Official 'FUCK THE POLICE' Thread. (Examples of Police Brutality)

I'm usually armed, although they are way used to it here, it still garners respect. I don't answer questions nor consent to searches. It's damn hard not to get intimidated and to stay cool. I hate dealing with po po.

I still would have called the police after being gang raped at that Gay Pride Parade brother ( srh88 ) ! Your bigotry is NOT going to do anything for that pain in the ass!

Do you really think you are more of a man than I because of a uniform I once wore? Man up Punk!

Imagine the life of this LEO working in Afganistan to find and execute those responsible for the thousands of innocent Americans murdered on September 11, 2001 here in the US. Fuck him? No respect?


What the fuck have you ever done to better the life of your fellow Americans? Bigotry?!?


Dude, I don't know how old you are, but you best check yourself before you wreck yourself! Stop being part of the problem and be a part of the solution brother.

racerboy71 said:

yah, i agree.. i wouldn't call a cop even if i was just shot.. i'd drag my bloody ass into a car and drive myself to the hospital.. calling the popo never makes shit better ime..
a buddy of mine was going through some shit years ago, was threatening to kill himself with a knife and shit so his moms called 911.. my buddy ended up getting arrested for making terroristic threats and possession of a weapon, the knife.. just what he needed at the time when he was obviously already having issues in life ...

Click to expand...

You realize the police would show up to the hospital for any gun shot wound right?

[video=youtube;4yTBHCNHaQo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yTBHCNHaQo[/video]

Civil disobedience, now that's fucking funny!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/13/michael-vincent-allen-shot-at-41-times-by-police_n_1881753.html

Shot at a guy 41 times while chasing him and is now facing criminal charges. Not to far from me, first reports were the guy rammed the cop and he shot him. Than a couple days later the truth came out. Nut Job Cop for sure.

[youtube]4xCA0U5fXBc[/youtube]

The family of a 20-year old man a Los Angeles County Sheriff’s deputy shot and killed two years ago says surveillance video released a few weeks ago but made public Friday shows a different story of what happened.

Jonathan Cuevas was out late in Lynwood on October 10, 2010 with two friends walking to a house party. They stopped at a liquor store on Long Beach Boulevard to buy beer and snacks. The group of men jaywalked across the street around 1:45 a.m. when a deputy patrol car pulled up to cite them for an alleged pedestrian violation.

The video, which has no sound, shows the deputy getting out of his car as Cuevas takes off running. The deputy shoots at Cuevas, who falls a few steps later at the corner of Josephine Street and Long Beach Boulevard.

“One, two, three four, five…he stands…six, he stands over them…seventh shot,” said the family’s attorney James Segall Gutierrez as he counted the deputy’s shots in the surveillance video he played for reporters Friday.

Four bullets hit Cuevas. He died later at a hospital.

“There were no reports at all that night that they were looking for somebody with Jonathan’s description. There were no reports that Jonathan was being violent in any matter,” Gutierrez said.

A Sheriff’s department incident report says the deputy involved, Julio Jove, says he saw Cuevas pull a handgun from his waistband and point it at him. But Cuevas' relatives maintain that the surveillance video doesn’t show that.

“It doesn’t show that he makes a threat to the officer. He’s running. He gets shot in the back and he falls down and the officer stands over him and continues to shoot him,” said Mayra Murrillo, Cuevas’s fiancé and mother of their four-year-old son.

Cuevas’ mother Alicia Alvarez said she began asking neighbors and business workers who witnessed the shooting after it happened.

“Something told me in my heart that something was very wrong because it was totally opposite of what the Sheriff’s homicide [detectives] told us,” Alvarez said.

Steve Whitmore, spokesperson for the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department, called the shooting tragic. But said that internal investigators, with oversight from the Office of Independent Review, declared the shooting justifiable.

“This video that was shown today is partial, small part of this story. It is by no means telling the whole story,” he said.

Whitmore said because of the civil lawsuit, he was not able to fully comment or divulge more details of the case but said the department looks forward to telling their side of the story in court.

The family is suing the department, the county, and the deputy involved for wrongful death.

Alvarez said she wants a public apology from the deputy and department, for the deputy to be held accountable, and for the Sheriff’s department to review its policy and training on when deputies should use deadly force.

http://www.scpr.org/news/2012/09/15/34292/surveillance-video-shows-deputy-shooting-lynwood-m/


Unreal.

Anybody see that kid reach for a weapon and point it at that pig? I didn't.

