A video released by the Travis County Constable's Office in Texas shows one of their deputies tasing a 72 year old woman during a traffic stop on May 11, 2009. Deputy Chris Bieze had stopped Kathryn Winkfein for speeding. When the Great Grandmother refused to sign the ticket and became argumentative, Deputy Bieze fired his taser gun causing the elderly Winkfein to fall to the ground screaming in pain.
As I watched the video this morning on MSNBC I couldn't believe my eyes. Yes the old woman was being argumentative. But the only physical contact was initiated by the deputy when he shoved her toward the shoulder of the roadway. He later claimed he was pushing her away from traffic, but he didn't say that in the video. In the video he just shoves her back with no explanation as to why whatsoever. All she knows is that this deputy that towers over her by at least a foot is putting his hands on her. But this just enrages the woman more.
At this point I can see why the deputy saw no alternative to placing her under arrest. But why did he tase her? He was easily strong enough to physically overpower her enough to place handcuffs on her and put her in the back of his car. But he didn't, he shot the poor woman with his taser causing her to fall to the ground. And to hear her scream out in pain was more than I could take. The Precinct 3 Sgt. Maj. Gary Griffin defended deputy Bieze by saying that he only used his taser when Winkfein became combative. Combative??? I thought the idea behind tasers was to use them when a suspect is in danger of harming themselves or someone else. I saw absolutely nothing in this video that suggested Mrs. Winkfein posed even the remotest threat to anyone. No, the only conclusion I can make is that the deputy was administering a little street justice as punishment for standing up to him.
We see it so much these days I think we've become numb to it. But the way people are treated by police officers today is giving America the feel of a police state more and more everyday. I was watching one of those amazing video shows the other day. It was a sting operation busting buyers of dope. The unaware buyers would walk up to a guy standing on a porch, make the buy, and immediately be surrounded by 6 to 8 undercover policemen. But despite being stunned like a deer in the headlights, and obviously willing to surrender, some eager beaver cop would conduct a flying tackle slamming the poor guy or girl to the ground so hard they often came up with cuts and bruises or at minimum a face full of dirt and weeds. Why is this necessary and how far are Americans willing to allow this trend to continue?
As a 50 year old, overweight man, the idea I might get mistaken for a bad guy scares the hell out of me. Right here in Spokane 2 men have died in recent years after being repeatedly tasered by police. What happened to the days when police officers talked to people. Police need to stop the us and them mentality. Remember, we're all in this together.
*************
Devin Barber, Politics Correspondent
Devin's column, "Left Of The Right" published weekly or more to Gather Essentials: Politics is a Blue Collar Democrats take on current political news.
Devin was raised by proud Roosevelt Democrats. Being the son of parents counted among the throng of Americans displaced by the Great Depression has given Devin a deep rooted passion for causes dealing with the poor and the working class.
You can find all of Devin's columns at LEFT OF THE RIGHT
You can keep up with Devin's postings and his Gather activity by joining his Gather network. Just click here: Devin Barber and then select the orange "Connect" button on the left-hand side of the page.
You can find Devin and other Political Correspondents, plus celebrity content and plenty of other politics experts at Politics.gather.com.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 90
Not becoming a police state, we have been a police state for a long time now.
Absolutely unnecessary. How can you teach kids nowadays that police are there to protect them when they see things like this on TV and in their own neighborhoods?
Sorry, but down here in Florida so many police have been shot and killed when pulling people over, I'm on their side. If you get pulled over, obey the officer or face the consequences.
David, I agree. She was asked NINE times to comply. Enough is enough!
Oh, 72-year-old lady was such a threat...
Savo, I'm sure the 88 year old man entering the Holocaust Museum yesterday wasn't a threat either. Oh wait, he decided to shoot people. There are a lot of crazies out there. All ages.
She should have complied, yes ... but tasing a 72 year old woman who has not hit or kicked and does not have a weapon? That is wrong.
David P. - What a ridiculous comparison.
An old woman upset over receiving a speeding ticket is not even close to being the same as an old man with years of grudges who decides to take a gun to a public place and start shooting people.
