Utah Highway Patrolman tasers & arrests man for refusing to sign a ticket

Run time: 09:58 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMaMYL_shxc   Posted on YouTube: November 20, 2007 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: November 21, 2007 By DU Member: 951-Riverside Views on DU: 9879

 

Officer John Gardner lied to his partner at 9:47 he never told Massey that he was going to get tasered.




http://www.kutv.com/content/news/topnews/story.aspx?content_id=33fb7027-f63d-4414-9a9f-f815f4d4f302

Don't forget to tell them how you feel about this http://highwaypatrol.utah.gov/contact_uhp.html

Ahhh...now that the world has seen the video now they have to act.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

do that? How would you feel if someone did it to you?

why you should put the officer's life and safety and that of his family at risk? Throw him to the wolves, I think you said?

Or if not his life and safety and that of his family's, what else would you expect people to do with his home address as information?

Hopefully his family will dissown him as they should.

At what point was there police abuse?

Pulling over a speeder and giving him a ticket?
Are you saying cops shouldn't pull over speeders or give them tickets?

Arresting him for not signing the ticket?
You do realize that is the law, right? The other option is to give him another ticket, like that would do any good. The guy was just stupid and wanted to argue. He even continues to get up and argue after being tasered, but stops after the officer warns him again (as if pulling a taser, what the guy thought was a gun, wasn't a good enough warning.)

Tasering him for refusing to obey a direct order?
Sorry, I realize you're not very bright, so I'll explain this for you.
His options were let the guy walk off and get back into his car, lock the doors and drive off (or just get back in and aruge more), tackle him to prevent that and put them both at risk because they are beside traffic, or taser him, which while it sucks because it hurts, it was the safest way for the officer to remain in control of the situation.
Yes, the officer must remain in control for his safety and the safety of the criminal (breaking the law does make you a criminal, in case you didn't know that definition.)

So at what point did the officer abuse the guy?
Ignorant people who speak without knowing anything, only based on what others want them to believe, are not only fools, but also show how dangerous words can be.
*sigh*

I'm tempted to forward it to the FBI and let them handle it.

Vile. Absolutely vile.

LOL! You truly show how little you know.

The officer had two other choices before tasering the guy: let him get back to his vehicle or tackle him. Letting him get back into his vehicle (the guy was beside his vehicle...how long does it take you to take a few steps, open a door and get inside?) gives control of the situation to the criminal (you know, the guy who broke the law) and complicates the situation by allowing somoene who just wants to argue to hide and lock himself in. Why take the chance? Why complicate the matter? Because he's a stupid man who can't believe he got stopped for speeding, who doesn't WANT to believe there was a sign a half mile back that he didn't see? Yeah, that's a great reason to complicate it!
The other option is to tackle him and put him and yourself and risk, at which point you'd be complaining about police brutality, because you don't think!

*sigh*
Comments like yours show ignorance! People like you need to be educated on the laws! If you don't obey an officer, yes, they do have the right to taser you to prevent you from walking away. They don't HAVE to tackle you to the ground! If that were required, they put themselves at greater risk. They don't have to take that chance just because the criminal appears stupid and not dangerous. When they take risks, bad things often happen, and they make the laws to protect officers, not stupid people (who don't know any better...yes, that's you. They get to protect themselves over not tasering you!)

If you want to do it different, then you can talk. If you want them to do it different, you need to be educated! (Don't worry, you've already showed your lack of education to everyone viewing your messages, and as they become educated, you are revealed to be less so.)

thanks for posting

... This tasering was completely unnecessary -- all you have to do to get tasered these days is slightly annoy an officer.

but in this case I think the only other choice was for the officer to physically wrestle the driver to the ground and handcuff him. If he had done that he would have been placing the driver and himself in greater danger. There was traffic going by at 40+ MPH and rolling into the road in front of a truck is not the best way to spend your last moments in time. The officer seems reasonable in every respect and I don't see a better outcome. Sure he was an arrogant asshole but that's the nature of being a cop.

