands of people that they are putting handcuffs on. They did forget to give them back for a moment but she wasn't driving anywhere at the time.

The horror.

 

[Chemical Tribe]

(Idiotic ranting) fascists, nazis, and communists in our state government to intimidate us are going nowhere.

*guffaw*
Fascists AND Nazis.
Working with communists.

Telling us you don't know what any of those words mean without telling us you don't know what any of those words mean.

Fascists, nazis, and communists may as well be the same thing to me, just different leaves off the same socialist branch of the ideological tree.

Nevermind a guffaw, I think I just laughed up my spleen. Please stop - just too funny.

Maybe he is Mr. Dinesh "fascist is the centralized state" d'souza.

 

[SixDegrees]

So how long before she is somehow tied to Jewish space lasers....via the bagel shop!

Obviously: without a good Schmear the Lasers won't focus!

Science question. Does clarified butter focus the JSLs better, or is normal butter good enough?

I think clarified butter is required for the Indian Space Lasers. From my experience, JSLs develop extraneous exhaust gases when dealing with butter.

Wait - I thought they were Italian. Just how many groups and countries have these things?

 

[Imbrium]

We must not allow a Jewish Space Laser gap!!!!

 

[SixDegrees]

Meanwhile, Trump's call records just went Nixonian.

Paging Rose Mary Woods.

 

[Snarky Robot]

In this case, the police didn't treat it as a serious threat. But resist she did, and I don't think you'd find a jury anywhere that would disagree after seeing the video.

And again, that’s a preposterously low standard that fundamentally harms those who interact with police the most. Any good statute will have something about some actual need to apply force back or have a serious risk of harm. Because of someone is just flailing when someone grabs them, we’re often talking involuntary reflex. I’ve specifically chosen to be a training dummy for MPs. I had less problem being tackled by the dog or getting maced than I did with someone trying to force my hands behind my back, even when I know it was coming. To the point that I almost broke someone’s nose.

Reflexive struggling against that is normal, and the easiest way to avoid any such “risk” is to wait until the person is calm enough to put their arms there voluntarily.

That a jury would think that’s enough to be a crime is the problem.

 

[SixDegrees]

In this case, the police didn't treat it as a serious threat. But resist she did, and I don't think you'd find a jury anywhere that would disagree after seeing the video.

And again, that’s a preposterously low standard that fundamentally harms those who interact with police the most. Any good statute will have something about some actual need to apply force back or have a serious risk of harm. Because of someone is just flailing when someone grabs them, we’re often talking involuntary reflex. I’ve specifically chosen to be a training dummy for MPs. I had less problem being tackled by the dog or getting maced than I did with someone trying to force my hands behind my back, even when I know it was coming. To the point that I almost broke someone’s nose.

Reflexive struggling against that is normal, and the easiest way to avoid any such “risk” is to wait until the person is calm enough to put their arms there voluntarily.

That a jury would think that’s enough to be a crime is the problem.

This didn't look at all reflexive. It went on for a good bit, for starters.

And although I'm well aware of abusive use of such charges, on the other side the police need the power to do their jobs without turning every encounter into a battleground, and laws like this serve a purpose of deterrence. Everyone is well aware that you don't behave this way with police, including Peters. The alternative is for police to just head-bag and ziploc everyone they encounter by default, because if resistance has no consequences at all then they're going to get resistance pretty much every time.

She's free - unlike a lot of people, because white - and she can make an argument in court that the charges weren't warranted, and/or should be reduced/eliminated. But again, it's super clear here she resisted without cause.

I'll allow that she probably needs extensive mental health treatment, and it's too bad we overload problems like that onto police instead of deferring to professionals, but they weren't there to oversee a screaming bagwoman - at least initially. They were there to confiscate her phone, she resisted, and she'll get more trouble as a result. I'm not having a problem with this particular instance; I think the police acted correctly.

 

[Imbrium]

Meanwhile, Trump's call records just went Nixonian.

Paging Rose Mary Woods.

Yes, missing calls, probably because he used his private phone. That's OK, but her emails! Also, it is reported that document destruction was something Trump took very seriously. He had burn bags, ripped up documents by hand, (too technically incompetent to operate a shredder). Aides also reported they repeatedly had to unclog the toilet because he flushed documents down the toilet, which explains his unhinged rants about low flow toilets. He is even reported to have eaten some documents.

