Well, let's conduct an experiment.  Let me shoot your Secular Progressive
ass (or chest) with 50,000 watts, and let's see what your reaction is after
I take off running, leaving the guide-wires attached.....



On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 4:51 PM, plainolamerican <[email protected]>
wrote:

> How can a reasonable person believe that someone running away from a cop
> poses a "significant physical danger" to that cop?
>
> It doesn't compute!
> ---
> of course it doesn't ... but Keith will always side with cops against
> blacks and xians against muzzies.
>
>
> On Tuesday, July 12, 2016 at 11:50:45 AM UTC-5, Perplexed wrote:
>>
>>
>> How can a reasonable person believe that someone running away from a cop
>> poses a "significant physical danger" to that cop?
>>
>> It doesn't compute!
>>
>> On Tuesday, July 12, 2016 at 12:28:02 PM UTC-4, KeithInTampa wrote:
>>>
>>> Your little cut and paste article answers your own question within the
>>> first sentence:
>>>
>>> "A seminal 1985 Supreme Court case, *Tennessee vs. Garner*, held that
>>> the police may not shoot at a fleeing person unless* the officer
>>> reasonably believes that the individual poses a significant physical danger
>>> to the officer"*
>>>
>>> (Emphasis Added)
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 12:11 PM, plainolamerican <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> there's seldom an excuse for shooting an unarmed suspect in the back.
>>>>
>>>> A seminal 1985 Supreme Court case, Tennessee vs. Garner, held that the
>>>> police may not shoot at a fleeing person unless the officer reasonably
>>>> believes that the individual poses a significant physical danger to the
>>>> officer or others in the community. That means officers are expected to
>>>> take other, less-deadly action during a foot or car pursuit unless the
>>>> person being chased is seen as an immediate safety risk.
>>>>
>>>> In other words, a police officer who fires at a fleeing man who a
>>>> moment earlier murdered a convenience store clerk may have reasonable
>>>> grounds to argue that the shooting was justified. But if that same robber
>>>> never fired his own weapon, the officer would likely have a much harder
>>>> argument.
>>>>
>>>> “You don’t shoot fleeing felons. You apprehend them unless there are
>>>> exigent circumstances — emergencies — that require urgent police action to
>>>> safeguard the community as a whole,” said Greg Gilbertson, a police
>>>> practices expert and criminal justice professor at Centralia College in
>>>> Washington state.
>>>>
>>>> Gilbertson said he thought the video of the shooting of Walter Scott in
>>>> North Charleston, South Carolina, was “insane” given what he said was the
>>>> apparent lack of justification.
>>>>
>>>> Though the legal standard has been established, courts continue to hear
>>>> cases involving use of force against fleeing felons under a variety of
>>>> circumstances. Just last year, the Supreme Court sided with police officers
>>>> who were sued over a high-speed, two-state chase in Arkansas that ended
>>>> with the deaths of the fleeing driver and his passenger.
>>>>
>>>> *In cases where police officers are not supposed to use deadly force
>>>> against a fleeing person, what should they do?*
>>>>
>>>> Each case involving a suspect who flees the police, whether in a car or
>>>> on foot, poses a balancing test for an officer, said Chuck Drago, a police
>>>> practices expert and former Oviedo, Florida, police chief.
>>>>
>>>> “Am I creating more of a danger by chasing this person than if I let
>>>> this person stay at large?” Drago said. “Especially in a vehicle pursuit,
>>>> is it worth risking everyone on the road to catch this guy?”
>>>>
>>>> In a pursuit on foot, the more reasonable option might be to call for
>>>> backup, including perhaps with a police dog, so that other officers can set
>>>> up a perimeter and trap the suspect, Drago said.
>>>>
>>>> In the South Carolina case, the former lawyer for the North Charleston
>>>> officer, Michael Slager, said Monday that Slager felt threatened and had
>>>> fired because Scott was trying to grab his stun gun — an older model that
>>>> would have had to have been manually reloaded. But if the stun gun was on
>>>> the ground at the time Scott fled, Drago said, then “there is no longer a
>>>> threat. The threat is gone.”
