Cops assualt 70 pound girl for refusal to give up cellphone

"officer safety" - the free pass for cops to assault, maim, and murder anyone they wish.

Police safety is completely overblown. On average less than 50 cops a year are killed by bad guys. "officer safety" is just an excuse that allows cops to operate outside the law.

Which brings up the "rule of law". There is no "rule of law", there is no one law applied equally to all regardless of status. This is a police state. If 3 teachers or 3 students or 3 adults had done what the cops did, the teachers/students/adults would be in serious trouble. Laws apply to Citizens, not to cops.

 

So, the girls "SAYS" that she was talking to her mother in the hospital. But instead of telling the principal that her mother was in the hospital and asking if she could talk to her mother standing right by the principal she turned he back on the authority figure who has a very tough job in any Houston school.

Turns out that her mother is fine and the whole thing was that she just didn't want to obey the rules.

 

and maybe if should put her hands up said and "don't shoot", oh wait that was another case of gross over reaction...

 

naw its you and your country that doesn't get it, you wont find this type of disfunctional abusive of authority in any other first world country...and strange as it may seem they're all more leftist than the usa and less violent...its your lust for violence that creates more violence...

 

They should have tazered her and sprayed her with mace or pepper spray (both if they have them) and use those sonic disruptor weapons that hurt people's ears and finally dropped a tear gas canister in front of her. Then shoot a couple of rubber bullets for good measure. Have a couple of dogs nearby in case she still resists after that.

 

Rrrrrrigth, and this same problem doesn't occur in other first world democracies for what reason?

 

apparently not............including you...........

 

Yes I do. We have the version of the 15 yr old girl who doesn't think the cell phone rules apply to her and one fellow student who "PROBABLY" only saw the end of the incident. They "PROBABLY" did what was necessary to handcuff an irate 15 yr olds flailing arms. Sure, they probably could of used less forceful tactics BUT, their tactics didn't injure her and didn't leave a mark upon her. Didn't even read anything about any pain, just embarrassment. Id say the tactic was successful. And if her embarrassment is the only damage, I think the princess will just have to get over it.

 

She wasn't arrested, merely detained to prevent her from fleeing with her phone. And she had already answered the question, she wasn't going to give them the phone because "I didn't want to". And isn't it revealing how she seems to think that is sufficient justification for defying the rules.

 

Wow I remember when you got detention for these sort of things. If that didn't work, then suspension and if that didn't work expulsion would do the trick.

 

Don't be a punk and the police

will leave you alone.

 

I remember several times having my cigarettes taken from me in High School. We didn't have police officers but I imagine had I ever decided like this girl, that "I didn't want to give" vice principal Bartee my cigarettes and stated I refused to do so and began to walk away, he would physically done whatever was necessary to take them from me and giving me 5 swats with that dreaded paddle of his for not doing so.

 

You're right. She wasn't put on the ground for missing Sunday School.

 

And when the irate guardian showed up and took the side of the immature rebel what would you have done?

 

Do you know what color of law means?

 

Or she is attacking you and threatening you with serious harm, women do not have some inherent right to attack men without fear of recourse and immediate physical recourse if they are trying to physically harm the man.

 

And the mother who was on the phone with her telling her not to cooperate was going to do what when they called her?

 

Take her home. Insanity I tell you!!!

 

Not if they refuse to cooperate with that administration and the orders they are giving her, not if she refuses to comply with the lawful orders of a police officer. Then it is going to get physical as they take her into custody and that means the slighest jerk of her hand or turn of her shoulder, or police do not have to put up with that while carrying out the job we hired to them to perform.

The girl escalated what should have been a VERY MINOR situation, Teacher "Mary put your phone away", Mary "Yes Ma'am". End if story. The child escalated it and is responsible for what happened to her.

That was entirely doings of the girl who decided to not comply with the school rules, not to comply with the direct instruction and the teacher in the classroom, refused to comply with the direction of the principle and refused to comply with the police. SHE ratcheted it up at every step.

Mary "you want me to put up my phone?" Teacher "yes", end of story no further questioned allowed.

 

Yes I'm sure that was the idea, get her off campus because of the disruption she was creating. She is refusing to cooperate and being belligerent and in the end refused the lawful order of a police officer. And her mother was on the other end telling her not to follow the request of the teacher to put the phone away, telling her to disobey the rules, so what is taking her home to mommy going to do?

 

same here...I asked my son the for the exact rules at his school ...its 3 strikes...cellphones can only be used with permission of the teacher-1st time phone is surrendered to principal and retrieved at the end of the day, parents are called in if there is a problem....2nd, sames as 1st...3rd time and phone is not returned until the end of the school year...I doubt it ever gets that far kids are too attached to their phones to risk losing them...anyone who objects to the 3 warnings are welcome to transfer to another school...

 

Police power isn't vested in school principles, nor are the police empowered to enforce school rules. They enforce law and I challenge you to find a law that criminalizes the use of a cell phone in school.

This is a non starter, the police in taking private property illegally by force are in serious trouble, as is the principle.

Cheers
Labour

 

That is a lot of stuff you are pulling out of thin air, including making up stories about the mom, to justify not handling the situation as a school administrator but instead calling law enforcement who started a physical altercation with the girl caused her to leave the school .

In no way shape or form did the principal handle the situation correctly. They endanger the welfare of their students when they bring police into any administrative situation. Case in point this story, she got lucky that she suffered no serious injuries while not long ago police killed a man while restraining them. There was no need for anything physical, but you bring police into the mix and you seriously don't know what the hell you are going to get.


[video=youtube;ALFK1giDqtc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALFK1giDqtc[/video]

Don't get police involved is school administrative rules. They have no place there.

And lets sum up again: What was illegal, where was the crime, wtf are police doing enforcing school rules?

 

What law is being broken? Can you post the state or federal law this child broke please. Ive never heard of law against using a cell phone but then I do live in a stable/sane democracy and not the usa...

 

They weren't lawful orders.

The administration rule does not have the force of law.

The continuum of force you argue with was illegal from step one of the initiation of force. The cop, the school administrator had no legal power to take the phone.

Cheers
Labour