Remember when Trump said that people who took the fifth were probably guilty, otherwise they wouldn't invoke it in the first place? Remember when a number of people testifying before the 1/6 committee invoked the fifth literally hundreds of times during their testimony? Does that mean they are guilty in the eyes of the Trumpenfuhrer? Does deliberately destroying documents by any means possible, and taking classified documents to Mar-a-Lago when he left office make Trump guilty?

How much do people have to see to finally understand the man is nothing more than a sociopathic criminal?

 

[SixDegrees]

Meanwhile, Trump's call records just went Nixonian.

Paging Rose Mary Woods.

Yes, missing calls, probably because he used his private phone. That's OK, but her emails! Also, it is reported that document destruction was something Trump took very seriously. He had burn bags, ripped up documents by hand, (too technically incompetent to operate a shredder). Aides also reported they repeatedly had to unclog the toilet because he flushed documents down the toilet, which explains his unhinged rants about low flow toilets. He is even reported to have eaten some documents.

Remember when Trump said that people who took the fifth were probably guilty, otherwise they wouldn't invoke it in the first place? Remember when a number of people testifying before the 1/6 committee invoked the fifth literally hundreds of times during their testimony? Does that mean they are guilty in the eyes of the Trumpenfuhrer? Does deliberately destroying documents by any means possible, and taking classified documents to Mar-a-Lago when he left office make Trump guilty?

How much do people have to see to finally understand the man is nothing more than a sociopathic criminal?

Some of this is rising to the level of actual Federal charges being possible. I understand the JD's reluctance to bring such charges without ironclad evidence to back them up, but the clock is ticking; any evidence needs to be forwarded to the JD prior to next January in the event the dems lose and their investigation is shut down. That still gives the JD another two years to investigate and prosecute, and given how slowly these things can move it would be better to bring charges even sooner - although there's a risk attached to losing as well.

 

[KGFish]

In this case, the police didn't treat it as a serious threat. But resist she did, and I don't think you'd find a jury anywhere that would disagree after seeing the video.

And again, that’s a preposterously low standard that fundamentally harms those who interact with police the most. Any good statute will have something about some actual need to apply force back or have a serious risk of harm. Because of someone is just flailing when someone grabs them, we’re often talking involuntary reflex. I’ve specifically chosen to be a training dummy for MPs. I had less problem being tackled by the dog or getting maced than I did with someone trying to force my hands behind my back, even when I know it was coming. To the point that I almost broke someone’s nose.

Reflexive struggling against that is normal, and the easiest way to avoid any such “risk” is to wait until the person is calm enough to put their arms there voluntarily.

That a jury would think that’s enough to be a crime is the problem.

This didn't look at all reflexive. It went on for a good bit, for starters.

And although I'm well aware of abusive use of such charges, on the other side the police need the power to do their jobs without turning every encounter into a battleground, and laws like this serve a purpose of deterrence. Everyone is well aware that you don't behave this way with police, including Peters. The alternative is for police to just head-bag and ziploc everyone they encounter by default, because if resistance has no consequences at all then they're going to get resistance pretty much every time.

She's free - unlike a lot of people, because white - and she can make an argument in court that the charges weren't warranted, and/or should be reduced/eliminated. But again, it's super clear here she resisted without cause.

I'll allow that she probably needs extensive mental health treatment, and it's too bad we overload problems like that onto police instead of deferring to professionals, but they weren't there to oversee a screaming bagwoman - at least initially. They were there to confiscate her phone, she resisted, and she'll get more trouble as a result. I'm not having a problem with this particular instance; I think the police acted correctly.

I think the issue here is not so much that resistance is a crime (there's a whole host of issues associated with it being allowed to be a stand-alone charge, as well as with the incredibly fuzzy notion of what constitutes resistance, but fundamentally, yes, there needs to be some consequence for making the act of arrest a battlefield), but that police is fundamentally trained to treat every situation as a battlefield where the only success metric is whether the police comes out alive. Even the military doesn't train that way.

Until that changes, every arrest is a battlefield, regardless of what the arrested person does.

 

[numerobis]

Meanwhile, Trump's call records just went Nixonian.

Paging Rose Mary Woods.

Yes, missing calls, probably because he used his private phone. That's OK, but her emails! Also, it is reported that document destruction was something Trump took very seriously. He had burn bags, ripped up documents by hand, (too technically incompetent to operate a shredder). Aides also reported they repeatedly had to unclog the toilet because he flushed documents down the toilet, which explains his unhinged rants about low flow toilets. He is even reported to have eaten some documents.

