Tyreek Hill and Scottie Scheffler

  • Thread starter Thread starter theel4life
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 326
  • Views: 4K
  • Sports 
StrangePackage said:
I'm going to go on record as hoping that Bo and everyone else who is defending the actions of these cops as completely reasonable, necessary, and appropriate are treated that way in every interaction that they have with law enforcement for the rest of their lives.

Moreover I hope that their family is treated the same way. Their parents, their children, their significant others, should all be subject to this exact same treatment in any circumstance dealing with law enforcement.

I certainly can't imagine they would object to that seeing as they feel this is completely reasonable. And I don't want to hear anything about mouthing off or being disrespectful because none of that is illegal and none of that should have any impact on the way law enforcement officers behave in a given situation. Moreover they should not get the opportunity to say that they were going to comply or would comply because Tyreek Hill could have been given the opportunity to comply, but the officer decided instead to get him out of the car because he felt like it. Bo is right about one thing- The officers are ultimately in control of that situation and they are responsible for how it happens.

If this was necessary reasonable and appropriate then they would have no objection to every time that they encountered a law enforcement officer they were treated the exact same way.

Anyone objecting to this as a personal attack or as malice on my part must clearly understand that what happened was wrong.
Click to expand...
Idk if I would go that far, but it is fascinating to me how people can see a video like that and somehow come away thinking that the way the cop handled the situation was even remotely acceptable.

My guess is that they see a cocky NFL star driving a flashy car and showing a bit of an entitled attitude, and think that him getting brutalized by a cop is an appropriate way to knock them back down to earth or something. These people love talking about law and order, but when push comes to shove they have a pretty fricked up idea of justice.
 
336Heel said:
Except he wasn't in the parking lot. He was on a major thoroughfare outside of the stadium lots.
Click to expand...
That road literally cuts through the parking lots. Directly on the other side of the bushes behind him on the video are the premium lots up against the stadium, across the street are the economy lots. On a game day you’re not even really supposed to use that road unless you’re parking for the game. I’d say that’s close enough to “in the parking lot.” Source: I am a native South Floridian who has been to that stadium dozens and dozens of times. You would not catch any sane person driving down that road 3 hours before kickoff unless they were attempting to park.
 
Last edited:
StrangePackage said:
I'm going to go on record as hoping that Bo and everyone else who is defending the actions of these cops as completely reasonable, necessary, and appropriate are treated that way in every interaction that they have with law enforcement for the rest of their lives.

Moreover I hope that their family is treated the same way. Their parents, their children, their significant others, should all be subject to this exact same treatment in any circumstance dealing with law enforcement.

I certainly can't imagine they would object to that seeing as they feel this is completely reasonable. And I don't want to hear anything about mouthing off or being disrespectful because none of that is illegal and none of that should have any impact on the way law enforcement officers behave in a given situation. Moreover they should not get the opportunity to say that they were going to comply or would comply because Tyreek Hill could have been given the opportunity to comply, but the officer decided instead to get him out of the car because he felt like it. Bo is right about one thing- The officers are ultimately in control of that situation and they are responsible for how it happens.

If this was necessary reasonable and appropriate then they would have no objection to every time that they encountered a law enforcement officer they were treated the exact same way.

Anyone objecting to this as a personal attack or as malice on my part must clearly understand that what happened was wrong.
Click to expand...
flamethrower GIF
 
2ManyBlueCups said:
The kick that no one claims happened and that no one has been able to produce video of? I think most likely they cut the body camera footage off just prior to Hill speeding off at 200 miles per hour and running over a puppy.
Click to expand...
I hope they cite the dog owner for violating the leash law.
 
ZenMode said:
I disagree. A cops #1 priority should be their safety.
Click to expand...
Does this also apply to soldiers? Firefighters? School teachers?

