America's citizens are at war with America's Law Enforcement!
 

It's true. Americas citizens are under attack from those who have been designated our protectors and public servants.

http://www.tampabays10.com/weird/wei...?storyid=19792

Watch the video, it's spectacular.
I especially like the part where the police officer assaults the card carrying member of the press. That's a really fucking nice touch. Somehow, I've woken up right smack in the middle of Animal Farm, and I don't like it. When a sworn public servant, who takes an oath to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States, blatantly violates that oath and constitution, theres something seriously seriously wrong.

Now, I know what some of you are thinking, long hours, in a bad situation doing a thankless job, well know what I say to that? Fuck that. Thats right, thats idiotic thinking. It's LUDICROUS to think ANYTHING gives anyone the right to do something like this. I've worked 85 hours in a week, in 100 degree heat, getting burned by weld spatter, and that didn't entitle me to assault people, and neither does this. They're called New Orleans 'Finest' for a reason, their position mandates that they be able to rise above the shit that they are wading in and be an example. Unforunately, I see fewer and fewer of those examples in todays police force anywhere and everywhere.

Now, what we have on here is a video-tape of a unlawful act. If these cops don't do jail time, I'LL go to New Orleans and cheerfully hop in whatever riot I am sure will be occuring.


This country is falling apart, its abhorrent and completely unacceptable. :(

Yes that is fucked up. Not the first time I've seen something like that either.

One of the many reasons I hate cops.

When I first read your article, I thought you were being a sensationalist blowing some "police brutality" case out of line. But that-- that was ridiculous and I hope to God or Allah or whomever that those police officers serve the same penalty that anyone convicted of assault would.

Could also be your penchant for starting fights. Five officers operating inappropriately should not make you 'hate' officers who donate their entire waking lives to keeping your neighborhoods safe of crime.

I can see why you might have though that, so to everyone else, please watch the video. It really speaks for itself.

That video didn't make me hate cops. You don't even know what you're talking about.

I'm by no means a protector of the image in Law Enforcement, but in all defense, the NOPD is notorious for being corrupt and violent. This shouldn't be taken as representation of all law enforcement.

Although I do agree that what happened there was horrible and shouldn't have.

There are good cops and bad cops... such is human nature and it is indeed sad when those in power abuse it.

Sweetpea

This really doesn't suprise me.

My personal feelings are that people should be drafted to become cops. Anybody who wants to be a cop shouldn't be allowed to be in law enforcement -ever. (Excluding the draft rule). The fact is that too many bullies (for lack of a better description) become cops and they could care less about any constitutional "rights".

easy fellas.

well, IMO, those were all bad cops. If there was one good cop in that bunch, you would have seen his billy club crack over the head of the police officer who was assaulting the member of the press.

It's another Rodney King video. I hope they're all convicted and sent to jail in another state.

CNN has an even more shocking video. The whole thing was filmed by a CNN camerman from a hotel window nearby. It's very graphic - the victims face is smashed into a bloody pulp and his lying in a pool of his own blood.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/10/10/ta....ap/index.html (warning - gore and violence)

That video is downright shocking.

The link wasn't working when I tried it so I can't comment on the video.

My feeling on cops are that I do see a need to have them, and I don't hate cops in and of themselves. I do hate a lot of what I see as retarded laws that they have to inforce, and when I see a cop busting a kid who had some pot in his car I start to dislike that cop because I feel he could use discretion on who he deals with. My hate is more with the lawmakers because I do understand that the cop is just doing his job, trying to get by in the world. But still he doesn't have to bust the guy going 15 over in a 25 he choses too and I don't like that.


I just wanted to comment that I think a better way to keep neighborhoods safe of crime is to create an evironment that doesn't foster crime. I feel that if the "criminals" of this country maybe had better living conditions they might not resort to stealing, fighting, killing etc.... Thats not to say there won't always be people who will steal, hurt, rape or whatever regardless of there conditions, and thus the need for a police force.

I don't want to change the coarse of this thread so I'll leave it at that, I just wanted to chime in with my 2 cents.