Remember when Trump said that people who took the fifth were probably guilty, otherwise they wouldn't invoke it in the first place? Remember when a number of people testifying before the 1/6 committee invoked the fifth literally hundreds of times during their testimony? Does that mean they are guilty in the eyes of the Trumpenfuhrer? Does deliberately destroying documents by any means possible, and taking classified documents to Mar-a-Lago when he left office make Trump guilty?

How much do people have to see to finally understand the man is nothing more than a sociopathic criminal?

None so blind as those who will not see.

 

[Sjoerd Verweij]

Mesa County is represented by Assault Weapon Barbie, (a.k.a. Lauren Boebert), so you know the stupid runs deep there.

It does brings some question to mind about whether Boebert's election was legitimate.

So, talking about projection, Assault Weapons Barbie and child sex related stuff.... "Lauren Boebert’s husband did jail time for "lewd exposure" in a bowling alley"

https://www.salon.com/2021/08/31/lauren ... was-there/

In January 2004, when Jayson Boebert was 24, he was arrested for exposing himself to two young women at a Colorado bowling alley. His future wife Lauren Roberts (as she was then known), who was 17 at the time, was also present and was told she was no longer welcome at the bowling alley.

Jayson Boebert pled guilty to "public indecency and lewd exposure" after that incident, according to The New York Post, and was sentenced to four days in jail with a subsequent two years on probation.

You think that's all on the Boeberts? Not by a long shot...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0RjfxXaXhw

 

[ready_load$81]

Maybe she's mad, because the policemen were "Gaspacho" forces from Pelosi ...

 

[KGFish]

Meanwhile, Trump's call records just went Nixonian.

Paging Rose Mary Woods.

Yes, missing calls, probably because he used his private phone. That's OK, but her emails! Also, it is reported that document destruction was something Trump took very seriously. He had burn bags, ripped up documents by hand, (too technically incompetent to operate a shredder). Aides also reported they repeatedly had to unclog the toilet because he flushed documents down the toilet, which explains his unhinged rants about low flow toilets. He is even reported to have eaten some documents.

Remember when Trump said that people who took the fifth were probably guilty, otherwise they wouldn't invoke it in the first place? Remember when a number of people testifying before the 1/6 committee invoked the fifth literally hundreds of times during their testimony? Does that mean they are guilty in the eyes of the Trumpenfuhrer? Does deliberately destroying documents by any means possible, and taking classified documents to Mar-a-Lago when he left office make Trump guilty?

How much do people have to see to finally understand the man is nothing more than a sociopathic criminal?

When they're facing the choice of being killed for following Trump or staying alive.

Yes, cult deprogramming is a thing. Unfortunately, there aren't enough people in the US to deprogram all the Trumpists, and even if there were, it would take many years. And there are unfortunately a few rather key events that will happen in the next few years that will still have the Trumpists be at full speed.

 

[Tamerlin]

"Dad, what were Trump supporters like?"

Don't forget the idiots who while invading the Capitol also pooped on the walls...

 

[daveishereagain]

In this case, the police didn't treat it as a serious threat. But resist she did, and I don't think you'd find a jury anywhere that would disagree after seeing the video.

And again, that’s a preposterously low standard that fundamentally harms those who interact with police the most. Any good statute will have something about some actual need to apply force back or have a serious risk of harm. Because of someone is just flailing when someone grabs them, we’re often talking involuntary reflex. I’ve specifically chosen to be a training dummy for MPs. I had less problem being tackled by the dog or getting maced than I did with someone trying to force my hands behind my back, even when I know it was coming. To the point that I almost broke someone’s nose.

Reflexive struggling against that is normal, and the easiest way to avoid any such “risk” is to wait until the person is calm enough to put their arms there voluntarily.

That a jury would think that’s enough to be a crime is the problem.

You (of course) conveniently leave out the part where she and those with her actively resisted the execution of a legal search warrant. That action caused the escalation of the action that took place. It's telling how certain ideologies support law enforcement against The Other but hand wave away resistance to legal strictures when it involves their side. Very telling.

 

[AceRimmer]

Wow, US politics has become such a shitshow...

That's putting it mildly. I personally think we are wandering aimlessly down the path to civil war.