You're like comparing an apple to a hand-grenade.
Hey, you've heard of Bonnie & Clyde. She could have been a 72 year old Bonnie. She pulls out her secretly hidden 45 and blows the officer away. These things can and do happen. I'm on the cops side. Listen to what he says or face the music.
Not all older women are so nice. Remember James Bobbitt's wife and Phil Hartman's wife. Sweet women that wouldn't hurt a fly. Then bang, snip, and suddenly those sweet women aren't so nicety nice.
Great non-sequitors, David. If she had been a Bonnie Barrow type of person, I expect she'd have shot the officer as soon as she got out of her truck; Lorena Bobbitt attacked her abusive and cheating husband while he slept; and Phil Hartman's wife killed him while he slept; neither of those last two assaulted an officer that pulled them over.
But for all the police know, YOU could be a vioilent and nefarious felon; so does that mean they should be able to tazer you if you throw a non-violent snit after being pulled over?
Bill, the answer is yes. If I ignore an officer's instructions 9 times to do something, they can tazer me. Tell you what, after 5 times they can tazer me. If I happen to be that stupid to ignore their orders, I deserve what is coming to me. But I don't think I need my head smashed into the hood of the car to comply with the officer's orders.
No we are not a police state. Yes, there are unfortunate incidents like this that happen. The cop didn't need to tase her, and the women didn't need to be a jerk either. Cops have to take way, way, too much abuse, but you don't taser an old woman.
A little class from both participants and this wouldn't have happened.
Justice is supposed to be blind. She deserved the same treatment as any other non-compliant. She was wrong.
Then why didn't the oficer giver her the Rodney King treatment.
JAck E is correct we have been a police state for quite sometime, it is not the country I was born into , and most people are so complacent they have not noticed.
Just wait, in 2012 we will have police tasering people for not using fluorescent light bulbs!
Frankly our country is moving in the direction that Germany took against its citizens and this is a prime example.
"Demokratie" Uber Alles. Whether you want it or not, forced at gunpoint. Freedom is not free, and it must be paid for by someone else, namely the unsuspecting U.S. taxpayer (and their progeny, via inflation). By gum, we'll accomplish that mission dead or alive, we will. For American freedom and liberty as written on that @#$$*@&&$ piece of paper, die Konstitution, we will give our friends the liberated Ay-rabs the freedom from bearing arms, and the freedom to socialized medicine, and that's just the official version. How about the freedom for free warrantless searches done by some pagan soldier with bad manners who doesn't speak your language? Freedom from stress - just shut down newspapers that point out unnecessary ugliness. And of course the freedom to enjoy an all-expenses paid (by the U.S. taxpayer) trip to lovely Abu Graib (isn't it *lovely* this time of year) where you, just like the Jews and Japanese of yesteryear, will be punished and tormented on the basis of your religion (or Sunni sect, etc). And all this for? Well, we obviously don't want your oil, in fact we want to decrease the oil supply in the world to drive prices ever upward to benefit the corporate investments of members of PNAC *who happen to be running our executive branch at the present time
Sorry, but I missed the point in this comment. Could you clarify your point?
She copied, pasted and plagiarized a comment from daily reckoning from 2006...
Yep, I copied and pasted; but I did not plagerize!!!!! I left the copy paste stand separate from my words with quotations marks did you not look Donna !!!!!! or maybe you do not know how to read and yes I forgot to leave the source, go back and look !@!#
I have quotation marks but I guess you can not read properly. Thanks for supplying the source that I forgot to add in my haste as my grandaughter was tugging at my knee for attention and I inadvertantly left it out. YOU ARE SO GOOD AT POLICING GATHER Donna I THANK YOU FOR YOUR INACCURATE INSIGHT. AND ACCUSATION OF PLAGARIZING!!!!!!
April H.
It is plagiarizing when you do not state where the quote came from, putting quotation marks without stating where the quote came from or saying it was a quote. Leaving the person or article from which a quote came from even by mistake leaves you open to being called a plagiarist.
So getting mad at donna f. for pointing it out does not make it right.
