It’s not worth the danger of the chase for a traffic violation, and not worth the danger of the chase for the drugs.
Alright, I’ll bash police overreach as much as the next guy. But, I’m more likely to agree that the police were bad when they cause significant property damage for chasing a car they smelled pot from, when the driver was actively smoking when they showed up. There’s not going to be much pot there, and therefore the whole entire situation is overblown.
But, if you show me multiple gallon zip lock bags of a controlled substance (regardless of your belief of whether it should be controlled or not) from the arrest… it’s absolutely ‘with intent to distribute’ at that point.
It doesn’t look like there was tons of property damage from the photos and there does appear to be a significant drug haul for the police. This post, from the photos alone, DOES NOT WARRANT ‘POLICE BAD’.
I’m willing to hear opposing arguments, and absolutely willing to change my standpoint if convincing evidence is provided.
Edit: dear gods, I just read the article too. I’m from the area, as well. How in the world did this warrant being submitted in this sub? There’s absolutely no ‘police bad’ here except someone thought police doing their job at all is bad. A traffic violation led to police finding distribution level amounts of a controlled substance, and their PIT didn’t cause large scale property damage. This is a fluff piece for police all day long. Get this shit out of here.
Edit 2: I can’t even, this post is the opposite of what should be posted here.
Bruh, it sounds like it was dumb luck.
They have chase for a the traffic violation, not for the drugs. They didn’t know about the drugs.
That’s the point, they didn’t need to know. They didn’t need to know if there were drugs, distribution level or not, to initiate this specific stop. They provided evidence that supported that they witnessed a traffic or moving violation that warranted a stop, they initiated a stop, and then the individual refused. So they initiated a chase and PIT, which without evidence to dispute we can assume fits their chase and PIT policy.
They got lucky in finding the drugs. But, police ‘training, experience and knowledge’ means that in the thousands of stops they do… they begin to see patterns that may result ‘bigger’* fish to catch. Aside from my and your opinion in what’s called a ‘hunch’, if the officer is obeying SOP and the law and can articulate (clearly state why he is doing a thing) why he’s chasing and PITing and how it fits his SOP, then power to him. COP does not equal BAD when they can do that.
That’s my problem with this post. The OP failed to prove COP BAD.
Your problem with this post is you lick boot.
Man defending yourself this hard in this sort of circle jerk community is never going to end well. No one here is going to take a nuanced look at the situation and any reasonable argument is falling on deaf ears.
without evidence to dispute we can assume fits their chase and PIT policy
No, it is fairly safe to assume that police don’t follow their own policies by paying attention to how many times they don’t bother.
Where in the article was evidence to support your claim provided?
I’m sorry you never learned to read words and comprehend them.
That’s such an odd statement coming from someone who couldn’t properly articulate their argument for why a case that doesn’t support ‘cops bad’ on the merits provided by OP’s link… is so adamantly ‘cops bad’ in their argument.
Please stop devolving to “I dislike this guy’s arguments because it doesn’t fit my narrative, so I must demonize him by belittling him so that I feel better about myself” and admit… with all the facts of this very specific situation given… that it just doesn’t fit this sub. It’s not a good case of ‘cops bad’.
Please stop licking cop boots.
Taking the article at face value, the cops didn’t know about the drugs until the chase had ended in the crash they caused. All they knew, as the chase began, was that a driver hadn’t stopped for an alleged but unspecified traffic violation — 30 in a 25, perhaps, or a rolling stop at a sign.
That’s not enough, in my opinion, to merit a chase all across the county, onto the interstate, and a PIT-maneuver-induced crash. These cops inflicted a lot of danger on your home town over a traffic violation. Bad cops, absolutely.
Stop, please. You just provided an opinion, you just biased the entire situation and your argument… by adding your biased opinion in regards to what ‘traffic violation’ the officers had.
Please understand that I’m not your enemy. But, an argument like that devalues your opinion, standpoint and viewpoint.