 

[aerogems]

"Dad, what were Trump supporters like?"

Don't forget the idiots who while invading the Capitol also pooped on the walls...

I've always wondered about people who do things like that. Long ago, in what seems like another lifetime, I worked in a fast food place. One day, someone went into the men's restroom stall and literally shat all over the place. It's as if they had explosive diarrhea and it was coming out like a fire hose they couldn't control. It was literally up on the walls at head level and even on the ceiling.

Who the hell does that? Who thinks, "You know what sounds like fun? Throwing shit around the bathroom stall in a fast food place!" Replace "bathroom stall at a fast food place" with any other location. Do they go to the zoo, see the monkey's flinging their shit at people and think, "Yes! I want to emulate THAT behavior!"

 

[SixDegrees]

"Dad, what were Trump supporters like?"

Don't forget the idiots who while invading the Capitol also pooped on the walls...

I've always wondered about people who do things like that. Long ago, in what seems like another lifetime, I worked in a fast food place. One day, someone went into the men's restroom stall and literally shat all over the place. It's as if they had explosive diarrhea and it was coming out like a fire hose they couldn't control. It was literally up on the walls at head level and even on the ceiling.

Who the hell does that? Who thinks, "You know what sounds like fun? Throwing shit around the bathroom stall in a fast food place!" Replace "bathroom stall at a fast food place" with any other location. Do they go to the zoo, see the monkey's flinging their shit at people and think, "Yes! I want to emulate THAT behavior!"

Well, we are monkeys...

I once pondered why, on Star Trek, Kirk didn't just teleport the contents of their latrines onto the bridge of their enemy's ship, then realized I had just pushed shit-flinging into the 24th century.

 

[Imbrium]

"Dad, what were Trump supporters like?"

Don't forget the idiots who while invading the Capitol also pooped on the walls...

I've always wondered about people who do things like that. Long ago, in what seems like another lifetime, I worked in a fast food place. One day, someone went into the men's restroom stall and literally shat all over the place. It's as if they had explosive diarrhea and it was coming out like a fire hose they couldn't control. It was literally up on the walls at head level and even on the ceiling.

Who the hell does that? Who thinks, "You know what sounds like fun? Throwing shit around the bathroom stall in a fast food place!" Replace "bathroom stall at a fast food place" with any other location. Do they go to the zoo, see the monkey's flinging their shit at people and think, "Yes! I want to emulate THAT behavior!"

Well, we are monkeys...

I once pondered why, on Star Trek, Kirk didn't just teleport the contents of their latrines onto the bridge of their enemy's ship, then realized I had just pushed shit-flinging into the 24th century.

Isn't that basically what Scotty did with the tribbles when he transported them onto the Klingon ship?

 

[theSeb]

Mesa County is represented by Assault Weapon Barbie, (a.k.a. Lauren Boebert), so you know the stupid runs deep there.

It does brings some question to mind about whether Boebert's election was legitimate.

So, talking about projection, Assault Weapons Barbie and child sex related stuff.... "Lauren Boebert’s husband did jail time for "lewd exposure" in a bowling alley"

https://www.salon.com/2021/08/31/lauren ... was-there/

In January 2004, when Jayson Boebert was 24, he was arrested for exposing himself to two young women at a Colorado bowling alley. His future wife Lauren Roberts (as she was then known), who was 17 at the time, was also present and was told she was no longer welcome at the bowling alley.

Jayson Boebert pled guilty to "public indecency and lewd exposure" after that incident, according to The New York Post, and was sentenced to four days in jail with a subsequent two years on probation.

You think that's all on the Boeberts? Not by a long shot...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0RjfxXaXhw

Not at all. I am aware that her and her husband have a longer rep list, but that specific example was the most related to the discussion happening at the time that I could think of.

 

[daveishereagain]

"Dad, what were Trump supporters like?"

Don't forget the idiots who while invading the Capitol also pooped on the walls...

I've always wondered about people who do things like that. Long ago, in what seems like another lifetime, I worked in a fast food place. One day, someone went into the men's restroom stall and literally shat all over the place. It's as if they had explosive diarrhea and it was coming out like a fire hose they couldn't control. It was literally up on the walls at head level and even on the ceiling.

Who the hell does that? Who thinks, "You know what sounds like fun? Throwing shit around the bathroom stall in a fast food place!" Replace "bathroom stall at a fast food place" with any other location. Do they go to the zoo, see the monkey's flinging their shit at people and think, "Yes! I want to emulate THAT behavior!"