>>>>
>>>> There’s also no indication on the video that after the physical
>>>> encounter between the men, where the officer has said he believed Scott had
>>>> tried to get ahold of his stun gun, that he shouts any instructions.
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, July 12, 2016 at 10:57:12 AM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe not if the guy just jacked you up with 50,000 watts and is now
>>>>> running away with the guide wires still attached to your chest.....
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:52 AM, plainolamerican <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Have you heard
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> that shooting an unarmed man in the back is the act of a coward?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Monday, July 11, 2016 at 4:07:38 PM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Obviously, the initial media reports are incorrect. Scott somehow
>>>>>>> wrested control of the taser from Slager during the altercation and shot
>>>>>>> Slager:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ​
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This becomes obvious with the enhanced video, and I will make it
>>>>>>> easy for you:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5em7GcDTg8U
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The taser guide wire is clearly visable from Slager's chest; as
>>>>>>> Scott runs after shooting Slager.  (If you can, try to watch this on a 
>>>>>>> full
>>>>>>> screen PC/laptop.  It may be difficult to see if you are viewing from a
>>>>>>> cell phone.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Other questions that you should ask yourself Plain Ol':
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you seen Officer Slager’s report?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you heard the radio calls made by Officer Slager?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you heard the radio traffic from the responding officers who
>>>>>>> were trying to aid an officer in a fight with a suspect?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you heard from the passenger that was riding with Scott?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you heard from the mysterious “car selling” neighbor (that
>>>>>>> Scott initially told Slager regarding the purchase of the vehicle) ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 4:24 PM, plainolamerican <
>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ok ... not exactly.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  According to the incident report and city officials, Slager then
>>>>>>>> fired his Taser, hitting Scott.[20]
>>>>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott#cite_note-WaPo.Charged-21>
>>>>>>>>  Scott
>>>>>>>> fled, and Slager drew his handgun, firing eight rounds at him from 
>>>>>>>> behind.
>>>>>>>> [7]
>>>>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott#cite_note-NYTimes.Charged-8>
>>>>>>>>  The
>>>>>>>> coroner's report stated that Scott was struck a total of five times: 
>>>>>>>> three
>>>>>>>> times in the back, once in the upper buttocks, and once on one of his 
>>>>>>>> ears.
>>>>>>>> [21]
>>>>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott#cite_note-NYTimes.Federal-22>
>>>>>>>>  Official
>>>>>>>> autopsy reports have not been released.[7]
>>>>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott#cite_note-NYTimes.Charged-8>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Immediately following the shooting, Slager radioed a dispatcher,
>>>>>>>> stating, "Shots fired and the subject is down. He took my Taser."
>>>>>>>> [20]
>>>>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott#cite_note-WaPo.Charged-21>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When Slager fired his gun, Scott was approximately 15 to 20 feet (5
>>>>>>>> to 6 m) away and fleeing.[7]
>>>>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott#cite_note-NYTimes.Charged-8>
>>>>>>>>  In
>>>>>>>> the report of the shooting filed before the video surfaced, Slager 
>>>>>>>> said he
>>>>>>>> had feared for his life because Scott had taken his Taser,[7]
>>>>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott#cite_note-NYTimes.Charged-8>
>>>>>>>>  and
>>>>>>>> that he shot Scott because he "felt threatened".[22]
>>>>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott#cite_note-23>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Monday, July 11, 2016 at 3:01:40 PM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Well not exactly.   It seems that Walter Scott shot Slager with a
>>>>>>>>> taser;  twice; and then ran with him still holding the 
>>>>>>>>> taser/cartridge with
>>>>>>>>> the taser guide-wires still in Slager's chest.  This was after the 
>>>>>>>>> two had
>>>>>>>>> been in a scuffle, where Scott was clearly on top of Slager;  
>>>>>>>>> apparently
>>>>>>>>> winning.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Not nearly as clean and neat as it was sold to the public.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (Watch the videos in the links provided Plain Ol')
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 3:21 PM, plainolamerican <
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Michael Slager stopped Walter Scott
>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/09/us/former-south-carolina-officer-is-indicted-in-death-of-walter-scott.html?_r=1>
>>>>>>>>>>  for
>>>>>>>>>> a busted taillight and then fatally shot him
>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>> he shot the unarmed man 8 times in the back.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, July 11, 2016 at 8:48:16 AM UTC-5, MJ wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [ALL people ... actually]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> September/October 2015 issue
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> *Police Shootings Won't Stop Unless We Also Stop Shaking Down
>>>>>>>>>>> Black People *
>>>>>>>>>>> *The dangers of turning police officers into revenue generators.