The driver should have signed the ticket and fought in court if it was not justified. My guess is the driver didn't see the first sign. I had a similar experience where I missed a no u turn sign. I still got a ticket even though as I explained to the cop I could have gone one block up. I wasn't in a hurry or anything else, I just missed the sign......still got the ticket, I did go back and sure enough the sign was there.

...that they are cruel and inhumane -- and this should be sufficient reason for their discontinued use. Applying a controlling/disabling force to a citizen should not involve undue pain and suffering, as is the case with tasers. Add to that the fact that they sometimes result in death, and it becomes a nobrainer that they have no place in law enforcement. In any case, I see no justification whatsoever in using them in cases of nonviolent noncooperation. Passive resistance does not call for the same measures as violent or aggressive resistance does. Police today seem to make no distinction.

As to a signature, why should any citizen ever be required to sign anything against their will? How does a motorist know for sure what the legal ramifications of signing documents produced by an officer are? Is the motorist supposed to read all the language on the ticket and have enough of a legal background to know exactly what signing it means? Or should he/she just take the officer's word for what it means? The driver produced his ID/license, why is that not sufficient?

What struck me about the video was how quickly the officer went from issuing the instruction to "turn around and place your hands behind your back" to tasering this man. The time interval between the officer's first order to do this (he did issue the order more than once) and firing the taser is approximately ten seconds (7:30 to 7:20 on video). At no time during that ten second interval does the motorist make any aggressive physical moves toward the officer nor does he issue any verbal threats. What the motorist does is walk slowly away while asking "what's wrong with you?" It appears to me at this point in the video the motorist is now frightened or distrustful of the officer's intentions. Why no warning of any kind from the officer? Why not say at this point, firmly and in an authoritative tone: "Sir, you WILL turn around, and you WILL put your hands behind your back RIGHT NOW, or you WILL BE TASERED!!!" I think the officer would've gotten compliance had he done so, and I think the reason he didn't issue any such warning is that by this point he was no longer interested in voluntary compliance, he wanted to taser this man. I think the officer decided when he didn't get cooperation on the signature that he was going to use the taser if he could steer the situation in such a way as to give the appearance of justification in front of his vehicle camera?

One easy way to test my theory would be to polygraph the officer. Law enforcement likes to use the polygraph on suspects, but they're not crazy about polygraphing their own in investigating these kinds of incidents. Why is that? Seems to me if there's nothing to hide the polygraph could help in resolving these matters much more quickly. How do you think the officer would do on his polygraph when asked questions like: "We're you looking to taser this man?" "Is the reason you didn't issue a warning before tasering is that you wanted to taser this man?" I think the officer would answer "no" on both of these questions and be shown to be engaged in deception on both -- and I think that's why he won't be polygraphed on these questions.

All that said, this motorist was definitely not cooperative. If I had been that cop, I would've been annoyed too. But I didn't see anything physically threatening done by the motorist, his behavior and comments were reasonably calm and rational, not warranting the use of a taser.

But in this case the series of events are clear to me.

The motorist wouldn't sign the ticket and the cop made the wrong choice at that time and decided to arrest the perp. He could have and IMO should have said ok no problem here's your copy of the ticket, have a nice day.

Once the cop made that bad decision the motorist made a very bad and even stupider decision to resist arrest.

After that tasering may have been the best outcome as all other forms of force would have been worse, and it was obvious the motorist wasn't going to comply and was forcing the officer to either use force or back down. For the cop backing down at that point wasn't an option in HIS mind. There's a lot of ego and machismo involved in this situation and it could have and should have been avoided. But raising the stakes by the motorist in this situation was stupid.

Anyone with children driving age should show this video to them with the following instructions. Only give the police your name, address and ID, never answer ANY questions without your lawyer present and FOLLOW ALL INSTRUCTIONS!

...don't see things in the same way when we look at this video.

I see a cop who badly mishandled a traffic stop involving a noncooperative, but also nonthreatening, motorist. The cop became irritated and seemingly determined to taser the motorist, and did, without justification. He then lied about the circumstances leading up to it to a fellow officer in front of the camera, claiming the motorist was jumping around, claiming that he issued a warning about tasering, claiming that he requested the signature, when in fact, he demanded it: "...first you're going to sign this."

