Re: Because We Have A Theme Going

1

This is why Andy didn't let Barney Fife carry a gun.


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 5:43 AM
horizontal rule
2

Jesus, that cop is a mess.


Posted by: Alex | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 5:46 AM
horizontal rule
3

That was bizarre in a way that I can't find the words to express. And on the shooting, did the cop have his gun in his hand when in approached or did he quick draw it? That was so quick.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 5:47 AM
horizontal rule
4

The audio makes such a difference. In the absence of the audio, don't you think we'd be arguing about whether the cop was legitimately afraid that the driver was going for a weapon, and whether maybe the driver had "disobeyed" some reasonable order?


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 5:48 AM
horizontal rule
5

I'm not sure. That first shot was just so quick.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 5:49 AM
horizontal rule
6

But you're timing it against the request for the guy's license. If the story (either from the cop or from benefit-of-the-doubters) was that the cop was ordering him to get away from the car, suddenly while it still looks criminal to you and me, there's a lot more room for argument.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 5:52 AM
horizontal rule
7

But the audio is what makes it bizarre beyond words. The driver's eerie calm may have saved his life (e.g. I think the cop would have interpreted any anger as a threat or it might have made him bleed too fast for medical care to be effective), but it's just inexplicable to me. Maybe it's just a matter of having had many absurd encounters with the police on prior occasions.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 5:53 AM
horizontal rule
8

It was about as quick as Crawford. Spit out an order, don't give someone time to obey it (or interpret their obedience as threatening anyway) and you can go ahead and shoot for failure to obey an order.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 5:54 AM
horizontal rule
9

Shock is a thing -- I think eerie calm is one of the ordinary possibilities.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 5:54 AM
horizontal rule
10

And what are the chances that he ends up with an all-white South Carolina jury that acquits?


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 5:55 AM
horizontal rule
11

6: But that wouldn't (or shouldn't) work if the driver was alive to testify. I think that's another difference. I can remember the NRA types making jokes about how if you are shooting in self-defense you should never just wound so nobody can testify but you.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 5:59 AM
horizontal rule
12

Man, watching it again makes it look even more fucked up. It was a quick draw, you can see the cop entering the video just as the gun is coming up from his hip. Then he puts two shots in him, the guy staggers away holding on to where he was just shot, cop puts another in him, guy raises his hands and backs away, cop puts ANOTHER FUCKING SHOT in him. I think they have something going with this "hands up, don't shoot" protest. Guy then falls to the ground (or is falling as he exits the frame) and the cop yells "get on the ground!" Then the guy still manages to call the cop "sir" and plaintively says "I'm sorry" twice. So you can be a totally obedient and subservient black man in the south and still get shot for no reason.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:02 AM
horizontal rule
13

11- Yeah, I guess in the absence of independent evidence like a video, cops would never lie about what was said during an exchange, and juries would always give the non-cop the benefit of the doubt.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:03 AM
horizontal rule
14

Maybe I'm wearing rose-colored glasses, but that was just so quick and the cop just kept shooting, I'd hope the jury would be open to listen.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:06 AM
horizontal rule
15

7: I generally manage eerie calm in a crisis and then break down completely once it's all resolved, so I can vouch for it as a thing. I haven't watched the video for this one yet. Guess I ought to.


Posted by: Thorn | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:07 AM
horizontal rule
16

Just remember the victim is out of the hospital -- it's a horror, but not as bad as it might have been.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:08 AM
horizontal rule
17

I mean, I hated Crash as much as the next person, but that all this cop can manage is to tell Jones to sit still and explain where his license is because an ambulance is coming, as if that's supposed to be consolation?!?!?! No, it's not like yesterday's video, but it's terrifying.


Posted by: Thorn | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:13 AM
horizontal rule
18

Wow, that's utterly horrifying. I can totally see how (especially with no audio) a cop would go to "he was reaching for a gun". Of course cops get understandably nervous when an unknown person reaches into a vehicle but ...wow.


Posted by: parodie | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:16 AM
horizontal rule
19

If they guy had died, the apologists would come out to tell us that he shouldn't have been out of the car in the first place, and he certainly shouldn't have turned to go into his car, and the cop felt legitimately threatened. The real problem is "police procedure" and what is legal, and what police are trained to do. When cops do investigations of shootings and almost always come back with "justified," they're not just whitewashing--shooting someone at the slightest apparent provocation is allowed.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:19 AM
horizontal rule
20

I can't see how a reasonable cop actually there at the time could have interpreted that as 'he was reaching for a gun' -- there was nothing violent going on, and the guy was responding appropriately to the order he'd been given. In the absence of audio, I'd be afraid that benefit-of-the-doubters would invent additional facts that would explain the cop's 'mistake'.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:19 AM
horizontal rule
21

Oh my god. I mean, thank god for video cameras and documentation? It has a similar feel to how DNA evidence is miraculously exonerating all these innocent people serving time - finally, unexpectedly, there is incontrovertible evidence that the system is often FUBAR.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:21 AM
horizontal rule
22

I'm also confused about the circumstances: the guy is at a gas station and seems to be preparing to pump some gas. Why was the cop there? Why was he asking for a license? It's all so strange.


Posted by: parodie | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:21 AM
horizontal rule
23

Because the guy is black.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:23 AM
horizontal rule
24

22: The cop's excuse is 'seatbelt violation', from later in the encounter. The driver contests that, saying that he just took off his seatbelt to get out of the car, but who knows, maybe he's lying. Or maybe the cop was planning to just hassle him for the hell of it (I assume the shooting was an impulse decision rather than planned. I could be wrong about that too.)


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:25 AM
horizontal rule
25

Jones says he took off his seat belt at the corner as he was pulling in, so MAYBE a seat belt violation, yes.


Posted by: Thorn | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:25 AM
horizontal rule
26

We see the cop drive around the station (doesn't appear to be following anyone, doesn't appear in a rush) and suddenly he's asking this guy who is stopped at a business for his license. It's just so _weird_ .


Posted by: parodie | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:26 AM
horizontal rule
27

Based on what was said in the video and the way the cop was at first driving out and then reversed back in, I'd bet that the driver removed his seat belt while turning off the road instead of waiting until he was completely stopped. In other words, what 23 said.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:28 AM
horizontal rule
28

Ah. I didn't realize seatbelt violations were cause for capital punishment. The USA is a surprising place.


Posted by: parodie | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:28 AM
horizontal rule
29

Or, what 25 said.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:28 AM
horizontal rule
30

Ok, fair enough.

My brain keeps flipping between "oh, well, he's ok now" and pure horror. What a completely incredible video.


Posted by: parodie | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:33 AM
horizontal rule
31

It's the fact that he says "I'm sorry" that kills me.


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:35 AM
horizontal rule
32

I hate watching people get injured. I haven't watched a single one of these videos - not John Crawford, not Michael Brown, not this one, etc. It just gets tic-like in my brain and I can't shake it off.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:40 AM
horizontal rule
33

So I appreciate the descriptions in the OP and elsewhere.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:40 AM
horizontal rule
34

These tragedies could be avoided if people were legally prohibited from storing anything in their glove compartment except a gun.


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:49 AM
horizontal rule
35

I'm at a loss. It's good that this video exists, because it would be hard to believe that a cop this reckless exists, that such a tragically absurd sequence of events unfolded as it did, without some sort of proof. I mean, the typical defense here would be to establish reasonable doubt based on the sheer implausibility of this happening the way it did.


Posted by: MAE | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:54 AM
horizontal rule
36

28 -- It's not the seatbelt, it's the being a scary black man that's the capital crime.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:55 AM
horizontal rule
37

I think that's what they mean by the difference between primary and secondary offense.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:02 AM
horizontal rule
38

In addition to the already-understood aspects of racism, law-codified violence, etc. this (from the description, don't want to watch) makes me wonder if hair-trigger training is also partly at fault. If your drills are constantly giving you practice in quickdraw-fire every time you see something vaguely threatening, even if they also contain some scenarios where you're not supposed to shoot, that builds up a physical memory that can kick in, especially under stress.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:08 AM
horizontal rule
39

Until so many cops stop shooting so quickly, they shouldn't be able to say they put their lives on the line.