You don’t know, and it’s okay to admit that. What we do know is that a traffic or moving violation occurred and police followed their SOP to ‘chase’. Then whatever ‘police training, experience and knowledge’ led to the pit that resulted in significant controlled substance confiscation. Distribution levels.
If, after an investigation, or a third party investigation, there’s evidence to support a different narrative. My friend, I’m here for it. But, you’re readying the pitch forks too early here.
Well, police shouldn’t be engaging in car chases. This might not be a very egregious case, but police chases often end very poorly and result in dead cops, dead suspects, and/or dead civilians. Personal property for civilians also tend to get caught in the crossfire. Suspects of color also are treated more harshly, and often receive an extrajudicial death.
The bigger problem is police enforcing laws that criminalize rather than reduce harm. Drug trafficking is bad, but it’s incentivized because users of illegal drugs get treated as criminals rather than people in need of medical treatment.
What should police do when someone chooses not to be pulled over?
Is it just an automatic give up because they happen to be in a car? They can do whatever they want and it’s not worth trying to enforce anymore?
I agree high speed chases are terrible… but there is no other solution. Checking their plates only works if they aren’t obscured, and if police weren’t allowed to chase, there isn’t much disincentive to obscure your plates and just refuse to pull over.
Mail them a ticket. That’s it. Unless the person fleeing is KNOWN to be a serious danger to others, in the sense that they are likely to hurt or kill someone.
A chase is somewhat justified, for instance, in the situation of someone driving around in a completely maniacal way that is nearly certain to result in injury or death of a third party.
Mail them a ticket how? They would have no idea who they are with an obscured plate.
If someone decides to run, then no police should not take chase. If it’s an infraction like speeding, the officer can record the plates and issue a fine for the infraction as well as evading police officers. You know, like what happens when police take chase.
Can you address the other part, how to deal with people obscuring their plates… it’s already way too common, what would happen if obscured plates and not pulling over meant you couldn’t be caught for any crime? Car chases are sometimes currently the only way to solve a problem that needs to be solved. And no matter how safe the officers try to make it, which most of them do, there is of course automatically elevated risk.
Ideally we need a different solution, but we don’t have one yet.
Obscured plates? There’s a guy in NYC that goes around and fixes them on parked cars. (NYPD can’t be bothered.) That seems like a fine way, though, tow and impound the cars when they’re parked.
…tow and impound the cars when they’re parked.
But there’d be no chase, no inherent danger, no exciting video for the 6:00 News, and no 'roided up cops would get the chance to say, “You think you can run from me, fucker?”
And all that is the whole point of the chase.
Ok, I like where you are coming from. I really do. But, police enforce laws. That’s their job. The problem here isn’t the police in that they are actively enforcing laws. The problem you have is The War on Drugs and secondly ‘chase policy’.
Your argument for ‘chase policy’ is secondary damage, harm and loss of life. This case. This chase. Is a perfect execution of ‘chase policy’. There isn’t any abuse, harm, damage, or loss of life that you’re lamenting or arguing against. And therefor it doesn’t fit your argument on the merits. It supports the argument of the Police instead, so it’s a negative against your argument.
The ‘drug’ issue is one of politics, and not police, since they’re just doing their jobs. How about we, myself included with you, actively support politicians who want to decriminalize and revoke the war on drugs? Instead of screaming ‘police bad’ for a case that isn’t worth our wasted breath?
Just because this particular chase didn’t go bad doesn’t make it a good thing or an argument for police chases. This both an exception to the rule and the best case scenario. Most chases don’t end like this. Most chases end with at least one person dead, usually the suspect. Remember, innocent until proven guilty. It’s not a good thing for cops to kill suspects that run.
Police selectively enforce laws all the time. Drug policy needs to change, but police don’t need to enforce it the way they do. Enforcement in the war on drugs is highly discriminatory, so it takes a joint effort between police not enforcing and politicians changing these laws for the change to happen.
