A Victoria police officer, Nathanial Robinson, 23, is under investigation for using a taser on a 76-year-old man armed only with licence plate papers.
The victim, Pete Vasquez, states “He just acted like a pit bull, and that was it,” he continues, “For a while, I thought he was going to pull his gun and shoot me.”
CLICK THE LINK BELOW FOR MORE + VIDEO:
This is a little to much over licence registration.
Then you are an idiot too.
suspend heck, fire the fool!
Well then you watched an entirely different video than this idiot did. The reason for the stop does not matter. If the cop was wrong on the reason for the stop…fine. That can be contested later.
However, the cop did make the stop. The man gets out of the car, is protesting the stop and starts to head into the place of business instead of answering the officers questions. The cop asks for backup on the radio then indicates toward the truck while obviously telling the man to put his hands there. The man does not do this….Passive Resistance. Now the cop escalates (and rightfully so) by going hands on to restrain the man. The man pulls away from this…Active Resistance. The cop can now escalate again to an intermediate weapon ie baton, pepper spray, and in some departments Taser. To add to the situation another subject approaches from behind the officer. The cop needs to quickly get a handle on the situation and does so by deploying the taser.
There is nothing to see here sir. Sections are missing immediately following the encounter…like the man being placed in the back of the car. The second officers are asking about well being after. That’s standard procedure. Just as they would administer first aid after a spray.
There is no story here. Everything I just said can be searched and confirmed as standard practices. There is no fourth amendment violation. Move on.
I am 70 years old, and I would not try to fight a police officer less than half my age.
It is obvious that the man had pulled into an inspection garage. All the cop had to do is go in with him to verify the inspection for the sticker on the car. The man had the paper work from the dealership, all he had to do was ask for the papers to verify the dealership plates.
He did not have to use the force he did! I know if I had been put down like that I would have most likely serious injuries.
That police department would have a serious law suit on their hands, for excessive use of force and personal injuries.
At no point did I see him resist him, and regardless of your age you will get upset when you are accused of having illegal plates. The dealer put temporary plates on a car so the buyer can travel to your insurance agent office, the BMV, the county tax people, and a garage to get the car inspected. It will not have a safety sticker on it because you just got it that day.
The Officer is in the wrong profession, shame on him. Not everyone is cut out for Police work. This kid is way out of line.
Why is Congress allowing this c**p to happen? Our military needs to take Obama the Muslim lover down!
So tired of hearing quotes like that. “Too much over license registration” “no body deserves to die over stolen cigars”
It didn’t escalate to that level because of the offense!!! Would any of these stories have happened if the subject did not resist arrest?
The man didn’t think he was too old to not comply with the officers directions and he didn’t think he was too old to resist arrest.
Here’s what you have to ask yourselves. Why is a false narrative being created to put a wall between the cops and public? You do realize it’s false right? The ferguson cop was justified. The take down in NY was justified. The takedown in this video is completely justified and well within the use of force policy.
So why the false narrative?
Your argument, correct me if I am wrong, is the police officer properly used the escalation of force, at least as dictated by your understanding of that specific officers SOP. That argument, while I am sure is based in policy, is completely ridiculous. It is so because you are not taking into account any form of common sense or discretion that is necessary on a case by case basis. Where was the threat to the officer immediate or otherwise that would require him to escalate his use of force to using a weapon? Easy answer, it did not exist. The man was approximately half of the officers size, did not have a weapon, obviously was not in a position to get back in his car or run from the officer. Where was the level of resistance that justified using a taser on the man? While I am sure your answer to this it says so in some policy, the policy does not make the escalation and use of force a requirement, simply an option.As a member of the Military with 2 combat deployments, there is no way we could indiscriminately apply our escalation of force in every situation that our “policy” justified doing so, nor were we expect to. In fact, in most pre-mission briefs it was directed that a certain amount of discretion and common sense be applied before resorting to said escalation. Common sense and discretion that according to your argument need not be applied by police because your policy does not say to use it, and the inference I get from you is that cops can not be expected to do so on their own. Your question was who is putting up this wall between the public and cops, to this I answer, cops like this who blatantly use more force than necessary, and people like you who justify it by referencing some policy.
He should not only lose his job, but be punished for what the did…..way too much excessive force.
Good..
what?????