Is this how USA police work?

**Unelias** · 05-30-2011 04:24 PM

Dancing forbidden near Jefferson memorial.

Discuss.

**Xei** · 05-30-2011 05:29 PM

Most Americans don't realise that in modern times they have fewer civil liberties than most of the rest of the Western world. Can you image what Jefferson would say if he saw that scene? It's totally outrageous.

I was watching a British programme last week about a celebrity chef who went to America to give a message about diet. Part of his project was teaching classes in a school, and getting the kids to cook healthy variants of the diabetes-inducing shite in the cafeteria. However very quickly, his classes were cancelled and he had to teach a small number of kids in their freetime. Then he was told the kids wouldn't be allowed to cook stuff or sell it to others. A while later the school's lawyers were telling this guy that he couldn't enter school premises or he would be arrested, and the contract they had was being torn up. The chef managed to get this partially revoked, but when he was allowed back into the school he was told that if he had any kind of conversation with any child about cafeteria food, he would be sued.

This entire thing was a minor, inert, positive project, and within a week it was totally censored. In the 'land of the FREE' for fuck's sake. The only reason Americans think they're free is because people all around them are mindlessly chanting it all the time, and they've never been anywhere else.

**CanceledCzech** · 05-31-2011 04:41 AM

Originally Posted by Xei

This entire thing was a minor, inert, positive project, and within a week it was totally censored. In the 'land of the FREE' for fuck's sake. The only reason Americans think they're free is because people all around them are mindlessly chanting it all the time, and they've never been anywhere else.

Xei, O Xei! I don't think you're really speaking with much sense here. You see, I was talking with a friend of mine about this very thread (your comment in particular) and I instantly remembered a story a month back about a UK man being ARRESTED for singing Carl Douglas' 1974 hit, "Kung-Fu Fighting", at a bar. Two people took offense and called the police, apparently. Now, granted, the way it played out was starkly different. The karaoke singer wasn't body slammed, but he was still arrested for something completely absurd.

AND ALSO How serendipitous, another friend of mine just sent me this, an article (complete with video footage) of UK police tipping and beating a handicapped man at a protest!

In closing, yes, America has a lot of problems. Problems I rant about every chance I get. But so does the UK. So don't come in here with your sanctimonious gloating, bashing America, especially when your own country is equally fucked up

Here's the chat log, that's relevant to you. I'm posting it because you're kind of self-important, and maybe if you see that you are, you will start to question it, and therefore grow emotionally and intellectually and stop making silly claims like.

Spoiler for chat log:

Enjoy your CCTV cameras, chap. Remember, slavery is freedom and 'a gramme is better than a damn!'

**Raphael** · 05-30-2011 05:35 PM

I love how the couple kept complaining about not being given a warning, when they so clearly were.

Anyways, I can't really side with the police or the tourists. I don't like how the police used excessive force, and I don't like how some of the civilians were egging them on by dancing in front of them like assholes.

This isn't a matter of freedom of speech, the civilians are just being dramatic. I think it's perfectly reasonable to not allow public displays of affection or dancing within the memorial. They can walk a few yards out the door and do it there if they want. I'm sure there's tourists waling through with children and they don't want to see a couple making out. Dancing inside a place like that is generally considered disrespectful, you wouldn't dance in a library either.

The policemen did ask them calmly that they had to leave in the very beginning of the video, that should have been the end of it. Instead of acting like mature adults and respecting the rules within the memorial, they decided to make this an issue about freedom of speech and start acting like children.

I was half expecting someone to pull out a flag and start burning it.

**tommo** · 05-30-2011 05:55 PM

Originally Posted by Raphael

I love how the couple kept complaining about not being given a warning, when they so clearly were.

Anyways, I can't really side with the police or the tourists. I don't like how the police used excessive force, and I don't like how some of the civilians were egging them on by dancing in front of them like assholes.

This isn't a matter of freedom of speech, the civilians are just being dramatic. I think it's perfectly reasonable to not allow public displays of affection or dancing within the memorial. They can walk a few yards out the door and do it there if they want. I'm sure there's tourists waling through with children and they don't want to see a couple making out. Dancing inside a place like that is generally considered disrespectful, you wouldn't dance in a library either.

The policemen did ask them calmly that they had to leave in the very beginning of the video, that should have been the end of it. Instead of acting like mature adults and respecting the rules within the memorial, they decided to make this an issue about freedom of speech and start acting like children.