You’re missing the point, and I’ve mentioned this before, the original post doesn’t say anything about how chasing in general is bad. It just lists this chase as an example of ‘bad cop’. But, this example by itself is anything but ‘bad cop’ unless your opinion is ‘any chase is bad, mmm’kay’ regardless of whether this one proves the opposite.
You and others keep bringing up other instances of extreme case scenarios, but none of that matters in this instance. If we want to discuss the merits of ‘chases are bad in general’ then this post needs to say that, and then should provide evidence supporting that instead of a case that does the entire opposite.
And, let me restate this for everyone’s benefit. I am only arguing that this example doesn’t support what the OP is trying to say. I am not arguing for or against anything else as it pertains to law enforcement and/or their practices.
Edit: earlier had this example in mind that I wanted to use to convey what I was getting at, and I just remembered it.
If you were browsing the NSFW subs and you saw an image of ‘generic naked girl standing upright with her tits out’ in the facedownassup, or however it’s spelled, sub… that image would still have tons of upvotes, because ‘NSFW must upvote bc tits’. But, it wouldn’t fit the spirit or the theme of the sub, and therefor would be out of place. Just as out of place as this post is in the ‘bad cop’ sub. It’s not a good example, sure you may have an opinion that ‘all chases are bad’ but this example is the ‘generic girl standing up showing her tits’ in a niche sub about BDSM, feet, assupfacedown, or whatever. Sure, tits, but not what the sub is for.
The police are not required to know the laws in the US
That’s an interesting opinion you have there. What in this case has lead you to believe that an argument of ‘lack of knowledge of laws to enforce’ is pertinent to the discussion?*
Their job is not to enforce laws
You don’t understand this issue. You’re wasting your breath, talking about something you obviously don’t know about about.
The facts that they gave chase, risking the lives of innocent bystanders, for any traffic violation is a serious problem. Period.
You just showed your bias again by stating lives were risked. Not once in the article was there any mention of it. Stop attributing your bias to the argument and defining it as fact.
But, if you show me multiple gallon zip lock bags of a controlled substance (regardless of your belief of whether it should be controlled or not) from the arrest… it’s absolutely ‘with intent to distribute’ at that point.
How did the cops know that was in the car when they escalated a traffic stop for a traffic violation into a high speed chase?
Where do you get high speed chase? Nothing in the article states the speed.
A chase just means they didn’t stop when the lights and sirens came on.
The title of the article is “Georgia cops proudly show off ecstasy pills, after high-speed freeway chase over traffic violation, and crash caused by PIT-maneuver”
Read the article. They don’t describe that at all.
The original headline at the news site is “Driver caught with $400K in Ecstasy pills, cash after high-speed I-20 chase.”
Read the article. That isn’t what they describe at all.
Cops start a pursuit when the suspect fails to yield. Once they lose visual they stop the pursuit. They don’t say what speed or how long but they stoped perusing
A short time later they see the suspect and pit the car.
The article is poorly written but this doesn’t appear to be bad policing. They knocked off the pursuit when it wasn’t safe and immediately stopped him when they don’t the suspect later.
I love to bash shitty cops but this is how I want them to behave unless I see evidence otherwise.
So since the title has the words high speed chase, but they don’t repeat it in the text of the article, the headline can be ignored?
Go back to school and learn to read.
Yeah, “high speed” isn’t mentioned in the article. It’s in the headline, though, and if we’re believing the TV station’s coverage enough to have a conversation about it, the headline is part of the coverage.
I like where you are coming from. You’re asking whether the officers knew there were drugs (with intent to distribute level) in the car! That’s a good point.
From what we have been provided, no one knows. What we can assume from what we have been provided is that a traffic or moving violation occurred and police acted within their SOP to initiate a traffic stop. Then the party failed the stop and it resulted in a PIT that did not cause significant property damage or loss of life but DID result in the apprehension of Distribution Level of a controlled substance.