If you don't want to put your life on the line, then don't be a cop. It's especially egregious because the benevolent associations are always calling, asking for money to support the cops who put their lives on the line every day. Which is it? Anyway, police salaries include what economists call a risk premium -- i.e. the extra money you are paid to assume risks at work. For instance, coal miners make better money than other laborers of similar skill, because you know, admin assistants aren't killed by mine explosions. And if the police departments can't find qualified people, then raise their pay.
 
ZenMode said:
I disagree. A cops #1 priority should be their safety.
Click to expand...
Then you must love how the cops in Uvalde reacted to that school shooting. They sure as hell followed your theory about their priority.

ETA: StrangePackage beat me to it.
 
StrangePackage said:
I'm going to go on record as hoping that Bo and everyone else who is defending the actions of these cops as completely reasonable, necessary, and appropriate are treated that way in every interaction that they have with law enforcement for the rest of their lives.

Moreover I hope that their family is treated the same way. Their parents, their children, their significant others, should all be subject to this exact same treatment in any circumstance dealing with law enforcement.

I certainly can't imagine they would object to that seeing as they feel this is completely reasonable. And I don't want to hear anything about mouthing off or being disrespectful because none of that is illegal and none of that should have any impact on the way law enforcement officers behave in a given situation. Moreover they should not get the opportunity to say that they were going to comply or would comply because Tyreek Hill could have been given the opportunity to comply, but the officer decided instead to get him out of the car because he felt like it. Bo is right about one thing- The officers are ultimately in control of that situation and they are responsible for how it happens.

If this was necessary reasonable and appropriate then they would have no objection to every time that they encountered a law enforcement officer they were treated the exact same way.

Anyone objecting to this as a personal attack or as malice on my part must clearly understand that what happened was wrong.
Click to expand...
I've dealt with cops like this before. I was pulled over, a cop asked me why my registration was expired, and before I could say another word he yelled "I'm not interested in your fucking story." I didn't argue with him, or roll my window up, or ignore his commands. I simply did what he said, heavily rolled my eyes as he walked away, and took my ticket. The exact same things Hill should have done.
 
2ManyBlueCups said:
I've dealt with cops like this before. I was pulled over, a cop asked me why my registration was expired, and before I could say another word he yelled "I'm not interested in your fucking story." I didn't argue with him, or roll my window up, or ignore his commands. I simply did what he said, heavily rolled my eyes as he walked away, and took my ticket. The exact same things Hill should have done.
Click to expand...
So it’s incumbent on the civilian with no training to handle a tense situation perfectly but the cop’s free to be a prick? How’s that boot leather taste?
 
UNCBAdookJD said:
So it’s incumbent on the civilian with no training to handle a tense situation perfectly but the cop’s free to be a prick? How’s that boot leather taste?
Click to expand...
They teach people in driver's ed to comply with the police's instructions when pulled over during a traffic stop. It is incumbent on the civilian to follow the traffic laws and to behave appropriately when they are pulled over.
 
2ManyBlueCups said:
They teach people in driver's ed to comply with the police's instructions when pulled over during a traffic stop. It is incumbent on the civilian to follow the traffic laws and to behave appropriately when they are pulled over.
Click to expand...
That is not the law, and thank God it's not. It is incumbent on the police officer to use reasonable force, if any.
 
superrific said:
That is not the law, and thank God it's not. It is incumbent on the police officer to use reasonable force, if any.
Click to expand...
It actually is the law that you have to comply with lawful orders when detained at a traffic stop. Also, nothing the police did in this traffic stop was unlawful.
 
UNCBAdookJD said:
Disagree, cops #1 priority should be public safety, which requires de-escalation. Cops signed up to accept risk to their personal safety.
Click to expand...
In a general sense, yes and I would agree. Within the purview of doing their job (protecting and promoting public safety), their first priority, if we want to be able to recruit quality police officers, is protecting their safety and taking basic, constitutional steps to protect themselves from unnecessary dangers like allowing a driver to hide themselves and their actions behind a closed window.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top