Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
Video shows that two motorcycle officers went after Hill after he appeared to speed past them at in his McLaren sports car on the roadway entering Hard Rock Stadium in light traffic — they later said they clocked him at 60 mph (97 kph). They turned on their lights and pulled Hill over. One knocked on the driver’s window and told him to put it down, which Hill did and handed him his driver’s license.
I am a huge police accountability buff. But also, law matters, and court rulings matter. If police order you out of your car for their safety (in the US), you have to comply. If you do not, they are authorized to use force to pull you out and almost never do that gently. Cops absolutely use excessive force all the time, so not doing things that specifically give them permission would be smart. Him rolling up his tinted windows and refusing to get out of the car are what made this happen.
Maybe, and I'm just spitballing here, but maybe for a simple speeding offense they didn't need to drag him out of the car? Just because they are allowed to based on past court cases doesn't mean they should use that for every issue they see.
The time between them ordering him out of the car (not asking to roll down the window) and them forcing him out was a few seconds.
The one I saw was longer, they knocked at least two different times and he kept telling them off.
But they didn't tell him to get out of the car yet. He should have rolled down the window yes, but that's a separate issue than Penn vs Mimms.
Sure, but once they establish a pattern of non-compliance it doesn't reset with each new instruction. They expect he will resist getting out of the car based on his refusal to roll down the window. At that point they have to choose whether to get him out of the car quickly, or risk non-compliance issue with that, which could involve fleeing or hitting people with his car.
When officer or public safety are at risk they will always choose to take someone into custody to stabilize the situation and then reassess from there.
The situation with the window can't be separated from the treatment with the door.
The clip I saw at the link looked like it was edited right there, I'd love to see the raw video. It could have been too quick, it could have been longer. I don't know.
Nice to finally see someone who knows Penn v. Mimms out in the wild.
They still need probably cause to force him out. They might have had it based on prior facts, but they might not have.
Cops are way past getting the benefit of the doubt from me
This looks like they were angry about an uppity black man.
This. They cannot tell you to get out for speeding or some other minor offense. They need probable cause for that. Then while he was in handcuffs, one of these clowns punched him in the face.
We need to end qualified immunity and start jailing these authoritarian tyrants.
This is wrong. Stop spreading misinformation. They can order you out of a car for nearly any reason. Safety being a primary stated purpose that has MASSIVE LEAWAY.
https://www.smithandeulo.com/can-police-order-passenger-out-of-car/?amp
https://defenseadvocates.com/can-police-make-you-get-out-of-your-car/
I can post these all day long. They’re everywhere. There is no excuse for people spreading this misinformation.
However, all other instances outside of those enumerated above appear to be unlawful reasons for ordering a passenger out of the car. For example, if the stop is concluded and the cop wants to talk to you about an unrelated matter. This would be an unlawful seizure. The Mimms case made it clear that while an officer may order an individual out of the car for legitimate safety concerns, the officer is not entitled to ask a driver out of the vehicle in every single instance in which he wants to speak with the occupants. See Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977).
That's literally you're own link. Pulling a driver over on the highway and asking them to step out and move to the shoulder grass is fine. Asking them to exit the car, on a side street is not a safety issue.
~~LEAWAY~~ LEEWAY
Excessive use of force by the cop who clearly wanted to escalate. Tyreek Hill also wasn't being smart in the way that was handled. We already know how paranoid and trigger happy law enforcement can be. People like to act tough on the internet, but I wouldn't DARE roll up tinted windows during a police stop knowing how shit could escalate. I'm trying to have them see my hands at all times. That's exactly the kind of shit that can happen when you're just trying to get home safe. Whatever it is, it's not worth it.
Tyreek Hill also wasn't being smart in the way that was handled.
Why is it that we have to cater to the ppl in the wrong? Give him his ticket and go. Plus there was already another officer before captain tiny dick showed up who confirmed he had no weapons in the car and according Hill keep the entire situation calm. Fuck him. You want respect you have to give respect
But the guy breaking the law was in the wrong? Yes he's going to get a ticket but he rudely rolls up the tinted window while the cop is still talking. Hill was clearly disrespectful first and antagonistic throughout.
Police def overdid it, but part of the problem might be that some people would prefer to pay the fine for speeding because it’s insignificant to them. This specific component of the legal system is broken because it treats the wealthy exactly the same as everyone else.
Fines need to scale based on the wealth of the perpetrator. It should be an equal punishment for breaking the law.
Also, you can just mail speeding fines to people, there's no reason to pull anyone over for that shit except to initiate a conflict.
They could have said “no problem sir, we’ll get this ticket to you right away” and then slow walked the whole process. Taking up hill’s time would have caused him more problems than anything else.
They use the pull over as opportunity to search for more offenses
Yes, as I said, to initiate conflict.
I have spent a couple years badmouthing this dude, but the police bodycam footage is pretty crazy. It's also crazy to me that a bunch of Miami cops would pull over one of the city's most well-known athletes and nobody was like "gee, maybe we shouldn't go so hard on this one, he's famous"
so you are saying they should treat him differently because he is famous?
No, the person is saying the cops should have been smarter. They didn't say, "the cops SHOULD HAVE done X." They said, "it's crazy that the cops DID do X."
Cops should be aware that if they fuck around with a famous person, they will definitely find out how it feels to face serious charges.
I wish it was the same for us poor people, but it's not.
Thought process might well have been: "This is an uppity black man, we'd better show these types a lesson."
Nothing makes a a cop more upset than seeing a black man doing better than him. A LOT of poorer white ppl seeing any brown person doing better than them is upsetting. You only got in your position because your a diversity hire or Affirmative Action!