Well, we are monkeys...

I once pondered why, on Star Trek, Kirk didn't just teleport the contents of their latrines onto the bridge of their enemy's ship, then realized I had just pushed shit-flinging into the 24th century.

Not to be pedantic, but you may be a monkey I am an ape.

 

[snuggles]

I just realized how much I need to see numbskull Trumpers resisting arrest for their actual crimes. This is literally the only thing that will shut them up. Although case in point: she did not shut up.

I guess literally nothing will shut them up.

 

[Chemical Tribe]

"Dad, what were Trump supporters like?"

Don't forget the idiots who while invading the Capitol also pooped on the walls...

I've always wondered about people who do things like that. Long ago, in what seems like another lifetime, I worked in a fast food place. One day, someone went into the men's restroom stall and literally shat all over the place. It's as if they had explosive diarrhea and it was coming out like a fire hose they couldn't control. It was literally up on the walls at head level and even on the ceiling.

Who the hell does that? Who thinks, "You know what sounds like fun? Throwing shit around the bathroom stall in a fast food place!" Replace "bathroom stall at a fast food place" with any other location. Do they go to the zoo, see the monkey's flinging their shit at people and think, "Yes! I want to emulate THAT behavior!"

Well, we are monkeys...

I once pondered why, on Star Trek, Kirk didn't just teleport the contents of their latrines onto the bridge of their enemy's ship, then realized I had just pushed shit-flinging into the 24th century.

Not sure about the original series but by TNG they had "waste extractions." Beamed out of them and probably recycled into energy.

 

[Deleted member 276317]

No one talks about tribble poo.

 

[Chuckstar]

Can someone explain to outside person why americans are so violent towards police?

Because police are almost universally violent towards the public. Especially if you're non-white.

Sure, a police officer standing at a corner seems reasonable enough if you engage them in conversation. But if they ask to frisk you for no reason and you don't move fast enough to comply, they are very likely to use force on you.

Increased militarization of police forces along with training practically designed to escalate situations leads to a general animosity from police towards the people they "serve". Also, there are structural incentives to create animus. Police officers get promotions based on job performance, which means "more arrests". So officers are encouraged to frequently engage with the public, "discover" crimes (like resisting arrest, planting contraband during vehicle searches), and then arrest them to boost their numbers. On top of that, we have police unions that institutionally protect the worst of the lot.

Oh, and in some jurisdictions, if you have a large sum of cash on you, cops can search you and just take it, claiming that you're a drug dealer. And you can't get it back even if they drop the drug charges (perhaps because there wasn't any or their attempt to "discover" it failed).

Basically, there's no reason to respect police in the USA. They are at best to be avoided and at worst they are an organized crime syndicate which is likely to kill you for no fucking reason.

“Militarisation of the police” is such a weird red herring. If the police weren’t given a second-hand armored carrier by the military, would they stop throwing you down hard for resisting arrest?

I get the issue of police militarization, it’s just not related to most of the issues we actually see play out with the police day-to-day in the U.S. And harping on it throws the focus away from where it really needs to be — better training and holding officers accountable for their actions.

 

[SixDegrees]

"Dad, what were Trump supporters like?"

Don't forget the idiots who while invading the Capitol also pooped on the walls...

I've always wondered about people who do things like that. Long ago, in what seems like another lifetime, I worked in a fast food place. One day, someone went into the men's restroom stall and literally shat all over the place. It's as if they had explosive diarrhea and it was coming out like a fire hose they couldn't control. It was literally up on the walls at head level and even on the ceiling.

Who the hell does that? Who thinks, "You know what sounds like fun? Throwing shit around the bathroom stall in a fast food place!" Replace "bathroom stall at a fast food place" with any other location. Do they go to the zoo, see the monkey's flinging their shit at people and think, "Yes! I want to emulate THAT behavior!"

Well, we are monkeys...

I once pondered why, on Star Trek, Kirk didn't just teleport the contents of their latrines onto the bridge of their enemy's ship, then realized I had just pushed shit-flinging into the 24th century.

Isn't that basically what Scotty did with the tribbles when he transported them onto the Klingon ship?

Indirectly, anyway, assuming tribbles shit after they eat.

 

[Chuckstar]

"Dad, what were Trump supporters like?"

