This story was submitted to CopBlock.org via the submission tab, where you too can submit stories for publishing. Feel free to write about a personal experience with police or to provide your thoughts on a police article/video: simply click here to get started.
I recently came across one of the first ever full length, high speed police chases.
In May of 1988, an Ohio officer who had installed a personal video camera on the dash of his patrol unit, caught a pursuit and capture of three robbery suspects. As you watch the video, you will see what looks to be the typical police chase. And it’s not much different. The only thing is the vehicles are not nearly as built to handle the chase, (as proven by the steam pouring from the lead cruiser after the stop). Bad guys are running, the police are chasing. It’s not until the suspects car is stopped that you begin to see the difference.
What you see is officers not just “doing the job”, but doing it well.Once stopped, the officers handcuffed the subjects, instead of beating them into submission. The subjects were led away from the arrest without injury, instead of having to be sent to the hospital for injuries received from officers.
The case of the suspects did not get held up with accusations of police abuse. There were no accusations of police brutality. Its a simple case of good guy catches bad guy, and throws him in jail.
The difference between then and now is amazing. Compare this video to most modern day chase videos, and you will see what has become of the once highly respected job of the police. The contrast is black and white.
The police knew their place in ’88. And it was not as executioner.
- Burn The Obedient
I agree with the author’s point about the end state of the chase being handled very professionally. Criminal behavior can make anyone mad, getting into a high speed chase puts innocent lives at risk. Most officers today and even some people feel they deserve a good beat down for their actions. This type of mentality has led to many innocent people getting beaten, or even killed before their day in court. Two wrongs don’t make a right. Assaulting a person is ONLY justified if an officer needs to defend him or herself. Untill police officers get punished in court for their unlawful assaults will things get back to a more transparent and equal society.
Here’s the thing about cops beating somebody that I just don’t understand. The law is very clear, police are allowed to use the minimum level of force above the resistance someone is putting up in order to subdue them and take them into custody. It never works out that way. Say you shove a cop away from you. Legally, he would be allowed to shove back a bit harder. But what actually happens is 4 or 5 cops pile on, kicking and punching. “Suspect” goes to the hospital, or is even beaten to death, and the cops are hard pressed to find a hangnail. Take the kid, Kelly Thomas, that they beat to death in Fullerton, CA. Not one of those cops had a visible scratch on them. Sure, they made claims about this broken thumb, and that neck strain, LOL, just like any other scumbag trying to fake an injury. Did you see the pictures of Kelly? Beaten to the point of being unrecognizable. Cop even admitted that he was hammering him in the face with a taser. WTF??????? If the law says minimum level of force to overcome resistance, how was it that all 6 of the cops involved weren’t charged with 2nd degree murder like one of them was? They beat him to death. Literally. They were unmarked. Was this the minimum level of force required to overcome Kelly’s resistance? And add to that the fact that he was committing no wrong and they shouldn’t have been bothering him in the first place. But only 2 of the cops were charged. And don’t you just love the excuse for not charging the others? Well, it seems they didn’t know that the first 2 were illegally beating Kelly to death when they piled on and helped. Oh well, maybe they’ll get boned on the federal side for civil rights violations. Maybe………
I think police need to see this, not a one flipped out and beat the windows out of the car then dragged the occupants out the broken windows and no one died in a fusillade of bullets. Yeah the driver got stuffed a bit but, it wasn’t an attempted murder by a mob justice like I’ve seen before.
Cops have with changed with the added militancy, especially the inclusion of their own “special operators.” Look at how they talk all military and calling us civilians, as though they aren’t. Somehow, i doubt the marines from iraq are nearly as impressed.
I just exchanged emails with a sheriff candidate who thinks we need to increase the use of SWAT. I guess he wasn’t impressed with meth lab story a few days ago.
So i’m crossing party lines and hope the dem candidatewill keep his promise of accountability. But hypoxia is a bad way to go.
What a stinky pile of crap. Chases / police interactions end good and bad now AND ended good and bad then. @certain: you to look at it in a better way, the way a court will look at it…reasonable force. Legally I can “one up” you meaning one step higher on the ladder. You have a fist, I can use a baton. You have a bat, I can step up to a gun. And NO, I don’t have to wait until you hit me. Or shoot at me, or any such nonsense. He chase depicted here was extremely dangerous, as they all are. This driver placed dozens of people at risk of serious injury or death. That must be kept in mind.