He jaywalked, took off running and this fucking cop shot him 4 times in the back. That is murder. I cannot understand why this cop drew his gun instead of attempt to chase him.

Something seriously has to change, this is unacceptable.

FUCK THE POLICE.

B.C. Supreme Court Justice Janice Dillon’s refusal to jail disgraced former RCMP Cpl. Benjamin Monty Robinson is a travesty.

In a decision that triggered immediate controversy Friday, Justice Dillon said his aboriginal heritage meant Robinson didn’t have to go to prison for obstructing justice after the fatal Oct. 2008 collision with a young motorcyclist.
She sentenced him to one month’s house arrest, another 11 months with a 9 p.m. curfew and told him to pay a $1,000 victim surcharge fee.

Oh, she also ordered him to write an apology to the family of Orion Hutchinson, the 21-year-old from Tsawwassen who lay dead or dying while Robinson, already buzzing on five beers, nipped home to drop off the kids and down a couple of vodka shooters.
It was an insult, and as they left the New Westminster courtroom, the family’s pain spilled onto the street.
“You’re not out for blood, you just want some kind of justice,” Judith Hutchinson fumed.
“Curfew? It’s basically like a kid being grounded. Any jail time would have been better. ... He got off so lightly.”
She said it was a slap in the face.

“I’m outraged,” she practically spat, adding the family doesn’t want Robinson’s condolences made “with an arm twisted behind his back.”
It was heartbreaking.

Twitter and radio call-in shows were quickly filled with condemnation from people who thought the judge was out of touch with community values, or worse.
We’re jailing young people for smashing windows during the Vancouver riot yet Justice Dillon bends over backwards to give this ex-Mountie house arrest?
The maximum penalty for obstructing justice is 10 years behind bars and the federal Tories have us jailing harmless pot growers.
This was a police officer — a man sworn to uphold the law, a man intimate with the ways drunk drivers evade responsibility.
A man, as Justice Dillon said, who used his knowledge and experience to obfuscate and mask his culpability in a horrendous accident.
This is holding police officers to a higher standard?

These circumstances demanded a much more serious response from the bench. The Crown suggested at least three months in jail, which was probably about right.
Instead, Dillon gave us sophistry: He’s an alcoholic, aboriginal, first-time offender suffering from post-traumatic stress and, besides, putting a former police officer in jail means protective custody.
That didn’t wash.

He was a seasoned RCMP officer and if we can keep gangsters in solitary for months awaiting trial, it’s not much of a hardship for corrections to accommodate a single ex-cop for a month or so given our early release provisions.
Furthermore, her reasoning misconstrued Parliament’s intent when it amended the Criminal Code to provide more justice for first nations offenders.
Lawmakers weren’t out to give a racial discount on sentencing.
The restorative goals of that law should not apply here — Robinson, a member of the prosperous Osoyoos band, was not the victim of systemic racism or neglect; he was not disenfranchised, marginalized, impoverished, oppressed or disadvantaged.

Justice Dillon gave someone a break who didn’t deserve it.
Robinson discredited police officers at a time they were under extreme scrutiny and he tarnished the iconic national force with his conduct.
The 42-year-old father of three was an RCMP corporal and he should have been treated like one, not given a get-out-of-jail-free pass because of a legal loophole.
Robinson did not acknowledge his guilt, apologize or show any remorse during the proceedings. It took until last week for him to do the right thing and resign as a Mountie.
In her judgment, Justice Dillon should have emphasized not his rehabilitation but rather deterrence, denunciation and the promotion of responsibility.
Her decision sends the wrong message to drunk drivers, to bent police officers and to those who think judges are too soft on crime.
Robinson still faces perjury charges over his testimony about the October 2007 death of Robert Dziekanski after he was repeatedly Tasered and subdued by Robinson and three other Mounties at the airport.
Walking away from court trailing reporters, his lawyer David Crossin offered: “Well, he’s prepared to take his medicine and he’s taking it.”

What a crock: Be home by 9 now, Monty!



Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/Opinion+Editorials+Columns/1515461/story.html#ixzz26bSxaW00


fuck the police

TheMan13 said:

I still would have called the police after being gang raped at that Gay Pride Parade brother ( srh88 ) ! Your bigotry is NOT going to do anything for that pain in the ass!

Do you really think you are more of a man than I because of a uniform I once wore? Man up Punk!

Click to expand...

theres a difference in an MP and a PIG though..

