ACLU Launches Phone App to Record Police Stops: Should Police Recordings Be Required?

How about the mop handle up some imogrents backside by the cops in newYork and the 4 cops were also from New York that shot at that man 47 time s ,and with a Glock it means some reloaded >. Or in Mass. when told to stand down still followed the speeder and even though an other officer had a assulat rifle as he stood at the back of his car with hands on the trunk the officer shot him behind the ear takeing his life >> The officer was tried put had to leave boston before the out come >> And mistake are brutality when the out come is the life of an other human being >> And in San Franisco the sniper shot the gun out of the perks hand >. And in the acdamy they alway shoot at the chest as it is the biggest target and if you kill them the city is less likely to be sued and have to support them as they did Mr. King >>> You sir are a part of that 60% that finds it easier to kill then find a better solution >> If you are not an expert marksman all the time you should NOT BE A SNIPER ,just an other grunt on the line >> All you have done is prove a point it eaiser to kill than just shot them in the leg >> Wear your vests and quit crying how hard your job is and learn when you screw UP TO SAY YOUR SORRY >> BUT THAN YOU NEVER MAKE MISTAKES AND IF YOU DO YOU DON'T HAVE THE BRAINS TO SAY i SCREWED UP >> My friend and I help an old man who's store was broken into ,When the police showed up all they did was accuse the man of not secure the store before going home >> Let me inform YOU SIR that after they left and we started the clean up we found that they got in by driving thier car thru the side wall >> Do you think those so called protector would say we screwed up >. Not those a holes >> QUIT MAKEING EXCUSSES FOR THEM AS THIER ARE VERY FEW WHO DESERVE IT

Well, this will be my last word on the subject.

1. You can't simply re-define words to mean what you want them to mean. A sniper who makes a difficult judgement call which ends badly is not being "brutal"; at worst, it's a tragic mistake, and you cannot simply redefine the word "brutality" to include "honest mistake made under pressure".

2. I'm not a cop, and never have been. I find, however, that people like you find it incomprehensible that someone who is not, and never has been, a police officer would stick up for them. Ergo, you simply insist that I'm a cop or an ex-cop (and, therefore, that I'm a liar to boot); that way, you find it easier to dismiss my arguments without bothering to address the substance. That's called the 'ad homimen' fallacy.

3. How the 7734 am I supposed to google these incidents when you repeatedly ignore my civil requests for enough information to do so? You won't even tell me the city in which these incidents allegedly occurred, let alone the PDs involved, the year or month in which they occurred, or the name of even one of the participants. You're too lazy to post any of that information, even though you presumably know it; yet you accuse me of being lazy because I'm not prepared to waste several days of my time trying to figure out which incidents you are referring to.

Here's a couple of cases of police brutality that, IMHO, weren't brutality at all:

Stacy Bonds, a young woman arrested for public drunk and disorderly, who physically resisted attempts to search her, took a swing at a police woman (on video), and moments later savagely kicked that same police woman (on video) so hard that the police woman was unable to put any weight on her right leg for several minutes. Police immediately wrestled Bonds to the floor (taking great pains to avoid inflicting any physical injury) and strip searched her; the judge threw out all charges against Bonds because of what he considered "excessive use of force".

Geoff Mantler, an RCMP constable in BC, Canada who apparently kicked an armed gunman in the face (caught on tape by a bystander across the street), apparently after the gunman leaped out of his truck and attacked Mantler. Mantler took down an armed gunman without a shot being fired; for that, he is now facing criminal charges for "excessive use of force". (And yes, I consider the fact that the armed gunman, Mr. Tavares, did not have a gun in his hand when he attacked Const. Mantler to be irrelevant.)

Google those.

I knew someone would bring up Rodney King. Just out of curiosity, have you seen the whole video or are you one of the millions who place all your belief in a few seconds of video that was highly publicized? Did you know that the video that you use as your evidence is approximately 20 minutes long? Did you know that there were two other black men in the car with Mr. King? The reason most are unaware of this is the fact that these two men surrendered peacefully and followed the officers command at the end of the high speed chase, they were taken into custody (uninjured) by those same officers. What many also don't take into account is that after Mr. King initiated his hostilities and began his fight with the officers, he was hit with two tazers. You made the statement that he was trying to stand up to seven cops and that most people would have done the same. Sorry to have to inform you of this, but most people wouldn't have started the whole incident to begin with, let alone get back up and fight after being hit with two tazers. Did you ever wonder why the criminal case was lost in court? Regardless of what was sensationalized by the media, the whole case was built entirely upon racism. Once the entire video was shown to the jurors and the evidence of the other two black men not being harmed was introduced, it's hard to say it was a racist attack. The officers were later convicted in a civil case, civil cases don't require all 12 jurors to render a guilty verdict, only a majority. Thank you for proving the point that there is always a bigger picture. As a former law enforcement officer, I learned long ago that there are two sides to every story, don't rush to judgment based on a media account that has been overly hyped because there is always more to that story.