The Chainlink

NYPD police officer explains to a cyclist why he had to nearly run him over and stop him "by any means possible", all for the cyclist's own safety.  You make the call about who's right (if anyone).  

"By any means possible"

To be fair, here's the police department's response:

"Became wedged"

Views: 184

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Who's worse, Chicago popo or New York Popo?

The cyclist was wrong on several counts: (1) wearing headphones in NYCity traffic, (2) running red lights in front of the police, and (3) disobeying an order from a policeman.  What a jerk.

Cops these days have a very tough job.  Law-abiding citizens should support them in ALL respects...DAs, the courts, and a large portion of our population don't seem to.

"Support them in all respects" including when they engage in misconduct? 

Regardless of what the cyclist did the officer HIT THEM ON A BIKE WITH AN SUV and then told them 'it was for their safety...'

It's a ridiculous justification.

It is also ridiculous that the officer chose to use a physical method of stopping somebody for not even a property crime.  If the officer really wanted to write them a bunch of tickets and give them static for not stopping or resisting or whatever they want to call it they could have just followed them until they stopped.  Or even gotten out and chased on foot, it ain't hard to catch a Divvy.

The issue isn't about them stopping them it's about the amount of force used.

Another perspective for consideration:

This is much more serious than a property crime.  A pedestrian down the road may have been grateful for the officer's actions, who without injuries was able to halt a perpetrator who'd rejected/ignored an officer's lawful commands, and instead of being passive, was actively endangering himself and others.  Running red lights where pedestrians have the right to be crossing and other such actions as CLP has accounted above is a serious scenario.  This gets into reckless endangerment territory. 

In similar circumstances if somebody had done all of this in a car, they might have ended up on the ground, handcuffed, etc.

In other jurisdictions, disobeying commands, fleeing, and endangering others even while on foot can end up in a taser event or being subdued on the pavement as mentioned, all with considerable odds of injury as would also come with an effort to tackle the cyclist. 

It was improper for the cyclist to do what was done, and it was the cyclist in this instance who precipitated the entire event.  In context, the cyclist may have ended up pretty well-off considering.  The whole circumstance is unfortunate, difficult to manage in real time, and thankfully no one was injured.  Everyone should be discouraged from setting something like this in motion in the very beginning. 

RSS

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service