Protection of the public seems to have been lost. The priorities:

1. protect the cop from any danger.
2.protect the cop from any disrespect.

If you were concerned about protecting the public, you wouldn't be so fast to let bullets fly in public.


Posted by: will | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:10 AM
horizontal rule
40

If it's hair-trigger training, then why do all these stories involve white cops shooting unarmed black people? In a country with a dedicated Second Amendment fanbase?

I suppose I could be living in some kind of availability cascade but Jesus.


Posted by: Disingenuous Bastard | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:16 AM
horizontal rule
41

Although I admit Vox can be Yglesian in its implementation and Buzzfeedian in its tactics, I think it is getting some good stuff out there. The many ways Richmond, CA gets its officers to do better - not just training and discipline.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:17 AM
horizontal rule
42

40: because racism thrives in our unconscious biases, right?


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:19 AM
horizontal rule
43

||

Oh, Ferguson...

|>


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:19 AM
horizontal rule
44

40: I thought I took pains to say in addition to the obvious racism. Which can also be expressed in a hair-trigger response.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:19 AM
horizontal rule
45

If you were concerned about protecting the public, you wouldn't be so fast to let bullets fly in public.

Yeah. Based on the video it appears the policeman fired four shots, and it sounds from the other news reports like only one hit the guy he was aiming at. So that's three stray bullets at a crowded gas station (at least four other customer's cars are visible in the video,) and it looks like at least one of the stray bullets was aimed in the direction of the main road.

Also, when the final shot was fired, the victim clearly had his empty hands held high above his head and was backing away from the policeman.


Posted by: MAE | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:21 AM
horizontal rule
46

re: 32, this. Definitely. I feel the same way. I don't even like realistic horror movies. Cartoon-y violence, yes. Anything that feels really 'real' is hard going.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:28 AM
horizontal rule
47

Yglesian in its implementation and Buzzfeedian in its tactics

This is what our police officers ought to be shooting at.


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:31 AM
horizontal rule
48

I hate the pushback that so many cops do an excellent job. It is true. They do.

But then you get something like this on video tape and nothing happens.

Cops need to be held accountable. They simply aren't.

Same goes for prosecutors. I believe they are immune from civil suit for providing false evidence at trial. Ridiculous.


Posted by: will | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:38 AM
horizontal rule
49

three stray bullets at a crowded gas station

Bystanders aside, is there an explosion risk there?


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:39 AM
horizontal rule
50

I'm told that DOOM left me with an inaccurate view of how easy it is to explode things by shooting them.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:42 AM
horizontal rule
51

If they don't want you to use your cell phone at the pump, you have to figure a bullet is probably unsafe.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:42 AM
horizontal rule
52

49: If I recall Robocop correctly, yes.


Posted by: L. | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:43 AM
horizontal rule
53

No, it's a cigarette that explodes the gas station in Robocop. Never mind.


Posted by: L. | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:44 AM
horizontal rule
54

Are there places where you can expect to have reasonable interactions with cops? Or maybe it's just me? I've obviously never had anything as bad as this, but I've pretty much only had negative interactions.

When I was in Austin, I got pulled over for having a broken taillight. I didn't get out of the car to check my taillights until later, but I did, I found that my tailights were working and that I was pulled over for a fabricated offense. That's not the bad part.

After I pulled over and stopped, I was greeted to a long rant from an angry cop. Apparently, since I had put the car in reverse when parking, that meant I was thinking about ramming the guy's car. I pointed out that it's fairly common to park manuals in reverse, which prompted the cop to rant for a solid couple of minutes; nothing new, just the same comments as before, but louder. He eventually cited me for two things, one of which was such an obvious fabrication I got it dismissed. The taillight thing wasn't dismissed, so I still had to pay a small fine.

That's pretty typical of my interactions with the police. I'm going about my business and suddenly there's an angry man with a gun in my face. It's doesn't happen often. Maybe once every couple of years, but considering that I have zero positive interactions, it's doesn't exactly give me a warm fuzzy feeling about the police. Is this normal, or do I just have unusually bad luck? I'm not white, but I don't think that's the cause because racial profiling for Asians doesn't seem to be commonly practiced.


Posted by: sral | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:44 AM
horizontal rule
55

43: Oh, no. Who would do that?


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:45 AM
horizontal rule
56

54: I have seen Buck have friendly interactions with the police. But (a) he's a middle-aged white guy and (b) he's unusually disarming.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:47 AM
horizontal rule
57

55: My Facebook feed of high school acquaintances, let me show you it.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:47 AM
horizontal rule
58

54: I wouldn't put aside racial profiling so quickly. I haven't had any trouble with cops being anything but perfectly polite to me since I stopped driving shitty cars and got old enough that I was obviously not a student.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:48 AM
horizontal rule
59

I've had mostly pleasant interactions with police.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:48 AM
horizontal rule
60

And police get a lot politer once they've been disarmed.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:48 AM
horizontal rule
61

I'm starting to suspect that my interactions with cops are so pleasant and nonconfrontational for all the wrong reasons.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:49 AM
horizontal rule
62

Interesting fact: if you have a bucket of aviation fuel, you can stub out a cigarette in it perfectly safely. Flashpoint is too high. It'll burn as a vapour, but it vaporises at too high a temperature.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:51 AM
horizontal rule
63

60 to 56, obviously.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:51 AM
horizontal rule
64


I am prepared to believe the very worst about a police officer in South Carolina, on account of personal experience.


Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:53 AM
horizontal rule
65

43 is...not surprising. Everything is culture war.

Are there places where you can expect to have reasonable interactions with cops?

Honestly, almost all my interactions with cops have been fine. Usually I'm pulled over for something legit (speeding) and about half the time they let me go, the other half it's a polite interaction.

Here in our posh, totally white suburb, the cops are downright friendly if they recognize you, and will pull you over in an instant if you're not white and don't live here. They, and most residents, I'm sure, consider that part of their job.

racial profiling for Asians

Still plenty of anti-Asian prejudice around, depending on where you are. In most of California and lots of college towns, Asians are considered white, but elsewhere, they're still "foreigners."


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:54 AM
horizontal rule
66

I know there are a lot of good cops out there. But I don't like that pushback either, because if it were just as simple as good cop/bad cop, there would be a lot fewer bad cops, because the good cops wouldn't be complicit in allowing them to remain on the force.


Posted by: weston | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:57 AM
horizontal rule
67

It might also matter how any given Asian does on the paper-bag test.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:59 AM
horizontal rule
68

I'm white and don't own a car, which drastically cuts down on my police interactions, but the one I have had (in the last decade or so) was entirely police and unthreatening. Later I learned that the police report contained a really obvious lie (and an impressive/hilarious one at that), but since all that did was require me to jump through some bureaucratic hoops with the insurance company of the person who hit me with her car it didn't matter that much.


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:59 AM
horizontal rule
69

Police -> polite, or at least for some of us.


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:00 AM
horizontal rule
70

Yeah, I think good cop/bad cop is the wrong approach. Their training is designed to minimize risk to themselves, and when cops are armed and the other person is not, that results in a civilian getting shot way too much of the time.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:00 AM
horizontal rule
71

My police interactions improved with age, but there was a time between age 16 and 24 where getting hassled by the man - sometimes reasonably but frequently not - was a pretty regular thing.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:05 AM
horizontal rule
72

cops being anything but perfectly polite to me since I stopped driving shitty cars

Yeah, I think not driving shitty cars goes a long way. I'd like to see a study comparing traffic citations for shitty vs. not shitty cars.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:08 AM
horizontal rule
73

70: this is what I was trying to get at in one of the earlier Ferguson threads. There's a trade off between the safety of cops and the safety of civilians and it looks to me like the balance is pushed way too far towards the safety of cops these days. And for all that cops like to boast about how they're the ones who run towards danger rather than away from it, they seem awfully unwilling to change that balance.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:08 AM
horizontal rule
74

I sometimes wonder if I'm being a jerk and provoking a bad response, and there are some things I've learned not to do. The first couple times I was asked to move from where I was standing or sitting, I started moving and said something like "ok, but why?" and was treated to something like an annoyed "because I said so", with some extra commentary about what would happen if I didn't move. Alright, that's kinda silly, but now I don't ask why when a cop asks me to do some arbitrary thing.

