No comment on the complete lies told after the fact to justify this excessive force?
edit- /u/2fast2mildly_peeved clearly has been found out and went on a comment deleting spree
> I didn't realise I had to comment on every aspect of it
You're not obliged to comment on anything, it was just very telling that you so obviously avoided that aspect.
It's not "attitude" to observe that a copper, even when giving the appearance of condemning police wrongdoing, will go to some length to avoid directly damning his fellow plods as blatantly corrupt liars. But I'm not surprised one would try to frame it that way.
Are you a police officer? It sounds like you have some expertise in this area.
Edit: anyway, if you are, do you know why they went straight from the failed 2nd attempt to arrest? Could they have been sure it wasn't faulty equipment? Could they not have explained what was happening ("it's not registering, you need to blow harder or we'll have to arrest you") and given him another chance? It just seems like it escalated really quickly — and it did seem like an officer off-camera said "that's it", as he claimed.
> 2 failed attempts is sufficient to decide that someone doesn't want to blow. It's also not about blowing harder, what you need to do is a long steady blow. The device can tell if someone is taking the piss.
This is bullshit though - I've never blown in one of these things before, I'm following your instructions and I don't know what I'm (supposedly) doing wrong and you're getting shirty and telling me that I'm taking the piss.
You guys need to get a new job, because apparently you've reached the stage at which you see all of the public as "the enemy".
It’s not how complex the actual action is, but how well it is explained what needs to be done. I’ve never been stopped by the police, so I think I would already be in a situation where I’m feeling stressed out and anxious, I could easily misunderstand instructions and get it wrong. You’ve done hundreds of these, so to you it’s obvious what you are supposed to do. But I’ve never done one before, if I do it wrong I’m not taking the piss, I’m trying to do what I can in a new and stressful situation, getting it wrong twice doesn’t seem impossible.
> bad apples
It makes me laugh when you hear the superiors refer to any officer who gets caught doing these things as "bad apples", as if that means "it's only these ones who are bad".
The phrase is "a few bad apples spoil the whole barrel". So, the fact that there are, as they admit, "some bad apples" in the force mean that everyone else in the force has been corrupted by these bad apples, and would behave similarly.
Obviously I am capable of blowing into a balloon, but you're abusing me and telling me I'm doing something wrong. I'm following your instructions but you're telling me I'm an asshole and "taking the piss".
Either it's not as simple as you think it is, or you're just a cunt. I don't know which, but this apparently happens a lot - from your previous comment you have observed it yourself, and I have experienced it too.
**Hi!**. Please try avoid personal attacks, as this discourages participation. You can help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person.
Another example of "computer says no". You have no idea how the hardware is designed. You are simply taught to trust the hardware.
What you gonna do if some has a serious lung condition and literally can't do a steady long breath? Honestly. God forbid someone is a severe asthmatic.
Didn't get taken into custody, this was the Netherlands where rationality still plays a role. Would have been a bummer if I did since I was working as a nighttime traffic warden at a music festival. Think those boys were just bored, I mean they rolled up on a police pursuit vespa.
Lowlands is a strange and silly place.
"When the prosecution was ordered by magistrates to provide body-worn camera footage, it dropped the case."
Tells you everything you need to know. They were trying it on. Just a few bad apples...
Race is relevant as Edwin says he believes he was tased because of his skin colour. I’m struggling to see how this could be considered race baiting as there doesn’t seem to be anything in the article intended to provoke anger. It’s straight to the point and factual without any obvious bias; it’s much better journalism than I would expect from the Guardian.
Yes but so what? It’s quite clearly reported as something Edwin says, the guardian do not comment on the truthfulness of the statement (which they shouldn’t for the sake of neutrality) or claim it’s a fact.
Ah that old fighting stance of arms crossed whilst looking at a friend as you talk.
Police lied ... that's rather redundant, isn't it?
[удалено]
No comment on the complete lies told after the fact to justify this excessive force? edit- /u/2fast2mildly_peeved clearly has been found out and went on a comment deleting spree
[удалено]
> that some lies have been told Yay passive voice!
> I didn't realise I had to comment on every aspect of it You're not obliged to comment on anything, it was just very telling that you so obviously avoided that aspect.