>>>>>>>>>>> *Jack Hitt
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In April, several days after North Charleston, South Carolina,
>>>>>>>>>>> police officer Michael Slager stopped Walter Scott
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/09/us/former-south-carolina-officer-is-indicted-in-death-of-walter-scott.html?_r=1>
>>>>>>>>>>> for a busted taillight and then fatally shot him, the usual 
>>>>>>>>>>> cable-news
>>>>>>>>>>> transmogrification of victim into superpredator ran into problems. 
>>>>>>>>>>> The dash
>>>>>>>>>>> cam
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/04/09/tsr-dash-cam-walter-scott-police-shooting.cnn>
>>>>>>>>>>> showed Scott being pulled over while traveling at a nerdy rate of 
>>>>>>>>>>> speed,
>>>>>>>>>>> using his left turn signal to pull into a parking lot and having an 
>>>>>>>>>>> amiable
>>>>>>>>>>> conversation with Slager until he realized he'd probably get popped 
>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>> nonpayment of child support. At which point he bolted out of the 
>>>>>>>>>>> car and
>>>>>>>>>>> hobbled off. Slager then shot him. Why didn't the cop just jog up 
>>>>>>>>>>> and grab
>>>>>>>>>>> him? Calling what the obese 50-year-old Scott was doing "running" 
>>>>>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>>>>>> stretches the bounds of literary license.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But maybe the question to ask is: Why did Scott run? The answer
>>>>>>>>>>> came when the *New York Times* revealed
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/20/us/skip-child-support-go-to-jail-lose-job-repeat.html>
>>>>>>>>>>> Scott to be a man of modest means trapped in an exhausting hamster 
>>>>>>>>>>> wheel:
>>>>>>>>>>> He would get a low-paying job, make some child support payments, 
>>>>>>>>>>> fall
>>>>>>>>>>> behind on them, get fined, miss a payment, get jailed for a few 
>>>>>>>>>>> weeks, lose
>>>>>>>>>>> that job due to absence, and then start over at a lower-paying job. 
>>>>>>>>>>> From
>>>>>>>>>>> all apparent evidence, he was a decent schlub trying to make things 
>>>>>>>>>>> work in
>>>>>>>>>>> a system engineered to make his life miserable and recast his best 
>>>>>>>>>>> efforts
>>>>>>>>>>> as criminal behavior.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Recently, two more deaths of African Americans that have blown
>>>>>>>>>>> up in the media follow a pattern similar to Scott's. Sandra
>>>>>>>>>>> Bland
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/texas-waller-county-sandra-bland-racial-tensions>
>>>>>>>>>>> in Texas and Samuel DuBose
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/video-shows-police-shooting-samuel-dubose>
>>>>>>>>>>> in Cincinnati were each stopped for minor traffic infractions 
>>>>>>>>>>> (failing to
>>>>>>>>>>> use turn signal, missing front license plate), followed by immediate
>>>>>>>>>>> escalation by the officer into rage, and then an official story 
>>>>>>>>>>> that is
>>>>>>>>>>> obviously contradicted
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://gawker.com/video-of-sam-duboses-death-drastically-different-from-t-1720896658>
>>>>>>>>>>> by the video (that the officer tried to "de-escalate" the tension 
>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>> Bland; that the officer was dragged by DuBose's car). In both 
>>>>>>>>>>> cases, the
>>>>>>>>>>> perpetrator of a minor traffic offense died.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> When incidents of police violence come to light, the usual
>>>>>>>>>>> defense is that we should not tarnish all the good cops just 
>>>>>>>>>>> because of "a
>>>>>>>>>>> few bad apples." No one can argue with that. But what is usually 
>>>>>>>>>>> implied in
>>>>>>>>>>> that phrase is that the "bad" officers' intentions are 
>>>>>>>>>>> malevolent­that they
>>>>>>>>>>> are morally corrupt and racist. And that may be true, but they are 
>>>>>>>>>>> also bad
>>>>>>>>>>> in the job-performance sense. These men are crummy cops, sometimes
>>>>>>>>>>> profoundly so. Slager had a record for gratuitously using his Taser.