I was half expecting someone to pull out a flag and start burning it.

Oh wow....

You're serious aren't you?

OMG PEOPLE KISSING! WON'T SOMONE PLEEEAAASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

What assholes for dancing. Fucking be serious more guys. The world is serious business, expressing yourself is not permitted.

**Raphael** · 05-30-2011 06:06 PM

Originally Posted by tommo

Oh wow....

You're serious aren't you?

OMG PEOPLE KISSING! WON'T SOMONE PLEEEAAASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

What assholes for dancing. Fucking be serious more guys. The world is serious business, expressing yourself is not permitted.

You may disagree with the rules, but that does not put you above them. Maybe you think it's your god-given to walk in public without clothes on, does that make it ok to do? Of course not. There are other ways of expressing yourself without offending other people and violating rules.

EDIT: Hey guys, I'm sorry if you got the impression that I agree with the rules, because I don't.

**Marvo** · 05-30-2011 06:09 PM

Originally Posted by Raphael

You may disagree with the rules, but that does not put you above them. Maybe you think it's your god-given to walk in public without clothes on, does that make it ok to do? Of course not. There are other ways of expressing yourself without offending other people and violating rules.

EDIT: Hey guys, I'm sorry if you got the impression that I agree with the rules, because I don't.

What's wrong with naturism?

**Raphael** · 05-30-2011 06:13 PM

It's against the law, that's what's wrong with it. So if you get arrested for doing it, you shouldn't be yelling at the authorities arresting you. You're barking up the wrong tree. (I'm not talking to you specifically, I just don't know how else to phrase the sentence without using forms of "you")

**Supernova** · 05-31-2011 02:42 AM

Originally Posted by Raphael

EDIT: Hey guys, I'm sorry if you got the impression that I agree with the rules, because I don't.

"When you make your peace with authority, you become authority."
-Jim Morrison

Most people's issue is that they just don't know how to deal with these issues in the most effective way. Getting aggravated with a cop is fucking stupid (I didn't get a chance to watch the video, so I don;t know if that's what they did, but people do that often enough). There's only one way they're trained to respond to that; furthermore, while enforcing the law, they don't give a flying fuck weather or not it makes any sense or if it is just.

**Marvo** · 05-30-2011 06:04 PM

Originally Posted by Raphael

I love how the couple kept complaining about not being given a warning, when they so clearly were.

Anyways, I can't really side with the police or the tourists. I don't like how the police used excessive force, and I don't like how some of the civilians were egging them on by dancing in front of them like assholes.

This isn't a matter of freedom of speech, the civilians are just being dramatic. I think it's perfectly reasonable to not allow public displays of affection or dancing within the memorial. They can walk a few yards out the door and do it there if they want. I'm sure there's tourists waling through with children and they don't want to see a couple making out. Dancing inside a place like that is generally considered disrespectful, you wouldn't dance in a library either.

The policemen did ask them calmly that they had to leave in the very beginning of the video, that should have been the end of it. Instead of acting like mature adults and respecting the rules within the memorial, they decided to make this an issue about freedom of speech and start acting like children.

I was half expecting someone to pull out a flag and start burning it.

Yeah man, couples making out is icky, don't want none of that shit. Imagine if they were gay?! Children scared for life. Ruined.

**IndieAnthias** · 06-04-2011 01:25 AM

sorry I didn't read the whole thread. This is altogether revolting. As in, it makes me ill to watch.

Originally Posted by Raphael

I'm sure there's tourists waling through with children and they don't want to see a couple making out. Dancing inside a place like that is generally considered disrespectful, you wouldn't dance in a library either.

If I were a parent I would be much more concerned about my kids seeing the arrests that took place, and the reality that it represents about the world they live in. That display of power was uglier than any display of affection I could imagine. And I have a vivid imagination.

I suppose the thing to do would have been to say "OK officer you win. I hope you realize that you just threatened to lock another human being in a cage because they were dancing, but I don't imagine you will be contemplating this deep into the night. So I'll just take it outside." But on the other hand I am a firm believer in the right, bordering on obligation, to disobey stupid laws.

The people in this thread defending the cops: I'm not going to lie, I'm a little afraid of you guys.