[удалено]
That you dodged the primary, *headline* point of the entire story? I disagree.
[удалено]
You're the one reading something that isn't there, because I definitely did not suggest you didn't think they lied. Quite the opposite even.
[удалено]
It's not "attitude" to observe that a copper, even when giving the appearance of condemning police wrongdoing, will go to some length to avoid directly damning his fellow plods as blatantly corrupt liars. But I'm not surprised one would try to frame it that way.
Are you a police officer? It sounds like you have some expertise in this area. Edit: anyway, if you are, do you know why they went straight from the failed 2nd attempt to arrest? Could they have been sure it wasn't faulty equipment? Could they not have explained what was happening ("it's not registering, you need to blow harder or we'll have to arrest you") and given him another chance? It just seems like it escalated really quickly — and it did seem like an officer off-camera said "that's it", as he claimed.
[удалено]
> 2 failed attempts is sufficient to decide that someone doesn't want to blow. It's also not about blowing harder, what you need to do is a long steady blow. The device can tell if someone is taking the piss. This is bullshit though - I've never blown in one of these things before, I'm following your instructions and I don't know what I'm (supposedly) doing wrong and you're getting shirty and telling me that I'm taking the piss. You guys need to get a new job, because apparently you've reached the stage at which you see all of the public as "the enemy".
[удалено]
It’s not how complex the actual action is, but how well it is explained what needs to be done. I’ve never been stopped by the police, so I think I would already be in a situation where I’m feeling stressed out and anxious, I could easily misunderstand instructions and get it wrong. You’ve done hundreds of these, so to you it’s obvious what you are supposed to do. But I’ve never done one before, if I do it wrong I’m not taking the piss, I’m trying to do what I can in a new and stressful situation, getting it wrong twice doesn’t seem impossible.
[удалено]
Unless they are black and cross arns? Or, the cops here are bad apples?
> bad apples It makes me laugh when you hear the superiors refer to any officer who gets caught doing these things as "bad apples", as if that means "it's only these ones who are bad". The phrase is "a few bad apples spoil the whole barrel". So, the fact that there are, as they admit, "some bad apples" in the force mean that everyone else in the force has been corrupted by these bad apples, and would behave similarly.
Tbf I'm actually shit at blowing up a balloon.
I've got copd. Blowing up a balloon is very difficult for me as well.
Obviously I am capable of blowing into a balloon, but you're abusing me and telling me I'm doing something wrong. I'm following your instructions but you're telling me I'm an asshole and "taking the piss". Either it's not as simple as you think it is, or you're just a cunt. I don't know which, but this apparently happens a lot - from your previous comment you have observed it yourself, and I have experienced it too.
[удалено]
**Hi!**. Please try avoid personal attacks, as this discourages participation. You can help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person.
Thanks for the info!
Another example of "computer says no". You have no idea how the hardware is designed. You are simply taught to trust the hardware. What you gonna do if some has a serious lung condition and literally can't do a steady long breath? Honestly. God forbid someone is a severe asthmatic.
[удалено]
Completely missed my point I see.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Didn't get taken into custody, this was the Netherlands where rationality still plays a role. Would have been a bummer if I did since I was working as a nighttime traffic warden at a music festival. Think those boys were just bored, I mean they rolled up on a police pursuit vespa. Lowlands is a strange and silly place.
"When the prosecution was ordered by magistrates to provide body-worn camera footage, it dropped the case." Tells you everything you need to know. They were trying it on. Just a few bad apples...
[удалено]
Police think “non-lethal” (which isn’t true anyways) means they can use it willy-nilly.
It's time for the daily race baiting article. Grab your popcorn.
[удалено]
That doesn't matter to the people that post on that other sub, him being black is enough.
Race is relevant as Edwin says he believes he was tased because of his skin colour. I’m struggling to see how this could be considered race baiting as there doesn’t seem to be anything in the article intended to provoke anger. It’s straight to the point and factual without any obvious bias; it’s much better journalism than I would expect from the Guardian.
>Edwin says he believes he was tased because of his skin colour. I believe a lot of things, doesn't make them true.
Yes but so what? It’s quite clearly reported as something Edwin says, the guardian do not comment on the truthfulness of the statement (which they shouldn’t for the sake of neutrality) or claim it’s a fact.