So I guess now you will be mad with me for pointing out this.
:O\
April,
You put ONE WORD, "Demokratie", in quotation marks. All I had to do was copy the first three words into "google" and found the original quote on the first entry.
James is absolutely correct. You can quote till the cows come home, but unless you cite whom the original writer was, it remains plagiarism and a violation of Gather TOS, not to mention unethical behvior.
As it stands, your comment appears as if YOU had written it, which in essence is stealing anothers well thought out, although confusing and ignorant, words.
I may be the Gather police, but sugar, at least I ain't a thief.
The thing is, James, is the way Donna went about this. You see it saddens me when we either are attacked or feel attacked here on gather. A place that I love and escape to from my daily grind. I think the key here is intent. Had she told me of an error I would just delete the comment and repost it and cite it. No, big deal! And I do see know that I was really distracted and used a little star instead of the quotation at the end. And removing it now would make all these comments seem out of place as a new comment cited properly would appear under the comments so Yep it was copied and pasted but not sited and thankfully Donna sited it for me . I would have rather been told politely than to go on with a mistake. Instead Donna made an accusation and has even called me a thief publically which in itself is against gather policy " defame, abuse, harass, stalk, threaten or otherwise violate the legal rights (such as rights of privacy and publicity) of others" She is a hypocrite by calling me a thief as doing so publically in itself is a violation of gather's TOS. And I am appalled at her picking and choosing which TOS bullit point she wishes to adhere to herself. Not only has she done it here but on another thread I made on someone elses article she called me a thief directly!!!! Here, she does it sarcastically and with a snarky bitchy attitude; stating she "ain't a thief" , implying that I am. Where I come from it is defamatory to call another a thief without it being proved in a court of Law or at the least by the gather staff. And I am absolutely sure that gather staff would not stoop so low they would politely inform that it was against the TOS and give me the opportunity to correct the mistake. She even admits to being one of the self-appointed plagiarism police - to police gather to her liking. I find these people have no life and are insecure in themselves. Anyone that feels that they have the right to police gather does not deserve my time or consideration. Her recent 'policing'comments directed towards me have nothing valuable to do in reallife. Her comments serve no meaningful purpose to the world. I think that the only thing that gives her life meaning is waking up and deciding to go on gather and hurt other peoples feelings. Maybe she is lonely because all of the other people she abuse's left her alone, and this is the way she lets off steam. Or maybe she is just a cranky bitchy old lady.
Looks like we need to arm Donna with a taser so she can victimize everyone easily from arms length. Geez, copying and pasting a comment! Get a life.
Main Entry: pla·gia·rizeIt appears we have folks who wish to decide what part of Gather's TOS to adhere to. I thought if you agreed to the TOS, that means all of TOS.
Well said Grems she violated the TOS herself.
no, the country is NOT becoming a police state, this is an isolated incident.
If only. Devin's right -- here in our neck of the woods a diabetic man was experiencing physical distress due to his condition. To the cops in the store, he looked drunk. They tased him 27 times (even after he was down)!!! The man subsequently died.
Tasers were invented as a non-lethal weapon, but those who use them improperly can cause serious injury or death.
That deputy was too "quick on the trigger"; a little diplomacy might have calmed the lady down enough for her to be more cooperative. They were BOTH wrong.
I agreee - they were BOTH wrong.
You don't antagonize an officer of the law who is doing his duty - but you also don't administer "justice" as an officer of the law - that part is for the courts!!
And yes, this is already a police state but the complacent and apathetic American people, more like cheerleaders, won't notice until their 72 year-old granmother dies at the hands of overzealous thug policemen. Then the tune will change.
Jeannie B said, "a little diplomacy might have calmed the lady down enough for her to be more cooperative" and she's right. The problem is that the entry to Cadet Training School requires a high school diploma and one felony conviction or less. We don't hire diplomats as police officers, we hire poorly educated thugs. Go to Youtube and plug in 'Tasered' or 'false arrest' or 'bad cops' or 'police brutality' or any number of similar titles. You'll be entertained for 100s of hours. It's a nonstop lovefest of police brutality caught on tape.