@T
Your comments sound as though you belive the cops had a right to beat the crap out of the guys being chased. This is what is wrong with police today. Police DO NOT have a right to assault someone so they need medical attention. Police are trained to use tactics to get uncooperative persons to submit to arrest. However, time and time again an officer chooses to use unecessary force to “teach them a lesson”. Once again it is not the officers job to punish a criminal for their actions, that is left up to the judge and jury.
@T
It is one thing to use force. It is another to beat a person not offering deadly force into the hospital or morgue. When a beating by five cops put someone into surgery with i.ternal injuries, you went too far. And the officer beating a man in the head should have been charged for it.
“The case of the suspects did not get held up with accusations of police abuse. There were no accusations of police brutality. Its a simple case of good guy catches bad guy, and throws him in jail.
The difference between then and now is amazing. Compare this video to most modern day chase videos, and you will see what has become of the once highly respected job of the police. The contrast is black and white.”
I was thinking the exact same thing when they pulled them out of the vehicle. 1988 vs now.
I took a few notes if anyone cannot watch the video.
@3:30 Come on, come on, you piece of shit. “The cop yelling at his vehicle” Rofl
@8 Minutes into the video, the state vehicle that the dash cam was attached to was being pushed to the max, the vehicle was at it’s peak and probable cleaned/cleared out the carb, Lol.
@9:10 The cop said something about a dildo. Lol.
@10:30 alright, alright, … , alright, yeehaw, a road block. The cops stated.
@12:24 Moments after the stolen car and criminals were surrounded, @ 12:24 the state vehicle started to hose out vapors of anti-freeze right at under the front right corner of the vehicles hood. Lol.
This was indeed one intense chase that thankfully, no one was injured in the process.
I did see a head of one of the criminals hitting the roof of one of the officers vehicles, “minor”.
What this reminds me of when I seen the close in on the stolen vehicle was GTA “video game”.
What a great video catch for 1988, very clear, no bump interruptions etc, etc, etc, clean and clear.
“The police knew their place in ’88. And it was not as executioner.”
Interesting video, thanks! That looked like a pretty professional operation. Get back up, box them in, take them into custody. No one died, no one even got injured as far as I could tell. As the officer said, “good deal.” I tend to agree with the sentiments expressed based on personal experiences. My dad was a police officer from the early 70s to just before 9/11. He and the officers he worked with DID seem different. That doesn’t mean there weren’t abuses, but there was simply a different approach.
Policing has always been a very troubled occupation, and we are now seeing how dangerous and unsustainable our form of policing is. But police back in those days didn’t seem to have the exaggerated hero-complex that many officers display today. There were fewer steroid-popping Robocops. And even though my dad and many of his co-workers had military backgrounds, there was not all of this talk about police as warriors. I think they would have laughed at that notion, in fact.
I was a criminal justice major and completed internships with a few police departments during my college days. By then, things had started to change, but I was still interested in LEO careers. But within the last couple years, I changed my mind. I can’t be a part of this system of policing. Again, it has always been a troubled system, but now it is in a downward spiral.
1 up? Fine. You want to call some of the stuff we see these days 1 up? I say you failed math miserably.
@Kaz: Interesting imagination you have there. I explain the legal difference to @certain, explaining the way the courts look at use of force incidents. Look at Graham vs. Connor for it. Its just like I said. Its a reasonableness standard. And its what would a reasonable officer do in that situation, with those facts, in that moment. Its not Monday morning quarterbacking, its has to be looked at as it was at the time. Chases are extremely dangerous situations. Real people get real hurt and real killed because of them. That’s not the police’s fault. “POLICE ARE TRAINED TO USE TACTICS TO GET UNCOOPERATIVE PERSONS TO SUBMIT TO ARREST”.You are VERY correct sir. That dodoesn’t mean stand there and dance around. Thatddoesn’t mean just wait until they are ready to quit resisting. That also doesn’t mean pound them into the ground. But the reason, as I described, that we are allowed to “one up” you is exactly what you said. Its not a school yard fight. I don’t want to fight you at all. I don’t have to stand there and exchange fists with you. You guys haven’t even ever gotten it right about why we have several officers there. Its overwhelming…its in hopes that you won’t fight…its to take you in custody with as little fighting and hopefully as little harm to anyone as possible. Your right (kind of) that the police don’t have the right to assault some of, to where they need medical attention or not. But YOU don’t have the right to resist a legal arrest, not even a little bit. But you do. And in the middle of the fight, the rules get hard to follow. You start the fight, don’t bitch about the results. As for the chases, YOu, and often times WE, don’t know why they are running. Some times we DO know. We know their records, their backgrounds…why they are running. We can use that information and should use it. I’m not in favor of ever “beating” anyone. But I will accomplish my legal goals.