In addition the cop was grossly negligent after the tasering in letting the motorist continue to lay where he fell, so close to the traffic lane, which was still in use.

I just don't see much to be said on behalf of this cop in looking at the video of this incident.

should taser him in the road? That was a use of potentially deadly force on a guy for not signing a fucking traffic ticket. Sometimes I think I'm on a different planet in this country.

arrest. The perp or victim depending on your view, made the choice to resist the officers commands. If he was being wrongfully arrested his legal and proper recourse was to submit and fight it in court, not in the street. IF he chooses to fight in the street he better 1. know what the hell he's doing and 2. have some powerful weapons and 3. shoot to kill.
As he was,unarmed and acting stupid he's lucky this is all he got. Up against a really bad cop he'd be in the hospital or dead.

Make no mistake I beleive cops in this country are dangerous and should be avoided if at all possible. But when confronted you better shutup and do as your're told or be ready and willing to defend yourself with more than just words and that would be really, really stupid.

I have a Driver's License and it's not signed. I never signed the back of it. It does say invalid if not signed. Does that mean my automobile skills are severely weakened without a signature? Or does that mean I'm waiving my rights? Or does that mean I have taking all the safety courses and passed the test?

So if one is forced to sign something without understanding all the legal mumble jumble, couldn't that be viewed as signing under duress? I'm curious... if you ask the officer (who is employed by the people) if he is willing to sign something that says he will secure and defend your Constitutional rights, would he/she sign? And if they refuse, would it be okay to taser them for not obeying orders? Or should we fire them immediately?

I forgot to sign a 1040 form and "pay my taxes" and the IRS wouldn't accept it. How come? They received my check so I sent a letter back and asked if I owed them more. Nope all they wanted was my signature.

So I sent another letter back and said I want the name of the agent, plus a social security number to know who I was talking with. The reason I asked for the Agents SS number was for their protection and security. :P After all...You know the terrorist are growing by leaps and bounds in this country. People, we need to check out the Agents/Police officers and make sure there is no connection to Saddam Hussein or USAma bin Laden. :) Just doing my job as a good citizen should do.:7

Yes, you think you are smart, but the sad part is you don't make sense.

While your argument about not signing something you don't understand makes a bit of sense (though you confuse the issue with your tangents), you need to watch the video to understand. The asked why he was getting the ticket, the officer said "speeding". The guy wanted to be shown the sign, and that is ridiculous to walk people through it like that.

There is a proper time and place to argue that point, and it's not road side. That's what the court is for, and the guy just wanted to argue. He asked the same question about why he was being pulled over and arrested over and over, and those questions were answered more than once. The guy was just stupid.

It wasn't about not understanding the ticket, it was about not accepting it, and no, the officer shouldn't be required to argue with people. (He did answer, the guy just wanted to argue. If you can't figure that out, watch the full uncut version and see how he's still asking the same questions much later. He's stupid. He doesn't know any better.)

So before people get their driver's licenses, they should understand 1) the proper place to argue a ticket isn't road side, it's in court, and 2) obey the officer or he has the right to taser you. Tackling is far too dangerous (people can pull knives or other weapons, and it's when they think they guy is unarmed that they get injured so it's wrong to ask them to risk their lives like that), and letting people walk away and get into their vehicles isn't going to resolve the issue, rather it will only complicate it.

Tasering the guy puts him down in the easiest method and simplifies the situation by having him down and ready to cuff instead of arguing with the man. The man was just stupid and uneducated, so the solution is EDUCATION.

(Asking for someone's SS number is just a stupid comment that makes no sense. Your dots aren't connection right, sorry.

*sigh* the problems stupid people create....

I know everyone is stupid but you. Have a nice day. Peace and love bro... You might have trouble connecting my dots. Because I don't have a Social Security number. :)

he probably would have used his gun. That cop was obviously itching to do a "hit" on someone, and it had nothing to do with a speeding ticket, and everything to do with a morbid curiosity to inflict harm on another human being.

I'm usually the first one to cry police brutality during these "tased for noncompliance" fiascoes, but this one doesn't strike me as unwarranted.

