Hammond Indiana police sued over smashed windows, use of Taser during traffic stop

[Pipeline 1010]

Are you an idiot. Before the seat belts laws were enacted in the 80s, almost no one wore them despite seat belts being readily available for decades in vehicles. It wasn't until legislation was enacted that people started wearing them. Seat belt use jump dramatically shortly after the laws were enacted and today most motorists always wear their seat belts. The law is a very good law as it has saved countless lives. Not only the lives of idiots that wouldn't be wearing seat belts, but lives of innocents such as children that may not have been buckled by idiot parents and such.

To think the seat belt law is an abomination is absolutely retarded.

Most people are all for seat belt laws that protect children. Children cannot protect themselves adequately.

But to call people who think that an adult should get to choose to wear/not wear a seat belt "absolutely retarded" seems a bit extreme, don't you think?

 

[runzwithsizorz]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but WHY didn't the cops just write a ticket for failing to wear a seat belt, even do the condescending lecture.
I fail to see why anyone else needed to be questioned, or ID'd. Perhaps a
chorus, or two of camp town ladies on the side of the road would have appeased these cops? "concerned about their safety", seriously?????
An army of cops with military grade weapons, against a husband, and wife with 2 children, and no warrants.
Soon we will all be asked out of our cars to dance, sing, and squeal like a pig
to show respect for authority.

 

[Pipeline 1010]

Want to know why it was made against the law on public roadways paid for by tax dollars? Because it incurs a greater cost on all of society when some fuckwhit decides to get into an accident without their seatbelt on.

Well, that is the reason we were sold on.

The actual reasons are threefold, and each of them is about money. (surprise! laws about money...hoocoodanode?)

1) Initially, car manufacturers pushed for this legislation (spent $tens of millions in funding on it) as an agreement with the feds...if they could enact seat belt laws that cover 75% of the population, the gov would hold off on passing planned laws requiring expensive airbag systems. So, profit for car companies.

2) Eventually, insurance companies liked this because it (a) reduced payouts in accidents due to reduced injury, death and (b) they could reject any claim made by someone who wasn't wearing their seat belt at the time of the accident. So, profit for insurance companies.

3) Initially, the public was like 75% against these laws. The only way they were rammed through is with the agreement that police couldn't pull people over JUST for not wearing their seat belt. The reason for the stop had to be something else and then they could ALSO write you a ticket for no seat belt. Naturally, the plan was always to quietly remove this provision at a later date, which occurred. Police/local governments liked this because it was (a) a source of revenue and (b) for police it was an excuse to pull people over as part of a fishing expedition. So, profit for governments, and extra excuses to try and bust people for cops.

 

[dmcowen674]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but WHY didn't the cops just write a ticket for failing to wear a seat belt, even do the condescending lecture.
I fail to see why anyone else needed to be questioned, or ID'd. Perhaps a
chorus, or two of camp town ladies on the side of the road would have appeased these cops? "concerned about their safety", seriously?????
An army of cops with military grade weapons, against a husband, and wife with 2 children, and no warrants.
Soon we will all be asked out of our cars to dance, sing, and squeal like a pig
to show respect for authority.

Exactly.

As usual so sad to see those in here supporting the horrific treatment of U.S. Police forces to the citizenry in here.

 

[Brovane]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but WHY didn't the cops just write a ticket for failing to wear a seat belt, even do the condescending lecture.
I fail to see why anyone else needed to be questioned, or ID'd. Perhaps a
chorus, or two of camp town ladies on the side of the road would have appeased these cops? "concerned about their safety", seriously?????
An army of cops with military grade weapons, against a husband, and wife with 2 children, and no warrants.
Soon we will all be asked out of our cars to dance, sing, and squeal like a pig
to show respect for authority.

The problem was the Husband kept moving like he was trying to reach something in the back. The Cops concerned as to the safety of the situation asked the Husband to exit the vehicle, which is perfectly reasonable. He refused and things went downhill from there.

 

[Daverino]

The problem was the Husband kept moving like he was trying to reach something in the back. The Cops concerned as to the safety of the situation asked the Husband to exit the vehicle, which is perfectly reasonable. He refused and things went downhill from there.

So we should add 'Moving while Black' to 'Driving while Black' to the list of things that 'concern the safety of officers while making a minor traffic stop.'

 

[HomerJS]

After seeing the seatbelt guy at gas station who followed orders and got shot any wonder the passenger was suspicious??