@Shawn: You’re right. But that’s the rare incident ( regardless of what you think you know about it, the numbers of police encounters to the number of uses of force are mind numbingly small. It doesn’t excuse the police using excessive force, but the choice to run, and to resist lands where again?
@Helmut: Police work has changed over the years certainly. I was here before 911 and now after…that didn’t have a damn thing to do with anything (I think that’s a little conspiracy theory). But if you don’t think their were rough police in the 60′s or 70′s, go back and ask you dad again. Then it was all batons, slap jacks, lead gloves. Lots of people seriously injured and killed. Just not as good a reporting job. Move into the 80′s and the gun violence really started to increase (some better reporting…people started hearing about things more). In the 90′s, more and more drug use and more guns. 2000′s, lots and lots of drug use, and guns and weapons are rampant. News carries everything, all the time.
But that just touches it. Kids in the late 80 and 90′s had less time with their parents, less parental involvement (not mas many stay at home moms). The schools had be home more touchy feely, no discipline. That translated directly into police encounters. Less respectfully people, less respectful of the Police and of anyone other than self. Add in a weapon explosion…handguns of every make, assault rifles that are readily available. Society changed, and so did the police. Had to. Policing iisn’t any more troubled than society as a whole. As for “RoboCops”. Don’t see the steroid poppers as you aledge, but most guys do work out, some a lot. Again, its just a reflection of society in general. Why you single out the police is just your issue.
@T
“It doesn’t excuse the police using excessive force, but the choice to run, and to resist lands where again?”
I’ve said this time and again. We are each responsible for our own choices ONLY. The person who resists is only responsible for his choice. That doesn’t take away an officer’s responsibility for controlling himself. The ability for self control is what is supposed to separate a cop from a vigilante.
I’m not asking for fair fights. I don’t do fair fights myself. But when someone is screaming for their damn mother or begging for their life, it’s time to cool it down. People will fight back if they think you’re trying to kill them.
When I was in security training, the little we did touch on physical combat taught us one thing I think has been forgotten. Some areas are off limits when using a blunt instrument. The head and neck are especially vulnerable for serious injuries and are considered lethal force.
t:
“I was here before 911 and now after…that didn’t have a damn thing to do with anything (I think that’s a little conspiracy theory).”
I don’t think it’s a conspiracy theory at all. I don’t need conspiracy theories. The truth is already bad enough. In my opinion, after 9-11, police got increasingly arrogant, and they became obsessed with finding “terrorists” here, there and everywhere. I attended some “anti-terrorist” training recently when I was still working in the healthcare security field. Some of it really does promote a paranoid world view and a vision of policing that is quite militaristic. Obviously the drug war, which has only gotten more aggressive since my dad retired, has played a major role too. But we can agree to disagree on that one.
“But if you don’t think their were rough police in the 60′s or 70′s, go back and ask you dad again.”
I don’t dispute the fact that there were rough police in the 60′s and 70′s. I’ve seen the footage and I’ve talked to dad and some of his co-workers about the “old days.” I recall talking to one guy who admitted that one time he was dealing with a really hostile prisoner,lost it and beat him so badly that he thought he killed him. But when that officer was talking about the incident he looked traumatized and sad. He was not gloating. He knew he acted unprofessionally and was clearly not proud of it. How would the officers we see on Copblock or Youtube today react? Would they show shame or would they simply rationalize their behavior and make a joke of it?
