Phoenix mayor apologizes for bad police behavior.

The mayor of Phoenix apologized to a family who said that police drew guns on them after an alleged shoplifting incident at a Dollar Store last month.

“I, like many others, am sick over what I have seen in the video depicting Phoenix police interacting with a family and young children,” Mayor Kate Gallego said in a statement.

“Wanna know why police are so agressive when approaching a vehicle no matter who is in it?”

So because officers, in the line of duty, run into insane criminals, now all American citizens should be ok with guns drawn on them when stopped by the police? I am sorry, but I am not ok with that thought process.

I am afraid that many people are losing sight of what it means to be an American citizen, and the rights inherent due to the sacrifice of those before us.

In no way, no matter how bad an officers day, week, month, or year have been, should they be immediately pointing a gun at any American citizen. That gun should only be drawn when coming up to level and firing.

This kind of stuff needs to be stopped. It seems that training is the big change between the old days and today. Officers should first be trained in the rights of the citizen, and how their first duty is to protect those rights, not curtail those rights for some perceived threat or safety for themselves. Officers, by the nature of their work, need to accept inherent risk. You cannot keep yourself 100% safe without infringing on the rights of innocent Americans.

For instance, having your service weapon pointed at the head of a 5mph speeder keeps you 100% safe, it does not however, keep the rights of that citizen safe and secure.

This is where the police of old really shined compared to those we see today. They accepted risk in order to keep our liberties in tact. Something to be proud of in my opinion, and something I wish more current officers would look up to.

According to the police:
“In a statement, Phoenix Police said the incident began when an officer was advised by store employees of shoplifting, and he was directed to people getting into a car. As the officer walked toward the vehicle, the car quickly backed up and started to leave the parking lot, police said.

The car stopped at another road, one of the women got out and the car then drove away. That woman was detained by the officer, who learned she had three misdemeanor warrants for her arrest, police said. The woman was later booked for the warrants, according to police.

The vehicle was later found in an apartment complex parking lot, and the man and woman inside were taken into custody and detained, police said. The woman told police that her aunt and child had gone into the store, and when the child came out with a doll, she believed they had stolen it because they didn’t have any money, according to police.

The woman heard the officer in the parking lot tell the driver to stop several times, but he didn’t, police said.

The man said he knew they had shoplifted from the store and that he threw a stolen pair of underwear out the window, according to police.”

Perhaps you haven’t heard all the situation:

“In a statement, Phoenix Police said the incident began when an officer was advised by store employees of shoplifting, and he was directed to people getting into a car. As the officer walked toward the vehicle, the car quickly backed up and started to leave the parking lot, police said.

The woman heard the officer in the parking lot tell the driver to stop several times, but he didn’t, police said.

The man said he knew they had shoplifted from the store and that he threw a stolen pair of underwear out the window, according to police.”

The parents were aware of the theft, they stole some things also, and left the store despite being called after by an officer and ignoring the call.

When does a simple misdemeanor theft turn ugly when the police try to detain the thieves? If you can answer that, then you would be the best police officer of military member that ever lived.

“So because officers, in the line of duty, run into insane criminals, now all American citizens should be ok with guns drawn on them when stopped by the police?”

This wasn’t any citizen. this was group of thieves that were running from the cops. If you don’t want to be treated like a criminal that could not be trusted not to open fired on someone, hen don’t be one.

“.....due to the sacrifice of those before us.”

So you find it admirable to think police officers should follow in the shoes of those that were murdered in the line of duty? A police officer’s job is not to die, it is to protect citizens, even from themselves. It’s like when the British Bobbies didn’t carry guns in England for many years. What are they going to do, say “stop, or I’ll say stop again?” Weapons are a tool, just like a tractor. And you’ll notice they got out of the car rapidly and when there was no possible threat, the guns were lowered. The tool did it’s job working with criminals.

“...people are losing sight of what it means to be an American citizen”

Making a decision on what to do is their right. If they chose to break the law, then they are at fault and will be treated accordingly. Additionally, making a decision to try to go around the law is one of those decision which is what they chose. And being a citizen is not trying to figure ways to get around the laws, but to follow them.

“That gun should only be drawn when coming up to level and firing.”

This isn’t the old west. The gun was used as a deterrent. Otherwise he would have just shot them. And by using it to protect himself and others, he might have saved some lives.

“...not curtail those rights for some perceived threat or safety for themselves.”

Again, these were not citizens, they were fleeing criminals. They’ve already proven they can’t be trusted. Don’t try to compare them to law abiding citizens that don’t receive this treatment.