>>>>>>>>>>> Timothy Leohmann, who leapt from his car and instantly killed 
>>>>>>>>>>> 12-year-old Tamir
>>>>>>>>>>> Rice
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cleveland-officer-shot-tamir-rice-within-seconds-of-pulling-up-in-patrol-car/>,
>>>>>>>>>>> had been deemed "weepy" and unable to "emotionally function" by a
>>>>>>>>>>> supervisor at his previous PD job, who added: "I do not believe 
>>>>>>>>>>> time, nor
>>>>>>>>>>> training, will be able to change or correct these deficiencies." 
>>>>>>>>>>> Ferguson's
>>>>>>>>>>> Darren Wilson was also fired
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/darren-wilsons-first-job-was-on-a-troubled-police-force-disbanded-by-authorities/2014/08/23/1ac796f0-2a45-11e4-8593-da634b334390_story.html>
>>>>>>>>>>> from his previous job­actually, the entire police force of Jennings,
>>>>>>>>>>> Missouri, was disbanded for being awful.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> When you ask why such "bad" cops are nevertheless armed and
>>>>>>>>>>> allowed to patrol the streets, one begins to see that lurking 
>>>>>>>>>>> beneath this
>>>>>>>>>>> violence is a fiscal menace: police departments forced to assist 
>>>>>>>>>>> city
>>>>>>>>>>> officials in raising revenue, in many cases funding their own
>>>>>>>>>>> salaries­redirecting the very concept of keeping the peace into
>>>>>>>>>>> underwriting the budget.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> We saw a glimpse of this when the Justice Department released
>>>>>>>>>>> its report
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.motherjones.com/documents/2191006-doj-ferguson-report>
>>>>>>>>>>> on Ferguson in March. In his statement, then-Attorney General Eric 
>>>>>>>>>>> Holder
>>>>>>>>>>> referenced a lady in town whose life sounded Walter Scott-like. She 
>>>>>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>>>>> received two parking tickets totaling $151. Her efforts to pay 
>>>>>>>>>>> those fines
>>>>>>>>>>> fell so behind that she eventually paid out more than $500. At one 
>>>>>>>>>>> point,
>>>>>>>>>>> she was jailed for nonpayment and­eight years later­still owes $541 
>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>> accrued fees.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The judge largely responsible for the extraction of these fees
>>>>>>>>>>> from Ferguson's poor, Ronald J. Brockmeyer
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/06/ferguson-judge-owes-unpaid-taxes-ronald-brockmeyer>,
>>>>>>>>>>> owed $172,646 in back taxes, a sum orders of magnitude greater than 
>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>>> late fine coming before his bench. Even as he was jailing black 
>>>>>>>>>>> ladies for
>>>>>>>>>>> parking tickets, Brockmeyer was allegedly erasing citations for 
>>>>>>>>>>> white
>>>>>>>>>>> Ferguson residents who happened to be his friends. After the 
>>>>>>>>>>> report's
>>>>>>>>>>> publication, he resigned so that Ferguson could "begin its healing 
>>>>>>>>>>> process."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But consider: In 2010, this collaboration between the Ferguson
>>>>>>>>>>> police and the courts generated $1.4 million in income for the 
>>>>>>>>>>> city. This
>>>>>>>>>>> year, they will more than double that amount­$3.1 million­providing 
>>>>>>>>>>> nearly
>>>>>>>>>>> a quarter of the city's $13 million budget, almost all of it 
>>>>>>>>>>> extracted from
>>>>>>>>>>> its poorest African American citizens.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Evidence also suggests that this new form of raising
>>>>>>>>>>> revenue­policiteering?­goes far beyond Ferguson. Remember the recent
>>>>>>>>>>> Oklahoma case involving Robert Bates
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/volunteer-tulsa-deputy-robert-bates-sold-company-went-back-to/article_7f23ccc3-4bcb-52a4-826d-c06103a42786.html>,
>>>>>>>>>>> a 73-year-old millionaire insurance broker with scant law 
>>>>>>>>>>> enforcement
>>>>>>>>>>> background who was allowed to go out on patrol­likely because he had
>>>>>>>>>>> donated lots of money and equipment to the local sheriff's office? 