Yes, it's not there fault they make a concious decision to commit crime, it's somebody elses...

Agreed the video and actions of the cops are really fucked up.

As far as the reporter, he should've known better. Those cops were in an intense situation, he had no right to be running up in there trying to dick around, especially considering what was going on right in front of him.

Jumpin Jesus - people who say they "hate all cops", it's about as indefensible a position as one can take. About as reasonable as "I hate all Jews". The majority of cops are pretty good people, who work hard and believe they can protect innocent people from crime. As with every profession, you get a few rotten apples, but people who volunteer to help other people have noble goals.

here's a real easy solution to all this that i think would help alot. if a cop is convicted with a crime, their penalty should be double that of a normal citizen. since they are entrusted with enforcing the law, they should be held to a higher standard. no cop should have an argument with this unless he/she is a criminal. this is my REALISTIC solution. the one which i would want is to string 'em up by their balls with piano wire, but don't think lawmakers would go for that.

Since when do you get arrested for public drunkenness on Bourbon Street?!?

The videos are sickening -- those responsible should receive no special treatment whatsoever. The victim is 64 years old, for god's sake. He's lucky to be alive.

You are probably right, but we see these videos from time to time on the news and it makes one wonder just how prevalent this type of police brutality is. I mean, for every case that the news cameras just happen to be at the scene are there thousands of other beatings that are not filmed?

Hell even on the TV show Cops, which I think tries to portray cops in a bright light, I often see what I find to be police brutality, not to the extent of the video but I still see some messed up stuff.

Hating a whole profession based on prejudiced generalizations is as stupid as hating a whole ethnicity.

I've met plenty of asshole lawyers, asshole cops, asshole nurses, asshole grocery baggers, asshole real estate agents, asshole stock brockers. Are we at war with all of those professions too?

Point being, there are assholes in every profession, not just cops.......they are human. Slapping a badge on somebody doesn't make them superhuman. They may still very well be an asshole.

I'm not a huge fan of cops in general myself, but please don't judge all cops based on these guys. Most cops wouldn't do that.

And BTW, new orleans cops in general are pretty well known for corruption. You do not EVER want to mess with NOPD.

Every time a teacher gets busted for child molestation, do we have a thread saying "teachers are at war" with us, or pondering a possible epidemic of teachers raping children?

No. Unfortunately, police are the most common authority figures in our society, and are the biggest targets of people who have a problem with authority, IMO. The vast majority of cops are pretty good people doing a samn hard, brave job. Like anyone, cops can make mistakes and, in this particular case, we seem to have a few bad apples who, if things are as they appear, should go to jail.

You can't say that it's just a few bad apples based on the evidence.

Out of five 'apples', three of them were beating a handcuffed man to a bloody pulp, one 'apple' was on horseback trying to block the camera, and the other 'apple' (who was the boss of the other four) then assaults the cameraman.

Which one was the good apple?

Not that I'm excusing anything BUT incidents like this that cause the American Citizenry to speak up are what help to preserve our freedoms. It reinforces in the laws that the government or law enforcement are not allowed to attack or treat innocent citizens too roughly.

I'm sure none of that is consolation to the victims of this. I wonder though what had triggered this. It's not normal for ANYONE to go apeshit on someone who has not antagonized it.

As for all of them being involved. It's likely that pack mentality kicked in. Still not justifieable but explainable.

You weren't being attacked by people you were sworn to protect. You weren't in constant fear for your life for weeks on end while thousands of drunkards rioted in the street. You weren't forced to stay there to try to protect those same drunkards that would just as soon see you dead just because you were a cop. So no, it's not really the same thing at all.

The man wasn't booked solely for intoxication. He was also booked for assault on a police officer, as well as "public intimidation." I don't know exactly what that means, but it sounds an awful lot like he was threatening to kill someone to me. It doesn't matter where you are, what's happening. If someone threatens to kill anyone, I fucking hope the cops will beat his ass down.

