Victim Disarmed and Cuffed for his "Safety"

Status
Not open for further replies.
I certainly see the officer safety side of the coin.

Go ahead, cuff the homeowner who called for help. Put them in the back of the cruiser. Maybe give them a little taste of the taser if they get "lippy," why not? Heck, the officer would be a lot safer if she'd have simply shot the homeowner when she arrived on the scene. No reason to get into cuffing distance, no time wasted, no one filing with a complaint with Internal Affairs afterward...

In all seriousness, I don't know any/many folks who would respond well to that situation. Call the police, they arrive, you disarm, and they cuff & stuff you? If they arrive at my house, they'll have me, the wife, and the kids all on the scene. Do they all get "secured" for the officer's safety? Or just me, trussed up in front of my kids 'cause I called for police assistance?

So, do the same penalties apply for "resisting arrest" if you are the homeowner and take offense at being roughed up by your "servers and protectors?"

As often as I defend law enforcement and extend the benefit of the doubt, it gets harder and harder to deny the "us vs. them" disconnect.

-Sam
 
i have the same question as sam, what happens with my wife and kid. As a Armed Nuclear Security Officer, my wife's more familiar with firearms than i am, owns just as many and would most likely also be armed in any real danger to us and/or the children.

would all those officers intend to detain her also. i really need to know to evaluate whether to even open the door to the police.

There is a case nearby in San Luis Obispo that is being settled where the police detained the homeowner because someone reported "a break in" (that never happened) at his home. I do not remember the details though it involved the police forcefully detaining a first cooperative homeowner - it looks as the city will pay 200 K to settle. I'm not convinced that this won't happen again, that you aren't safe from the police in your own home.
 
As a law enforcement officer myself, unless I know the person/homeowner/business owner, I am going to handcuff them too. Depending on the circumstances. I cant count how many calls I have been on where the home owner and/or reporting party has been 100% compliant and within a matter of minutes (again depending on the situation) has gone from "Joe/Jane Citizen" to A-hole in a split second.

This sounds like an absolute way to guarantee the A-hole version, just so your statistics stay good.
 
Possum.

You revealed something:
....prior to us figuring out....

Big difference in one and us.

Also:

...rescuing a downed piliot....
So, the fighter jock gets handcuffed?

...or picking up a isolated personell...
So, the soldier from an outpost gets handcuffed?

You might not have meant what you said but you said it as if you meant it. Is your real name Charles Dodgson aka Lewis Carroll.
 
Uh, I AM in public safety. If you need to clear the scene you wait for another officer to help, you don't hog tie the victim and search by yourself just *hoping* that the bad guy is gone.
+1

The officer should have called for backup. Citizens who have behaved well should be treated well, and should not be put in risky or uncomfortable situations.

As for the officer safety issue, the first rule in any kind of life-saving is to not put more lives at risk. It's just as important to keep the citizen save as the cop. The cop put herself first. (But, that's what cops do.)
 
Law enforcement operations should not be equal to military service operations. LEO is there to serve me the same way that politicians are there to serve me. Just because it does not happen that way, does not make it right. The phrase "If 500 million people say something stupid, it still makes it stupid" comes to mind.

As far as anti-LEO, I don't think that's the case, but a lot of people are tired of being treated like criminals no matter what. I guess we can just get rid of our God-given, constituionally protected rights, all in the name of safety right? I will be honest, I do not trust LEO anymore due to a lot of the militarization of what's going on in which everyone is a perp and no longer are any of us consider 'good guys.' Just like was said prior about being tased, I honestly do not know how I would act in a situation like that and am scared to be honest about it.

That is not the role of the PEACE officer. If that officer truly wanted to feel safe, she would have used the homeowner as a temporary partner to 'watch her back' so to speak. That would have been a much wiser course of action then putting him in temporary custody. Again, this is for PEACE officers, not military personnel. You (and used to be me) are there to blow things up, take everyone in custody and do your thing and continue to be the best at what you do, so do not misconstrue my words.

Damian
 
BINGO!!!! I got a speeding ticket and the cop ( with gun drawn ) made me exit the vehicle, walk backwards, and put my hands on the trunk.

Never been arrested,no warrants, NOTHING!!!

A few months ago, my wife was going 4mph over the speed limit and the cop gave her one for 11 over.
 
mcdonl said:
Wow, this thread is getting a serious anti-law enforcement vibe to it.

Right, because obviously if anyone questions the specific actions of a specific police officer they must be anti-law enforcement?

Think, just for a moment, about how silly that assertion sounds.
 
The number one concern on a Leo's mind is scene security and safety. By handcuffing the homeowner it made one less thing for the officer to worry about.

some of ya'll are new to this whole civil and Constitutional rights thing aren't ya? ya see, things like the 2nd and 4th Amendments are there to place limitations ON THE GOVERNMENT, not on the citizens. that means that MY rights get to be the ones that are protected. NOT the cops' idea of their "rights" which don't exist. capiche?
 
