Chicago cop chokes kid that talks too much.

[Steelman]

I'd say that is the most widely misunderstood training aid ever developed. It has incorrectly been turned into policy by many agencies when all it was ever designed to be was a guide, a visual aid to assist officers in understanding escalation and deescalation of force.

Arguing the validity of policy is kind of a moot point in case. What is your take on the officer striking and then constricting the other party's throat? Was it warranted? Where does it fall in the Continuum?

Looking for direct and simple answers since I'm posting from an iPhone

 

[Bunnykid68]

That choke was worse than what Coach Knight did to Neal Reid

 

[Kutnupe14]

Excessive, he should (at the very least) have a suspension coming.

 

[strahd71]

Excessive, he should (at the very least) have a suspension coming.

i disagree, and thats ok with me as long as its ok with you

personally i'd like to see him get a raise

and honestly it pains me to defend a cop

jake

 

[Kutnupe14]

i disagree, and thats ok with me as long as its ok with you

personally i'd like to see him get a raise

and honestly it pains me to defend a cop

jake

Sometimes ingo members baffle me.

 

[Darral27]

What do you guys that think the officer was in the wrong should have done? Do you think a nice finger wagging would have ended the situation? Do you think he should have just turned and left the boy to think he had won the altercation? What the officer did was not excessive. He was in a confrontation and ended that confrontation without seriously harming the kid. The kid should also think twice before he gets into another officers face yelling at him. What ever happened to respecting authority? What ever happened to simply respecting your elders. We need more officers to put these punks in their place like this officer did. I was always told as a kid you will respect me because you love me or you will respect me because you fear me, either way you WILL respect me. Guess that kid got taught a lesson he should have been taught long ago.

 

[jsharmon7]

What do you guys that think the officer was in the wrong should have done? Do you think a nice finger wagging would have ended the situation? Do you think he should have just turned and left the boy to think he had won the altercation?

He had a grip on the kid's right arm just before he grabbed him by the neck. If he was attempting to take control of the kid, he had a perfect opportunity. So, was he attempting to gain control or "teaching the kid a lesson?" Police officers are not trained to use force for retaliation or teaching lessons about disrespecting the police. Officers who let their ego get in the way of their duty end up having a lot of trouble in their career. Something led this officer to feel it necessary to confront the kid about the behavior you saw in the video, I'm not questioning that part.

 

[strahd71]

What do you guys that think the officer was in the wrong should have done? Do you think a nice finger wagging would have ended the situation? Do you think he should have just turned and left the boy to think he had won the altercation? What the officer did was not excessive. He was in a confrontation and ended that confrontation without seriously harming the kid. The kid should also think twice before he gets into another officers face yelling at him. What ever happened to respecting authority? What ever happened to simply respecting your elders. We need more officers to put these punks in their place like this officer did. I was always told as a kid you will respect me because you love me or you will respect me because you fear me, either way you WILL respect me. Guess that kid got taught a lesson he should have been taught long ago.

i agree!

look i'm the first one in line to bash a cop for brutality or acting like a douche bag. but seriously everyone pees their pants because society is going down hill, and young people dont respect anything blah blah blah and i agree! but here this worthless punk gets an object lesson in life and gets man handled a little bit and folks want to pee their pants about that too. which is it? you cant have it both ways, do we want punks to learn lessons or do we want to continue to coddle them? this kid didnt get hurt! i've done a hundred restraints or better at my past jobs i can guarantee you he didnt get hurt.

and yea Kutnupe14 some of you folks baffle me too

jake

 

[phylodog]

Arguing the validity of policy is kind of a moot point in case. What is your take on the officer striking and then constricting the other party's throat? Was it warranted? Where does it fall in the Continuum?

Looking for direct and simple answers since I'm posting from an iPhone

I don't think it's moot, what is that officer's agency policy on use of force? If it is the force continuum then I'd say his level of force was appropriate, somewhere between "touch" and "pain compliance & takedowns". As it is used an officer is allowed to go +1 on the continuum in an attempt to gain control or compliance and the smartmouth was clearly in the verbal resistance realm. This is the problem with having the continuum as policy. An officer can remain within the boundaries set forth by the continuum yet his actions may be considered unreasonable.

As far as whether it was warranted, I would have to see his department policy to make an informed argument either way. If I was his supervisor I would advise him, regardless of policy, against that particular technique and remind him that while I feel the little idiot deserved every bit of it, many would not agree.