I cringed and then started yelling at the TV when I saw the video.
Seriously, that big honkin' officer was in danger from this short great-grandmother? Give Me A Break !!
Tazers have taken the place of Mace as an officer's always appropriate, non-lethal tool for forcing civilians into compliance.
And the argument that the officer was not in the wrong, because he totally followed "the book" just incenses me further. If "the book" allows for tazering an unarmed great-grandmother on the side of a road, over a speeding ticket, then the freakin' book is wrong.
Tazered and arrested for a traffic violation; as if the officer couldn't have written down her plate number, followed her home, or mailed her the ticket.
This old woman was out of line. She created the confrontation. The cop went overboard, but he was in the right.
The officer had no common sense, I read somewhere she dared him to, but that could be a false claim.
Either way it was not appropriate, I hate the damn things, not sure why they need them.
Winkfein was stopped for driving 60 mph in a 45-mph zone just west of Austin.
She resisted arrest and wasnt moving out of the way of traffic. He could have pushed her or wrestled her to the ground... then it would have been brutality. Cop was going to look bad either way. Tazing isnt damaging... maybe next time she will follow directions better and not be an ass about it.
~M
Winkfein did not resist arrest. And the deputy did not ask her to move away from the lane of traffic, he just shoved her.
And if you truly believe tasing isn't damaging, perhaps you should ask the 300 plus people who have been killed by them since 2001.
She was given NICE orders by the policeman and refused to comply NICE times. If she wasn't 72 and tauted as "grandma"... would you feel differently? Justice is supposed to be blind. We complain when it is.... we complain when it isn't.
You are way off base here Tammy. Tasers were meant to be used as a LAST resort, but too many police departments use them with unthinking impugnity. Statitics are hard to come by, but the number of deaths by tasing since 2001 is somewhere around 300. And 80% of them were unarmed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taser_controversy
I don't think that was the kind of blindness the ancient Greeks were thinking about when the blindfolded lady of justice symbol was created.
I keep reading justice on this thread - justice is what a court would administer - the officer's job isn't to administer justice, it's to either write her a ticket and give it to her or have it sent - or, if she is being a danger to herself or others, to use appropriate means to bring her in. He could have simply handcuffed her. He is MUCH stronger than she is
Seemed like a last resort to me. You think a 72 years old lady is not dangerous, but I can guarantee you sometime somewhere a 72 year old lady like this probably pulled out a knitting needle and murdered a cop with it. Why do you expect cops to take unnecessary risks. Tasering this lady was safe and effective, there is no lasting damage, and she was so embarassed she did not even answer her door the next day to talk to reporters about the incident. The lady lost her cool, the officer did not.
"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.".... Quote... Pres. Obama.
He wants a police state...
~M
He was talking about the State Departments role in foreign affairs Michael, not a Federal police force. In other words he was saying that talking to our foreign adversaries rather than hitting them over the head is a far better way of achieving our national security goals. And that we need to give the State Department the power, strength, and funding it needs to carry out that mission.
Geez, are you really that stupid, or did you think we wouldn't notice how astonishingly wrong you got that quote.
Sorry Devin, NOT. He's allocated $500 billion to form his "civilian army". Remember the last dictator who had a private army?
Linda,
You really need to see a doctor lady... I suppose he's doing this in secret because there sure as hell aren't any news stories about it.
I was curious Linda, do you nutbags make a new tin foil hat every night, or do you use the same one over and over?
On a serious note though, Do you possess even the slightest knowledge about how our Federal government works. The president doesn't allocate money, Congress does.
Devin, you are so childish...
Michael QUOTED Obama and you spun it into YOUR twisted reality.
If you would read and research with an open mind, and your brain turned on, you would be on a much higher level of intelligence than you THINK you are on.
OK, he SAID he would allow/use/steal $500 million for this purpose.
And, Devin, you STILL don't understand how the "news stories" work. You won't hear of things which will alarm honest Americans - you will hear only the spin or nothing. You shoul expand your areas of news resources.