“In the 90′s, more and more drug use and more guns. 2000′s, lots and lots of drug use, and guns and weapons are rampant”
Drug USE or drug PROHIBITION, T. Most drug-related homicides should actually be termed prohibition-related homicides, since this is exactly what they are. And if a person is on a drug when they commit a violent crime, it is most likely alcohol. I know this from research as well as experience in hospital security. I never, ever fought anyone because they had just smoked a joint. If you work in law enforcement, you know this is true. It is time for the police to admit that drug law enforcement promotes violence more than it curtails it.
“Again, its just a reflection of society in general. Why you single out the police is just your issue.”
Society is fucked up, T. But here again you refuse to admit the role of your profession in making it more fucked up than it has to be. My former director at the hospital was talking about his time working in a police department and he told me that commanding officers there would say “we don’t pay you to think.” He just chuckled about it. I, on the other hand, didn’t think it was funny. I will never, ever stop thinking critically about who I am and what I am doing. Unfortunately, police departments don’t seem to value critical thinking and that is the primary reason I opted out of a career in policing.
And for the record, I don’t just single out the police, T. But that is who we are talking about in this thread. I do expect better of the police, though. I expect them to live up to all their high-minded rhetoric and time and time again they fail. I didn’t turn my back on the police, they turned their back on me.
Helmut: I believe you are being unduly influenced by an overabundance of information. The “arrogance” that you think you have seen since 911 isn’t a reality. Its cameras and reporting. People have been dieing from cancer and eveverything else for thousands of years. It just wasn’t understood or able to be seen in the past. Doesn’t mean it wasn’t there.
I’ll say, as I have before, that I know bunches of police “leaders” that don’t have a clue. They are way out of touch with their own people as well as the citizens they serve. But Joe Cop on the street isn’t. Those who work in the shit holes know they work in the shit holes. But we also know that not everyone that lives there is a shithead. That’s who I work for. They can’t help themselves against said shithead. I do that. But you are very, very mislead by your pro drug stance. If you work in a hospital…you should be ashamed by that stance as you see everyday the harm done by drugs. I’ve stated before that I couldn’t care less if you want to smoke yourself to oblivion, in fact please do so. Your an adult, so please just speed it up and get out of the way. But what I see everyday…are the side effects. Other than some domestic related incidents, I’ve NEVER arrested anyone for breaking and entering that didn’t have a drugrecord and currently use. I’ve NEVER arrested someone for robbery that ddidn’t have an extensive drug history. The overwhelming amount of people that I arrest for pettier thefts…drugs, drugs, drugs. That’s not involved with prohibition. That’s not involving the violence that goes along with the production, transport and sales. That’s just the people committing massive amounts of crime to fund THEIR USE. Ending prohibition won’t end that. And your pro drug stance has impaired / biased your view about the community you live in. Not many cities or communities want or except drug sales and use as an except able standard. The people who maybe smoked pot in high school or college have grown up and moved on. They now know that getting stoned isn’t what its all about. They don’t want their kids exposed to it. They don’t want the stuff theyve worked hard get earn, stolen by some kid who then just gets stoned off it. I dealt with a child abuse child yesterday…dad smokes marijuana daily and also used meth. Mom is an ex-junkie trying to move on. The 4 year old girl got caught in the middle. At the end of the day, I don’t care even a little about adults who make stupid choices, your a grown up and can choose to do what you want, you know the risks. But that kid doesn’t.
Oh, if you haven’t figured it out yet, the marijuana that people smoked in the 60 s, 70′s 80′s and even 90′s is far different from what is available today. The 6-7% THC back in the day is nothing compared to the 25-27% THC there is now. And lacing it is back big time. PCP is back. Ask your card about that. The explosion of prescription drugs is new. While is was always there, it was nothing when compared with today.