Massey had his hand hooked in his pocket, and kept it there the entire time, even after the officer drew his taser. His posture was suggesting he was hiding something in his pocket and getting ready to pull it out. Whether or not he actually had anything in his pocket is immaterial--the officer reasonably felt threatened, he ordered Massey to turn around and put his hands behind him, Massey didn't comply, so he used nonlethal force to subdue.

This particular case, judging from that video, would be debatable if the officer had used his gun rather than his taser. As it is, I see it as perfectly justifiable based on Massey's behavior... YMMV.

EDIT: I think I should probably add this: The initial function of a taser was as a tool to replace the use of deadly force with equally effective non-lethal and non-injurious force, for instances where something must be done but deadly force isn't called for. A cop facing down a strung-out meth-addicted homeless veteran with a box cutter can't just walk away and should not be expected to put himself in close quarters to wrestle the thing away, so in the past, that would probably lead to the homeless veteran getting shot. With the use of tasers, deadly force can be avoided.

We've heard plenty of horror stories like the 6-year-old boy and 12-year-old girl who were tased by Miami police officers not too long ago. What the stories usually leave out is the fact that the boy was threatening to cut himself with a shard of glass, and the girl was about to run into traffic. Immediately immobilizing them with a taser may well have saved their lives.

It should be used in instances where there is danger to the officer, the suspect, or bystanders, and deadly force is unwarranted. It should not be used simply to force compliance. And if this were just an issue of Massey's noncompliance, it'd be overboard. But it wasn't.

I'm also not defending the lying. That should have an investigation all its own, to see if the officer violated policy by tasing without warning first.

They ALWAYS cover up for their own no matter what. Like that cop in Illinois that murdered his 3rd wife and disappeared his fourth, it was YEARS after the fact and after media scrupency before a legitimate investigation was held.

Because of an isolated case of corruption?

Even if there is systemic corruption in every city, county, and state police force in the country, do you imagine the vigilantes aren't going to be just as corrupt or worse?

I'm still terrified you think one or many random individuals on the Internet would bring a better outcome to this case than the justice system. Why does it matter that Bush suspended habeas corpus and approved illegal wiretaps, if we're going to start from the assumption that every facet of the justice system is so corrupt it operates outside the law anyway?

I'm not advocating revenge killings or anything from the movie Boondock Saints yet. I just think ostricising them from the community and is vigilanteism a complete non-starter with you? Sometimes we have to take things into our own hands to make it right because the system will not make it right, 1776 ring a bell?

...One man getting tased and arrested does NOT rise to the level of injustice requiring popular uprising. One man getting shot and killed in cold blood would not rise to that level of injustice. Twenty people all independently getting shot and killed in cold blood wouldn't. To rise to that level of injustice it needs to be something systematic, and I have yet to see anything systematic in it.

Vigilantism is not a non-starter, but I'd first need to be convinced that the entire system is so corrupt that the vigilante alternative at the very least wouldn't be worse. The Mafia and the Yakuza started as vigilante defenders against corrupt governments, after all. We know where those led.

Good point, but if you've been chronicling police abuse and corruption over the years you would probably come to my point of view.

Or who watches the watchers? That sounds like what you're asking, and of course, it's always an important question...

But if we decide that all police are rotten and corrupt--even if you're correct and they all are--then some others decide to take things into their own hands... Who watches the watchers of the watchers?

And if that group becomes corrupt (like the Yakuza and the Mafia) and we can't rely on the first group because they're still corrupt and probably in cahoots with the second group, and a third group pops up... Who watches them?

It's an infinite regression. At some point you need to have trust in the system. Six steps down the line, twenty steps down the line, there needs to be some group that is capable of self-policing. But if it is possible for this hypothetical group that's twenty steps down the line, why is it fundamentally impossible for the first group--our actual police forces?

The only other option is the police-free, every-man-for-himself Anarchist state.

How do we fix the system though? We know that not all police are corrupt but most are too apethetic to react. Maybe we should turn to them and rely on their anonamous info.