 

[Steelman]

the smartmouth was clearly in the verbal resistance realm.

If I was his supervisor I would advise him, regardless of policy, against that particular technique and remind him that while I feel the little idiot deserved every bit of it, many would not agree.

Are IMPD officers training to use choking restraints to soothe their aching pride?

Is there an IMPD policy against using choking restraints?

 

[phylodog]

Are IMPD officers training to use choking restraints to soothe their aching pride?

Is there an IMPD policy against using choking restraints?

Can't say. I wasn't trained by IMPD. I've never received training in choke holds or soothing my aching pride.

 

[Steelman]

Can't say. I wasn't trained by IMPD. I've never received training in choke holds or soothing my aching pride.

But you ARE training IMPD officers, correct?

 

[phylodog]

But you ARE training IMPD officers, correct?

Not in choke holds or pride soothing.

 

[Ted]

Nice to know that unpopular (albeit arguably idiotic) speech, resulted in law enforcement engaging in a clear violation of his civil rights.

The drunk kid might have talked trash and even verbally threatened the cop, but I'm not seeing how the officer is justified in using such force for the supposed offense.

 

[Steelman]

Not in choke holds or pride soothing.

So you would probably be familiar with departmental policy and whether it prohibits choke holds. Since you are not training them in choke holds that would lead me to believe that a policy exists within IMPD.


Would the use of a choke hold by an IMPD officer (with a policy expressly prohibiting it) be considered deadly force by IMPD?

 

[phylodog]

So you would probably be familiar with departmental policy and whether it prohibits choke holds. Since you are not training them in choke holds that would lead me to believe that a policy exists within IMPD.


Would the use of a choke hold by an IMPD officer (with a policy expressly prohibiting it) be considered deadly force by IMPD?

I don't train them in choke holds because I'm a firearms instructor. I don't train in survival tactics, defensive tactics, martial arts or anything other than firearms training.

 

[Ted]

So you would probably be familiar with departmental policy and whether it prohibits choke holds. Since you are not training them in choke holds that would lead me to believe that a policy exists within IMPD.


Would the use of a choke hold by an IMPD officer (with a policy expressly prohibiting it) be considered deadly force by IMPD?

Seems to me that Indiana code would answer this matter.

IC 35-42-2-9 (b)

A person who, in a rude, angry, or insolent manner, knowingly or intentionally:
(1) applies pressure to the throat or neck of another person; or
(2) obstructs the nose or mouth of the another person;
in a manner that impedes the normal breathing or the blood circulation of the other person commits strangulation, a Class D felony.

 

[phylodog]

Seems to me that Indiana code would answer this matter.

IC 35-42-2-9 (b)

A person who, in a rude, angry, or insolent manner, knowingly or intentionally:
(1) applies pressure to the throat or neck of another person; or
(2) obstructs the nose or mouth of the another person;
in a manner that impedes the normal breathing or the blood circulation of the other person commits strangulation, a Class D felony.

And shooting someone, according to the IC, is attempted murder or murder. The actions can be justified and considered reasonable under the right circumstances.

 

[Steelman]

I don't train them in choke holds because I'm a firearms instructor. I don't train in survival tactics, defensive tactics, martial arts or anything other than firearms training.

Well this argument has become circular in nature. You're skirting my questions with some standard (and comical) officer courtroom responses.


It is concerning that you are unable to separate emotion from fact in this case. Whether or not this "particular individual" was being a smart ass (or deserved to be choked) does not warrant a response beyond the powers granted to him by departmental policy.

It's not the Wild West - you don't get to form a posse, round up the "bad guys" and soothe your aching pride by any means necessary.

This response to a "contempt of cop" violation breeds contempt towards cops.

 

[phylodog]

Well this argument has become circular in nature. You're skirting my questions with some standard (and comical) officer courtroom responses.


It is concerning that you are unable to separate emotion from fact in this case. Whether or not this "particular individual" was being a smart ass (or deserved to be choked) does not warrant a response beyond the powers granted to him by departmental policy.

It's not the Wild West - you don't get to form a posse, round up the "bad guys" and soothe your aching pride by any means necessary.

This response to a "contempt of cop" violation breeds contempt towards cops.

I asked what his department policy was and no one has provided it yet. As I stated earlier, if his department policy is the force continuum as it appeared earlier in the thread then I don't think he violated it.

I might have been a bit more forthcoming if your initial inquiry hadn't included the "aching pride" part but you never know. I could just be a jerk.