When I got pulled over, I suppose I could have parked my car in neutral, but considering that I was getting pulled over on a fabricated charge, my guess is the guy would have been angry before I said anything either way, just with a different pretext.

I've sometimes thought it's just that I don't really commit any crimes, nor have I needed to report any crimes (well, except one time when I saw someone break into a neighbour's apartment; I basically just put on hold and then ignored, so nbd except for my neighbour). As a result, if I get stopped it's because someone is having a bad day and wants to exercise some authority. And yet, people here seem to mostly have ok experiences.

I have yet to have a bad experience with police since moving back to the midwest, so it could have just been a thing about the south. As with 71, I'm also older now, so maybe that's it.


Posted by: sral | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:10 AM
horizontal rule
75

If you kept your car in gear after the cop got out of the car, I think he was right to yell at your for that.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:13 AM
horizontal rule
76

You got to keep the car in gear. If you park it in neutral, it could roll. Cop wouldn't like that either.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:18 AM
horizontal rule
77

I was assuming the engine wasn't turned off.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:19 AM
horizontal rule
78

My usual steps when parking are: put car in reverse, engage clutch, turn off motor, which is what I did. If I wasn't turning the engine off I would have left it in neutral.


Posted by: sral | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:22 AM
horizontal rule
79

Uhh, flipping the order of the clutch/reverse thing, of course.


Posted by: sral | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:23 AM
horizontal rule
80

That makes sense.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:24 AM
horizontal rule
81

People park their manuals in reverse? What's wrong with first gear?


Posted by: Eggplant | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:27 AM
horizontal rule
82

Huh. I swear I used to drive stick, but it wasn't for long and it was a long time ago. Parking in gear sounds bizarre to me -- I think I always parked in neutral with the parking brake on. All one motion: shift, flip the key, yank the brake on. That's not how everyone does it?

Maybe I'm just misremembering.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:27 AM
horizontal rule
83

Also, when the final shot was fired, the victim clearly had his empty hands held high above his head and was backing away from the policeman.

Backing away as in possibly trying to flee?

No, not worth joking about, I guess.

The fact that it's basically uncontroversial accepted wisdom, not just among cops but among most of the public at large, that a cop being shot and killed is a MUCH BIGGER DEAL than a civilian being shot and killed, is completely fucked up.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:27 AM
horizontal rule
84

82: In theory, one parks it in gear in case the parking brake fails.


Posted by: Eggplant | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:29 AM
horizontal rule
85

Not that I didn't set the parking brake, but I couldn't rely on it alone. I always parked in gear.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:29 AM
horizontal rule
86

In case the parking brake gets pwned.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:30 AM
horizontal rule
87

82.1: that will eventually ruin your parking brake, which isn't really designed to carry the whole weight of the car straining against it. If you park in gear you have the whole resistance of the drivetrain and engine plus the parking brake keeping the car in position.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:30 AM
horizontal rule
88

I'm probably just misremembering, then. Reverse rather than first definitely sounds odd, though. What's the benefit?


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:30 AM
horizontal rule
89

44: sorry, I didn't mean to be criticizing you! More just expressing how I'm dumbfounded by the number of these videos/tapes that fit the racial theme.


Posted by: Disingenuous Bastard | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:31 AM
horizontal rule
90

54: Are there places where you can expect to have reasonable interactions with cops?

The other day we were all standing around in the kitchen, and a lady cop came up to the window, which was open, and asked if we knew the whereabouts of one J______ B______, whose mail we sometimes receive. She was a little bit annoyed that we hadn't opened the front door for her when she knocked. We told her that we'd never heard of him, except for getting his mail on occasion, and that we'd live there for over 5 years. Then she went away and found 5 summonses.

Now, what is the probability that this interaction would have played out significantly differently with 3 black people instead of 3 white people? I would guess that it approaches 100%.


Posted by: Natilo Paennim | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:31 AM
horizontal rule
91

If you were already in reverse for parking, you'd probably just leave it there. At least I did.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:31 AM
horizontal rule
92

If you park it in reverse, it'll roll uphill, so you can find it easier.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:32 AM
horizontal rule
93

I was going for Full Moby in 92, but apparently it was time to be sincere. Damn you, tricky Moby.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:33 AM
horizontal rule
94

I miss my old manual transmission car. Not the Dodge Neon. The 1980 Audi 4000.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:35 AM
horizontal rule
95

Anyway, the obvious solution to all of this is to require that only African Americans can be cops. That should stop the racist shootings of minority civilians, and if all the cops are black, then I think the background racism in society would make a lot of people suddenly think that cop lives shouldn't be valued so highly above civilian lives, and think maybe trigger happy cops are a real problem. So training programs and police procedures get adjusted accordingly. Hell, maybe many communities would even decide to disarm cops on patrol. Win-win-win.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:35 AM
horizontal rule
96

shooting someone at the slightest apparent provocation is allowed.

It's not, which is why he's fired and being charged with a crime. That video is pretty nuts.

If it's hair-trigger training, then why do all these stories involve white cops shooting unarmed black people?

Only about a third of the police shootings in this country are black people. They're overrepresented in terms of percentage of population but really that's not surprising considering we live in a country where half the homicide victims are black.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:38 AM
horizontal rule
97

Or shootings by Zimmerman types and open-carry advocates would become very common.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:39 AM
horizontal rule
98

97 to 95.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:40 AM
horizontal rule
99

No one's collecting the statistics, but the question is what part of the WTF shootings are of black victims, not what part of all the shootings. This guy, the Crawford shooting, and so on.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:40 AM
horizontal rule
100

Only about a third of the police shootings in this country are black people.

Cite? I thought that both this number and the number of firearm deaths were not tracked nationally. I'd be happy to learn that's wrong, and that there is data.


Posted by: lw | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:40 AM
horizontal rule
101

88: I don't think it really matters. My driver's manuals have said reverse instead of first, so my guess is that reverse has a slightly lower (or is it higher?) gear ratio. Since there's a lot of written documentation on how you "should" park in reverse, it's probably fairly common.


Posted by: sral | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:42 AM
horizontal rule
102

On first gear vs reverse, I was told that you want to [mumble mumble] something the car against gravity and the natural way the engine would roll? So if you're facing uphill, you should leave it in first, and if you're facing downhill, you should park it in reverse.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:45 AM
horizontal rule
103

My personal interactions with cops are as if they're out of Mayberry or something. Twice pulled over for traffic violations; neither resulted in a ticket. Other than that: let's see, cops at the Christmas display downtown gave the Calabat a teddy bear, and one local policewoman on patrol in a car here noticed a baby's sandal on the ground, noticed me pushing the baby (minus a sandal) in the jogging stroller, circled back to the sandal, and picked it up and returned it. We're one lost kitten away from a stereotype.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:45 AM
horizontal rule
104

100: Peter Moskos, the guy who teaches at John Jay and did a two year stint in Baltimore PD as part of his grad work has combed the FBI numbers. Source at the bottom of his post.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:47 AM
horizontal rule
105

solution to all of this is to require that only African Americans can be cops

This doesn't work. There was a recent case in Chicago where a black officer shot a black guy in circumstances that were pretty debatable. And didn't the same thing happen in SLC recently?

It's not, which is why he's fired and being charged with a crime

Fair enough. But the bar for shooting someone seems pretty low. Bro. You know? Ho ho ho.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:49 AM
horizontal rule
106

105.1: that was addressed in the second half of my paragraph. Presumably the shootings you are describing are not racist, they're just the result of cops being twitchy and overvaluing their own safety.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:51 AM
horizontal rule
107

Ah, I didn't read that far.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:53 AM
horizontal rule
108

lw, number of firearm deaths annually here. Are you maybe thinking of the research ban?