Don't forget the idiots who while invading the Capitol also pooped on the walls...

I've always wondered about people who do things like that. Long ago, in what seems like another lifetime, I worked in a fast food place. One day, someone went into the men's restroom stall and literally shat all over the place. It's as if they had explosive diarrhea and it was coming out like a fire hose they couldn't control. It was literally up on the walls at head level and even on the ceiling.

Who the hell does that? Who thinks, "You know what sounds like fun? Throwing shit around the bathroom stall in a fast food place!" Replace "bathroom stall at a fast food place" with any other location. Do they go to the zoo, see the monkey's flinging their shit at people and think, "Yes! I want to emulate THAT behavior!"

Well, we are monkeys...

I once pondered why, on Star Trek, Kirk didn't just teleport the contents of their latrines onto the bridge of their enemy's ship, then realized I had just pushed shit-flinging into the 24th century.

Not to be pedantic, but you may be a monkey I am an ape.

“Monkey” is not well defined in its relationship to “ape”. Sometimes, “monkey” is used as a synonym for “simians” which would include “apes”, while other times as a synonym for “non-ape simians”.

 

[Imbrium]

No one talks about tribble poo.

The first rule of tribble poo is that you don't talk about tribble poo.

 

[VelvetGlove]

I'm pretty sure resisting arrest and assaulting a police officer are against the law.

Not to defend her in any possible way with regards to her conspiracy nonsense or recording illegally, but the standards for “resisting arrest” are so flexible (and low) that they’re often abusive. I don’t think it’s impossible to actually have resisting arrest, but flailing/kicking/etc without any actual harm is what helps justify use of force in situations that do not need it.

I’ve seen people charged with “resisting arrest” for flexing and pulling away from officers. I’ve seen it for simply dropping their weight because they don’t want to be arrested. Nobody harmed, just making the lives of officers a little harder.

And I’ve seen people tazed for those things. And then the tazing used as proof that force was needed to subdue them.

We should all want a little higher standard to want a charge of resisting arrest. If you’ve never been forcibly tackled and had your arms forced behind you, it’s not a pleasant thing. There’s natural fight or flight and it’s hard to contain in the heat of the moment when someone starts grabbing you.

Nothing excuses her overall choices in life, but something that de minimus should not be treated a serious threat or criminal action.

In this case, the police didn't treat it as a serious threat. But resist she did, and I don't think you'd find a jury anywhere that would disagree after seeing the video.

I beg to differ: I could easily select a jury that would not only disagree that she resisted arrest, but would also find her innocent of all charges. The prosecution would no doubt shoot down my jury selection, however.

 

[aerogems]

Can someone explain to outside person why americans are so violent towards police?

Because police are almost universally violent towards the public. Especially if you're non-white.

Sure, a police officer standing at a corner seems reasonable enough if you engage them in conversation. But if they ask to frisk you for no reason and you don't move fast enough to comply, they are very likely to use force on you.

Increased militarization of police forces along with training practically designed to escalate situations leads to a general animosity from police towards the people they "serve". Also, there are structural incentives to create animus. Police officers get promotions based on job performance, which means "more arrests". So officers are encouraged to frequently engage with the public, "discover" crimes (like resisting arrest, planting contraband during vehicle searches), and then arrest them to boost their numbers. On top of that, we have police unions that institutionally protect the worst of the lot.

Oh, and in some jurisdictions, if you have a large sum of cash on you, cops can search you and just take it, claiming that you're a drug dealer. And you can't get it back even if they drop the drug charges (perhaps because there wasn't any or their attempt to "discover" it failed).

Basically, there's no reason to respect police in the USA. They are at best to be avoided and at worst they are an organized crime syndicate which is likely to kill you for no fucking reason.

“Militarisation of the police” is such a weird red herring. If the police weren’t given a second-hand armored carrier by the military, would they stop throwing you down hard for resisting arrest?

I get the issue of police militarization, it’s just not related to most of the issues we actually see play out with the police day-to-day in the U.S. And harping on it throws the focus away from where it really needs to be — better training and holding officers accountable for their actions.

Counterpoint: Wateringhole, USA PD buys a bunch of APCs and other surplus military gear, and then feels like they need to find an excuse to use it. So, a dozen or so people protesting suddenly becomes a "riot" and an excuse to get all dressed up in tactical combat gear and go out and crack some heads.