Why not just write a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt and move on???

If he had followed orders and got out of the car a little too quickly maybe he was worried about getting shot

 

[Brovane]

So we should add 'Moving while Black' to 'Driving while Black' to the list of things that 'concern the safety of officers while making a minor traffic stop.'

No you add, keep your freaking hands where the officer can see them during a traffic stop. It isn't rocket science. Anybody that gets pulled over and starts reaching into the rear of their car for something is going to draw the officers attention.

 

[Capt Caveman]

The problem was the Husband kept moving like he was trying to reach something in the back. The Cops concerned as to the safety of the situation asked the Husband to exit the vehicle, which is perfectly reasonable. He refused and things went downhill from there.

Yeah, He was probably reaching back to get a gun from one of their teenage children that were sitting in the back seats.

Note, two of the officers had already been sued in the past and settled out of court for undisclosed amounts for using excessive force. I can understand the car passenger's fear and asking for black police officers to come to the scene.

 

[Daverino]

No you add, keep your freaking hands where the officer can see them during a traffic stop. It isn't rocket science. Anybody that gets pulled over and starts reaching into the rear of their car for something is going to draw the officers attention.

Hey, whatever. . . I'm white and have been pulled over four times for speeding in my life. Got four tickets. Never once did I think the officer was going to pull his gun on me. Also, I didn't really give much thought to what I was doing in the car.

The laws of probability say that if race has nothing to do with these types of incidents we should see many more videos of white people getting shot and tazed while getting seat belt violations. But that just isn't happening, now, is it? But we got an unarmed black kid shot in Ferguson, a 67 year old black woman tazed on the streets of Tallahassee, a black man shot for getting his license out of his car, after being asked to get his license, a black man and woman getting their children threatened by the cops, a black kid getting hit in the head by the butt of a cop's gun and now this guy. . . in three weeks?

Come on.

The sad thing is that this has always happened and probably has been much worse in the past. It's only now that people are filming the shit out of everything when they meet the cops that this stuff is getting more exposure in the past few years. And good on them. Who'd think that the man or woman who thought to stick a video camera in a phone was arming the American population with the best weapon for social justice in this generation.

 

[mizzou]

Safety is not the choice of the State. It is the choice of the individual.

That's actually an interesting question. there are many safety laws the state chooses to enforce because of a whole wide combination of thoughts. Child safety laws, work safety laws, etc. etc.

Basically, when your individual choice to not choose safety affects the safety of others (I.E. you are a human missile in your car or...you make my insurance rates skyrocket), the state gets involved at the request of the group.

All this, at the expense of individual freedoms.

 

[The Merg]

Note, two of the officers had already been sued in the past and settled out of court for undisclosed amounts for using excessive force. I can understand the car passenger's fear and asking for black police officers to come to the scene.

Not to say the suits weren't valid, but many times the lawsuits are settled since it ends the suit quickly and at a lower amount than it would be just to take it to court even if the defendant wins in court. The big question is if they admit wrong-doing in the settlement. If they don't, the case was settled merely for financial reasons and it is truly unknown to the public if the suit had any merit or not.

- Merg

 

[Sinsear]

Some people need to be reminded that summonses are issued in lieu of arrests.

 

[mrwindta]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but WHY didn't the cops just write a ticket for failing to wear a seat belt, even do the condescending lecture.
I fail to see why anyone else needed to be questioned, or ID'd.

Exactly, easy case to win. The officers had to see the kid in the back recording them and they still decided to escalate the situation. Now what if the son responded by jumping out the car and coming to his father's aid? Would they have shot the son?

 

[HumblePie]

I'm not sure that's probable cause to make them exit, or to search....

In most states, if not all of them, not wearing a seat belt is a criminal violation, usually of the lowest misdemeanor class. As such, the cops have probable cause into a criminal violation and they can certainly ask a person to exit their vehicle during that exchange.

 

[waggy]

If you are wearing your seat belt only because you don't want to be stopped you are an idiot.

no he would be a idiot if he didn't wear it at all.


personally i can't sit in a car without it on. There is a different feeling without it on.

 

[HumblePie]

Well, that is the reason we were sold on.

The actual reasons are threefold, and each of them is about money. (surprise! laws about money...hoocoodanode?)

1) Initially, car manufacturers pushed for this legislation (spent $tens of millions in funding on it) as an agreement with the feds...if they could enact seat belt laws that cover 75% of the population, the gov would hold off on passing planned laws requiring expensive airbag systems. So, profit for car companies.