Posted by: ydnew | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:53 AM
horizontal rule
109

Link in 108 is to homicides. Injury data here.


Posted by: ydnew | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:56 AM
horizontal rule
110

And didn't the same thing happen in SLC recently?

Ha, wingers latched onto one of the photos from the scene and saw one of our black officers and assumed he was the shooter. He wasn't.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:57 AM
horizontal rule
111

Presumably the shootings you are describing are not racist

I didn't read that far either! Actually, I'd dispute this. It seems quite possible that even black cops react differently to black suspects/perps/people than they do to whites.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:57 AM
horizontal rule
112

The sense that police training is over-protective of police safety at the expense of public safety comes, for me, from invocations of things like the Tueller Drill whenever I see police shootings of unstable people without guns, like the guy with the knife last month. Yeah, someone with a knife or a rock could really do you a lot of damage very quickly, but I want police forces to put a lot of effort into figuring out non-lethal ways to deal with that kind of threat, and if that involves accepting a higher level of risk for the officers on the scene, so be it.

Bizarre as the homicidal Barney Fife in this post is, it looks as if he's applying the same sort of capability-based-threat-assessment: he can't see what the driver is going for, so it could be a gun, at which point if he doesn't shoot immediately the driver might shoot first. The only problem with that line of thinking is that while it is technically _possible_ that the driver was going for a gun, there's no reason at all to believe that it was likely.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:57 AM
horizontal rule
113

that will eventually ruin your parking brake


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:58 AM
horizontal rule
114

106: automatically assuming that black men are more likely than white men to be dangerous criminals is not just something white people do... "There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps... then turn around and see somebody white and feel relieved." - Jesse Jackson


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:58 AM
horizontal rule
115

I had just read a couple of places that there was no good data on police shootings -- I should try and find where I read it so as to figure out what they were talking about.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:58 AM
horizontal rule
116

Also, (even though it's been said plenty before), cops seem to be able to handle the open-carry nutjobs just fine, despite the actual visual presence of the gun.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:00 AM
horizontal rule
117

I wonder what the half-life of that Jesse Jackson quote is?


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:01 AM
horizontal rule
118

Anecdotally, the cops in PG County in Maryland (which is America's wealthiest majority -minority county, IIRC) are notable for disproportionate violence against African-Americans, regardless of the officers' race, and that's a place where both the police and civilian power structure are not white-dominated.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:03 AM
horizontal rule
119

that will eventually ruin your parking brake, which isn't really designed to carry the whole weight of the car straining against it.

This is new to me. My driving instructor certainly said that you park (stick, not automatic gear) in neutral with the brake applied. (And turn the wheels in to the kerb on a slope.)

If the parking brake isn't designed to hold the car still when it's parked, what the hell is it designed for?

Plus I cannot quite see how the gear train would be taking any load off the brake.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:04 AM
horizontal rule
120

I had just read a couple of places that there was no good data on police shootings

You know what there should be? Good data on police shootings. Like, any time a gun is fired in the line of duty, a copy of that police report should get filed with the Department of Justice.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:06 AM
horizontal rule
121

If the parking brake isn't designed to hold the car still when it's parked, what the hell is it designed for?

Well, its really the "emergency brake", not the "parking brake". Its designed to be a redundant system to stop your car in case your first set of brakes fails.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:08 AM
horizontal rule
122

This is what I was thinking of, but I'm not sure how to reconcile it with the Moskos post.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:09 AM
horizontal rule
123

104, 108, thanks, this has been an informative morning. Moskos is interesting.


Posted by: lw | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:09 AM
horizontal rule
124


Plus I cannot quite see how the gear train would be taking any load off the brake.

Try parking your manual transmission car on a slope without pulling the parking brake. It works! (As long as the slope isn't too steep.) The parking brake (and pointing the wheels to the curb) are a failsafe.


Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:10 AM
horizontal rule
125

118: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Black+and+Blue.-a075434981


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:10 AM
horizontal rule
126

Bizarre as the homicidal Barney Fife in this post is, it looks as if he's applying the same sort of capability-based-threat-assessment

Yeah, like a nut, which is why he's getting charged with a crime. It's like that Wal Mart shooting, you can't just roll in with an active shooter response unless you have a reasonable basis to believe the subject is an active shooter. And in this case, seat belt violator reaching into the car after you order him to get out his driver's license is perfectly understandable and not a reason to immediately escalate the encounter to lethal force.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:10 AM
horizontal rule
127

104, 122: Actually, it looks like Moskos is looking at justifiable police homicides, which would systematically eliminate the interesting ones. Or am I mistaken?


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:11 AM
horizontal rule
128

Well, its really the "emergency brake", not the "parking brake". Its designed to be a redundant system to stop your car in case your first set of brakes fails.

Some are, some aren't. A handbrake between the seats is designed to be used as an emergency brake as well as a parking break. The pedal-lever ones by the floorboards are not.


Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:12 AM
horizontal rule
129

Shouldn't brakes only wear if they are applied while the car is in motion?


Posted by: Eggplant | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:14 AM
horizontal rule
130

121 is also news to me. I am pretty sure that this isn't the way I was taught. If my brakes failed, I think I would change down and brake using the gears - brake using the handbrake and you'd be likely to skid out of control.

However my memory may be at fault. 119 is not entirely accurate: the UK Highway Code - which isn't law in itself, but a sort of guide on how to be a good driver, much of which is also enforceable by other laws - says you should park in gear on hills.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:14 AM
horizontal rule
131

126: I'm not saying he's right, I'm saying that the kind of thinking reflected in the Tueller Drill -- someone with a knife 20/30 feet away could kill you before you had time to shoot them, so shooting is automatically justified -- sets up morons to make that class of mistake.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:14 AM
horizontal rule
132

129 is a good point. No motion, no wear.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:15 AM
horizontal rule
133

129: I was taught that the emergency brake was a cable-based thing and the cable would stretch if engaged under tension for long periods.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:16 AM
horizontal rule
134

No motion, no wear.

What was the last Marley verse - non-cat, no care?


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:17 AM
horizontal rule
135

Non-woman non-cat.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:17 AM
horizontal rule
136

||
Now that this is an automobile thread instead of a racism thread, I'm going to pop in to say that I just TOTALLY ACED the phone interview for the job I'm going for. Crossing my fingers that everything goes well in the in-person.
||>


Posted by: Natilo Paennim | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:23 AM
horizontal rule
137

Try parking your manual transmission car on a slope without pulling the parking brake. It works! (As long as the slope isn't too steep.)

I know - but I would still guess that, if you have the handbrake on, it will be taking the same strain whether or not the gears are engaged. No?

Wiki:"Although sometimes known as an emergency brake, using it in any emergency where the footbrake is still operational is likely to badly upset the brake balance of the car and vastly increase the likelihood of loss of control of the vehicle, for example by initiating a rear-wheel skid. Additionally, the stopping force provided by using the handbrake is small and would not significantly aid in stopping the vehicle."

As for handbrake cables stretching...really?


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:24 AM
horizontal rule
138

134: obligatory pedantic comment that the Marley lyric is not "No woman, no cry", i.e. "if you don't have a woman, you will have no cause to cry", along the lines of Stalin's "Death solves all problems. No man, no problem" - but "No, woman, no cry", ie "No, O woman I am talking to, do not cry".

Said, said, said, I remember when we used to sit
In the government yard in Trenchtown,
Ob- - ob-serving the hypocrites
As they would mingle with the good people we meet.
Good friends we have, oh, good friends we've lost
Along the way.
In this great future, you can't forget your past,
So dry your tears, I say.

