Another blood sucking personal injury trial lawyer heard from.

Yeah, the police officer should have used better judgment and communication skills. However, this idiot got out of her car (which any numbskull knows not to do in a traffic stop) and didn't follow orders. I don't give a crap if she had children in her car or what the case was--having children does not excuse you for being a dumbass.

Now for the controversial part: If this were a black man, would we still think that he used excessive force? I mean, all the uproar has been about the fact that she is a mom and that her kids were in the car. SO WHAT? Also, yeah, it sucks to get pulled over for going 5 mph over the limit--it REALLY sucks--but whether you're going 5 over or 20 over you are STILL breaking the law.

Now of course the officer will be suspended without pay (it's a case that has attracted media attention). But I don't think that this is a case of a 'pig cop out of control' as so many of the posts surrounding this story try and make it out to be.

Poorly trained cop + stupid a-hole woman w/ kids = National headline.

Pathetic.

1. She was in no danger from traffic... There was like one car the entire time, and I think he was aware that she was not about to be run over. He was parked behind her. Stop grasping at straws.

2. You've gotten out of the car? You're supposed to be an attorney?

3. You would think that an attorney would know better than to equate this with a communist regime... That is probably the dumbest thing I've heard in quite some time. You sound like those screaming lunatics who believe that Obama is the reincarnation of Hitler.

4. Getting out of your car and following an officer IS AN ACT OF AGGRESSION. Refusing to comply with orders IS AN ACT OF AGGRESSION.

The truth is that this woman thinks that because she is a woman and spit out a few kids that she is entitled to special treatment. I mean, who thinks that they're going to climb into a police car and watch a policeman's dash cam uninvited (that is not the way to go about it)? The way to go about this is to remain calm, take the ticket gracefully, then challenge it later in court.

PS, Taser guns are good solutions to stupid ******* that don't comply. Better than bullets, at least!

And I have never been pulled over (I obey traffic laws)... But if I were, I'd like to think I wouldn't behave like a ******.

First of all, way to backpedal. Yeah, you can see my point... Of course you can, 'cause it makes sense.

Did she get run over? No. She didn't. Why? Because there were no cars coming. Was she thrown violently into the middle of the road with cars speeding toward her...? No, she wasn't. Are all ambulance chasers such drama queens? (But, hey, I suppose a hypothetical car is just as dangerous as a REAL one... Ehm, anyways...)

She acted like a fool and she got tased. Too bad. Cry me a river.

Also, how did my post display poor communication skills? Did you get my point? Seems that way. Could I have been nicer? Sure. But I don't have to be "nice." Neither does he. She needs to do what she is told by a police officer who is obviously getting nervous because of her refusal to cooperate. If she resists, then that's on her head.

I don't know what the hell you're trying to prove by comparing this to a communist regime. You just sound silly (see my Obama/Hitler reference above).

BTW, I love how you quickly try and reference American history... How about YOU read a history book. You might find that our nation isn't exactly pristine when it comes to communication skills and the 'heavy hand' of the law. It's nice to live in fairytale land, but please don't try and make this into an "it's un-American" argument--you're just going to end up making a bigger fool of yourself.

While I'm on the subject of communication, how about her listening skills? Pretty lacking.

PS. How about not attempting to win a losing argument by appealing to people's nationalistic sensibilities. It either comes off as a pathetic attempt to set up a straw man or just a way to get out of the actual argument at hand. Your desperation is palpable, especially in your last plea: For me to use my legal name.

What difference does it make? I mean really. If I told you my name is Mike or Jim or Billy Bob--does that make my argument any LESS sound? Are you going to check my references? I'm not running for office, I'm posting on a blog. Legal names are not required. (I mean really, are you going to cite me? Look me up in the phone book so that we can have lunch? No thank you, you're not really my type.)

Peace.

You're not a police officer. Your hypothetical holds no water. You are a blogger with no authority. You are of no importance to me. You're not even talking to me face to face.

Were you an officer then I would have happily handed over my license with a smile, stayed in my car, and accepted my ticket gracefully.

How can you equate giving a police officer a taser to giving a child a taser? Are you stupid? I wouldn't usually be so crass, but I mean, you've earned it.

I have not spoke to anyone in Syracuse who lives in fear of the police. BTW, I actually live in Syracuse. I work in East Syracuse. There isn't FEAR in the streets of cops tasing people left and right. For the most part, we all have common sense and use it.

BTW, tasers CAN potentially be lethal. But they're a helluva option over guns. Rule of thumb: Don't argue with the police, don't act stupid, and don't break the law. Then you won't get tased.

Once again, I want to address your comparison of my not giving my name on a blog as opposed to my not giving my name to a police officer. That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. (Personal attack that adds nothing to the subject will be redacted.)

slow17motion is obviously feeling pretty good about bashing an attorney on an Internet blog and doesn't care if it appears as though s/he is just a pi**ed off, angst-y teenager (and the name implies he or she IS 17...).

From what I've learned, Lawyers DO have to take into account hypothetical situations so the real deal will not happen in the future. What you are missing here, slow17motion, is the preventative aspect of the law. You are of the old school thought process that Lawyers exist solely to win their injured clients money. Period. End of discussion. However, there are many attorneys out there who are not fixed solely on $$$ figures and actually give a **** about upholding the law and promoting safety.

Just try and stop being the quintessential pissed off teenager and open your eyes to the reality of how our Civil Justice System works - how do you think certain safety laws and regulations come about? They just don't appear out of nowhere...unfortunately someone usually gets hurt really badly before a lawyer picks up the case, bringing attention to its cause, and through mediation, settlement or a trial, those at fault will be punished and laws on the books will change precedent for further related injury cases.

In this woman's case, I hope her attorney makes it clear the officer was OUT OF LINE in his actions, overreacted big time at a routine traffic stop, and fights for due compensation. And
slow17motion, just to make it clear, "compensation" will hopefully include holding the Onondaga County Police Department accountable for the brazen use of tasers in future routine traffic stops when a person peacefully exits their vehicle and is thrown to the ground into oncoming traffic.

By the way, you never addressed Steve's point that the woman DID try to get back in her vehicle but was pulled out by the cop during the process. And I hope I wrote in your "lingo" well enough for you to see how juvenile you were sounding.

Here's a recent news article about 3 deaths due to police taser use:

More ...

Way to edit posts!

Okay, Alex. Let's take a look at your nonsense.

First of all I'm in my twenties, I'm a dude, and I have three college diplomas. Just because my posts are written in a semi-hostile, semi-sarcastic tone does not make my point any less correct.

Anyway... You cannot make RIDICULOUS hypothetical arguments with no basis. She was not hurt. Not at all. And his comparison of me not giving my name on a blog to me not giving my name to the police is completely nuts.

And let me address your point about her getting back in her car. She only got back in her car when she was told that she was under arrest. After that she panicked and tried to comply. When she got into the car, it was too little too late. After a policeman tells you that you're under arrest, you can't just say, "I TAKE IT BACK!" and run back inside your car. What do you think, that the officer is gonna be like, "Oh, never mind, it's all good." That's just foolish.

Your link is broken, just like your logic. I don't know how you think that you've written in my lingo--I mean, you basically just rambled and failed to make any decent points.

Your post = epic fail.

My post = WIN!