>>>>>>>>>>> He
>>>>>>>>>>> killed an unarmed black suspect when he grabbed his gun instead of 
>>>>>>>>>>> his
>>>>>>>>>>> Taser. In the days that followed, we learned that other deputies 
>>>>>>>>>>> had long
>>>>>>>>>>> resented this guy's freelance incompetence.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Essentially, these small towns in urban areas have municipal
>>>>>>>>>>> infrastructure that can't be supported by the tax base, and so they 
>>>>>>>>>>> ticket
>>>>>>>>>>> everything in sight to keep the town functioning," said William 
>>>>>>>>>>> Maurer, a
>>>>>>>>>>> lawyer with the Institute for Justice who has been studying the 
>>>>>>>>>>> sudden rise
>>>>>>>>>>> in "nontraffic-related fines."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Take the St. Louis suburb of Pagedale, where, among other Norman
>>>>>>>>>>> Rockwell-worthy features deemed illegal, "you can't have a hedge 
>>>>>>>>>>> more than
>>>>>>>>>>> three feet high," Maurer says. "You can't have a basketball hoop or 
>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>> wading pool in front of a house. You can't have a dish antenna on 
>>>>>>>>>>> the front
>>>>>>>>>>> of your house. You can't walk on the roadway if there is a 
>>>>>>>>>>> sidewalk, and if
>>>>>>>>>>> there is not a sidewalk, they must walk on the left side of the 
>>>>>>>>>>> roadway.
>>>>>>>>>>> They must walk on the right of the crosswalk. They can't conduct a 
>>>>>>>>>>> barbecue
>>>>>>>>>>> in the front yard and can't have an alcoholic beverage within 150 
>>>>>>>>>>> feet of a
>>>>>>>>>>> barbecue. Kids cannot play in the street. They also have 
>>>>>>>>>>> restrictions
>>>>>>>>>>> against pants being worn below the waist in public. Cars must be 
>>>>>>>>>>> within 500
>>>>>>>>>>> feet of a lamp or a source of illumination during nighttime hours. 
>>>>>>>>>>> Blinds
>>>>>>>>>>> must be neatly hung in respectable appearance, properly maintained, 
>>>>>>>>>>> and in
>>>>>>>>>>> a state of good repair."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Where did this Kafkaesque laundry list come from? Maurer
>>>>>>>>>>> explains that in 2010, Missouri passed a law that capped the amount 
>>>>>>>>>>> of city
>>>>>>>>>>> revenue that any agency could generate from traffic stops. The 
>>>>>>>>>>> intent was
>>>>>>>>>>> to limit small-town speed traps, but the unintentional consequences 
>>>>>>>>>>> are now
>>>>>>>>>>> clear: Pagedale saw a 495 percent increase in nontraffic-related 
>>>>>>>>>>> arrests.