All those facts presented here… there isn’t an argument for ‘police bad’.
They put people in danger fora traffic violation. The fact that they didn’t kill anyone this time and got lucky on the drugs (which shouldn’t be illegal anyway) does not excuse the risk they caused.
From what we can tell;
The officers witnessed either a moving or traffic violation.
They initiated a stop.
The party involved refused to stop.
They followed either policy, experience, training, or knowledge to initiate a chase then a PIT
PIT led to apprehension AND finding a significant ‘distribution level’ amount of a controlled substance.
—
Those are facts.
You don’t have anywhere that you can argue ‘people in danger’ because the article doesn’t* say ‘people were put on danger’. You can’t argue about ‘people’s lives being in danger’ because you DO NOT KNOW if any were. Or if this department even has a history of endangering people’s lives in chases.
What you can, and have done, I’d say that your opinion is that ‘chases are bad’ because ‘people’s lives can be in danger’ without the context of the situation because you don’t have it. Regardless of your aside argument in parenthesis that I’ve even mentioned that I have opinions for, as well, but aren’t supported by current law.
The officer was in danger. So was the public. Either you’re arguing in bad faith or you’re stone dumb.
The officer crashed his car into a traffic suspect. Period.
You are not listening to me nor did you read the article. Therefor, all I can assume is that you are a troll.
I’m not listening to you because you sound like an idiot.
There are safe police chases?
When a person tries to leave on a bike for instance, that is still considered a chase, even if its not very far from the initial point of the cop trying to detain the person. This stop at a Texas campus is an example.
Student was pulled over for lack of lights biking at night.
Yes. And from the article you, as the OP to this entire discussion, have linked. This one at least, based on the facts presented in your chosen article, has proven to provide the police with the argument and justification for police chases being both safe and beneficial to enforcing the law.
And that is my entire argument. You. Chose. The. Wrong. Article. to make a “Police Bad” argument.
This chase ended with a PIT-maneuver and a crash, which seems the opposite of ‘safe’.
We do know. The article says the officer was doing traffic enforcement, not drug interdiction.
In every single argument I made I stated that it was traffic and moving violation related, as per the argument. You have continuously applied your bias to it stating that there was ‘risk to life’ without evidence.
The officer crashed his car. Into the suspect’s car.
This time their stupid driving did not cause much damage. Other times that manuever has caused loss of life for those involved and innocent bystanders. Police should not be using pit manuevers at all. They are dangerous even for trained professionals in a controlled environment.
My entire point is that the regardless of your opinion about PITs, this very specific situation does not reflect negatively on police, as it sounds like a textbook example of what the police are going for, and therefor is out of place in this sub.
Instead, how about we have a different post that describes what you guys are now trying to attribute to this one: “PITs are bad, mmm’kay”. And in that post how about we describe and debate the merits with links that support that narrative. Because this one sorely missed the mark.
regardless of your opinion about PITs, this very specific situation does not reflect negatively on police
“Police generally shoulndnt shoot at black kids, but this black kid was a real asshole, so it’s justified.”
The pigs didnt know what was in the car when they risked the life of the driver and many people around.
Ok, so what you’re saying (outside of attributing ‘risks lives’ and to ‘many people around’ which isn’t clearly stated in this case… which is what I’m trying to say…) is that you have a fundamental issue with PITs in general, regardless of whether this one was or could have been low threat and low risk, because you don’t have any facts to state otherwise. What we do know is that didn’t cause the harm to anyone that you’re arguing.
So, re-read my argument and go start a new post about ‘PITs bad’ and stop trying to shoehorn in a best case scenario for police as an argument for ‘bad cop’. It looks terrible and is a dumb argument to try to make when* all you have is this terrible evidence to support your claim.
But if I think pits are bad than every use of pit by police is bad and therefore this article aligns with the topic here quite well.