Does that get anywhere near "popular uprising" or are they going to have to drag you off to a FEMA camp before you realize what's going on?

Even Amnesty International only records 245 "Taser-related deaths" in the past six years. And those aren't deaths caused by tasers, those are deaths of people who had been tased shortly before their deaths, many of whom were already overdosed on drugs.

Have a source for your claim?

I should have said "almost 300 taser deaths this year.

Tasers have been involved in more that 300 deaths in the US and Canada.(Eight in Maryland)
http://www.topix.com/forum/baltimore/T9V5VGC467K0QV4RJ

*on the edit: Amnesty says 245 in the US, over 300 if you count our neighbor to the North.

That's total since Amnesty International started counting in 2001.

And again, it's deaths where a taser was involved, not deaths that were caused by a taser.

From a 2004 document on Amnesty International's site:



http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engamr511392004

Out of more than 70 cases of what they consider taser-related deaths, only five had the taser being a direct contribution to or cause of the death. In the other cases, the most they say is that it cannot be ruled out that the taser may have played a secondary role in exacerbating a pre-existing risk of heart failure.

I'd much rather be tased than, say, shot. In this particular case, that's probably what the choice would have come down to.

Sorry, dud (yes, dud), that's not a word.

You're posts are funny. You never speak about what you would have done differently so people can teach you why cops don't let people just walk off, or why they don't tackle them at the side of the freeway. *sigh* such intelligence.

I mean seriously, you're defending an idiot who, after getting tasered, calls for his wife to come help him. What's she going to do, get tasered as well? LOL!!! You are such a smart man it's hillarious!

A monkey can make comments about cops being bad, but it takes intelligence, experience and knowledge (education) to make a change.

The change we should make is educate morons like you so you understand that yes, you must obey an officer or he can arrest you. Yes, there are appropriate times and places to argue the actions of a "bad cop", not with the cop himself. That doesn't solve anything, or do you have a story you'd like to share that proves otherwise? :D

You make a great case for not giving any power to stupid people, not that I'm for that, I'm just saying you are making their point for them.

Keeping the hand in/near the pocket and the way the guy was walking around did it for me. Right then, the trooper had about 2 seconds to decide whether or not he was a threat.

It bothers me, though, that the trooper never mentioned the hand & pocket either to the suspect or to the backup officer after his arrival.

And the trooper escalated the situation from the beginning with his attitude, and he completely lost control of the situation from an officer safety/suspect safety point of view after the tasing. He shouldn't have left the handcuffed Massey lying near the side of the active traffic lane, in the very dangerous position of between the patrol car and the stopped vehicle. And he stopped paying attention to the prisoner (because that's what Massey was by then) and wasn't even aware that Massey had gotten up and started walking around while he was concentrating on the passenger. Not good in either case.

I think this whole situation could have been avoided by more training, in both people skills & officer safety.

Or better recruitment selection; some people just shouldn't be cops, and this could well be an example.

And then fucking tasers him for questioning his "police" tactics. No wonder so many people have no respect for authority these days. If that's enforcing the law then I'm a fucking kangaroo. That is ridiculous police behavior. Note that the cop tasers him beside the highway and leaves his body in the road while cuffing him and then goes to the other side of the car to cover his sorry ass by attempting to convince the wife that her husband was out of line. First the husband should never have been told to leave the car for refusing to sign. He has the right not to sign. The officer was not threatened as some above wrote. Massey was walking away from te officer when he was tased. This video is straight up proof that anyone with a GED can be a cop these days. These two people are your average American family. If the wife got tased and lost her baby would that merit what the cop felt was just? Something needs to be done about the use of tasers in the hands of fools before more innocent people die. US citizens are losing their rights these days and this video is proof that the scale has slide far too much towards the side of the state.

Not in that jurisdiction, as quoted in the article. This is why there is a system for ticket appeals--there's a procedure to go through if you don't think your ticket was justified. Note that signing the ticket is not equivalent to pleading guilty or no contest, it is merely signing to say you were served the ticket and you plan to either pay or contest it.