[video]http://youngnet.tumblr.com/post/31647394548[/video]

Police enlist young offenders as confidential informants. But the work is high-risk, largely unregulated, and sometimes fatal.

On the evening of May 7, 2008, a twenty-three-year-old woman named Rachel Hoffman got into her silver Volvo sedan, put on calming jam-band music, and headed north to a public park in Tallahassee, Florida. A recent graduate of Florida State, she was dressed to blend into a crowd—bluejeans, green-and-white patterned T-shirt, black Reef flip-flops. On the passenger seat beside her was a handbag that contained thirteen thousand dollars in marked bills.

Before she reached the Georgia-peach stands and Tupelo-honey venders on North Meridian Road, she texted her boyfriend. “I just got wired up,” she wrote at 6:34 P.M. “Wish me luck I’m on my way.”
“Good luck babe!” he replied. “Call me and let me know what’s up.”

“It’s about to go down,” she texted back.

Behind the park’s oaks and blooming crape myrtles, the sun was beginning to set. Young mothers were pushing strollers near the baseball diamonds; kids were running amok on the playground. As Hoffman spoke on her iPhone to the man she was on her way to meet, her voice was filtered through a wire that was hidden in her purse. “I’m pulling into the park with the tennis courts now,” she said, sounding casual.

Perhaps what put her at ease was the knowledge that nineteen law-enforcement agents were tracking her every move, and that a Drug Enforcement Administration surveillance plane was circling overhead. In any case, Rachel Hoffman, a tall, wide-eyed redhead, was by nature laid-back and trusting. She was not a trained narcotics operative. On her Facebook page you could see her dancing at music festivals with a big, goofy smile, and the faux profile she’d made for her cat (“Favorite music: cat stevens, straycat blues, pussycat dolls&#8221.

A few weeks earlier, police officers had arrived at her apartment after someone complained about the smell of marijuana and voiced suspicion that she was selling drugs. When they asked if she had any illegal substances inside, Hoffman said yes and allowed them in to search. The cops seized slightly more than five ounces of pot and several Ecstasy and Valium pills, tucked beneath the cushions of her couch. Hoffman could face serious prison time for felony charges, including “possession of cannabis with intent to sell” and “maintaining a drug house.” The officer in charge, a sandy-haired vice cop named Ryan Pender, told her that she might be able to help herself if she provided “substantial assistance” to the city’s narcotics team. She believed that any charges against her could be reduced, or even dropped.

Hoffman’s legal worries were augmented by the fact that this wasn’t her first drug offense. A year earlier, while she was a senior, police pulled her over for speeding and found almost an ounce of marijuana in her car. She was ordered into a substance-abuse program, which required regular drug testing. Later, after failing to report for a test, she spent three days in jail.

Hoffman chose to cooperate. She had never fired a gun or handled a significant stash of hard drugs. Now she was on her way to conduct a major undercover deal for the Tallahassee Police Department, meeting two convicted felons alone in her car to buy two and a half ounces of cocaine, fifteen hundred Ecstasy pills, and a semi-automatic handgun.

The operation did not go as intended. By the end of the hour, police lost track of her and her car. Late that night, they arrived at her boyfriend’s town house and asked him if Hoffman was inside. They wanted to know if she might have run off with the money. Her boyfriend didn’t know where she was.

“She was with us,” he recalled an officer saying. “Until shit got crazy.”

Two days after Hoffman disappeared, her body was found in Perry, Florida, a small town some fifty miles southeast of Tallahassee, in a ravine overgrown with tangled vines. Draped in an improvised shroud made from her Grateful Dead sweatshirt and an orange-and-purple sleeping bag, Hoffman had been shot five times in the chest and head with the gun that the police had sent her to buy.

By the evening of her death, Rachel Hoffman had been working for the police department for almost three weeks. In bureaucratic terms, she was Confidential Informant No. 1129, or C.I. Hoffman. In legal parlance, she was a “cooperator,” one of thousands of people who, each year, help the police build cases against others, often in exchange for a promise of leniency in the criminal-justice system.

Informants are the foot soldiers in the government’s war on drugs. By some estimates, up to eighty per cent of all drug cases in America involve them, often in active roles like Hoffman’s. For police departments facing budget woes, untrained C.I.s provide an inexpensive way to outsource the work of undercover officers. “The system makes it cheap and easy to use informants, as opposed to other, less risky but more cumbersome approaches,” says Alexandra Natapoff, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles and a leading expert on informants. “There are fewer procedures in place and fewer institutional checks on their use.” Often, deploying informants involves no paperwork and no institutional oversight, let alone lawyers, judges, or public scrutiny; their use is necessarily shrouded in secrecy.