Good cops need to take the anger and frustration they feel towards "anti-LEO" sentiments and use it to DRUM OUT BAD COPS instead of closing ranks around "a few bad apples" that take occasional liberties because "they just want to go home at the end of a shift."
 
i will chime in from the military side of the house. no matter if i am doing hostage rescue operations, rescuing a downed piliot, or picking up a isolated personell, or saving a iraqi family from thieves form his home. everyone is gonna get zip cuffed and searched, and secured, until everything is secure, and figured out. you can imagine for example the mindset someone might be in if they were captured, and under enemy control for long periods of time. there is no telling what they are capable of, or what is going through there mind. even if you are wearing the smae uniform and you are on the same "team".

if i go into a house with possible good and bad folks, everyone is gonna be secured, cleared and searched prior to us figuring out who is who and what is what.

You boys must run things a little different than we ever did. Knocking over a target's home? Sure, we detain everyone with a pulse. Take down an arms warehouse? Same deal, everyone with a pulse gets zip cuffed. CSAR a downed pilot? No way in hell I'd put him in cuffs. Unless I gave him a fullout physical on the spot to ensure he had no injury whatsoever would I ever consider slapping him in cuffs. You have obviously never been in zips...they strain your back and are quite uncomfortable. After the pilot has ejected, it would be so foolish to put him in cuffs. Just...wow...
 
I understand that it is somewhat different, but how this situation really that different from a LEO walking up to a citizen who is legally open carrying in public and disarming and restraining the citizen until the LEO can determine that the citizen is safe.

The open-carrier and Mr. Mitchener are both acting well within in the law and in both cases the LEO is violating an individual's constitutionally protected rights through steps, deemed by the LEO, necessary to protect the LEO's safety.
 
If a cop handcuffs you don't they have to arrest you first?
Isn't being handcuffed without being under arrest illegal improsinment? and woul not such action be cuase for crimainal charges against the office?
 
If a cop handcuffs you don't they have to arrest you first?
Isn't being handcuffed without being under arrest illegal improsinment? and woul not such action be cuase for crimainal charges against the office?

No, no, and no.
 
You boys must run things a little different than we ever did. Knocking over a target's home? Sure, we detain everyone with a pulse. Take down an arms warehouse? Same deal, everyone with a pulse gets zip cuffed. CSAR a downed pilot? No way in hell I'd put him in cuffs. Unless I gave him a fullout physical on the spot to ensure he had no injury whatsoever would I ever consider slapping him in cuffs. You have obviously never been in zips...they strain your back and are quite uncomfortable. After the pilot has ejected, it would be so foolish to put him in cuffs. Just...wow...

i have been in zip cuffs, plenty of times. if we zip cuffed an american of any kind it would be in the front, make sure he is stable and if there was time we would take them off if that was the case. if not he will be fine for a few minutes in the helo with cuffs on.

first of all my context was in that of someone that had been detained by the enemy for a long period of time, thier mental status is unknown, there is no telling what kinda stree they have been under, what they want to do and or have been thinking that they will do when they get thier hands on a weapon of some sort, either to themselves your team members and your the "bad guys".

common sense dictates, and if i came to a helo crash that crashed 30 minutes prioir even more, i am gonna c spine em, put them on a spine board and call medivac, maybe my above post was a little merky and not clear, and for that i am sorry. we take the physical well being every seriously of piliots etc, and personell.

the main thing i am getting at here is people that have been captive have an altered mindset they may be in the now, they may not be.

all of the iraqi's look the same in thier civilian attire, there is no uniforms with the enemy that we face. so we do what we have to to bring everyone home alive.
 
It's pretty telling that domestic law enforcement are treating US citizens the same way our troops deal with Iraqis who may be potential insurgents. The old "us vs. them," "there's a war on" mentality dies hard. It makes perfect sense if there *IS* actually a war on. As possum describes, you cannot tell who the bad guys are and you could be walking into a trap. But how many home owners stateside call the police in order to lure them into an IED death zone? The police have no idea what a real war here would mean, and I hope they never find out.
 
shadowman,
there is many points and specific scenarios/ reasons that i wanted to add to the "we do this because", but in doing so would be giving the bg's ideas and we can have none of that! some things i don't want to devulge to the open forum that is the internet.
 
It's pretty telling that domestic law enforcement are treating US citizens the same way our troops deal with Iraqis who may be potential insurgents. The old "us vs. them," "there's a war on" mentality dies hard. It makes perfect sense if there *IS* actually a war on. As possum describes, you cannot tell who the bad guys are and you could be walking into a trap. But how many home owners stateside call the police in order to lure them into an IED death zone? The police have no idea what a real war here would mean, and I hope they never find out.
it would truely be hell for all parties involved.
 
If I call the cops to my house for a crime, present them my ID and/or permit, showing that I am indeed at my residence, and they try to handcuff me, there IS going to be trouble. Unless she's cute.:evil:
Everytime I've been cuffed so far, I deserved it. :banghead:
 
Placing someone in custody with cuffs on constitutes an "arrest", by definition: you are taking their freedom away. Opens the officer and department up to a lawsuit from the victim. Want to take bets on what a jury of CIVILIANS woud rule on that one? It may be SOP, for awhile........
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top