You don't see anything even a little bit threatening about Massey's posture? Christ, I was sure he was hiding something in his pocket or his pants, and I wasn't even in a position to be hurt, the officer was.

Police officers should not be required to take chances. They shouldn't have to be certain a person has bad intentions before they interpret warning signs. That is why when you are pulled over by a police officer you are supposed to be careful to keep both hands visible at all times and not make any sudden movements.

Massey was tased because he was walking away from the officer--or rather, standing with his back facing the officer so he couldn't see what Massey was doing in front of him, and lost sight of one hand. If someone draws a weapon on you, you don't typically turn at a roughly 45 degree angle away and keep your hands around the level of your pockets while walking away slowly. You turn to face them and lift both hands up where they can be seen, or you obey orders, which were in this case to put them behind his back. He did neither of these things.

It's unfortunate, but Massey did a lot of really dumb things in this situation that made it worse than it had to be. He seems more to blame than the cop, to me.

The family style SUV. The fact they pulled over right away. The cop is sitting in the desert in front of the 40 mph sign Massey said he didn't see. Massey pulled over instantly and the cop orders him out of the car for refusing to sign and then leaves him handcuffed with his head in the road. I see a very different picture than you do. Law or no law. Personally I see the "law" in the US as being as dangerous as the ones they are supposed to be protecting us from. People are being tasered all the time. Police pay is very low and that ends up attracting less than qualified applicants. They make bad decisions quite often and always seem to get away with it even when caught on camera. In New York during the RNC convention 3 years ago they were caught doctoring video to make themselves look less bad. Hell you can watch "Cops" or "To Catch A Predator" and see that they use unnecessary force all the time. I know it's a stereotype but they seem to be usually overweight, skinhead, and wearing SWAT/military style clothing more and more these days. If these are the folks protecting us I personally don't feel too safe. The best thing to do is stay away from them in general. Another complication is that many ex military are coming back from this unjust war and joining the police. They are bringing with them all their anger, guilt, and other neurosis' that they acquired in Iraq. And I'm sure they have many. Now they are policing us. Great. I for one am not too happy about that fact.

Yeah, the cop is an asshole. Most cops are assholes. There's a breaking news item.

So, you're confronted by an asshole -- who just happens to be representing the local/state government -- who has the authority to ticket, arrest, or even kill you if the circumstances warrant it. You're being ticketed and fined a hundred bucks or so for speeding. What's the smart move? Prove to you and the world one more time that cops are assholes, or take the ticket and move on. Massey chose option B and found himself in a world of hurt. Just like everyone else who confronts a cop.

Hells bells. I was ticketed for the sin of taking off my seatbelt while stopped at a red light so that I could pick my cellphone off the floor of my car. I was so pissed off that, in my mind, I would have been totally justified in kicking the cop's nuts into his mouth for such petty bullshit. I paid the fine instead. Which choice do you think was less painful for me?

Tasers are deadly, they kill loads of people. The kid in the video was arrogant and stupid however he should not have to play taser roulette for that,. If that cop could not get that kid into custody, without using a often deadly weapon on him, he should quit the force right now! Really that is a pathetic excuse,. he felt threatened? really? I think he felt the kid was cocky and was taking him down a peg! That is NOT his job!!! except in a fascist police state and that is what america is sadly fast becoming!

Don't defend the use of a DEADLY weapon to punish impertinence. Cops, like bus drivers, have to deal with annoying people every day, resorting to weapons use is ridiculous, and in my mind pathetically weak behavior.

Got statistics?

Got comparisons to other forms of subdual techniques like pepper spray, batons, or physically wrestling someone to the ground? Rubber bullets, beanbags? Regular bullets?

As I said before, tasers are not meant for dealing with "annoying people." They're meant as a replacement for more serious force when there is danger of personal injury to an officer, a suspect, or a bystander.

"Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

“When the government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.” –Thomas Jefferson

...that person coming out of the vehicle will be armed and the officer will get shot for tasering their spouse.

Do they realize how pissed off that wife was? There are spouses out there who have guns. There are spouses that know how to shoot. There are spouses that wouldn't put up with this shit.

Do they realize how many husbands out there would terminate any individual who would taser their wife?