...and Devin, you never answered my question about the last dictator who had a private army. Well, do you?
I know frustrate you Devin because you don't like being challenged, thus you go into your "defensive" mode of name calling on top of being rude.
I see it when people comment and respond to your posts, and try to enlighten, you just coil into the fetal position and cry "mommie - they won't let me have my way".
Devin - in HIS own words (your savior):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&hl=en-GB&v=Tt2yGzHfy7s
You do your own homework about the $500 billion dollar price tag. If it is to be "equal" - well, you do the math.
Uh, sorry, but tazing is and can be lethal. There have been multiple deaths reported all around the country.
Yes, we are a police state and it's only going to get worse. They harass people like this, just because they can. In our area, there was a lady who had to much to drink, and the officer tazed her about 8 - 10 times. She fell to the ground on the first taze, bumping her hed on the car bumper (she was not driving or on the highway - it was outside a bar) and the fat slob continued tazing her. After putting her in the police car, he re-opened the door and did it again. I guess the big baby didn't like what she said. That must have been a BIG threat to his manly hood- all caught on tape.
Hopefully this video will circulate and act as a deterrent for others that think that disobeying a police/peace officer is "okay". She was asked NINE times to comply and was told she would be tazered if she didn't. She made the choice.
Yeah, there is a reason cops, the good professional ones, follow rules like this. Once she turned this into a physical altercation, no more Mr. Nice Cop, he has to take her in or the next time she was an encounter with the law she will escalate it with more force remembering being let off for the first time.
There are times to complain and protest, and there are times to shut up and sign your ticket and go to traffic school or whatever.
10-year-old Flower Mound girl arrested after fighting with sister
http://www.pegasusnews.com/news/2009/jun/09/10-year-old-flower-mo
und-girl-arrested-after-fight/
Terrible!
"She had it coming" is NEVER a good excuse for causing another person harm. The police are supposed to be held to a higher standard of behavior than "ordinary" citizens. Defusing a situation is always preferable to escalating it.
The news story said that the woman grew combative when asked to sign the ticket. She seemed to have a chip on her shoulder from then on, but the officer could have calmly explained that she was not admitting guilt by signing the ticket. Instead he chose to use threats, intimidation, and his trusty Taser. Shame on him.
It made him feel like a "real Man"!
just walking away shaking my head at SO much ignorance!
I agree with you Spartan...
I was a cop for too many years and back then we didn't have tasers nor even mase. I went to more police burials than I want to remember. Many because they let their guards down because the person being arrested was either a teen or older person or someone they knew.
I ended one arrest with my head split open with a ten pound cast iron grating, my teeth knocked out and he was a teenager who stood about 5' 8" and I'm 6' 3". I was out of work for over a month and the doctor didn't want me to return to work even that soon. Yes, I got him handcuffed and in the back of my patrol car before I passed out.
Guess by these people I would have been cruel if I had had a taser and used it on him.
:O\
James ... you should write an article about that, people just do not seem to get it. Apparently the belief is that officers are paid to put themselves foolishly in the way of harm, instead of that they are out there representing all of us, as human as the rest of us with as much reluctance to be harmed as anyone else.
They make a big deal about Tasers because they are electrical and there have been some people who have died as a result of being tazed. The problem with that is that people are in varying degrees of physical health and some do die as a result of a fight or are injured. No telling if all in all Tasered did not save more lives than they have cost, and most tased victims are fine.
The problem I have with this incident is that this was no fight. The woman never swung or kicked at the officer; and from what I've heard of the tape, she never threatened him either.
The officer's responses seem to go from asking her to comply, immediately to yelling at her to comply. Then the officer adopted an aggressive threatening stance towards her while she only remained argumentative. Video shows the woman trying to brush past the officer, but she never struck or swung or threatened.
Yes, I'd like our officers to be safe, but this seems like TOO MUCH over reacting. Tazering is electric, it is supposedly non-lethal, it makes the person feel like they are being electrocuted, which means it's kind of like waterboarding. It should not be used as a compliance measure on anyone that is not being violent.