>>>>>>>>>>> "In Frontenac, the increase was 364 percent," Maurer says. "In 
>>>>>>>>>>> Lakeshire,
>>>>>>>>>>> it was 209 percent."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This racket now has many variants. South Carolina hosts "
>>>>>>>>>>> Operation Rolling Thunder
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://ij.org/south-carolina-police-seized-nearly-100-000-in-crackdown-but-stopped-few-criminals>,"
>>>>>>>>>>> an annual dragnet in which 21 different law enforcement agencies 
>>>>>>>>>>> swarm
>>>>>>>>>>> stretches of I-85 and I-26 in the name of catching drug dealers. In 
>>>>>>>>>>> 2013,
>>>>>>>>>>> this law enforcement Bonnaroo netted 1,300 traffic citations and 300
>>>>>>>>>>> speeding tickets. But after everyone had paid up, the operation 
>>>>>>>>>>> boasted
>>>>>>>>>>> exactly one felony conviction.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> A different strategy in San Diego simply tacks on various fees
>>>>>>>>>>> to an existing fine. A 2012 *Union Tribune* investigation
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&biw&bih&q=cache:gLaPZ1TIbc0J:http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2012/aug/18/courts-how-your-35-speeding-ticket-becomes-a-235/%2BCourt+officials+say+that+San+Diego+County+law+enforcement+agencies+have+recently+been+issuing+fewer+tickets+than+in+the+past&gbv=2&&ct=clnk>
>>>>>>>>>>> revealed that while speeding is a simple $35 fine, other government
>>>>>>>>>>> agencies can tack on as many as 10 other surcharges, including: a 
>>>>>>>>>>> state
>>>>>>>>>>> penalty assessment, $40; county penalty assessment, $36; court
>>>>>>>>>>> construction, $20; state surcharge, $8; DNA identification, $16; 
>>>>>>>>>>> criminal
>>>>>>>>>>> conviction fee, $35; court operations, $40; emergency medical air
>>>>>>>>>>> transportation penalty, $4; and night court, $1. When it's all said 
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> done, that $35 ticket comes to $235.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Another report
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://cdn.sandiegouniontrib.com/news/documents/2015/02/25/SDPD_traffic_stops_report.pdf>
>>>>>>>>>>> released earlier this year connects the dots: African Americans and 
>>>>>>>>>>> Latinos
>>>>>>>>>>> make up less than a third of San Diego's population but represent 
>>>>>>>>>>> 64.5
>>>>>>>>>>> percent of those searched during a traffic stop.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There is still no comprehensive study to determine just how many
>>>>>>>>>>> cities pay their bills by indenturing the poor, but it is probably 
>>>>>>>>>>> no
>>>>>>>>>>> coincidence that when you examine the recent rash of police 
>>>>>>>>>>> killings, you
>>>>>>>>>>> find that the offenses they were initially stopped for were 
>>>>>>>>>>> preposterously
>>>>>>>>>>> minor. Bland's lane change signal, DuBose's missing plate. Walter 
>>>>>>>>>>> Scott had
>>>>>>>>>>> that busted taillight­which, we all later learned, is not even a 
>>>>>>>>>>> crime in
>>>>>>>>>>> South Carolina. Eric Garner was selling loose cigarettes. When 
>>>>>>>>>>> Darren
>>>>>>>>>>> Wilson was called to look into a robbery
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/08/15/ferguson-police-releasing-name-of-officer-who-shot-michael-brown/>,
>>>>>>>>>>> the reason he initially stopped Michael Brown was for walking in the
>>>>>>>>>>> street­in Ferguson, an illegal act according to Section 44-344
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.municode.com/library/mo/ferguson/codes/code_of_ordinances?searchRequest=%7B%22searchText%22:%22manner%20of%20walking%20in%20roadway%22,%22pageNum%22:1,%22resultsPerPage%22:25,%22booleanSearch%22:false,%22stemming%22:true,%22fuzzy%22:false,%22synonym%22:false,%22contentTypes%22:%5B%22CODES%22%5D,%22productIds%22:%5B%5D%7D&nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH44TRMOVE_ARTVIIPE_S44-344MAWAALRO>
>>>>>>>>>>> of the local code. Between 2011 and 2013, 95 percent of the 
>>>>>>>>>>> perpetrators of
>>>>>>>>>>> this atrocity were African American, meaning that "walking while 
>>>>>>>>>>> black" is
>>>>>>>>>>> not a punch line. It is a crime.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And not just a crime, but a crime that comes with fines that are
>>>>>>>>>>> strictly enforced. In 2014, Ferguson's bottom-line-driven police 
>>>>>>>>>>> force
>>>>>>>>>>> issued 16,000 arrest warrants to three-fourths of the town's total
>>>>>>>>>>> population of 21,000. Stop and think about that for a moment: In 
>>>>>>>>>>> Ferguson,
>>>>>>>>>>> 75 percent of all residents had active outstanding arrest warrants. 