Furthermore, in the video it's obvious the man was struggling; it took 4 officers to restrain him. Now we have no indication if this guy was only drunk. For all we know, he could have been hopped up on anything. I've never personally had to restrain anyone on crack, but I witnessed two police officers trying to do the same. Two large men were thrown down by one smallish guy who was on drugs. He was ready to murder both of them, in the street. Had there not been a very large fisherman there willing to step in, he most likely would have killed them both.

Is this situation the same? Probably not. But we don't know that. The only evidence we have is what we see in the video, which begins well after the confrontation began. We don't know what the man said, we don't know what he did to warrant arrest. But the fact is, these officers were in a war zone. If you've ever seen a riot in person, you'll know what I mean. They were under constant and immediate threat to their lives. Did they overreact? Perhaps. But us judging them without knowing the whole situation is absurd.

I second this - I'm taking a law enforcement class at my university this semester and the instructor (a retired deputy police chief) has talked at length about the corruption problems in the New Orleans police department (as well as other areas).

Sure, there are bad cops. These guys are bad cops. I don't hate cops - at all - as a result of this, and no individual cop ever will make that happen.

apparently the guy is now claiming he hasn't had a drop of alcohol in 25 years. I hope he got a blood test that night.

Also to the person saying he was resisting.... he didn't resist until the officers assulted him. Watch the begining of the video up to the horse blocking the view then watch closely when the horse is out of view at what the officers are doing.

I never thought of that before. While I agree with your basic premise (Most people who are 'cop wannabes' are just power hungry asshole idiots) it does not stand the light of inspection.

I agreed with you, as I have an extreme dislike for Wooden Bullets (security guards who pretend they are cops) but then I thought about expanding that same logic to other professions. The thought of making politicians drafted worked, but doctors, teachers, soldiers didn't.

Logic: The people who are actively persuing that career must have alterior motives, and are therefore excluded from the process. Hmmm.

I agree with Ganggreen 110%. There is a trust that society places in our protectors. Like the thread that compared people to sheep, cops to sheepdogs, and criminals to wolves, we need these sheepdogs to keep us safe. When a cop breaks that trust, it is easily twice as bad as a regular citizen! I say 10 times as bad. Give them 10 times the sentence. I want that asshole cop to think 10 times before he does something illegal.

If you look at the statistics, cops rarely get convicted of anything. There are a few that get made into examples but the vast majority get off with desk duty or nothing at all.

Account for the trumped-up charges or the angry criminal who wants the officer to suffer for writing him a ticket, and I'm sure that you'd find the majority of those were justified.

We're not talking about a few bad apples out of 5, we're talking about a few bad apples out of tens of thousands, probably hundreds of thousands in North America alone. Or is the logic "These 5 cops suck, ergo, the 100,000 men and women in uniform also suck"?

You know, 60 cops died at the WTC on 9/11 trying to save other people, doing their jobs bravely - maybe all cops are saints, based on that singular incident?

IMO, there's no defense for these guys - 5 cops on an unarmed 60 year old - there is no reason for that level of force. None. And there is no police manual that I know of that would condone it.

But I probably know a dozen cops - they are pretty decent people for the most part, a couple of them I don't think much of as cops, but the other 10 are solid.

am I the only one who finds it funny that Journey was playing in the background? When the lights go down in the city...

bet that dudes lights went out a few times.

I don't hate cops.. but I'm not fond of them either. Most of them are alpha males who automatically think you're doing something wrong when you're just standing on the sidewalk talking on the phone.

To lighten the mood a little bit.. a story I stole from a police officer forum I read..

Cops are (funny) people too. :)

The first kid was right, his mom's gonna be mad.

.... it was a joke, he didn't REALLY taser a little kid.

I like how the cop shouted his name and badge number at the reporter, telling him to get out his pen and write it down.

Stupid stupid stupid....

Not really. NO is apparently corrupt enough that he's confident any complaint will come to nothing.

I just wanted to touch on a few things Moose said.

Correct. IIRC in an article I read last night there is a Resisting Arrest charge in there too.

I've watched the video several times and only saw the one officer hit him. The rest were using control techniques, albiet it uneffectively. The dude in the tan vest was doing more to hinder them all than help.