**snoop** · 05-30-2011 06:00 PM

A good percentage of the police in America are alright and understand when action actually needs to be taken. However, the current town I live in is a place where all the cops are bullies and assholes. They harass you, follow you around, pull you over without reason, and speed without their lights on. Just two months ago one of them was speeding around 60/70 mph on their way to McDonald's (cops eat free there where I live). The cop destroyed an SUV pulling out of a parking lot and killed the driver. After having the entire police force plus some state troopers show up to investigate the scene for several hours, they did probably the most despicable thing they could have: covered their fellow pig's ass. When the final report went out, it was said that he was going the speed limit (35 mph) and it was just an unfortunate accident. First of all, I saw it happen. There is no way he was going 35 mph. Second of all, if you just took 2 seconds to inspect the damage on both vehicles, it would be abundantly clear that speeding was going on. If it were anyone else in this town, they would have been charged with vehicular manslaughter. What happened to the cop? Nothing. Wasn't suspended, wasn't fired, wasn't charged with a crime, nothing.

There are plenty of other stories illustrating how much like thugs the police act like where I live, but that isn't what the thread is about.

**Xei** · 05-30-2011 06:47 PM

A couple gets arrested for kissing and you wonder why some people are 'anti-American'?

One positive thing I forgot to add is that technology now plays a large part in helping to safeguard freedom. The internet and cheap, mobile cameras have put the state under a lot more scrutiny. It's funny actually, it's basically the opposite of 1984.

**Raphael** · 05-30-2011 07:15 PM

Originally Posted by Xei

A couple gets arrested for kissing and you wonder why some people are 'anti-American'?

One positive thing I forgot to add is that technology now plays a large part in helping to safeguard freedom. The internet and cheap, mobile cameras have put the state under a lot more scrutiny. It's funny actually, it's basically the opposite of 1984.

Again, I don't agree with the rules and I think the police used excessive force, but do I feel like the civilians had their freedom of expression rights suppressed? No.

I wouldn't even call this a freedom of expression issue, it's more about them loitering in a public area. The police weren't trying to censor their actions.

**Requiem** · 05-30-2011 07:24 PM

ok so they have have a place to protest outside

if the protest is big enough inside it will prevent other people from seeing that stupid stature and that's not good.

**Requiem** · 05-30-2011 07:13 PM

speaking of founding fathers, martin luther king said: "In any civilized society, it is every citizen's responsibility to obey just laws. But at the same time, it is every citizen's responsibility to disobey unjust laws."

i bet him and all the founding fathers would approve even the most sexually explicit activity in the jefferson memorial. and most certainly dancing as well.

but was that kissing couple even part of the group he was telling the rules? did they have a sign with the rules?

and those dancing monkeys were just trying to stir shit up. just go home, relax, have a glass of water and wait

**Ne-yo** · 05-30-2011 07:43 PM

Originally Posted by Requiem

speaking of founding fathers, martin luther king said: "In any civilized society, it is every citizen's responsibility to obey just laws. But at the same time, it is every citizen's responsibility to disobey unjust laws."

I'm sure MLK didn't mean "disobey" in the same manner as resisting and provoking officers to take heavier measures. Afaik, King and other civil rights demonstrators, "peacefully" being detained and taken into custody for non-violent civil disobedience is part of an extenuatory modus operandi encapsulating the political message of non-violence. It establishes that the demonstrators truly believes in what they are essentially demonstrating, and disregarding the law, in acceptance of a higher law, and is willing to undergo being detained for that acknowledgement. Furthermore it demonstrates compassion for the oppressors, which is far more powerful a tool than belligerence. However, history demonstrates in the case of the Civil Rights movements were certainly more successful than any act of violent resistance in the U.S. Just something to think about.

**Raphael** · 05-30-2011 08:08 PM

Well said Ne-yo.

Originally Posted by Requiem

i bet him and all the founding fathers would approve even the most sexually explicit activity in the jefferson memorial.

I can't imagine why you'd think that.

**Ne-yo** · 05-30-2011 07:15 PM

People need to understand, there is a regulation that specifically states, that you cannot demonstrate inside of the memorial. By definition of said regulation, this 'protest' was an inside demonstration. It doesn’t matter if you are dancing silently or holding up a protest sign. If it was one person swaying to their ipod in the memorial the police wouldn't give them a second look. However, it's clear that one person swaying to music is not the case here.

