General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMan stopped by cops for walking with hands in his pockets
Last edited Sun Nov 30, 2014, 08:38 AM - Edit history (1)
This happened in Michigan. I'm just going to leave this here without comment because I am too angry
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/11/african-american-man-stopped-by-michigan-cop-for-walking-with-his-hands-in-his-pockets/
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)McKean pointed out that both he and the officer were both being respectable at which point the officer high-fives him before adding, Im really mad at the situation, whoever called. Thats crazy.
Even the cop was embarrassed to have to respond.
marym625
(17,997 posts)That call would have been taken seriously if the person walking with hands in his pocket was white? And why stop him? He did nothing suspicious, call or not.
I am grasping at anything I can to try and figure out your point. This was yet another illegal stop for walking while black
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)Sometimes the calls are for stupid things.
This wasn't a situation of some cop stopping a black man on his own.
marym625
(17,997 posts)And a call about a guy walking with his hands in his pocket is a nuisance call.
Even if they found it to be worthy of investigation, there was no reason to stop the guy. Walking down the street with hands in pockets on a cold winter day is not suspicious activity.
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)It wasn't until the officer arrived did he determine the call was silly.
The officer behaved like we want them to. He was polite, respectful, quickly agreed it was a stupid call, apologized and moved on.
Maybe you just want to be angry, if so, there are plenty of real police incidents to be mad about. This isn't one of them.
If you still want to find someone to be mad at, be mad at the person that called in the "suspicious person".
marym625
(17,997 posts)And just because there was a call doesn't mean that the cop had to stop the guy. It's a violation of his rights. Walking down the street is not suspicious activity.
IIt's excusing these small incidents of violations that allow the big ones to happen
I have had cops not respond to calls I made about happening-at-that-moment break ins and a neighbor shooting a handgun into the sky in the middle of my densely populated residential street. They seriously never even showed up! If I was the dispatcher, I would say, "Yeah, people can walk down the street with their hands in their pockets - what are they doing that is suspicious?" Because, it was ONLY suspicious bc someone has a touch of the racism plague.
marym625
(17,997 posts)Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)auto windows being smashed in the parking lot of where I lived at the time. The idea that cops swoop in on call is a riot.
PsychGrad
(239 posts)And I'm not even kidding. We had a guy, in the middle of the night, a known meth addict - shooting a hand gun up into the air in the middle of the night from the middle of our street - and they NEVER showed up. We called the next day and asked where they had been - why hadn't they come - what were we supposed to do about this guy (he was also the guy burglarizing a house that they never showed up for when we called, he has moved, thankfully) - and they said, "sorry, we just couldn't get around to it". Um, what? I consider that pretty serious!
And even more recently, I had a man pull a knife on me and another person, threaten his own life and mine and the other person's - and they took 38 minutes to show up. I mean, seriously, in 38 minutes, he could have hung us and butchered us like deer. If they can ignore those types of calls - a "suspicious person" call seems fairly negligible.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)I can assure you that at no time would anyone call the police on me for simply walking with my hands in my pockets. You must admit that wouldn't happen to a white person, right?
And I think you're kidding yourself if you think they wouldn't have said, "No, there's nothing to see here." Responding could be driving by and saying, "nothing to see here." I know police don't have to actually talk to the person because I've had friends on Facebook complain that they call the police about something and the police respond with, "We drove by and didn't see anything out of the ordinary."
marym625
(17,997 posts)FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)However, once the call was made, I can't blame the police for responding to the call and checking it out and doing it politely and respectfully.
Could the cop have just ignored the guy once he saw him? I don't know their policy on that. Some places probably would require him to just for liability reasons. If a cop ignored someone and that person then went on to commit a crime, then there could be a lawsuit.
Other cities may allow the officer to drive by and ignore.
Either way, this is an example of how police should interact with citizens and on the list of things police do wrong, this isn't even on the radar.
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)This is obvious troll bullshit. As if the cop wouldn't respond to a call of a suspicious person.
marym625
(17,997 posts)To troll DU.
If you have nothing to hide you shouldn't care that your phone calls and emails are listened to and read? If you peacefully protest it's OK to be bombed with tear gas?
If your rights are violated it's wrong. Just because the cop violated rights nicely doesn't make it ok. It's because we dismiss any violation that we'll never be able to stop any violation. Stopping a person and questioning without reasonable cause is against our 4th Amendment rights. A call about someone walking down the street is not suspicious activity or reasonable cause to violate those rights.
Response to marym625 (Reply #34)
Post removed
marym625
(17,997 posts)You are the one that needs instruction in the law.
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)I'm sorry, I don;t have time to argue with someone like you. Good bye, and welcome to ignore.
marym625
(17,997 posts)uppityperson
(115,674 posts)4th amendment says :The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized
http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/get-involved/constitution-activities/fourth-amendment/fourth-amendment-mean.aspx
What was this man doing that led the officer to reasonably conclude criminal activity may be afoot? What made this man suspicious beyond walking down the street in freezing weather with his hands in his pockets? How many other people were stopped for doing that same suspicious activity? If none, why this man?
His 4th amendment rights were violated.
marym625
(17,997 posts)Unfortunately, it's wasted on someone who decides that the post is to troll. He doesn't understand nor does he doesn't want to understand.
Zenlitened
(9,488 posts)That's the same thing Zimmerman said.
That's what they pretty much always say.
Always a perfectly good "reason" to hassle the black guy, huh?
Sick. Sick and sad.
marym625
(17,997 posts)I don't understand how anyone thinks this is ok. Not like he was cutting through yards or hopping fences. Dude was walking down the street.
Zenlitened
(9,488 posts)People will never admit that, of course. But the endless, inevitable excuse-making and explaining-away is impossible to interpret any other way.
marym625
(17,997 posts)That people can't see this.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)marym625
(17,997 posts)PsychGrad
(239 posts)I think the cop felt like he was suspicious too. Perhaps, it's a "white" neighborhood - which again, racism abounds. Bullshit. And people wonder why there are riots and looting. I can't say that if I was black, I wouldn't get so fed up with this kind of bs that I wouldn't want to cause some shit too. Hell, I'm white and I kind of already want to break some shit because of all of this crap!
marym625
(17,997 posts)I am absolutely blown away at anyone defending this. Walking down the street is not suspicious activity, unless you're black.
marym625
(17,997 posts)Shows he wasn't ok with this guy walking down the street "making people nervous." Even defending that people were nervous was justification for violating his rights.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)He handled it very well. This chit needs to stop.
marym625
(17,997 posts)If we don't stop the small stuff, we'll never be able to stop the big stuff
Thank you
INdemo
(6,994 posts)as the police think they will be protected by "Republican law"
marym625
(17,997 posts)Scary stuff.
Thank you
Logical
(22,457 posts)marym625
(17,997 posts)Festivito
(13,452 posts)Pontiac has a large black population. They're not stopping everyone who is black.
It makes no sense to stop someone because they have their hands in their pockets. But the message could have been badly typed by an operator or badly spoken by the caller. So, you check it out anyway.
marym625
(17,997 posts)The call was he was walking with his hands in his pocket.
Checking it out doesn't mean you stop the person if there's no suspicious activity.
ecstatic
(32,567 posts)Or when taking his hands out his pockets. It's clear that the only way to solve this mess is to arm everyone with cameras.
Response to marym625 (Original post)
marym625 This message was self-deleted by its author.