I'm sure it's going to happen and come out on video like this one.

Terrorize the populace long enough, and they will begin to fight back.

...that so many people in this group seem to consider tasering a motorist for refusing to sign a ticket (which isn't what happened, but let's pretend) is an unacceptable and unjust escalation of force... But shooting a police officer dead for tasering that motorist would be perfectly justified and understandable?

If this happened with absolutely no justification in the street, it would be at the very worst assault. Last I checked, assault is not a capital crime.

and you have a gun, just shot a warning shot. That should take care of your spouse's murder and yours.

Glad they have this video tape. NOW I would take this SOB to court and sue him and his department for every cent I could squeeze out of them. What a terrible, gross injustice. This "pig" lives up to the name. A power hungry, fascist swine. This guy never appeared the least bit dangerous. He wanted simple answers, and this uniformed idiot must not have got any the night before, because he is waaaay "over reacting".

I'm shocked.

It's madness.

Notice at the end the two cops stand right in front of the camera and seem to have a little chit chat where one cop verifies his side of the story to the other cop. They obviously know the camera is rolling. I think this is a common performance done by police to attempt to cover their tracks and show camaraderie among themselves. Strength in numbers so to speak. Why else would thy talk on camera when they could easily go off to the side? It's to bolster their own case. Nothing more.

Yeah it is. I agree! People jumping all over a cop for arresting a guy when he gets out of control, then stops the guy from getting back into his car and complicating the situation by tasering him. I agree it's sick.

What isn't sick is tasering stupid people, people who don't want to listen, accept or obey.
Bad things happen to stupid people, even if it's just because they don't know any better. That's a fact of life.

Guy blows through a speed limit sign and gets pulled over. Rather than contest the ticket, he decides to become belligerent. Bad move.

Cop has a stick up his ass and decides to arrest this guy for not signing. That, of course, is bullshit. If you get cited for speeding from an optical device that records your license plate, no signature is required.

So, the intersection of two complete assholes leads to yet another not-so-shocking video and yet another debate on DU.

Welcome to the infinite loop.

"When you put a couple assholes together, all you get is a bunch of shit."

wrong, just kiss their ass immediately or they will fuck you up on camera and not give a shit because they know they will be protected. Its amazing some of the shit you catch on these police cameras, it shows that they know they are not held accountable for what they do. So remember kids, when an officer speaks to you, make sure you call him sir and never ever question anything he does to you because he will tazer, shoot, beat, or arrest you or all of the above. If he fondles you in an inappropriate way, just act like you like it and go to the authorities afterwards. I'm absolutely positive they will prosecute him for his wrong doings :sarcasm:.

Again, never question authority, they don't like it when their egos are tested and they WILL make you regret it and never do it again.


Its sad where our country is heading and the worst part is the amount of people that have been brainwashed and don't see what is happening right in front of them.




"...um yeah he took a ride on the taser." " good for you"

951 watch this video...
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=8356

The Barboza family has owned their dog Bobby for five years. A few days ago they say a Teton County Idaho Sheriff's Deputy knocked on their door demanding to see the dog. Any animal lovers here, please tell me if this is okay?

I'm so emotional right now, that words can't describe the anger I'm having for this Human being. My mother said if I don't have anything nice to say to keep quiet. Anyone else want to chime in? Please give me words of encouragement for the human race.

I'm not trying to hijack your thread with my last post. I want people to see some of the sickness we have with "authority" it's more than one bad apple.

Deception is partial truth and lies. The heading of this post, "Utah Highway Patrolman tasers & arrests man for refusing to sign a ticket", is literally deception, whether done in ingorance (not knowing any better) or intentional.
Watch the FULL video in three parts on You Tube.

"Utah Highway Patrolman arrests man for refusing to sign a ticket, then tasers him for refusing to obey a clear, direct order" is the truth. Does the other heading have truth? Well the guy did get arrested for refusing to sign the ticket, but saying he got tasered first is a lie, and that is the way it is phrased, which is deceptive.
Saying "his pregnant wife" is also a load of bunk, as it has nothing to do with the matter. The same thing would have happened if he was alone. Heck, she should have been tasered for rushing out at him and refusing to obey his direct orders. She got out more than once and didn't learn from the example of her husband!! (Few of you realize a cop is at risk every time they are doing their job, how many times the passenger rushes the cop. The cop MUST have complete control of the situation because it is life or death. It is when they relax that things happen and officers die. That's the sad reality.)