>>>>>>>>>>> Most of
>>>>>>>>>>> the entire city was a virtual plantation of indentured revenue 
>>>>>>>>>>> producers.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Back in Pagedale, *St. Louis Post-Dispatch* reporter Jennifer
>>>>>>>>>>> Mann recently calculated
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/municipalities-ticket-for-trees-and-toys-as-traffic-revenue-declines/article_42739be7-afd1-5f66-b325-e1f654ba9625.html>
>>>>>>>>>>> a 500 percent increase in petty fines over the last five years. 
>>>>>>>>>>> "Pagedale
>>>>>>>>>>> handed out 2,255 citations for these types of offenses last year," 
>>>>>>>>>>> Mann
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote, "or nearly two per household."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Once the system is primed for maximizing revenue­starting with
>>>>>>>>>>> fines and fine enforcement," Holder said apropos Ferguson, "the 
>>>>>>>>>>> city relies
>>>>>>>>>>> on the police force to serve, essentially, as a collection agency 
>>>>>>>>>>> for the
>>>>>>>>>>> municipal court rather than a law enforcement entity."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In Alabama, a circuit court judge, Hub Harrington, wrote a
>>>>>>>>>>> blistering opinion
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.motherjones.com/documents/2191007-court-order-in-dana-burdette-v-town-of>
>>>>>>>>>>> three years ago asserting that the Shelby County Jail had become a 
>>>>>>>>>>> kind of
>>>>>>>>>>> "debtors' prison" and that the court system had devolved into a 
>>>>>>>>>>> "judicially
>>>>>>>>>>> sanctioned extortion racket." This pattern leads to a cruel 
>>>>>>>>>>> paradox: One
>>>>>>>>>>> arm of the state is paying a large sum to lock up a person who 
>>>>>>>>>>> can't pay a
>>>>>>>>>>> small sum owed to a different arm of the state. The result? Bigger 
>>>>>>>>>>> state
>>>>>>>>>>> deficits. As the director of the Brennan Center's Justice Program 
>>>>>>>>>>> put it,
>>>>>>>>>>> "Having taxpayers foot a bill of $4,000 to incarcerate a man who 
>>>>>>>>>>> owes the
>>>>>>>>>>> state $745 or a woman who owes a predatory lender $425 and removing 
>>>>>>>>>>> them
>>>>>>>>>>> from the job force makes sense in no reasonable world."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> When the poor come to understand that they are likely to be
>>>>>>>>>>> detained and fined for comically absurd crimes, it can't be a 
>>>>>>>>>>> surprise to
>>>>>>>>>>> the police that their officers are viewed with increasing distrust. 
>>>>>>>>>>> In this
>>>>>>>>>>> environment, running away from a cop is not an act of suspicion; 
>>>>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>>>>> common sense.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Cops like to talk about "good police." They say, "That guy is
>>>>>>>>>>> good police"­a top compliment, by which they mean cool under the 
>>>>>>>>>>> pressure
>>>>>>>>>>> of the street and cunning at getting people to give up the details 
>>>>>>>>>>> of a
>>>>>>>>>>> crime. Good police look bad when sharing the street with crummy 
>>>>>>>>>>> police. But
>>>>>>>>>>> when budgetary whims replace peacekeeping as the central motivation 
>>>>>>>>>>> of law
>>>>>>>>>>> enforcement, who is more likely to write up more tickets, the good 
>>>>>>>>>>> cop or
>>>>>>>>>>> the crummy one? When the mission of the entire department shifts 
>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>> "protect and serve" to "punish and profit," then just what 
>>>>>>>>>>> constitutes good
>>>>>>>>>>> police?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/police-shootings-traffic-stops-excessive-fines
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>>>>>>>>> For options & help see
>>>>>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
>>>>>>>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>>>>>>>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>>>>>>> For options & help see
>>>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
>>>>>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>>>>>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>>>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>>>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
>>>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>>>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>> --
>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>>>
>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "PoliticalForum" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to