@T
One point you forgot to comment on is the fact that police often do things to teach the person a lesson. Cops then use “excessive force” in hopes the next time a cop tells them to do something they listen. Do you think it is cops to “teach someone a lesson”. IMO it is not ok. I believe cops should use necessary force to get an uncooperative subject into custody. However, If someone is just trying to get away and not fighting back then I believe that punching, kicking and beating on them in unecessary force. If a cop cannot physically handle someone bigger or stronger than them that is what backup, tasers and pepperspray is for. Using those things on someone allready in custody IMO is unecessary force.
t: “But you are very, very mislead by your pro drug stance. If you work in a hospital…you should be ashamed by that stance as you see everyday the harm done by drugs. I’ve stated before that I couldn’t care less if you want to smoke yourself to oblivion, in fact please do so. Your an adult, so please just speed it up and get out of the way.”
Here we go. I am not pro drug. In fact, I have smoked marijuana a grand total of one time in my life. I am anti-prohibition and I am not the least bit ashamed of that. I think you have been deluded by drug warrior propaganda and your own concerns about job security.
“The overwhelming amount of people that I arrest for pettier thefts…drugs, drugs, drugs. That’s not involved with prohibition. That’s not involving the violence that goes along with the production, transport and sales. That’s just the people committing massive amounts of crime to fund THEIR USE. Ending prohibition won’t end that”
You’ve admitted that the primary motivator here is to “fund” drug use. It is not an effect of using the drug, per se. T, I never said that ending prohibition would end crime. And some people may still commit thefts/burglaries to pay for drugs. Some people still steal alcoholic beverages from stores, after all. But I do think property crimes may drop if drugs are made legal for a couple reasons. In a legal market, people could purchase currently illegal drugs from pharmacies. The drugs may be cheaper in this kind of market because the risks associated with the black market are not present. Also, doctors would be able to prescribe these drugs to addicts and ween them off of the substance in a supervised setting. I have seen heroin withdrawal while working in a hospital. It is ugly, and this is a big reason why people continue to use. Minimizing the pain of withdrawal could make it easier to kick addictive drugs. Summing up, the thefts you’re seeing ARE related to prohibition because prohibition makes it harder for people to quit using.
“Not many cities or communities want or except drug sales and use as an except able standard.”
Fine. In a more de-centralized, less statist society, communities could prohibit sales. Some towns prohibit alcohol sales too. Let’s get the feds out of it and go from there. But hey, in a freer society, maybe people would be more apt to mind their own fucking business and wouldn’t care as long as the person using the drug wasn’t hurting anyone or interfering with anyone’s rights.
“Mom is an ex-junkie trying to move on. The 4 year old girl got caught in the middle. At the end of the day, I don’t care even a little about adults who make stupid choices, your a grown up and can choose to do what you want, you know the risks. But that kid doesn’t.”
Yes, I’m all to familiar with these cases. And they are happening NOW with prohibition policies in place. Prohibition does not stop people from abusing drugs, messing up their lives or messing up their kids. It just gives police and other officials a way to make it look like their doing something. And it gives them an excuse to control more and more of the lives of the people. And the emphasis on incarceration breaks up families, even families that are more stable than the one you described. Again, if the parents here had an opportunity to go to a clinic and ween themselves off of the drug legally, maybe they would have been more successful.
“Oh, if you haven’t figured it out yet, the marijuana that people smoked in the 60 s, 70′s 80′s and even 90′s is far different from what is available today. The 6-7% THC back in the day is nothing compared to the 25-27% THC there is now. And lacing it is back big time. PCP is back. Ask your card about that. The explosion of prescription drugs is new. While is was always there, it was nothing when compared with today.”
The more potent pot scare tactic. Even if that’s true, has it caused an overdose death yet. Didn’t think so. Of course “lacing” pot happens. It’s being sold in a black market with low quality control standards for fuck sake. Again, the problems you blame on drugs are, in fact, related to prohibition policies. As for the prescription drug thing, you sounded a little excited. As if it’s a great new opportunity here. Another reason to kick in doors and fuck shit up! And that’s why prohibition continues: it is hugely profitable. The dealers profit, tough on crime politicians profit and cops and C.O.’s profit (more work, more career advancement, more court OT, and for some, more opportunities for corruption). Yeah, you and yours get a lot out of these policies, but that does not mean it is a moral system. Think about that next time you try to make someone feel “ashamed” for being anti-drug war.