Except what you’re continuing to miss here, is that this case is a slam dunk for the police officers and makes them look good! “Hey, man. Good police work, you saw a moving or traffic violation and went to initiate a stop, then followed our SOP and got the guy. Not only that you got Distribution Levels of a Controlled Substance! You should be promoted and have your picture on our Facebook page!”
How about instead you use an article where the police officer slammed into a mini van of nursing students headed to the hospital killing all 8 of them, and he barely walked away with a scratch on him and he got paid leave and early full retirement from the PTSD.
This post doesn’t say “all PITs are bad” in the title nor the article, and it’s not what I’m arguing at all either. I could give two shits about your opinion, because it is an opinion, about PITs in general. I don’t care. What I do care is that this post is the equivalent of “gone mild” content being submitted to “gone wild” subs. It’s out of place and doesn’t fit the theme of the sub, nor the spirit of the argument OP is trying to make.
And that shit bothers me because it waters down subs. WTF do we have themed subs, why don’t we just have a single page where we throw random shit at the walls until it sticks? Anarchy! Ahhh!!
Edit: I’m abandoning this thread at this point.
I have clearly articulated my argument throughout, repeating myself to multiple people, while also addressing their specific questions, concerns, or related or novel arguments.
I stand by, regardless downvotes, mockery, or trolls, that this post on the merits of the article provided, doesn’t fit the spirit of the sub. That’s it. To say or argue anything else would attribute more to the post, of your individual opinion, than is present here in the facts provided.
The article is really short but I don’t see an issue with what happened here.
Sounds like the cops were reasonable since they didn’t pursue at all cost. That’s a large issue of mine. Often they pursue at all cost and that’s a no no.
“Ends justifies the means”? You’re saying the police risking lives and property over a traffic violation is ok because it worked, and they got lucky with what the guy was carrying?
I guess you just disvovered that most of this super leftist community doesn’t want to adress actual problems but instead jerk eachother off about how evil Police inherintly are. Welcome to lemmy
Also, society has decided that these drugs are illegal to sell and told the police officers “catch criminals for us, we’ll pay you”.
The coppers did a good and lawful job on this one and are totally in the right to be proud of their work.
I personally disagree with the whole drug criminalization thing and I also totally think we should hold the police accountable when they abuse their powers.
But this ain’t that.
The poster is an idiot or a bad faith actor.
It’s not the drugs that are bad. It’s what the dealers and organizations do to be able to keep selling them. Treat dealers and criminals like nazis and crooked cops/politicians/businessmen.
Exactly, let’s instead go after politicians who criminalize this drug (hell, I’d absolutely experiment with this with the wife if it were legal) instead of the police enforcing the law as prescribed.
Granted… I’d be willing to take a step back… if they provided a good argument against the PIT itself for a traffic or moving violation AND then the failure to stop. 🤷♂️
But, that’s an entirely separate argument that the OP hasn’t brought up yet.
Edit: they touched on the chase for traffic violation, but didn’t comment on the specifics regarding the PIT. Let’s debate that more, I’d tell the OP.
If they have that weight then good… wreck em. Fuck drug dealers like trashy mainstream companies.
Every person I’ve known that has weight like that has killed people.
I hate how naive people give them a green light as if they “needed to sell drugs because America is too hard to live in.” These people still rape lives well after they have enough money to get by without selling. They are no better than rich mainstream politicians and businessmen.
XTC is a party drug, imho not the same as pushing meth or similar tbh
Doesn’t mean the source their supporting doesn’t traffik humans and other drugs, as well murder to protect their business. It’s not like this was a kid selling a couple Oz from some homegrown weed stash. If they have that much MDMA it’s organized crime. People are going to want to protect that organization to save their livelihoods usually at any cost. It really sucks seeing that stuff in life… I hope I never find myself around it again. People can be heartless, I’ve seen innocent people put in prison because they got used by the people above them. It’s fucked. The street game is no less bullshit than mainstream rich business people when you get to the point where you’re actually making money. If anything can describe authentic crime is war/heartlessness. I wouldn’t wish it on anyone with innocents.