I’ve been in their shoes a few times as a military cop. I am not going to die so someone who has proven themselves a criminal and can’t be trusted can take away my rights as a citizen, being able to live rather than be shot by some piece of dung person. And too many cops have been killed for that reason. I already showed you a small list of people that did it your way and they’re dead. Their families miss them. All the proud of them in the world won’t bring them back.

No one got harmed, everyone who was guilty of a crime was jailed, a good scenario. Hope for the next one to be as good. That way no one dies.

rwood

Councilman Sal DiCiccio
From his FaceBook page

Councilman Sal DiCiccio Statement on Police “Shoplifting” Incident.

Please Share

(UPDATED: I have officially requested the radio transmissions from the “event”, since nobody else has. That will give you the actual situation as it was happening!!!!)

While the media has created a narrative that this was a “child shoplifting” stop, video from the store appears to show both adults stealing. Further, the viral video being used to paint a negative picture of the Phoenix Police Department doesn’t tell the whole story – it’s like reading the last page of a book and assuming you know everything that happened in the previous chapters.

Here’s what happened, and I challenge anyone – media, politicians, and the public – to dispute this timeline of events:

1. A call came in regarding a theft from a store, officers responded.
2. Upon arrival, the responding officer was alerted to another theft from the same store.
3. During this second theft, store video confirms additional items were taken by multiple adult suspects, including both the adults present during the stop.
4. Suspects were identified and police approached the individuals while in their vehicle at the store parking lot.
5. Officers gave multiple commands to the driver of the suspect’s vehicle to exit the vehicle.
6. Despite lawful orders, the vehicle took off and stopped a short distance away.
7. At this time, a single female passenger exited the vehicle and surrendered to police.
8. Driver proceeded to continue to ignore lawful police orders and took off once again, coming to a stop approximately one mile away.
9. The female passenger who originally exited the vehicle confirmed that she heard the orders, and asked the driver to stop, then asked to be let out of the vehicle.
10. Vehicle was identified and followed by a second police unit, which was waiting for assistance from additional units before activating their emergency lights and initiating the stop.
11. Vehicle turned into an apartment complex and stopped, causing the tailing police unit to initiate contact, and the first officer called the suspects out of the vehicle while the second officer – per policy – remained in a defensive location with his service weapon in the ready position, but not aimed.
12. Once all the passengers had exited the vehicle and officers could see that they were not armed, the second officer returned his service weapon to his holster – again, per policy.
13. The female passenger admitted to police upon being detained that she could hear the officer in the parking lot ordering them to exit the vehicle, and that the driver ignored those orders and fled.
14. Both the driver and female passenger admitted to having shoplifted items from the store.
15. Driver and passenger additionally admitted to tossing stolen items out of the car as they drove away.

While the video that shows the conclusion of the incident looks bad, the only element of this arrest which appears to be out of policy is the use of foul language during the incident, which is unfortunate, but hardly unusual in a charged situation. Unfortunately, the narrative being painted is that this was a stop involving a four-year old child rather than an apparent crime committed by adults who put their children in harms-way by bringing them to a criminal activity.

The actions of the officers appear to be entirely in line with policy. There was no use of excessive force. The stop was lawful. Police were responding to a crime, and engaged in a heightened response due to the actions of the driver in failing to comply with lawful demands and driving away from the original scene.

This constant barrage of attacking our officers in the end puts all our law-abiding citizens at risk, as well as the officers charged with protecting us. Some have claimed that because this was “only” a shoplifting incident, that police should have approached the traffic stop less aggressively. That narrative completely ignores the fact that the driver was ordered to stop by police, chose to ignore those orders, and fled the scene. Officers who conducted the stop weren’t merely responding to a shoplifting case: they were responding to a shoplifting case where the suspect had also already demonstrated that they were willing to ignore the lawful orders of officers on the scene. Under that circumstance, it would be the height of irresponsibility – and incredibly dangerous – for officers to respond without taking extra defensive measures. They could not treat this incident as a minor traffic stop without putting both their lives and potentially the lives of other members of the public at risk.

I hesitated to put out any statement on this issue until more information became available because – without question – someone viewing the video without any additional facts would and should be upset by what they saw. However, in light of the full facts of the case, I challenge anyone to contradict the timeline I have put out, and challenge anyone to show me exactly where the police have acted out of policy, with the exception of the use of foul language. Barring that, I will not be making any further statements on this issue publicly, as it appears likely the suspects will soon be filing a substantial claim against the City of Phoenix.

https://youtu.be/khQofOZiYgg
https://youtu.be/cRP5wN3JvVE

With all due respect, your original comment, as well as my reply, were not directed at this story in particular. It was in reference to why police are acting the way they are across the country. You surmised that they do these things because of the danger they face. I merely replied that was a danger they needed to face to ensure American citizens their rights.