@Helmut
Sorry, but T is right. It would be one thing if drug users were tbe only one paying the price. They aren’t and never will be. And if drugs were legal, how would that convince users to ween themselves off?(a tactic that won’t work)
I do disagree with WODs tactics, but not on fighting drug use. Until you can ensure the consiquences will only be felt by the users, you won’t get drugs legalized. And even then, you leave pushers still chasing after kids.
Shawn:
Users should be held accountable for their behavior. Voluntary intoxication would not be an excuse for violence or negligence in any sensible society. This does not mean they should be incarcerated or controlled by correctional authorities simply for using the drug. If they use the drug and don’t harm or interfere with anyone else, why would you want to use the coercive power of the state to stop them? We need to rid ourselves of this urge to use government cages and guns to intimidate people with different lifestyles than our own.
Regarding weening off drugs, what I mean is that if drugs are not strictly prohibited, then medical professionals can develop programs where patients are given drugs (not synthetics like methadone, which can themselves be addictive)in a supervised setting. The healthcare staff can then administer less and less gradually until hopefully the person kicks the habit. This should be less painful for the patient than going “cold turkey” in a jail cell. Of course not everyone will succeed, but it makes more sense to me than prison. I mean, how does getting locked in a cage help one to get rid of an irrational craving. Well, in most cases it doesn’t.
As for dealers chasing kids, well that happens under prohibition anyway. Here I think you are getting caught up in the save the children rhetoric that is almost never helpful in criminal justice. If drugs are not strictly prohibited, then communities can develop their own approach to sales. I don’t think sensible communities will want the open air markets we now have, so I think it is more likely that people will go to pharmacies or specialty shops. This is a far cry from what we have now. I mean, how often to liquor shop employees have running gun battles in the street?
Also…what’s not mentioned is the mindset of criminals in 1988, and 2012. There are hundreds of vids out there that end with a felony stop at the end. No bum rush. Also.. back in the day when these chases happened. The police didn’t use stop stix….they used buck shot and slugs from a shot gun. yep, that’s right. Cops used to SHOOT at fleeing vehicles!!! Which you very rarely see today.
PSOSGT…WTF are you talking about. Rarely shoot at fleeing vehicles? All the time you read about an officer shooting at a suspect in a fleeing vehicle. Just a month or so ago we saw some clown police woman running down the road discharging her weapon in an urban setting at a suspect who took her vehicle(which the dumb bitch left running and unattended). Here in Florida(Jacksonville I think) about a week ago we saw 4 officers unleash 47 rounds into a car with a kid in it, hitting the kid in the foot etc, etc…any day of the week you can read some story about a scenario where it happens. Get the fuck out of here with the rarely seen firing on a fleeing vehicle shit. I know you are an officer from your comments, and despite what people here say most officers are decent men/woman just earning a living. However just stop with the blue line shit. “Used to shoot at fleeing vehicles” …try still do.
Oregon is the only state in the nation that has a law, Oregon Senate Bill 111 Police Use Of Deadly Physical Force that passed and signed in 2007, mandated to be in full force July 1, 2008 with a program attached called, Truly Reforming Law Enforcement.
Since Jan. 1, 2006 our organization has researched and investigated nationwide why officers “kill at will without due cause.”
We were shocked to learn that not one of the 19,000 + federal to American Native Police Bureaus have any procedures nor training when a officer starts to use unjustified deadly physical force.
Our program has five major steps with specific, clear procedures, training, accountability and we will monitor to be sure the program is in place and we will keep it effective.
To date, 11/29/2012 not one of Oregon’s law enforcement top officials have put in place said program, which violates their premeditaded breach of their oath of office to protect the public which violates said law, other state, federal laws including the United States Constitution.
We succeded in forcing resignations of six top officials in the state, and city of Portland, Oregon as our thousands of emails to the public created hundreds of contacts to them to either start the program or resign today.
Google:
1. Program, Truly Reforming Law Enforcement
2. Rise In Police Brutality USA TODAY NEWSPAPER Dec. 18, 2007
3. Jerry Atlansky Oregon Senate Bill 111 Police Use Of Deadly Physical Force.
Contact us for any reason and you will get a reply.
Jerry Atlansky, Founder/Chairperson
United States Police/Oregon State Police-
Independent Citizens Review Board
Portland, Oregon 97213
[email protected]