Dang, I guess the cops really will shoot you for no reason....

[47]

Oh she touched the trigger alright...

[GarGuy]

It looks like after the shot she was still holding the trigger down.

Could be. Finger was definitely on the trigger.

[SaltwaterSlick]

I’m not someone who would sue for accidents to collect a big check, and I loathe ambulance chasers like the Texas Hammer clowns, but I’d sue every officer, the department and the city for everything they have if that happened to me‼️

[GarGuy]

Oh she touched the trigger alright...

And that's after she had shot him. Miracle she didn't shoot again.

[tvc184]

"Officer Safety" It's their favorite excuse. He should have exercised his 4th amendment rights and told her to kick rocks

The Supreme Court and Texas law disagrees with you.

Telling her to kick rocks if is more than just words, is a crime.

Carry on.

[Bassdeer]

Judge, I'm not suing because she shot me. I'm suing because the light was yellow, and the cop said it was red.

[Duckologist]

The Supreme Court and Texas law disagrees with you.

Telling her to kick rocks if is more than just words, is a crime.

Carry on.

Does the Supreme Court not also recognize the 1st ammendment? For example, giving a cop the finger is protected speech under the 1st ammendment

[Texas452]

The Supreme Court and Texas law disagrees with you.

Telling her to kick rocks if is more than just words, is a crime.

Carry on.

If he didn’t break any laws, he can say that, but they pulled him over for a “red light violation “ so they can ID HIM.
the man’s constitutional rights were clearly violated, so much so the SD changed it’s policy.

[Draco]

The only people who do anything like are the ones with bad training/trigger discipline.

Semi related note, and I hate to say this because I have 0 issues with LEO’s, but I used to go to a range several years ago where multiple RO’s told me that they would pay closer attention when they knew an LEO came in because they had a higher chance of a negligent discharge or incident from one of them than members of the general public.

Not my words and could well be because they had LEO’s show up for practice on a regular basis.

Go ahead and google it and then tell me all about it. If even Glock employees are shooting themselves then it really makes you wonder about the design.

[Draco]

You don't need to believe me, Google it and then be a smart ***.

[tvc184]

Does the Supreme Court not also recognize the 1st ammendment? For example, giving a cop the finger is protected speech under the 1st ammendment

The Supreme Court agrees with that. There have been multiple cases where expression towards the government and specifically towards the police is protected under the First Amendment.

Interfering however is not protected.

[Duckologist]

The Supreme Court agrees with that. There have been multiple cases where expression towards the government and specifically towards the police is protected under the First Amendment.

Interfering however is not protected.

The Supreme Court ruled interference is a physical act and not mere words. Exercising your 4th amendment right by not consenting to any searches and seizures does not constitute interference nor does telling cops to kick rocks

[tvc184]

The Supreme Court ruled interference is a physical act and not mere words. Exercising your 4th amendment right by not consenting to any searches and seizures does not constitute interference nor does telling cops to kick rocks

Certainly and I never suggested otherwise.

If you go back to my original unedited post I said, “if is (sp- it’s) MORE than just words”.

If that’s your solution for this guy by saying, “kick rocks” or “I don’t consent”, great. He just can’t do anything other than uttering the phrases.

[tvc184]

If he didn’t break any laws, he can say that, but they pulled him over for a “red light violation “ so they can ID HIM.
the man’s constitutional rights were clearly violated, so much so the SD changed it’s policy.

He was accused of breaking a law by running a red light. It only requires reasonable suspicion to detain a person lawfully. The officer claimed probable cause on the video by saying that he witnessed the guy running a red light.

They can ID the driver, order him out of the vehicle, issue him a citation and if in Texas and most other states, place him in handcuffs and haul him off to jail.

Police policy is not law and changing policy means nothing. Policies are changed all the time.

Where was the detention or frisk a constitutional violation?

The officer was an idiot but that’s a different issue.

[Texas452]

He was accused of breaking a law by running a red light. It only requires reasonable suspicion to detain a person lawfully. The officer claimed probable cause on the video by saying that he witnessed the guy running a red light.

They can ID the driver, order him out of the vehicle, issue him a citation and if in Texas and most other states, place him in handcuffs and haul him off to jail.

Police policy is not law and changing policy means nothing. Policies are changed all the time.

Where was the detention or frisk a constitutional violation?

The officer was an idiot but that’s a different issue.

I guess we will see how this plays out in court, I’ve been pulled over before and never was searched like that or even asked if I had a firearm.
unreasonable search and seizure could be the civil rights violation?
this was all caused by an egomaniac that pulled a man over for running a red light, we have all been in that situation where, “am I going to make it or not”.
a level headed LEO would have let this go, if that was the case?
from what I’ve heard, the charges have been dropped, and now he’s suing the taxpayers because of this foolishness.
I see LE breaking the law all the time, speeding, running stops signs, changing lanes without a blinker, it’s no big deal to me, I’m not going to turn it in.