“They can get us into the places we can’t go,” says Brian Sallee, a police officer who is the president of B.B.S. Narcotics Enforcement Training and Consulting, a firm that instructs officers around the country in drug-bust procedures. “Without them, narcotics operations would practically cease to function.”


http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/09/03/120903fa_fact_stillman#ixzz26q9z1FCo


Fuck The Police!

The deaths of two female police constables have brought into focus the unarmed status of most British police. Why does Britain hold firm against issuing guns to officers on the beat?

It's the single most obvious feature that sets the British bobby apart from their counterparts overseas.

Tourists and visitors regularly express surprise at the absence of firearms from the waists of officers patrolling the streets.

But to most inhabitants of the UK - with the notable exception of Northern Ireland - it is a normal, unremarkable state of affairs that most front-line officers do not carry guns.

Unremarkable, that is, until unarmed officers like Nicola Hughes and Fiona Bone are killed in the line of duty. There are always those who question why Britain is out of step with most of the rest of the world, with the exceptions of the Republic of Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and a handful of other nations.

For a heavily urbanised country of its population size, the situation in Great Britain is arguably unique.

Film director Michael Winner, founder of the Police Memorial Trust, and Tony Rayner, the former chairman of Essex Police Federation, have both called for officers to be routinely armed.

But despite the loss of two of his officers, Greater Manchester Chief Constable Sir Peter Fahy was quick to speak in support of the status quo.

"We are passionate that the British style of policing is routinely unarmed policing. Sadly we know from the experience in America and other countries that having armed officers certainly does not mean, sadly, that police officers do not end up getting shot."

But one thing is clear. When asked, police officers say overwhelmingly that they wish to remain unarmed.

A 2006 survey of 47,328 Police Federation members found 82% did not want officers to be routinely armed on duty, despite almost half saying their lives had been "in serious jeopardy" during the previous three years.

It is a position shared by the Police Superintendents' Association and the Association of Chief Police Officers.

The British public are not nearly so unanimous.

An ICM poll in April 2004 found 47% supported arming all police, compared with 48% against.

In 2007, the centre-right think-tank Policy Exchange found 72% of 2,156 adults wanted to see more armed police patrols.

For decades there have been incidents that have led to calls for issuing all officers with firearms. Cases like those of Sharon Beshenivsky, shot dead during a robbery in 2005, or of the three plain-clothes officers murdered by Harry Roberts in west London in 1966, or the killing of PC Sidney Miles in the Derek Bentley case of 1952.

Few expect the system to change even after widespread public horror at the deaths of PCs Bone and Hughes.

For one thing, incidents such as that in Greater Manchester are extremely rare. Overall gun crime, too, remains low.

In 2010-11, England and Wales witnessed 388 firearm offences in which there was a fatal or serious injury, 13% lower than the previous 12 months. In Scotland during the same period, there were two fatal and 109 non-fatal injuries during the same period, a decade-long low.

Additionally, officers, chief constables and politicians alike are wary of upsetting an equilibrium that has been maintained throughout Britain's 183-year policing history.

"There's a general recognition that if the police are walking around with guns it changes things," says Richard Garside, director of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies.

Arming the force would, say opponents, undermine the principle of policing by consent - the notion that the force owes its primary duty to the public, rather than to the state, as in other countries.

This owes much to the historical foundations of British criminal justice, says Peter Waddington, professor of social policy at the University of Wolverhampton.

"A great deal of what we take as normal about policing was set out in the early 19th Century," he says.

"When Robert Peel formed the Metropolitan Police there was a very strong fear of the military - the masses feared the new force would be oppressive."

A force that did not routinely carry firearms - and wore blue rather than red, which was associated with the infantry - was part of this effort to distinguish the early "Peelers" from the Army, Waddington says.

Over time, this notion of guns being inimical to community policing - and, indeed, to the popular conception of the Dixon of Dock Green-style bobby - was reinforced.

While some in London were issued with revolvers prior to 1936, from that date only trained officers at the rank of sergeant or above were issued with guns, and even then only if they could demonstrate a good reason for requiring one.

Today only a small proportion of officers are authorised to use firearms. Latest Home Office figures show there were just 6,653 officers authorised to use firearms in England and Wales - about 5% of the total number.