I don’t understand why a blanket prohibition against demonstrations inside the memorial seems so unreasonable to people. You can demonstrate directly outside of the memorial. You can demonstrate on the sidewalk for that matter. The place to challenge an arrest is in court. Not at the hands of the officer making the arrest. Which is where these demonstrators failed. The cops were reasonable and courteous until the demonstrators started acting like jerks.

Go in there, dance, get peacefully arrested. Take it to court. You don’t change the law by pissing off cops. This wasn't brutality. Rodney King was brutality, this is nowhere near the likes of that. A cop tells you to put your hand behind your back and you resist, you just get what you get.

**Descensus** · 05-30-2011 08:07 PM

Gotta love how tough that bicycle cop thought he was when he bodyslammed Kokesh to the ground and was holding him by his throat.

**ooflendoodle** · 05-30-2011 08:56 PM

To answer the OP, no that's not how cops operate just a few out of an entire nation.

**Unelias** · 05-30-2011 09:04 PM

I am glad that this created comments. First of all, I can tell that all the people here in Finland are doing a collective facepalm. This was actually in a article with a headline "Is America already a police state?". Helps to destroy the already low reputation USA has among us.

Now, to the video itself. The first cop to cuff the woman is already using excessive force. I admit, I am not familiar with USA law or regulations, but putting a handcuffs means that you are doing a capture. ( I don't know what is the official word in juridic speech in English) Seriously, you put handcuffs after verbal suggestion? You could have just give more commands and then the next step would have been to show them to way to go out. Or just to walk them out. You put handcuffs when you decide that the customer is either dangerous to himself, to you or the enviroment. ( read VIOLENT ) It is a wonder they didn't run out of handcuffs. The officers were calm which was nice to see thought. I was half-expecting them to start whacking batons, spraying or taking a firearm... actually surprised when they didn't.

This is as arbitrary as if policeman asks for your ID and you tell him to wait for a bit untill you found it and he decides to cuff you and take you to the station, because you weren't fast enough.

It is USA and these guys probably got a medal doing that. If it was here they probably were all in court with at least charges of misuse of their police status and use of excessive force. But that most likely never happened here since our police actually is very well trained and disciplined. The thoughts I am expressing are not refering merely at this link and situation, but all I have seen, read and heard of about USAs police and law incidents. And oh, boy does it makes me happy not to live there...

Now, to the protesters. They might have been provoking the police, but if I had been there I wouldn't even be sure if the police were serious when they cuffed the woman and man for kissing. I doubt they would have been dancing in the first place if police hadn't made the mistake of taking excessive means to "separate" that couple. I am not even a police, even though I work in the security business, but seriously I would have handled that situation ten times better. That toolbelt covers only the situations you cannot handle with lesser means.

Now, just for comparison I took a liberty of adding Finnish police general principles of operation.

The Police Act requires that the police discharge their duties in an appropriate and impartial manner and seek to promote a conciliatory spirit. The actions of the police must not cause any more damage or inconvenience than is necessary to carry out the duty at hand. Measures taken must be justifiable in relation to the importance and urgency of the duty and the other factors affecting overall assessment of the situation.

The Police Act also requires that the police endeavour to maintain public order and security primarily through issuing advice, requests and orders. The police are not entitled to infringe on people's rights any more than is necessary to carry out their duties.

Although police operations are largely based on the requirements of the law, the work of police officers is not merely a mechanical process of supervising compliance with the law but also involves measures to ensure the peaceful co-existence of all sectors of society and respect of the rights of the individual. The values and good practices underlying police operations are incorporated into the ethical oath for police officers.

Can be found from General principles of operation

Now this is my first reply to this and I am happy to share more thoughts.

**Raphael** · 05-31-2011 05:00 AM

Originally Posted by Unelias

The first cop to cuff the woman is already using excessive force.

Wait--- what? Since when is cuffing someone excessive force? Maybe if she had glass arms.

The cop in the beginning kind of looks like James Cameron now that I think of it.

**poopman** · 05-31-2011 05:04 AM

why is it not excessive force to cuff someone for hugging? seriously, they were in the jefferson memorial. maybe you should look into some of his stuff.

**~~DeletePlease~~** · 05-31-2011 05:20 AM

Originally Posted by poopman

why is it not excessive force to cuff someone for hugging?

They weren't cuffed for hugging, they were cuffed for ignoring a simple warning and undermining what he was saying by dancing in front of the officers when they were told not to (which galvanized the rest of the idiots to follow suit). Cuffing them was supposed to serve as an example for the rest of the group.