I agree. On the flip side though, what's not to say the cops didn't instigate it? Could they have said something to him that may have made him resist arrest? We see only what the news media was us to see. Sensationalistic journalism at it's best. :thumbsup:


Punching a 64 year old drunk in the face is a bit extreme though. I don't see the justification for that level of force in the video. It would be completely different if the man had turned and started swinging. But, again, the events that transpired before the start of the footage may tell a different tale. There is no justification whatsoever for officer Smith to attack the Associated Press journalist.

It sounds like the NOPD handled it appropriately. They will have to go to court and defend their actions, and then all of the evidence will be presented, not just a short video clip, to determine guilt or innocence.

You would think the NOPD would know to beat them IN the police stations in the room where the camera doesn't 'work', not on the street. That alone is bad police work.

While I agree we are missing the start of this event I don't think calling this "Sensationalistic journalism at it's best" is remotely fair.

The video I saw, had no voice over, no music (well Journey in the background doesn't count :lol:) ... it was raw unedited footage.

That's about as objective as one can get.

It's not objective. They started it from the point of the beat-down and have portrayed it as such in the media. I'm curious to know what happened in the 20-60 seconds before the point they decided to show the world.

If the journalist was trying to get into the fray, or getting in the way of the cops and their "arrest" the officer was more then justified in his techniques for dealing with the guy.

Charging him, bending him backwards over a car, jabbing him in the stomach, and cussing at him aren't justified. That's not proper crowd control.

From what I could see, the officer asked the journalist and others to move on or back away. The journalist, still a good distance from the fracas, flashed his credentials. The cop then when ape-shit on him. Not justified.


IF they have the footage they should show it. I didn't get the impression they had it. Rather, they came on the scene and started rolling.

As I said, it would be better if they had the footage. However, it doesn't change the fact that what we see is what happened. There is little that is subjective about the actual footage we've seen (ie no voice over, editing, lighting, etc. giving additional context or information).

The only way this could get more "objective" would be to have better audio.

To hell with what happened the previous 20 seconds. There is nothing this 65 yeard old man could have done to warrant this beatdown. There is no evidence, other than the statements of these overbearing "policemen" that the man did anything at all. They're claimimg he swung at them? Ok, where's a witness that will back that up? A witness who's not one of those four cops. There were plenty of people watching, including the press!

I can't believe all the people standing up for these cops!

If it turns out to be true that this man hasn't drank in how ever many years, then these cops are full of bu-lo-nee.

Watch it again. He was walking toward the confrontation, and looked to be less than 10 feet from it. And what exactly was flashing his "credentials" supposed to accomplish?




Again, if one views the entire clip, one can see that it is edited. There's a jump cut after the horse backs up, and another one right before Officer Fatty Smith comes barging in. And then it jumps straight to another person being arrested (again with no footage of what led up to the arrest), and then yet another police incident that gets cut off. So it seems pretty obvious that they weren't there to film the Journey cover band, and just "happened" upon this "brutal mutilation".

I never said he wasn't walking forward. What I said was he was still a good distance away and his actions we not warranted. Listening to what I can hear, it sounds like Mr. Angry Pants can't keep his temper under control and doesn't like it when people report his bad actions.





You are correct there are a few edits. I guess they are exhibiting a liberal bias and Mr. Angry Pants really should have kicked that yellow journalists ass...

1) what we saw, regardless of the edits, was brutality.
2) I have no issue with four officers taking down a suspect in that manner. I do have an issue with the multiple punches to the head. Unjustified.
3) Mr. Angry Pants needs to get his shit under control or sit at a desk. That is no way to treat *anyone* from the public. There are better ways to do crowd control.

I see nothing untowards in the piece, even with the edits. As it stands it is a Rorschach test. You see what you want to see.

Some see this headline: 64 year old gets beat by police. Report witnessing the event is roughed up.

Others see: Ignorant, criminal black man gives some of our boys a rough time and gets what he deserves! Member of the Yellow Press sticks his nose where it doesn't belong and gets his ass whooped!