I'm also reminded of comments made by actors who have played Superman or Batman about how putting on the costume really makes you feel like a different person. This is backed up by a lot of psychological research, right down to where people might tell you to wear a suit and tie even for a phone screen interview just because the act of dressing so formally will put you in a different mindset.

It may not be the primary factor, but it is definitely a significant contributing factor.

 

[watermeloncup]

Can someone explain to outside person why americans are so violent towards police?

Because police are almost universally violent towards the public. Especially if you're non-white.

Sure, a police officer standing at a corner seems reasonable enough if you engage them in conversation. But if they ask to frisk you for no reason and you don't move fast enough to comply, they are very likely to use force on you.

Increased militarization of police forces along with training practically designed to escalate situations leads to a general animosity from police towards the people they "serve". Also, there are structural incentives to create animus. Police officers get promotions based on job performance, which means "more arrests". So officers are encouraged to frequently engage with the public, "discover" crimes (like resisting arrest, planting contraband during vehicle searches), and then arrest them to boost their numbers. On top of that, we have police unions that institutionally protect the worst of the lot.

Oh, and in some jurisdictions, if you have a large sum of cash on you, cops can search you and just take it, claiming that you're a drug dealer. And you can't get it back even if they drop the drug charges (perhaps because there wasn't any or their attempt to "discover" it failed).

Basically, there's no reason to respect police in the USA. They are at best to be avoided and at worst they are an organized crime syndicate which is likely to kill you for no fucking reason.

“Militarisation of the police” is such a weird red herring. If the police weren’t given a second-hand armored carrier by the military, would they stop throwing you down hard for resisting arrest?

I get the issue of police militarization, it’s just not related to most of the issues we actually see play out with the police day-to-day in the U.S. And harping on it throws the focus away from where it really needs to be — better training and holding officers accountable for their actions.

I think "militarization of police" also involves their training, where everything is seen as a threat to be subdued. Though ironically police rules of engagement are much weaker than the actual military operating among civilians. But I see what you mean, the police who killed George Floyd definitely weren't militarized in terms of equipment, for example.

 

[SixDegrees]

Can someone explain to outside person why americans are so violent towards police?

Because police are almost universally violent towards the public. Especially if you're non-white.

Sure, a police officer standing at a corner seems reasonable enough if you engage them in conversation. But if they ask to frisk you for no reason and you don't move fast enough to comply, they are very likely to use force on you.

Increased militarization of police forces along with training practically designed to escalate situations leads to a general animosity from police towards the people they "serve". Also, there are structural incentives to create animus. Police officers get promotions based on job performance, which means "more arrests". So officers are encouraged to frequently engage with the public, "discover" crimes (like resisting arrest, planting contraband during vehicle searches), and then arrest them to boost their numbers. On top of that, we have police unions that institutionally protect the worst of the lot.

Oh, and in some jurisdictions, if you have a large sum of cash on you, cops can search you and just take it, claiming that you're a drug dealer. And you can't get it back even if they drop the drug charges (perhaps because there wasn't any or their attempt to "discover" it failed).

Basically, there's no reason to respect police in the USA. They are at best to be avoided and at worst they are an organized crime syndicate which is likely to kill you for no fucking reason.

“Militarisation of the police” is such a weird red herring. If the police weren’t given a second-hand armored carrier by the military, would they stop throwing you down hard for resisting arrest?

I get the issue of police militarization, it’s just not related to most of the issues we actually see play out with the police day-to-day in the U.S. And harping on it throws the focus away from where it really needs to be — better training and holding officers accountable for their actions.

I think "militarization of police" also involves their training, where everything is seen as a threat to be subdued. Though ironically police rules of engagement are much weaker than the actual military operating among civilians. But I see what you mean, the police who killed George Floyd definitely weren't militarized in terms of equipment, for example.

One problem is, there just isn't any but the most perfunctory training when they receive these weapons. They may get some routine maintenance information, but that's about it. So now they've got military-grade vehicles and weapons with no idea how or when to use them, and testosterone inevitably takes over. It creates an environment that makes police feel like they're at war with the citizenry they're supposed to be serving.

There is ZERO need for police to have weapons like these. If things are that bad, that's what the national guard is for.

 

[DarthSlack]

Can someone explain to outside person why americans are so violent towards police?

Because police are almost universally violent towards the public. Especially if you're non-white.