When I watch 6 police cruisers and 12 cops subdue a man because he wasn't wearing a seatbelt ( and I have witnessed such several times ) , then yes, I believe that we are in a Police State.
Such reports sure seem to be on the rise since the Patriot Act.
Really, the old lady had to be such a threat to deal with her like that... how idiotic!
Maybe we are?
The US Governement is putting hundreds if not thousands of law abiding, tax paying car dealerships out of business for no fault of their own!
The US Government just turned bankruptcy laws on their head by putting union workers ahead of bond, prefered stock and secured debt holders!
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Administration-Rein-in-pay-apf-15500519.html?.v=6
Now the Chicago Mafia wants to use their heavy hand on all exectutives!
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/11/us/politics/11health.html
It looks worse that it is. That old lady was really being negligent in her driving and her movements right next to the highway and abusive to the officer. She was going 60 in a 45 zone ... substantially over the speed limit. She really gave the officer a lot of guff, and as the police chief said, if he had physically tackled her or hit her with a baton she would have been severely hurt, maybe bones broken.
Too bad ... now maybe she'll learn not to push things with the cops when she is in the wrong.
I think there is a problem that only the police get blamed for, and that is that there is no dis-incentive for many criminals these days. They commit their crime and are treated like royalty as they go through the legal system. Then they go into a hotel "IF" they are convicted, and given a lenient sentence, we can see from all the criminals that get out and do it all over again, and the over-crowded prisons are likely to release them early even from that.
The cops maybe be over-zealous with some, true. It is like the torture debate in way. On one side they just want to torture people because they think they are the bad guys and on the other they feel like every alledged bad guy is a misunderstood innocent.
All in all I think most of these debates are to rake up something to talk about on the news. What do we gain from hearing this stupid stubborn old woman's story. And you know they are scraping the bottom of the barrel when there is no racist aspect to the story ... it would be much worse if the woman was black.
"..no dis-incentive for many criminals these days. They commit their crime and are treated like royalty as they go through the legal system. Then they go into a hotel "IF" they are convicted, and given a lenient sentence, we can see from all the criminals that get out and do it all over again, and the over-crowded prisons are likely to release them early even from that."
OMG Bruce. Are you comparing this woman to a hardened criminal? That's just sad.
Also, if you think our prisons are like hotels, then you really need to take a tour of one, and I don't mean a white-collar prison. To live in one of our American prisons means to constantly be looking over your back in hopes you won't be beatup, raped or killed by fellow inmates or a bad guard.
One of the biggest reasons American criminals return to crime after being released from our prisons is that our society does not accomodate the reintegration of felons; specifically in hiring them to work. You may think that there is justice in not letting criminals become income earning workers, but it just exacerbates the problem because people do not willingly let themselves starve.
The solution to criminal activity is usually found in making sure people always have opportunities to support themselves. When society does not allow access to survival, people will do whatever it takes to get by; including theft and robbery.
Also, I see no reason for the officer to wrestle her to the ground or use a baton on her.
The officer already had all the evidence he needed to make sure the woman would be punished for her speeding. The fact that he had pulled her over, that he told her about the infraction, that he had written her the ticket, and that she refused to sign it, were all on the video tape.
She was a speeder, not a violent criminal on the lam. Tazering her was authoritarian posturing; it was unnecessary and it was abusive.
Great comments Bill
Bill, you are deliberately mis-reading my comment. A police officer's demeanor and tactic have to be thought out as if he is facing a criminal. Giving them two sets of tactics - one for nice people, and one for killers does not work, for one thing how can they tell who is who, and how fast can things change?
He was arresting her and she was resisting.
But any time you disagree with anything I say you'll always have John Rebel on your side cheering you on.
Police behavior cannot be tailored for little old ladies, and any thought by any of you would realize the obvious.
Bruce - I did not mis-read your comment; either deliberately or accidentally.
I just FULLY disagree with the idea that police officers must ALWAYS act as if they ARE facing a criminal. Making or allowing officers to always take that stance is just lazy and dangerous policing. It too easily leads to abuses by officers who only have to say "Hey, the abused could have been a criminal." in order to be make themselves free of reprisals. Additionally, treating every person AS a criminal will only lead to people not trusting police officers, because the regular innocent person will know that officers can abuse them at will.