Just legalize drugs already.
I’ll admit I’m not sure I’m for legalization but I do support de criminalization.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
XTC is a methamphetamine.
Go read about what mdma is and the history of ecstasy.
MDMA is a different drug entirely from methamphetamin. It contains some of the same molecular compounds but that does not mean it’s the same drug.
And? That’s such an odd response.
What do you the MA stands for in mdma?
3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine is the proper name.
That’s not how chemistry nomenclature works.
Methyl and methylene groups are present in tons of molecules, they don’t make those molecules methamphetamines. That’s like saying people who use olive oil are eating motor oil because they both have the word oil in the name.
Please do not spout nonsense about things you don’t understand.
MDMA has similarities to amphetamine but it’s mechanism of action is different enough that is has a wildly different safety profile and patterns of use/addiction potential. Either drug containing a methyl group is not what makes them dangerous, that word only describes a part of their structure.
I understand it just fine.
You appear to think it’s not an amphetamine which isn’t true.
And your weird oil explanation. lol. Clown world.
Methane is basically an isolated methyl group.
Are your farts classified as methamphetamine?
And is far safer, with much different effects to actual meth. You’re trying so hard to look clever, but you’re a fucking idiot.
Rule 1 reminder: Real-life decorum is expected. Please don’t say things only a child or a jackass would say in person.
It’s classified as a methamphetamine.
I get you want to look clever but know your drugs.
I love your argument. Since you don’t understand drugs. I’m the idiot because you didn’t even realize mdma is methamphetamine even though it’s in the name. lol.
Clown.
Methamphetamine is not a class of drugs it is a specific drug.
MDMA and meth are part of the substituted amphetamines class which includes hundreds of molecules, some of which are drugs some of which are not.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substituted_amphetamine
Just because drugs are in the same chemical class does not mean they necessarily share any similar pharmacology. Tiny changes in the structure of molecules can completely change their effect or render them pharmacologically inactive.
lmfao, ok bro.
XTC is a band.
Did the police know what volume of drugs were in the car when they decided to put the lives of everyone else on the road in danger because of a traffic violation?
The police didn’t cause the chase. They participated in it, of course but I don’t think it’s reasonable to hold them responsible for the chase happening in the first place. The drug dealer(s?) could have stayed put.
eta: I am by no means a police apologist or a “back the blue” type, either. There is plenty wrong with how police do the job they have but this isn’t that
What? Of course the police caused the chase. The guy drove off, yes, but if the police don’t chase him there’s no chase.
Your bias shows with every comment. There is a law. A law is broken. An officer witnesses the law being broken and initiates a stop. (Pivotal or action moment occurs!!) the person who is engaged in a stop does not adhere to the law (for a second time!!) when the police signal them to stop. Then the police (dependent on chase policy) begin a chase and/or initiate a PIT.
If we step-by-step this… it’s the law breaker… who is wrong in THIS* SPECIFIC CASE.
now, if you want to question what information the media has received, and if it came from the police directly… then I may be there with you, since ‘police stated’ is and has been heavily debated in the past.
There’s a possible worldview where… both wrong things are wrong. Endangering others is what the drug dealer is doing (I don’t really believe ecstacy is worth this event but I digress.)… endangering others is what the cops also actively did. Neither is right. Cops have the ability to back off and find the person pretty efficiently when they have plates on their car. Also this is ecstacy not fentanyl or meth.
All we know is that it was initiated on a moving or traffic violation. The drugs were found afterwards, so don’t factor into the chase decision. We do not have information to support that lives were put at risk.
There are no safe police chases, and no safe PIT-maneuvers to cause a safe crash. People and property are at peril.
deleted by creator