No, woman, no cry,
No, woman, no cry.
Here, little darlin', don't shed no tears,
No, woman, no cry.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:28 AM
horizontal rule
139

It's a thing.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:28 AM
horizontal rule
140

From link in 125

Police brutality may help Al Sharpton garner a spot on "Rivera Live," but the black uppercrust sees little point in putting the police on trial here in Prince George's County, or anywhere else in the nation for that matter. Like their white counterparts, African-Americans will countenance a few police thrashings if that's the price of keeping their Jags from getting jacked.


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:28 AM
horizontal rule
141

I'm saying that the kind of thinking reflected in the Tueller Drill

The drill gets misinterpreted a lot and it's absolutely not about "someone with a knife 20/30 feet away could kill you before you had time to shoot them, so shooting is automatically justified". The proper lesson of the drill is that there needs to be a plan for dealing with subjects who are armed and that just approaching a guy with a knife empty handed is creating a situation that's inherently dangerous.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:29 AM
horizontal rule
142

I completely believe that parking with the handbrake on stretches the cables over time, but if you aren't supposed to do that and also aren't supposed to use it to brake in emergencies (which I absolutely believe), then what is the thing for in the first place? (I mean, aside from this obviously.)


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:34 AM
horizontal rule
143

136: Congrats!


Posted by: ydnew | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:34 AM
horizontal rule
144

141: Justified!


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:35 AM
horizontal rule
145

141: That sounds perfectly reasonable. But then you look at the shooting of the guy with the knife from last month, and it looks like something's gone wrong. Yes, he was an unstable guy waving a knife, but the only thing that seems to have made immediately shooting him necessary is the kind of thinking I described.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:37 AM
horizontal rule
146

136: Congrats and good luck, natilo!


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:41 AM
horizontal rule
147

119 -- I watched a few British driving instruction videos a while back which suggested that the hand brake is taught much more as the "regular" brake over there. Eg you use the handbrake as a matter of course when stopping on a hill, instead of as a failsafe.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:54 AM
horizontal rule
148

147: And how!


Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:57 AM
horizontal rule
149

147: manual gearboxes don't have a parking pawl; automatics do.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:00 AM
horizontal rule
150

There are lots of places in WeHo where turning the wheels to the curb is required and a ticket will appear fairly quickly if it's not done. I've always left manual transmission cars in first.


Posted by: biohazard | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:02 AM
horizontal rule
151

I'm fairly sure that no American cars have a parking pawl, and have a strong belief that you just made the word 'pawl' up on the spot.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:02 AM
horizontal rule
152

(151: Google reveals that this is absolutely wrong. Just in case anyone was tempted to rely on me.)


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:03 AM
horizontal rule
153

151: Get hep to the pawl, LB.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:04 AM
horizontal rule
154

149 -- yes of course but most Americans who drive manual cars don't routinely use the handbrake when stopping at a light (not parking) on a hill. YouTube led me to believe that the British do otherwise, perhaps reflecting a broader cultural fondness for the handbrake.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:05 AM
horizontal rule
155

Also pawls are great. I'd think MIT students would have a whole class on the humble pawl first semester freshman year.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:06 AM
horizontal rule
156

154: or a cultural fondness for extended clutch life.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:07 AM
horizontal rule
157

You don't need to keep the clutch in if you put it in neutral, dude.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:09 AM
horizontal rule
158

154: I used the handbrake on hills. The smell of burning clutch and costs of rolling back into the car behind is a good reason.


Posted by: biohazard | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:10 AM
horizontal rule
159

157: right but if you don't want to roll backwards you will often end up feathering it a little.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:10 AM
horizontal rule
160

Yeah, I think not driving shitty cars goes a long way

Anecdatum: the time I was pulled over and ordered at gunpoint to put my hands out the window, I was driving my beat-up pickup (the rear plate had come off or been stolen). I was also driving in my largely black neighborhood and it was after dark, so maybe the cop figured his chances of charging someone with driving while black were pretty good.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:16 AM
horizontal rule
161

||

Today I heard a story about how one of my senior colleagues recently encountered one of their recently-graduated PhD students (2012, I think?) in a restaurant and had no idea who the former student was. I work with some remarkable people.

|>


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:17 AM
horizontal rule
162

Yes, and I do love a handbrake start on a steep hill.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:17 AM
horizontal rule
163

145: "Waving a knife" seems to gloss over the part where he immediately advanced on them with the knife and refused to stop. The guy was like ten feet away and still coming when they shot him.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:17 AM
horizontal rule
164

There are lots of places in WeHo where turning the wheels to the curb

Western Homisphere?

154: yes. The hill-start drill that we're taught - and which is a requirement for passing the driving test - is roughly
Starting with handbrake on:
Gear neutral, engine on (if not already on; ie if you're moving off from parked rather than from a light)
Throttle up
Let in clutch slowly until it catches
Handbrake off slowly
Let in clutch slowly the rest of the way while throttling up a bit further to avoid stalling
Move off.


You mean that US drivers, stopping at a light on a hill, would just hover on the clutch? Ouch. That would mean you failed your test in the UK.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:20 AM
horizontal rule
165

I think that using the parking brake alone while parking on a hill is supposed to be bad for the brake system not only because it can stretch the cable over time but also because it puts stress on the linkages because torsion or something.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:21 AM
horizontal rule
166

164: That drill is how I've always done it, but I learned to drive on a stick which is not the norm over here.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:22 AM
horizontal rule
167

164: Yes, that's exactly how I learned it.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:23 AM
horizontal rule
168

Gear neutral, engine on (if not already on; ie if you're moving off from parked rather than from a light)
Throttle up
Let in clutch slowly until it catches
Handbrake off slowly
Let in clutch slowly the rest of the way while throttling up a bit further to avoid stalling
Move off.

That's what I do (not on a gentle slope but on something steep) except for the part where I don't see where you actually go into gear. But I don't put in the handbrake until I'm about to start moving -- for whatever reason I feel much more comfortable with foot brake + neutral while I'm sitting around idling for an unknown amount of thime. It's true, though, lots of US drivers seem not to know how to do this at all.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:26 AM
horizontal rule
169

161: What are the rules regarding lethal force when encountering former PhD students?


Posted by: AcademicLurker | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:26 AM
horizontal rule
170

Whoops, just noticed this. Yes, my car is a beater. It has a huge dented/partially rusted out area that I sanded down and spray painted in the hopes of avoiding more rust and it's well over a decade old.

I feel a bit silly buying a new(er) car just to avoid getting hassled by police, but it could be worth it when I move.

And now that this thread has jogged my memory, I can think of a couple positive (or at least non-negative) interactions with police. But the ratio is still worse than 1:1.


Posted by: sral | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:26 AM
horizontal rule
171

Hmm. The quoted got lost. The thing I just noticed is the comment about how driving a shitty car might draw police attention.


Posted by: sral | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:27 AM
horizontal rule
172

And then I left a word out. I give up on the internet.


Posted by: sral | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:27 AM
horizontal rule
173

I'm thinking I may not ever have learned how to start on a hill with a stick, because the handbrake routine is unfamiliar. The whole point of the handbrake routine is that it lets you start giving the car some gas with the brake still on?


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:29 AM
horizontal rule
174

165: That's the drill I learned back a few centuries. Doing it smoothly and quickly was a matter of pride.

I've seen a great many people riding the clutch or auto transmission on the very steep hills near me. Many of them do it badly with much back & forthing. Look in Google Earth starting at Sunset Blvd and Sweetzer in WeHo for a view of the grades in this area, some are as impressive as any in San Francisco.


Posted by: biohazard | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:30 AM
horizontal rule
175

I don't understand what you need the handbrake to stop rolling backward if you are accelerating. Just hit the gas until you move forward.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:31 AM
horizontal rule
176

(All my manual driving was on Long Island, which as a big sandbar is pretty flat.)


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:31 AM
horizontal rule
177

173: yes, but you can achieve the same effect with the regular brake by placing your right foot on both the foot and the gas and pressing into the gas as you let off the brake.