What our officers DO need to do, is to always be aware that they MAY be facing a criminal; because, yes, things can go wrong very fast.
Police behavior needs to be tailored to the needs of the public. By your justifications it would seem totally appropriate if SWAT approached every car pulled over, with weapons drawn on a "FULL GO" order, because there MIGHT be a gun toting criminal in the car.
And thanks for the snide remark about John Rebel. I'm sure he appreciates you painting him (or her) as nothing more than my lackey; even though we don't know each other at all.
> the idea that police officers must ALWAYS act as if they ARE facing a criminal.
Come on, there you go again, police must always be aware that the person they are facing may not be what they seem, and may for some reason present an unseen threat. That is not lazy, or dangerous, it's simple the pragmatic truth of trying to enforce the law and protect society's interests. Which is just what I said, and even what you said.
I have had a couple of run ins with bad police officers, thankfully nothing major, but I feel no need to refuse to comply when a cop asks me or demands that I do something. If I did I would expect there would be problems and when problems escalate with the police the control is lost by the individual in most cases and in the hands of the police - it cannot be any other way.
I painted John Rebel accurately, maybe I have a reason to Bill, you seem to double think and dismiss most of what I am saying, and that which you cannot dismiss you have to spin in some ridiculous way in order to disagree with. Like thinking that what I saying would lead to SWAT approaching all cars with weapons drawn ... that's ridiculous, you're ridiculous, what a waste of time to argue with your pointless ranting.
Pointless ranting... Yup, you are exactly right. I am delusional. I keep resisting the fact that this is a new America. An America where a little old lady who does not cooperate with a police officer can righteously be electro-shocked into submission.
> I keep resisting the fact that this is a new America. An America where
> a little old lady who does not cooperate with a police officer can
> righteously be electro-shocked into submission.
See Bill, from reading some of your comments and articles I know you and I have similar values, but where we differ is that I do not feel it is necessary to go off on every incident that has several of the symbolic icons of whatever point of view one chooses. We are being programmed NOT to think, but to react to the symbols of our choice. Be it old lady versus police, guns, marijuana, globalization, we are knee-jerked into distraction by all of these things to create noise and chaos that allows what you are calling a New America to be engineered by those with enough marketing money and the power to use it.
If you want to blame anyone for your New America, blame yourself for constantly being rope-a-doped into reacting to these stories where moderate thoughtful people would not give it a second thought.
This lady behaved stupidly for whatever reason and an event that did not have to happen happened. There was not even any damage done, so what are people going off about? Nothing! There are way more important things to think about in this world ... but they are so complex it is much easier to work off our frustration and adrenalin by yapping on the Internet.
What a losing group of people Americans have become, no wonder they are more easily herded that sheep.
It is no wonder why the police jump to "authoritarian posturing" as Bill's Spirit says. When gather members themselves participate in "authoritarian posturing" by calling others thieves; it just goes to show how pervasive it is in society that the whole world reacts on a higher level then necessary. Unfortunately, there has been a shift to aggressive and non- affectionate behavior amongst our whole society and it is a problem. And starts at home. And yes, I am aware of gather relationships.
yup
And assuming positions by self-appointing themselves to policing without asking the entire population to vote on whether they want that or not. I don't want a Gather member whose intellect and intelligence I can't assess policing my activites on Gather, EVER.
April, I called you a thief after you lambasted me for calling you out for plagiarizing anothers' words.
plagiarize One entry found.
Main Entry: pla·gia·rizeAnd even then, I did not call you names like "bitch", as you did above.
Actually, my original comment was an explanation to Tammy about the inane PLAGIARIZED comment you posted.
