I know you guys love to discuss this kind of stuff.
What do you see?
Just proves my adage-better to carry a pistol than lift weights !!
I didn't see anything out-of-line. The guy took a couple of swings at somebody. The cop said something to him (I am going to assume it was turn around, put your hands behind your back, knuckle-to-knuckle, etc.) He didn't comply. The cop hit him a couple of "compliance blows" - which are within normal use-of-force - shots to create some pain in the recipient and encourage compliance with instructions. He was slow going down to his belly - he got a couple more shots. Once he went to the ground and became compliant, there was nothing more done. Perfectly routine. Certainly nothing in the video to indicate any brutality. Unless you want to defend that ANY use of force by the police constitutes brutality.
I just viewed that a second time. When the cop speaks to him - he says "Nooo!" That's when he gets clipped the first time. Watch closely at that point - look how the cop "drags" the blow on the collar bone. He is trying to inflict a little hurt - but not putting everything into it. The following blows are the same - glancing, "pulled" shots. I'll tell you what - if he had been at my facility, he would have learned an important lesson about the time he made a grab for the baton.
When we began to converse on this forum I mentioned I had respect for quite a few prison guards-also , quite a few I'd like to put through a wall . Then I asked you if you would get into trouble for ''talking '' to an ex-con ..you replied -''I have already alerted my superiors that I speak with you ..''I would have preferred you said ''HEY SCUMBAG'' you are a POS ex-con and I cannot talk to you ''-but that was long ago and easily forgotten !
However, WHERE do you see ANY prison bars in this picture ?? I see a paying consumer getting thrown out by a guy too light in the ass to throw him out so he calls out the DOGS who respond with violence-NO one has that right !! You hear the TASERS charging long before you see a rent a pig come into the picture-the only violence performed by the rather large gentleman was a shot to the ushers chest-then come the ''love taps''or ''compliance blows'' although a baton to the throat does not qualify as a compliance blow in my book , (and I have been on the receiving end , several times ).
I have nothing ever to say to you so I'll place you on ignore and you can go back to riding herd on Humans while saving Greyhounds ?
I didn't see anything wrong there, but I'd like to see what the guy did before he walked down the stairs. As a bonus, I wish they would have duct taped the woman who kept screeching "stop it" and other things.
r.payton - "rent a pig" is kind of out of line, in my opinion.
I don't like second guessing anyone, especially since I only watched the video once, but...
What concerned me is the stike near the head. Strikes to the clavicle were acceptable by my policy so if that was the target then no problem. If the strike target was the head then I suspect there's a problem. I'd have to watch the video a few more times.
Otherwise, in my quick judgement, the escalation of force and the force used seemed reasonable and appropriate.
I carried the sidehandle baton and used it only a few times. I opt'ed to use voice, hand constraint, OC, and taser. Basically hand, OC, and tasers are on the same use of force continuum level after voice. While batons are still commonplace and useful (especially the long stick in for crowd control in demonstrations) they are a bit outdated, in my view. If a person is an active resister I'd usually pass on the baton and go directly to OC or taser.
It is also my personal opinion the baton technique used stunk.
In any confrontation between peace officers and those who are disturbing the peace, I have one ultimate position. I want to see all of the peace officers go home, safe and un-injured. That precludes anything resembling a "fair fight". When a drunk resists, you "call out the dogs" - irregardless of how "light in the ass" that might make a responder look. The idea isn't to look good in the eyes of bystanders - it is to subdue - quickly - a drunk and disorderly individual with no harm coming to the responders.
The person was being ejected from the premises but escalated the situation by committing a battery on a by-stander and then further esculated the situation by first passively then actively resisting. The police officer who you described as 'too light in the ass' called 'out the dogs' and did so appropriately. I guess your saying this suggests it's your opinion is that the police must engage offenders in a 1:1 ratio. Well I have news for you they should never do except in your imagination. Cops must follow rules and law but fortunately for the dirt bags they don't, therefore cops rely on superior numbers. This reduces the likelihood of serious injury to police officers and reduces the additional burden on the tax payer if the cop is injured and goes on work comp. Furthermore it does helps reduces injury and sometimes additional charges on the dirtbag.
Whether we're talking cops or a military operation there is a tactical advantage in numbers and both forces understand the ideal ratio that puts the good guys in the best advantage for success in overcoming the enemy's resistance.
Second, when the offender escalated the situation the cops resorted to baton strikes and taser, but your words 'violence' is accurate but doesn't change the fact their acts appeared justified. At least thats what it looked to me from the short clip.
I understand you've been on the receiving end and that's unfortunate...for you. Over the course of my career I've been on the sending end very often and never hesitated once to put him/her down. Hesitation causes injury or death. The suspect picked the method I used not me. I'd much prefer sending the guy to ER for treatment/check out before booking him rather than visiting a cop in the hospital or at his/her funeral.
Edit: I think it sounds like M. Richardson has been both kind and generous toward you. Based on some of your past posts that seem to have a skewed view toward LE I suppose it isn't surprising you fail to see that.