Posted by: sral | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:33 AM
horizontal rule
178

Cosign 168. Only it's irrelevant now, because my car has a hill-holder brake; stop on a hill and let off the brake pedal, and the brakes will stay on either until I drive forward or a couple of seconds have passed, whichever is sooner. Subarus have had this feature forever and I've never understood why other manufacturers didn't either reverse-engineer it or license it.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:33 AM
horizontal rule
179

164 -- the standard instruction isn't to hover on the clutch, but just to use the footbrake and throttle more than usual to avoid slipping back. Not saying that's the best technique, but it's the one more standardly taught. So most US drivers, I think, either do that (or heel-toe it).


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:33 AM
horizontal rule
180

I don't understand what you need the handbrake to stop rolling backward if you are accelerating. Just hit the gas until you move forward.

Right, so you know the bit where you take your foot off the brake and move it onto the gas, and you have to do it reallyquick if you're on a hill so you don't roll backwards in that interval, but you also don't want to STOMP on the gas and go leaping forward into the person in front of you, so you'd like to be able to do it with finesse? And also you have to let in the clutch to go into gear? All this is taken care of with the handbrake start because you can move your foot to the gas and go into gear as smoothly as you like, because the car is held in place in the meantime by the handbrake.

Does not apply to automatics, because they don't work that way.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:35 AM
horizontal rule
181

On really steep hills, isn't the standard procedure to have one of your passengers get out and push to keep you from rolling back?


Posted by: AcademicLurker | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:37 AM
horizontal rule
182

177 was something I was told not to do and sounds like something you'd read in the start of an accident report.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:38 AM
horizontal rule
183

180: My way, I would certainly err on the side of rolling back a bit in an unfamiliar car, but really in my own car I always knew how much to stomp on the gas to go smoothly up the hill.

And I don't see how using the handbrake is automatically more smooth. If the car is held in place by the handbrake and the gears wouldn't actually engage until you let the brake out.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:40 AM
horizontal rule
184

182: Why's that? I don't see how it's different than the handbrake/gas thing. At this point, brake/gas is embedded in my muscle memory so it would be mildly annoying to switch, but I'd do it if it was actually unsafe.


Posted by: sral | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:40 AM
horizontal rule
185

That's what I do (not on a gentle slope but on something steep) except for the part where I don't see where you actually go into gear.

Whoops, yes, forgot that part! You go into gear before "throttle up".

But I don't put in the handbrake until I'm about to start moving -- for whatever reason I feel much more comfortable with foot brake + neutral while I'm sitting around idling for an unknown amount of time.

On the flat, me too. But if you're on a hill with footbrake + neutral and you want to move off, then surely you have two choices:
take your foot off the brake while in neutral - car rolls backwards; or
put car into gear while foot on brake, then take foot off brake in order to move it to accelerator - car stalls out.
No?

you can achieve the same effect with the regular brake by placing your right foot on both the foot and the gas and pressing into the gas as you let off the brake.

Yikes. That would definitely mean you failed your test.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:41 AM
horizontal rule
186

Or, in fact, what 180 says.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:42 AM
horizontal rule
187

184: I don't see how it is different either, except that it doesn't depend on foot width. I think the handbrake/gas thing is crazy. I don't understand why you would ever want to use the brake and gas at the same time, excepting cases where you wanted to spit gravel at your paint or the paint of those behind you.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:42 AM
horizontal rule
188

Bringing the threads back together, the police in the US are clearly stopping black drivers far too often and Asian drivers not nearly enough.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:44 AM
horizontal rule
189

Yeah, 180 is pretty much it. I prided myself on being perfecty good at finesse starts on SF hills without using the handbrake, but on the other hand I probably wasn't the world's greatest friend to clutches. New Minis have a hill assist feature where they engage an electronic pawl, essentially, for two seconds when you let off the (foot) brake on a slope. It's quite nice.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:44 AM
horizontal rule
190

The link in 64 is horrifying.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:44 AM
horizontal rule
191

177 is heel-toe, which is what they'd teach you in an advanced driving school. So sral is a race car driver without knowing it.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:45 AM
horizontal rule
192

183 seems right to me. I don't see how this wouldn't just push the moment where the clutch is engaged and the brake isn't down the line to where the brake is the handbrake instead of the foot one. I suppose you could be exploiting that fraction of a second where the car lurches forward if you're trying to drive with the handbrake on? That seems like a bad idea though.


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:45 AM
horizontal rule
193

I'm confused about whether the use of the handbrake makes it more likely to be shot by the police.


Posted by: will | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:46 AM
horizontal rule
194

189: not coincidentally Mini is owned by the same people who built my car.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:50 AM
horizontal rule
195

183 seems right to me. I don't see how this wouldn't just push the moment where the clutch is engaged and the brake isn't down the line to where the brake is the handbrake instead of the foot one. I suppose you could be exploiting that fraction of a second where the car lurches forward if you're trying to drive with the handbrake on?

The car just strains against the brake gently and then you let the handbrake out. Your hand is on it all ready to let it out.

As for 185, I think I like keeping the possibility of using both hands for other things, with a little rollback, if I have to move off more suddenly than planned, I guess? Dunno.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:50 AM
horizontal rule
196

192 is pretty much right. You can feel when the weight of the car shifts from being held by the handbrake to being held by the engine - it kind of shifts forward a bit. That's the point at which you let the handbrake out. The point of doing it on the handbrake rather than the footbrake is that you need to be doing it with a bit of throttle on to stop the car stalling out.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:52 AM
horizontal rule
197

194: oh, hah. Hi there!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:52 AM
horizontal rule
198

I actually doubt there's much difference for either safety or clutch life once you get used to one method or another.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:54 AM
horizontal rule
199

and Asian drivers not nearly enough.

Asian driving stereotypes appear to be among the last strongholds of acceptable racism in even the most liberal parts of this country. Some years ago, when China Airlines started service to SF, locals joked, "You've seen us drive. Now watch us fly."


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:55 AM
horizontal rule
200

"As for 185, I think I like keeping the possibility of using both hands for other things"


Other things???

left foot- clutch
right foot - brake
right hand - steering
left hand - not needed for handbrake, so, what, origami? Conducting an orchestra? Rolling a joint?


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:56 AM
horizontal rule
201

199 was not a general aspersion on Asian drivers but a specific reference to sral and his scary (but apparently racing-driver-ish) 2 Pedals 1 Foot technique.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:58 AM
horizontal rule
202

Apparently enough Americans keep their right hand more or less permanently on the gear shifter that driving instructors warn you that doing so hurts your transmission. I don't know if that's true or not. I think it just annoys the driving instructors.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:58 AM
horizontal rule
203

Other things = two hand steering if something weird is up, being ready to shift gears.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:59 AM
horizontal rule
204

202: it reduces control anyway.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:59 AM
horizontal rule
205

Also left hand = steering because I am not in the UK or Japan.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 10:59 AM
horizontal rule
206

Or a post carrier.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:00 AM
horizontal rule
207

200: Gesturing vigorously at other drivers?


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:01 AM
horizontal rule
208

As you say.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:01 AM
horizontal rule
209

Operating the horn. A friend of mine just got back from India and is convinced that drivers there never use their eyes but just rely on echolocation using continual honking.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:02 AM
horizontal rule
210

Anyway, most likely it's all just because it's habit and that makes it just feel weird to sit there idling with the handbrake on.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:02 AM
horizontal rule
211

Studebaker invented the hill assist. Not sure why it wasn't more common, it must cause some other issue.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:03 AM
horizontal rule
212

Studebaker invented the hill assist. Not sure why it wasn't more common, it must cause some other issue.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:03 AM
horizontal rule
213

I think the handbrake/gas thing is crazy

The flatlander perspective. But wait, I thought Pittsburgh was very hilly?


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:05 AM
horizontal rule
214

200: Texting, obviously.


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:06 AM
horizontal rule
215

rely on echolocation using continual honking

Also how it is in Tehran.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:06 AM
horizontal rule
216

Not sure why it wasn't more common, it must cause some other issue.

Lesbianism.


Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:08 AM
horizontal rule
217

213: Born and raised in Nebraska, followed by seven years in Columbus, Ohio. I did have a manual transmission for my first four years in Pittsburgh. I didn't have any particular problems.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:08 AM
horizontal rule
218

201: To be clear, I didn't read it as a general aspersion, but it definitely is a thing here, sort of like the way you could use the word "kike" in otherwise polite company a generation ago.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:09 AM
horizontal rule
219

Speaking of, happy Rosh Hashanah where applicable.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:11 AM
horizontal rule
220

218 last -- what?

Also man is the Asian driver thing bullshit. As someone who drives every day through various ethnic ghettoes, Asians (or at least Koreans) aren't even remotely close to the worst identifiable group of drivers.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:12 AM
horizontal rule
221

218: Yeah, my parents are, while mostly reliably liberal, not lacking in bits of racism, and "Asian driver" is much closer to the surface than other things -- like, I have had to argue with my mother about that specifically within the last couple of months.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:13 AM
horizontal rule
222

We've been over the Asian driver thing here long ago--I think the stereotype is slowly dying, but occasionally I still see the kind of hyper-cautious, slow-driving Asian that I think inspired it, although in the midwest I no longer see the hyper-cautious, slow-driving Asian woman wearing white gloves that someone pointed out to me and I started seeing everywhere in California.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:15 AM
horizontal rule
223

I have various stereotypes about people with NY or NJ plates. Or, I guess, just one stereotype. It's not that locals don't do stupid things, but locals do stupid things really slowly.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:18 AM
horizontal rule
224

The worst drivers are the ones in the North Carolina mountains with Florida license plates.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:25 AM
horizontal rule
225

That's the truth. But we don't get many of those here.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:26 AM
horizontal rule
226

220.1: I was thinking specifically of some famous author (William Manchester?) defending another (H.L. Mencken?) in the NYT against accusations of anti-Semitism in the NYT long ago. Someone who is not on a phone can do the research if need be.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:28 AM
horizontal rule
227

Also, pretend I didn't fuck that up by not previewing.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:29 AM
horizontal rule
228

So I finally got around to watching the video in the OP, and that cop is totally going to walk. He's going to claim that since the guy he shot didn't say anything in response to his demand to see his license but just reached back into the car, he had a justified fear that he was going for a gun, so he was totally within his rights to shoot him.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:29 AM
horizontal rule
229

No, Oregonians are the worst drivers.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:30 AM
horizontal rule
230

229 to, like, a bunch of comments.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:30 AM
horizontal rule
231

I drive a stick, and really only have to heel & toe when I go to Seattle. The best solution then is to use the light rail.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:37 AM
horizontal rule
232

Virginians are the worst. Especially if there are, say, six or seven snowflakes on the ground.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:55 AM
horizontal rule
233

151&ff:

Who learned to distinguish, though not in school,
The belt-feed lever from the belt-holding pawl.

--

I also learned the handbrake & clutch method for starting uphill. My mother pulled the handbrake out of the Volvo doing it midcity once, and still managed not to collide fore or aft; near thing though.


Posted by: clew | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 11:56 AM
horizontal rule
234

I think 228 is probably right, barring an unusual jury. His being fired in the first place (rather than some vague suspension) is more than I'd normally expect in this kind of situation.


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:11 PM
horizontal rule
235

234: Seriously? I mean, seriously? I guess I wouldn't be terribly surprised by a hung jury because of one crazy holdout, but you think it'd be unusual for a jury to convict based on that video?


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:14 PM
horizontal rule
236

Beverly Hillbillies are the worst. They tend to think the most expensive car has the right of way under all circumstances. That mixes badly with the tourists and the intrinsically hostile old men.


Posted by: biohazard | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:15 PM
horizontal rule
237

I always leave my manual in gear when parking*, except not always, because last month when I was at my dad's house and left the car parked on his sloping (~5%?) driveway, I awoke to find it in the front yard (fortuitously, the wheels were turned, and the car rolled neither into the street nor into his mailbox; one of those solar walkway lights did take a hit). The handbrake was on, but not sharply enough, apparently.

Which tells you that the transmission is doing most of the work, because, while my street is level, I certainly park on hills, and I don't think I yank any harder on the handbrake (except on super-steep hills, I think).

*usually reverse. IIRC, the Car Talk guys recommend this, and it does have to do with the gearing ratio, as suggested above. Even facing uphill, you're better off in reverse, counterintuitive as it is


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:21 PM
horizontal rule
238

They tend to think the most expensive car has the right of way under all circumstances.

A friend of mine told a story in which she expressed exactly this attitude: "Excuse me, I'm in an Audi, and you're in a VW, so just get out of the way." And this is a generally status-conscious person.

Very funny.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:23 PM
horizontal rule
239

Further to 226, my memory is better than I thought.

Once Mencken even referred in the diary to ''two dreadful kikes.'' My father was a social worker who crusaded for birth control and fought housing discrimination against Jews. Yet I once heard him describe an objectionable Jew as a ''kike.'' All this, it must be remembered, occurred before the Holocaust revealed to the world where such ugliness ultimately led. At the time such slurs were usually as lacking in malice as the Polish and Italian jokes told today.
So more than a generation ago, but well within living memory.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:27 PM
horizontal rule
240

They tend to think the most expensive car has the right of way under all circumstances.

Funny, when I was living and driving near DC I felt like the opposite applied, at least at the very low end: my beat-up Datsun had right-of-way over your Lexus, because clearly I didn't care about getting a bit more damage on mine. The lack of rear bumper (just the mounting posts sticking out like spikes) and the headlight area painted with bright red Rust-Oleum probably contributed to the effect.


Posted by: Nathan Williams | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:28 PM
horizontal rule
241

235: I think everyone knows where I stand on the police brutality/shooting thing, and even I was like "oh yeah, no wonder the cop opened fire, it totally looked like the guy could have been going for a gun". I'm aware enough to realize what a fucked-up response that is, but I wouldn't trust anyone less naturally suspicious of the cops than me to come to the right conclusion there.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:29 PM
horizontal rule
242

240 is right by my experience.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:30 PM
horizontal rule
243

The other part of my reaction was "Jesus Christ, you don't just reach for your glove compartment without explicitly telling the cop that's what you're going to do". I do that whenever I get pulled over, and I'm in one of the demographics least likely to get shot by the police.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:35 PM
horizontal rule
244

233 to 231: the snapped handbrake was going up the hill from the ferry, where out-of-towners leave too little room between cars and then lurch when starting.


Posted by: clew | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:36 PM
horizontal rule
245

239: That's rationalizing in retrospect, not saying it was okay to say that word at the time.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:38 PM
horizontal rule
246

241: The guy was moving much too quickly. I don't know if I would have shot him absent a visible weapon but I sure would have gone to high alert with a full epinephrine dump.


Posted by: biohazard | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:41 PM
horizontal rule
247

241, 243, 246: Wow. I thought that I had a bad impression of the trigger-happiness of the police. I mean, he was moving quickly, but in any non-police situation he was moving absolutely normally for someone who hears a shouted order that they're cooperatively complying with.

I mean, what literally happened is that the cop shouted an order at the guy, and then shot him for obeying it.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:47 PM
horizontal rule
248

247 is right.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:50 PM
horizontal rule
249

This is why people should have all identifying info implanted in an RFID chip in their wrist. Nothing to reach for.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:51 PM
horizontal rule
250

247: I dunno. It's always seemed reasonable to me to be very careful not to surprise or scare people carrying guns, and that even before Kent State. I mean, for example, I tell cops at a traffic stop that I'll have to get out of the car to get at my wallet 'cause the bucket seats won't let me do it while seated.