What we may be seeing is the police following their Force Continuum (Department policy on Use of Force). It's hard to say due to there being so many edits to the film. The officers may be perfectly justified in their use of force.


Nice Straw Man argument. "Either you see this like the rest of us sensible people or you're an ignorant racist redneck."

You know, I am terrified that our country is going to shit, and the bird flu epidemic crisis that is about to show up is scaring the hell out of me. I am agnostic, but this is sounding like shit out of Revelations. I'll see you all in the next world, if it exists!

He wasn't in the way. It's a public area, and the cops have no right to tell us to leave it. The cops NEVER, EVER have the right to tell us not to take pictures of something that's happening in public.



Agreed. I never flash my creds when the cops tell me to leave. My journalist credentials don't give me any more rights than those of you who are not journalists. If you wanted to grab a home video camera and start shooting right next to me, you have that right. You do not need to work for a media outlet in order to be allowed to take pictures in public.



No, it hasn't been edited. That's raw tape. See, unlike most people with home video cameras, we generally stop recording when we know the video's gonna be crap. In the first cut, his camera moves about 15 or so feet. He didn't miss much of the action so he obviously ran there. He hit stop when he ran over there because he knew the video wouldn't be useable anyway. It's called editing in the camera, and it's to make the editor's job a lot easier for him. He's not hiding anything.




What are you suggesting, that they set up the whole thing for fun? How'd they get NOPD in on it?

Seems to me that with all the mistakes the media makes, you'd have enough fodder to go after us without attacking a non-issue.

Yes, I agree. Smashing a mans face into a wall is great policy... :rolleyes:

Nice to see my message was clear.

I see a lot of disturbing things in this thread, and its gotten huge, so I'll just make some blanket statements.

The problem, IMO, is not so much these cops, it's law enforcements elitist attitude. Everyone is saying, well, the cop told him to go away and he did'nt. A badge does not give an officer carte blanche to issue orders, though many seem to think it does. Police officers are becoming a whole seperate class of society that is not being held up to the same rules and restrictions that the rest of us plebs are. That is bad. Very bad. That's revolution bad, because there will eventually be a terrific backlash. So if you like your way of life the way it is now, call em as you see em, and put the rules back in play on those who consdier themselves above them.



Now, CNN is reporting that the suspect was not issued any sort of sobriety test at all and the officers involved are out on bond.

Draw your own conclusions. But if the conclusion that you come to is that a lot of rights were violated, and a man was brutalized, think about what would be happening now if that camera crew was not there. And also consider, that for every one documented example, we have 1,000 others undocumented. Mebbe more.

More talk about the revolution that's coming. There isn't going to be one. Never. The best you can hope for is some disorganized, sporatic rioting in the streets, but that'll be quelled.

Why shouldn't they be? They have the same rights all all the other people accused of a crime.

Are you just making this up? I'd like to see stats to back that statement up.

I feel a backlash is inevitable, you don't, theres no need to argue about that.

I did'nt say they should not be out on bail, but if this was nothing they would not have been arrested. Like it or not, cops are not subject to the same rules we are. Something has to be very very wrong for public administrative action or criminal charges against one. When was the last time you ever heard of a cop getting a DUI? Think it never happens. The case of the speeding NJ cops in virginia lends weight to my argument IMO.


And I asked you to consider that for every one there was 1,000, I did'nt say it was fact. But marketing types hold this point of view, and it doesn't seem very far fetched to me. But the point is, you don't know one way or the other do you? That I don't is not acceptable to me.


You also ignored the most immediately obvious aspect of my argument.

You stated it as if it were fact. You even base your statement on "marketing types" that hold this point of view. Surely you have proof to back that up, otherwise it falls under the logical fallacy of Appeal to Annymous Authority. You're just repeating rumor as fact.

Which was?
- Law enforcement has an elitist attitude that will eventually lead to revolution. I addressed that.
- Just because someone's a cop it doesn't give him the right to assault a reporter. I addressed that point earlier in the thread. I agree with you.
- The cops are out on bond. I addressed that too.
- Your claim that police brutality is an undocumented incident with a 1,000:1 ratio. I also addressed that.