None of which implies, of course, that the British police are somehow gun-free. Each police force has its own firearms unit. Police armed response vehicles have been deployed since 1991.

In addition, trained officers have had access to Tasers since 2004 despite controversy about their use. Met Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe called for police response officers to be routinely armed with the weapons in November 2011.

Particularly in London, the sight of armed officers at airports, embassies and other security-sensitive locations has become a familiar one, especially since the 11 September attacks.

However much firearms become an accepted part of British life, however, former Met deputy assistant commissioner Brian Paddick doubts police themselves will ever support a universal roll-out.

For one thing, the sheer cost of equipping all personnel with weapons as well as providing regular training would be prohibitive at a time of public spending cuts, he says.

In addition, Paddick adds, front-line officers would not be keen to face the agonising, split-second decisions faced by their counterparts in specialist firearms units.

"In terms of the police being approachable, in terms of the public being the eyes and ears of the police, officers don't want to lose that," he says.

"Every case in which a police officer has shot someone brings it home to unarmed officers the sheer weight of responsibility that their colleagues face."

Cases like that of Jean Charles de Menezes, shot dead by a Met firearms officer after he was wrongly identified as a terrorist, illustrate Paddick's point.

For now, at least, that starkest of all distinctions between British officers and those abroad looks secure.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19641398


Fuck AMERICAN Police!!

Yes the police do suck royal extra cheesy rotten ball sacks all day and they dont care who knows it. FTP

hey padawan, i'm not sure if you are a reader, but if not, you should check out skunk magazine...

every month they have a section called i think the drug war follies, and has some interesting reads on people who have been screwed over one way or another by the cops or dea or both..

[HR][/HR]HOUSTON (AP) — A Houston police officer shot and killed a one-armed, one-legged man in a wheelchair Saturday inside a group home after police say the double amputee threatened the officer and aggressively waved a metal object that turned out to be a pen.

Police spokeswoman Jodi Silva said the man cornered the officer in his wheelchair and was making threats while trying to stab the officer with the pen. At the time, the officer did not know what the metal object was that the man was waving, Silva said.

She said the man came "within inches to a foot" of the officer and did not follow instructions to calm down and remain still.

"Fearing for his partner's safety and his own safety, he discharged his weapon," Silva told The Associated Press.

Police did not immediately release the name of the man who was killed. They had been called to the home after a caretaker there called and reported that the man in wheelchair was causing a disturbance.

The owner of the group home, John Garcia, told the Houston Chronicle that the man had a history of mental illness and had been living at the house about 18 months. Garcia said the man had told him that he lost a leg above the knee and all of one arm when he was hit by a train.

"He sometimes would go off a bit, but you just ignore it," Garcia told the newspaper.

Silva identified the officer as Matthew Jacob Marin, a five-year veteran of the department. He was immediately placed on three-day administrative leave, which is standard in all shootings involving officers.

Houston police records indicate that Marin also fatally shot a suspect in 2009. Investigators at the time said Marin came upon a man stabbing his neighbor to death at an apartment complex and opened fired when the suspect refused to drop the knife.

On Saturday, Marin and his partner arrived at the group home around 2:30 a.m. Silva said there were several people at the house at the time. The caretaker who called police waited on the porch while the officers went inside, she said.

"It was close quarters in the area of the house," Silva said. "The officer was forced into an area where he had no way to get out."

http://news.yahoo.com/houston-officer-kills-double-amputee-wheelchair-222540280.html







FUCK THE POLICE!

A Policeman shot and kill Native American sculptor, John Williams while holding a block of wood and carving knife on a street corner. Shot him 4 or 5 times if I remember. He was completely deaf in one ear and wearing headphones while he was working on a sculpture. Witnesses say the man never saw the cop approaching him because he was looking down while working. That's how he made money. By standing on a street corner and making totems. He was well known in the area. The police officer claimed the artist lunged at him with the knife. Witnesses say it never happened. Mr. Williams was standing in a non-threatening pose according to witnesses.

"His body stance did not look threatening at all," Amber Maurina said of the man (a witness). "I could only see the gentleman's back, and he didn't look aggressive at all. He didn't even look up at the officer."

Click to expand...

The cop approached to about two car lengths from Mr. Williams and shouted, "hey, hey, hey" and then shot him.

it can only be fixed from the inside yet they seem to like the power they have , no change in sight