"authoritarian posturing" again I see
defame One entry found.Ads by Google Main Entry: de·fame Pronunciation: \di-ˈfām, dē-\ Function: transitive verb Inflected Form(s): de·famed; de·fam·ing Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French & Medieval Latin; Anglo-French deffamer, diffamer, from Medieval Latin defamare, alteration of Latin diffamare, from dis- + fama reputation, fame Date: 14th century 1archaic : disgrace2: to harm the reputation of by libel or slander3archaic : accuse synonyms see malign - de·fam·er noun
Every member of Gather has the "right" to point out a comment or article to the larger community when a copy and paste which does not site its source is posted.
Such instances of copying and pasting without citing can cause Gather MAJOR legal headaches, and it behooves all of us to police such things to the best of our ability, lest we see Gather's doors closed.
Personally, I'd have reported the whole incident to Team Gather right after April responded with the rant that included the phrase "go back and look !@!#".
Yeah maybe I SHOULD HAVE SAID "GO BACK AND LOOK DAMM IT" NSTEAD OF USING CURSE CHARACHTERS; BUT i DID NOT WANT TO CURSE.
TO me the Appropriate Conduct would have been to privately contact the member; if that is not satisfactory resolved then any inappropriate behavior should be reported to Team GAther. And if uncomfortable doing that, report it directly to Team Gather. That is one of the main problem gather has as a site is allowing other members to police other members. I totally agree with John Rebels statment " I don't want a Gather member whose intellect and intelligence I can't assess policing my activites on Gather, EVER." Some people know how to do this tactfully others do not . Personally I think this should HAVE BEEN be left to Staff if Donna could not offer constructive critisism. There is a nice way to say what she said!!!!! And then there is the way she said it!!!
After it was publically pointed out; I admitted to making a mistake because I inadvertantly left out the cited source. but even then I was publically defamed not only on this thread but another. Which is also against the gather TOS HAd Donna adhered to
section number 2 of the gather TOS herself
"Respect other members and treat them fairly. I will not slander, libel, or defame other members. I will be open to giving and receiving constructive criticism.
Calling me a plagerist and a thief does not adhere to the TOS, EITHER it is like calling the kettle black and it defamatory!!!! Furthermore, I never called anyone a bitch I did say that her behavior was bitchy though.
THere is a right way and a wrong way to point out that a comment is wrong for whatever reason, but her original comment was not constructive critisism and it was sent directly to my email because it was posted below a comment of mine. To me it was meant to be inflamatory and degrades me another member. And because any continuation of this matter does not "Strengthen and contribute to the overall good of the community" as the TOS further requires I am done with this.
The original post was only meant as an explanation to another commenter, and as far as I can see, you STILL have not responded to her comment. Do you even understand what the paragraph you posted means?
And for the record, It is not slander, libel or defamation if it is TRUE.
I'm done with your little hissy fit. Grow up.
April - I respect your view that you don't want a Gather member whose intellect and intelligence you can't assess, to police your activities on Gather; but the truth of Gather's setup and goals do not accommodate that view.
Members are not only allowed to police what other members do, they are encouraged to do so. A perfect example of this comes from the Gather installed buttons on every page, to report inappropriate behavior or material. They are placed there for members to use at their discretion.
In this case, Donna pointed out the uncited cut and paste, which did in fact "look" like plagarism, so she was not out of bounds for calling it that in her first comment. Sadly, everything escalated with your next comment. Near as I can make out, Donna was not required by TOS to be nicer in her first comment; but I'm sure Team Gather would join me in wishing that both of you could have been nicer there after.
This man is an animal who became a cop so he could legally torment people. Yeah, she was uncooperative. Find me a woman over 70 who's not.
C'mon, people.. this was in Texas! Texas, where they sentence people with an IQ of forty-seven to a hundred years in prison.
Should we all blindly trust a person because they are wearing a badge?
Not only should this policeman be arrested for manslaughter, every other ranking officer who defended him should be declared accomplices.
Jail time is not necessary —but— several years of community work and an life ban on working in security services, especially the police, should be sufficient.
And yes, the US is turning into a police state.
Thanks to the millions of truly patriotic people "in uniform", we're currently resisting the New world order's "war on terror" agenda to lock us all down but along comes an idiot like this one to smear the entire police force, in the public's eye.