Which only leaves us with this:
They would've probably gotten away with it.

your missing the rift forming between the citizens of this country and their 'protectors' saying, 'there won't be a revolution because of that' and continuing on is not adressing the issue.

The rift is forming in the extreme wings of the political ideologists. I haven't seen anyone outright condone police brutality yet. I have seen a bit of violence against police advocated though.

It's happening in society, this is not a cooked up issue.

They don't have to, complacency is good enough.

Karma does not strike me in any way as a concept that is beyond anyones comprehension.

Only by political extremists. The extremists are the only ones who ever advocate and predict a revolution. Leftist Marxist types and right wing white supremists seem to be the two most common. Thankfully they are both in the minority.

Complacency in what? The cops were charged with a crime and will have to defend themselves in court. That is anything but complacency, and until you are able to source your 1,000:1 ratio argument with facts you have no real argument here.

Karma? You're bringing Karma in as a defense? :hmm:

Yes, I'm complaining that the rampant abuse of power by the state is responsible for a black man being abused, so I'm either a socialist, or a racist. right. And I dont appreciate you eluding to me being either a nazi or a communist.


It all comes back to that backlash that you don't think will ever happen.

This wasn't a case of state sanctioned abuse. This was an instance of one cop going totally nutbar and illegally ape shit on some guy, and 3 other officers doing mostly text book manuvers.

If for some reason no remedy is found for the situation, then you can start looking at a larger "state" type issue.

The officers were arrested and charged and will stand trial to defend their actions. I would have to see more evidence that police brutality is a common thing and is rampant. It was discovered and it was dealt with.

I wasn't alluding to anything. I said they were the two most common types. Certainly there are other types (anarchists for example), but I stand by my statement that only the political extremists are the ones who cry for revolution.

First of all, If you consider that journalist got an "ass kicking", then you have lived a very sheltered life. Second, that smart-ass "liberal" comment is so far off base it's really not funny. Third, I do believe this was filmed with bias because of the supposedly "raw" footage that was on the tape afterward, which addresses this question:

I think they were trolling for it, and hit the jackpot, because with the "if it bleeds, it leads" mentality combined with the "all NO cops are corrupt" mentality, sprinkled with a little thing called, oh a hurricane, I think they saw Bourbon Street as a goldmine. I could find no statements of what they were actually there to cover, and if anyone can find out provable evidence of what this other "mystery story" was then I will gladly withdraw that comment.


You're right. (up until the smart-ass straw man bit).

I think that personal definitions has a lot to do with it. Regardless of the dictionary definition, "brutal" means something far worse that this to me, and calling every other thing "brutal" simply dilutes the word into meaninglessness.

I agree with the poster(s) that say our society is in trouble. Not because of some agitated cops in a troubled region that overreacted to a situation. But because incontextual "sound bytes" and "video bytes" are used to whip people into a crucifying frenzy. That, compounded with the pseudo psychic inducing powers of the internet, is bringing about the painful death of objectivity.

News Flash: Objectivity never existed.

I've already explained the raw to you. Reread the explanation.




And so what if they were? I'll tell you something, if I got a tip that cops were beating the crap out of the citizens of my town, you can BET my camera would be down there that night looking for it. Police abuse, which translates to governmental abuse, of the general public is wrong, it's illegal, and it's the media's responsibility to expose it. This doesn't fall under the "if it bleeds it leads" concept, which by the way I have no trouble telling you that many TV stations buy into. Those stations go out and cover every traffic accident as though it's the biggest story of the day.

There's a very good reason to expose police brutality, and that's exactly what this news crew did.

I believe that's ridiculous. People are on Bourbon street with cameras recording all kinds of crap every day of the year. And now, especially with the hightened focus after the huricane, of course there are going to be people with video cameras. How has this turned into a conspiracy? lol. What a sad state of affairs.

Good. Admitting that that the clip is not objective is half the battle.

Half of what battle? The battle to exonerate obviously abusive police officers? The clip is objective. It is factual information recorded by means of a video camera. Observations and interpretations are never completely objective. Data is always objective.