Sure, a police officer standing at a corner seems reasonable enough if you engage them in conversation. But if they ask to frisk you for no reason and you don't move fast enough to comply, they are very likely to use force on you.

Increased militarization of police forces along with training practically designed to escalate situations leads to a general animosity from police towards the people they "serve". Also, there are structural incentives to create animus. Police officers get promotions based on job performance, which means "more arrests". So officers are encouraged to frequently engage with the public, "discover" crimes (like resisting arrest, planting contraband during vehicle searches), and then arrest them to boost their numbers. On top of that, we have police unions that institutionally protect the worst of the lot.

Oh, and in some jurisdictions, if you have a large sum of cash on you, cops can search you and just take it, claiming that you're a drug dealer. And you can't get it back even if they drop the drug charges (perhaps because there wasn't any or their attempt to "discover" it failed).

Basically, there's no reason to respect police in the USA. They are at best to be avoided and at worst they are an organized crime syndicate which is likely to kill you for no fucking reason.

“Militarisation of the police” is such a weird red herring. If the police weren’t given a second-hand armored carrier by the military, would they stop throwing you down hard for resisting arrest?

I get the issue of police militarization, it’s just not related to most of the issues we actually see play out with the police day-to-day in the U.S. And harping on it throws the focus away from where it really needs to be — better training and holding officers accountable for their actions.

I think "militarization of police" also involves their training, where everything is seen as a threat to be subdued. Though ironically police rules of engagement are much weaker than the actual military operating among civilians. But I see what you mean, the police who killed George Floyd definitely weren't militarized in terms of equipment, for example.

One problem is, there just isn't any but the most perfunctory training when they receive these weapons. They may get some routine maintenance information, but that's about it. So now they've got military-grade vehicles and weapons with no idea how or when to use them, and testosterone inevitably takes over. It creates an environment that makes police feel like they're at war with the citizenry they're supposed to be serving.

There is ZERO need for police to have weapons like these. If things are that bad, that's what the national guard is for.

And it certainly doesn't help that much of their training is focused on developing a "warrior" attitude.

 

[Tamerlin]

Well, we are monkeys...

Trump supporters appear to be evolving backward from monkeys, rather than forward...

 

[Veritas super omens]

In this case, the police didn't treat it as a serious threat. But resist she did, and I don't think you'd find a jury anywhere that would disagree after seeing the video.

And again, that’s a preposterously low standard that fundamentally harms those who interact with police the most. Any good statute will have something about some actual need to apply force back or have a serious risk of harm. Because of someone is just flailing when someone grabs them, we’re often talking involuntary reflex. I’ve specifically chosen to be a training dummy for MPs. I had less problem being tackled by the dog or getting maced than I did with someone trying to force my hands behind my back, even when I know it was coming. To the point that I almost broke someone’s nose.

Reflexive struggling against that is normal, and the easiest way to avoid any such “risk” is to wait until the person is calm enough to put their arms there voluntarily.

That a jury would think that’s enough to be a crime is the problem.

This didn't look at all reflexive. It went on for a good bit, for starters.

And although I'm well aware of abusive use of such charges, on the other side the police need the power to do their jobs without turning every encounter into a battleground, and laws like this serve a purpose of deterrence. Everyone is well aware that you don't behave this way with police, including Peters. The alternative is for police to just head-bag and ziploc everyone they encounter by default, because if resistance has no consequences at all then they're going to get resistance pretty much every time.

She's free - unlike a lot of people, because white - and she can make an argument in court that the charges weren't warranted, and/or should be reduced/eliminated. But again, it's super clear here she resisted without cause.

I'll allow that she probably needs extensive mental health treatment, and it's too bad we overload problems like that onto police instead of deferring to professionals, but they weren't there to oversee a screaming bagwoman - at least initially. They were there to confiscate her phone, she resisted, and she'll get more trouble as a result. I'm not having a problem with this particular instance; I think the police acted correctly.

I think the issue here is not so much that resistance is a crime (there's a whole host of issues associated with it being allowed to be a stand-alone charge, as well as with the incredibly fuzzy notion of what constitutes resistance, but fundamentally, yes, there needs to be some consequence for making the act of arrest a battlefield), but that police is fundamentally trained to treat every situation as a battlefield where the only success metric is whether the police comes out alive. Even the military doesn't train that way.

Until that changes, every arrest is a battlefield, regardless of what the arrested person does.

But I thought resistance was defined by Ohm's law....