You seem to note that these people are not citizens due to the fact that they have allegedly committed a crime. That seems very odd to me, unless I missed that these people were illegal aliens. If this is the case, I agree and they have no rights as American citizens.

Next you seem to insinuate I find it admirable to be killed in the line of duty. I do not. I do find it admirable to be able to do your job without the quick use of a gun as an intimidation multiplier. In the days of old, it was not taught to use your weapon as a intimidation multiplier. As a matter of fact it was frowned upon.

You see, what they realized, and what we seem to forget, is that if you use the weapon as intimidation multiplier, and the perp still does not do what you ask, what is your next step? You have painted yourself into a corner. The next and only step, after this ramping of intimidation level, is to shoot the person. This is why this was not taught. The only time your gun was drawn was to fire. You say old west, I say historical training.

I know many who lived this life and worked these beats in the old days, and being a kid, the best part to talk about was the service revolver and situations when they used it. I was very surprised at how little they had used them. Whether it be a joy rider, a drunk driver, or a gang of ruffians, nothing seemed to be worthy of drawing their weapon. As a matter of fact, it seemed to be a source of pride in the things they accomplished without the sidearm use. Of course being young and curious I would always ask why? Tell them, that if it were me, I’d have that gun out 24-7. They very quickly taught me something, something that has stuck with me ever since.

They told me, not only would you be scaring the crap out of every grandma you came in contact with, but more importantly you would be trampling the rights of every American. If you allow the criminals to dictate how you treat the rights of Americans, then we have all lost.

As I got older, and times changed, many times conversations would turn to recent police events. Many (at least while they still were alive) were surprised and dismayed by how quickly weapons were being drawn in altercations, and how it was to the detrement to all those involved. Not only did the citizen have a gun pointed at them, but the officers had essentially wasted all of their intimidation multipliers along the way. Straight from verbal to end of the line, gun drawn. And it is important to remember there is only one step after that, and that is firing the weapon.

Those guys were a different breed, one to be looked up to and respected. Respect that was earned in the fire and crucible of the real world. And they did it without many of the tactics we see in use today. And yes, many were injured and some of them died. But they did so upholding the code (not this thin blue line stuff, which seems to serve as a division between us and them, something the old timers worked very hard to make sure did NOT happen). I would love to see more of those type men in service today.

Hope this helps with my position, and I know it is not a popular one in this day and age. I understand where you are coming from, and I thank you for your service to our country. Have a good day.

“…..they have no rights as American citizens.”

They do, but they also have responsibilities. Please read post number 30 as it’s timeline posted is a perfect answer to the questions.

Refusing to stop for police or evading a police officer is the criminal act of not stopping when told to by a police officer. It is punishable by fine, jail, or both in most states.

If an office comes across a situation with anyone capable of firing a gun, and is hidden and shielded by children, the only terms they can use is weapon intimidation. Trying to talk them gently out of the car can get you, or them, killed. People many times only understand that if they can be harmed more than they want, make decisions. Some gamble, some take the way out with suicide which could easily have harmed the kids. The only thing the police officers had with a fleeing criminal that is refusing to readily work with them, and to protect the public, is intimidation. Otherwise anyone in the area is threatened. And I’ll say it again, once it was determined the woman in the car was not a threat, the need for that intimidation was gone and the weapons were lowered.

You talk about the old police and how they may have handled the threat of a gun, historically, you may not be aware of some of the actions by people and communities. In the old days, it was perfectly legal to cross the street and blow the back of the head out of the guy that threatened you with a gun yesterday. Famous people like Wyatt Earp used their weapons for safety and security by intimidation as they were outnumbered and outgunned. He had shot guns scattered all over town so he could run to one for protection or his duties as a town marshal. And bad a$$ lawmen kept the riff raff in line to protect the town. Bill Hickok was supposedly the best with a side gun and he used it often. But people in his towns behaved themselves because of that intimidation. It even went as far as requiring visitors, upon entering town to disarm, either at a hotel or a lawman’s office. Residents of many famed cattle towns, such as Dodge City, Abilene, and Deadwood, had similar restrictions.

If that police officer was perfectly sure there was no threat from the passengers of the car, one that had committed a crime and fled from arresting officers two ways, do you think he would have pulled it without reason? If he had, he should be brought up before a board and discharged at the minimum. But it isn’t their job to die anymore than kill. Both are a last resort.

Killing someone is not fun unless you are mentally deficient. Been there, done that, hated it. But in many cases it’s all you’ve got other than what could only be considered suicide.

rwood

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.