The guy wanted to argue the ticket. As the officer later states that is not the time or place to do it. There is a proper time and place to.
Was the officer quick on the draw? Yes, which is what they are trained to do. The criminal (he did break the law by speeding) wanted to argue. He needed to be shown the sign, which he could have checked out on his own.

The officer tells him he was going fast and gets his info. He returns to his car and prints the ticket. He returns and askes Massey to sign it, which Massey refuses to do. Massey is asked to exit the car. (Would telling him he was under arrest really help this stupid man who couldn't accept what was happening? Seriously, folks, watch the video and see how many times he asks why he was pulled over and is being arrested, and how many times he is answered. He just refuses to accept it. Arguing with idiots doesn't help anything.)
He gets out and starts to argue again. When he refuses to obey the officer, the officer draws his taser.
Masey claims he believed it was a gun and yet he starts to walk off. He just doesn't get it! He refuses to accept what is happening. He's a moron who doesn't know any better.

If the officer doesn't use the taser at that point, the guy gets into his car and locks the doors and complicates everything, or the officer puts himself at risk by tackling the guy.

Yeah, it happens fast and it sucks to get tasered, but the guy made some VERY poor choices that led to the response. (If he'd been tackled people would have thought "police brutality", but again, if you don't get the guy before he gets into the vehicle the situation is only made A LOT worse. *sigh* So many speak without thinking.

WILL TASERS GO AWAY?
No. True, some are used unnecessarily and people don't like they way they are used to control people, but do you really want to give control of the situation to the criminals?
This is a perfect situation where the guy was in no danger, he was just stupid and not wanting to obey the officer when he was getting arrested. Is that really a reason that "he shouldn't get tasered?" If someone is stupid and wanting to argue, they shouldn't be tasered? "He has the right to argue?" Yes, but not there. He does not have the right to be taken to the sign. He'd still be arguing, and still be in the wrong.

Are the police always right? No, that's why there is a step that allows people to argue their case: in court before the judge. The guy was wrong.

If you refuse to sign a ticket, you can be arrested. If you refuse to obey an officer, you can be tasered.

Stop twisting the truth.
And don't judge the officer until you ride with them and see the people they have to put up with. True, Massey seemed to be just a normal, stupid person, but that's no reason the officer has to take ANY risks, give control of the situation to the idiot, or not act!

Tasers do a lot of good. True, people lose control of themselves and get tasered. That's just more reason to keep control of yourself! The officer certainly did. He talked to the wife to let her know what was going on, even! He was well trained and did his job well.

So, what are YOU going to do?
If you're the cop, are you going to let the guy walk off and get back in his vehicle? Are you going to tackle him beside traffic? Then you aren't going to last long on the job.

Are we going to make more laws against cops? Inhibit their ability to do their job? Take the tasers away so they have to tackle or shoot bullets? Yeah, that's a smart move.

How about we EDUCATE people! How about to get your driver's license you need to know the laws! That the officer CAN arrest you for not signing the ticket, that you must obey or he CAN taser you. How about they show the videos where things go bad to SHOW people why officers MUST have control of the situation to protect themselves.

Don't make fools of yourselves by arguing against the cop. Know the laws, why they are there, and realize Massey was just a poor, stupid man.

(Yeah, you want people to speed up in the fast lane and so you ride their tail to get them to go faster or switch lanes, but if they slam on their brakes, not only are you most likely dead when you slam into them, but legally you are at fault! It sucks, but there are consequences for being stupid!!!!)

So when you are on the road, if you don't want this to happen to you, sign the ticket, gather your evidence and meet the officer in court! Or you can argue, like you are doing here, and find out how a good shot from a taser feels. :D
That's the TRUTH! No matter how you want to argue it!