2) Eventually, insurance companies liked this because it (a) reduced payouts in accidents due to reduced injury, death and (b) they could reject any claim made by someone who wasn't wearing their seat belt at the time of the accident. So, profit for insurance companies.

3) Initially, the public was like 75% against these laws. The only way they were rammed through is with the agreement that police couldn't pull people over JUST for not wearing their seat belt. The reason for the stop had to be something else and then they could ALSO write you a ticket for no seat belt. Naturally, the plan was always to quietly remove this provision at a later date, which occurred. Police/local governments liked this because it was (a) a source of revenue and (b) for police it was an excuse to pull people over as part of a fishing expedition. So, profit for governments, and extra excuses to try and bust people for cops.

Number 2 is what you hit on. Because in the case of the person not having insurance while driving, guess who pays out? Even with insurance, you think insurance companies don't pass on their payouts in the form of high premiums to their clients? It didn't increase profits like you think, because those costs were already passed on to other consumers.

 

[bshole]

In most states, if not all of them, not wearing a seat belt is a criminal violation, usually of the lowest misdemeanor class. As such, the cops have probable cause into a criminal violation and they can certainly ask a person to exit their vehicle during that exchange.

Typical conservative, screams about FREEEEEDUMBBBB!!!! while attacking it every chance they get.

 

[The Merg]

In most states, if not all of them, not wearing a seat belt is a criminal violation, usually of the lowest misdemeanor class. As such, the cops have probable cause into a criminal violation and they can certainly ask a person to exit their vehicle during that exchange.

In VA, it is a civil violation. The fine that is instituted is sent to the State LiteraryFund.

However, they can still ask the person to exit the vehicle as long as the stop was legal, although in VA, seatbelt violations are a secondary offense except if it is related to child seat belt violations.

- Merg

 

[mizzou]

Police can order occupants out at their will, this has been agreed upon numerous times by federal judges. If they say get out of the car GET OUT OF THE CAR. Otherwise you are interfering.

LOL at "I need a white shirt" He knows the ropes......

They should be charged for placing children in danger.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Can someone explain why everyone in the car needs to have a picture ID for a traffic stop. I understand the driver but anyone else in the car?

 

[mizzou]

Can someone explain why everyone in the car needs to have a picture ID for a traffic stop. I understand the driver but anyone else in the car?

Some areas the front passenger also has to wear a seatbelt. ID is needed for a criminal traffic summons. If you don't want to sign the summons, you go to jail for something silly.

For whatever reason, if Police say "Get out of the car" They have EVERY right to do that, and they can force you out if needed.

and LOL @ CNN anchor saying " I have the right to not stop and drive to a populated area." where the fuck did you hear that!? You better call 911 if you do that stupid shit.
Oh my god the stupidity they say "They weren't arguing!" Really? They were arguing the ENTIRE TIME.

 

[HumblePie]

Typical conservative, screams about FREEEEEDUMBBBB!!!! while attacking it every chance they get.

LOL what? who you calling conservative mr racist? I'm atheist, pro-choice, and understand what GOVERNMENT is for. It is there to govern but with the smallest intrusion into our lives as possible. Sometimes the government has to intrude and sometimes it should stay the hell away. Proper civil discourse and discussion are how we the people with our elected representatives decide on a proper course of governance.

Making seat belt laws was the right choice. It has saved untold number of lives and saved untold money for the American public as well. It has literally zero repercussions or downsides to it's enactments except for the occasion fuktard like in the OP.

 

[mizzou]

Can someone explain why everyone in the car needs to have a picture ID for a traffic stop. I understand the driver but anyone else in the car?

sorry should have clarified, they can ASK, but can't DEMAND. Unless you are subject to a criminal investigation or guilty of a crime/ordinance, you don't have to give your ID but it's a good idea that you do.

 

[HumblePie]

In VA, it is a civil violation. The fine that is instituted is sent to the State LiteraryFund.

However, they can still ask the person to exit the vehicle as long as the stop was legal, although in VA, seatbelt violations are a secondary offense except if it is related to child seat belt violations.

- Merg

Correct for VA, which is why in Virginia you can't be pulled over only for seat belt violations. If you are, you can not be asked to exit your vehicle because it is not a criminal offense there technically.

http://virginia.drivinguniversity.com/driving-safety/virginia-seat-belt-law

You really need to learn this.