Who said anything about exonerating anybody(see my comment about the psychic inducing powers of the internet)? It's half the battle to having an open minded discussion rather than knee-jerk diatribes. And according to Charlatan the clip is not objective because objectivity does not exist.

Objectivity does not exist when the sources are human. I highly doubt that charlatan was arguing against the existence of an objective reality, and even if he was, that discussion is a little beyond the scope of this one, perhaps worthy of another thread. He was actually specifically referring to your opinion that the internet was Were you referring to objectivity as it exists absolutely or were you referring to it in the context of interpersonal communication?

I think the line that most people are taking is that the contents of the video, regardless of who shot it, seem to point only towards the conclusion that the police officers involved are piece of shit douchebags.

As I stated in my earliest post... this film is as close to "objective" as you are going to get. True Objectivity will never exist as long as there is some form of human mediation (as Filtherton points out, this goes beyond the scope of this thread).

I feel the subjectivity mrklixx and others believe this film has is inconsequential when faced with the simple facts. We saw a police office repeatedly punch a 64 year old man's head. We also saw a police officer loose his temper and threaten a citizen by stander. We saw other things but these are the two key elements that have people upset.

As far as I'm concerned. The two events were uncalled for and represent a lack of control on the part of these two officers. This not how officers who are supposed to server and protect should behave. Disciplinary actions should be taken.

I watched the video three times and read all the posts in this thread up 'till here.

My thoughts:

You can stop mentioning the age of the man who resisted arrest. It's irrelevant. It took three cops to get him restrained, he's hardly "feeble".

Edit: Section in yellow was negated by watching the video a fourth time (see two posts down).

I saw violence on that tape but nothing I would call brutality. They weren't hitting him over and over again with clubs, they weren't tasering him multiple times, they were restraining him.

The part where it looks like the cop is punching him in the head: it looks to me like they were trying to get the guy to get put his arms behind his back so they can handcuff him.

There is some dispute as to whether this guy was publicly intoxicated or hadn't had a drink in 25 years. Irrelevant. He did something to draw law enforcement attention upon himself and didn't comply with orders. He needed to be restrained, he was restrained.

The fat bastard who assaulted the reporter should get the same punishment as any citizen who grabs lapells and yells. A slap on the wrist and a small fine. It was wrong to go so apeshit on the reporter, but the reporter wasn't really damaged.

Talk of citizens being at war with law enforcement, right-wing and left-wing extremists, revolutions, totalitarian states, etc. is all drama-queen bullshit. Fantasy-world premises (cop punishments = citizen punishments x 10) are ridiculous since we live in reality, not idealist la-la land. The only people at war with law enforcement are people attempting to do whatever they want regardless of what the law allows (and the over-zealous fuzz).

Everyone, go watch the CNN one. It's much better, and shows the aftermath--the man laying on the street in a bloody mess. After seeing that, I can't for the life of me see how anyone could say that isnt police brutality. Repeatedly smashing a man's face against a wall until he is laying in the street in a pool of blood is brutality, cut and dry. I don't care what he did, that was completely uncalled for.

Apparently there were two different video clips linked to on that CNN site. The first one was the beating, the second was the rooftop angle of the bloody guy laying on the sidewalk. After watching the second one I went back and watched the first one again.

Two things I noticed this time that I hadn't noticed the first three times I watched the clip before making my last post. Over the top of the horse's ass near the beginning of the clip you can see a cop punching the guy in the back of the head. Obviously this negates my statement about seeing violence but not brutality. When the camera angle switches and the guy is still standing, he has no blood on his shirt or face, so (again) obviously more was happening on the ground than just trying to get his arms behind his back for handcuffing.
This does not mean that I now believe that the cops were evil and the guy was an innocent. I think everyone involved in the incident made some bad decisions which, in turn, provoked more bad decisions by all concerned.

Of course we all know the best way to avoid this kind of police beat-down. Stay at home and only communicate with the outside world by computer.
Oops, preaching to the choir.