Posted by: biohazard | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:55 PM
horizontal rule
251

Or we should all learn to fall to the ground and submissively expose our soft underbellies whenever we see the police.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:55 PM
horizontal rule
252

250: Okay, I've been wearing seatbelts all my life because it seems reasonable just in case, but despite a lot of time spent in a car (less than an normal American, but still a lot) I've literally never needed one. Things that you take precautions to avoid can be way far away from things you expect to happen.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:57 PM
horizontal rule
253

To put it another way, what you're guarding against by not opening your glove compartment without warning the cop first isn't that the cop might make a reasonable mistake, but that you might have Psycho Barney Fife on your hands. You're afraid of a mistake, but not a reasonable one.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 12:59 PM
horizontal rule
254

250: Well, sure, when I was ordered to put my hands out I complied with haste. But if I had been in this situation I would also have complied with haste. Having a gun pointed at you: scary.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:00 PM
horizontal rule
255

251: No, work on changing the policies, training, and the choosing of personality profiles. But meanwhile, don't scare paranoid people with guns unless you have your final diagnosis.


Posted by: biohazard | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:00 PM
horizontal rule
256

245: I think you need to define "okay to say that word at the time." OK to whom? I'm sure nobody Jewish would like it, and I'm equally sure that most of them would have kept their mouths shut about it, unless they were in a situation where they could plausibly win a fistfight over it. My sense of the time is that only a small fraction of the non-Jewish population would object, whether vocally or internally. I think it was probably quite rare to be in a milieu where somebody saying "kike" casually* would be upbraided.

Furthermore, and maybe I've been misinformed about this, my sense is that, pre-WW2, coarse ethnic language was the norm, and not considered a particular mark of prejudice - Archie Bunker referred to pretty much everyone by ethnic group (I don't know how much the actual character used terms like kike or dago, but his IRL counterpart would have pretty freely) whether he approved of that group or not. Again, that doesn't mean it was OK as such, and that sort of terminology is an invitation to stereotype and discrimination, but my point is that I don't think it's a particularly strong marker of the character of the speaker, just as having pre-feminist views of women means something very different in 1910, 1960, and 2010. It's never to the credit of the view-holder, but it's a very different signifier at the different times.

I should probably note here that I could be entirely wrong about how ugly the specific term was considered - not all casual ethnic slurs have equal weight, and maybe "kike" was distinctly worse than, say, "heeb". That's never been my impression, but what do I know.

*as opposed to being part of an anti-Semitic rant, to which I'm sure more people would have objected, if only on grounds of propriety


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:02 PM
horizontal rule
257

253: Getting stopped isn't a frequent happening. It's unusual and therefore I think about what's going on and what might go on. Very early on, not long after I started driving, a cop shot some newly-wed by mistake 'cause of a mis-transcribed stolen car report. I've never had much faith in people not making serious errors anyway.


Posted by: biohazard | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:07 PM
horizontal rule
258

About 100 comments late:
I can't think of a negative police interaction I've had. Scratch that, one on the phone I've mentioned here before- my car was towed due to an event where they gave short notice, I was out of town, called to find car and complain about their policy and cop on phone yelled that I can't complain and hung up. But in person nothing- even the one time I was stopped on my bike for (not) running a red light I told the cop, probably too aggressively, that the light had changed and the car at the front just hadn't started. He was under the light and couldn't see the actual light cycle. He just said, ok, have a good day.
I play hockey with a couple cops. It's funny, this weekend is our first kid sports banquet thing, stereotypically held at the so and so cultural center, and I was thinking about how we were getting into the old boys network- almost all the coaches have blatantly Irish or Italian names, which are the same names you see in city politics or police force.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:10 PM
horizontal rule
259

253: I believe "keep your hands on the wheel and in sight when pulled over" was actually part of my Driver's Ed curriculum in high school (in a mostly wealthy suburban area). I can't remember if explaining what you were about to do ("I am going to get my registration out of the glove compartment now") was also explicitly taught or just something I absorbed as a good idea.


Posted by: Nathan Williams | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:16 PM
horizontal rule
260

259: I know it as a rule too, but of course this guy wasn't pulled over -- he was already getting out of the car when the cop yelled at him. He could not have complied with the cop's order without doing exactly what he did. He might not have gotten shot if, rather than obeying, he froze, and asked explicit permission to move, but that doesn't make the cop's actions anywhere near understandable.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:19 PM
horizontal rule
261

Keep your hands in sight and obey instructions is what I was taught.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:20 PM
horizontal rule
262

That one can be shot by mistake is something I learned early on. For example, from 1970:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1964&dat=19700727&id=FIVGAAAAIBAJ&sjid=VS8NAAAAIBAJ&pg=2313,4438825


Posted by: biohazard | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:22 PM
horizontal rule
263

I'm not saying that letting him off would be the right decision, or even on balance a reasonable one, but the Crawford video isn't noticeably better and there wasn't even an indictment in that one. Having the guy on the stand will probably help in this case. But after having seen multiple versions of this play out over the last year or two I tend to assume that a randomly selected group of Americans will feel fine going with "well, he was black kind of threatening look in some unspecified way, and the cop probably shouldn't have done that but he puts his life on the line and it's unfair to second guess him".

I mean, I'd be happy if cynicism let me down here, but...


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:23 PM
horizontal rule
264

260: not to you, and not to me when I stop to think about it, but it takes an active effort for me to drag myself back to that way of thinking.

Basically with cops I figure that the Antioch sexual consent code is the right approach, and that stepping outside that has a decent chance of getting me shot.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:24 PM
horizontal rule
265

Combining threads, that reminds me of a kids-misinterpreting-words thing. In elementary school we had a game where when you lost you had to go through the Paddy wagon. Kids lined up in two lines and loser went through the middle and got smacked on the butt by everyone in the lines. Because of that I always thought it was Patty wagon. (You got patted as you went through.) I had no idea until years later it was a term referring to the ethnicity of police forces.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:25 PM
horizontal rule
266

263, 264: I'm shocked by the Crawford decision not to indict too, but this looks to me to be significantly stranger even than the Crawford video, because the cop was in full control of the timing. He yelled an order at a man halfway out of a car, and then shot him for obeying it. Even the "Antioch College" standard -- you're saying that if you hear an order from a cop to "Do X", the reasonable response is to freeze and ask "May I do X?" That's nuts.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:29 PM
horizontal rule
267

266: the cop says "I need to see your license"? You say "my license is in my car. Is it okay if I reach in and grab it?" and wait for verbal confirmation before you move. You don't do that, at the very least you find yourself staring at a drawn weapon. And yes, it's nuts.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:37 PM
horizontal rule
268

Pretty much every time I've been pulled over, while waiting for the officer to appear at my window, I've leaned over to get the registration out of the glove box. The cop can clearly see me doing this, right? But he doesn't know if I'm getting a gun or a piece of paper. I've never had a cop approach the window with a gun drawn because he assumed I'd gone for my glovebox gun.

I do think that the last time I was pulled over I spaced the registration, and the cop had to explicitly ask me for it, and I said, "It's in the glovebox" as I leaned over to get it. But I don't recall feeling like I was asking for permission or trying to avoid getting shot; I was just narrating something I'd forgotten to do, just as I'd say, "Oh right, the rice is still in the cooker" if I got to the table and it wasn't out.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:39 PM
horizontal rule
269

Oh yeah, and the other reason I expect the cop to walk is precisely that it's so weird when you stop and think about it. It doesn't make any sense that the cop shot him for following his order, so clearly he had a reason that we as civilians are not capable of understanding. And we shouldn't second-guess our brave peace officers anyway.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:42 PM
horizontal rule
270

That style of interaction is nuts enough that I think it would amount to a hilarious sort of work-to-rule action (which is not to say that I don't think cops kind of deserve that treatment at this point).
"My license is in my car. Is it ok if I reach in to grab it?"
...
"This is the license I have taken from my car. Is it ok if I approach you and hand it to you?"
...
"I have given you my license, is it all right for me to move back a step and allow you to read it?"
...
"I see you are holding my license towards me. I interpret this as an indication that you are intending to return it to me. Is it ok if I step forward and take the license from you?"
...
"I understand your lawful order that I shut up and stop narrating my actions like an idiot. I am complying with that order and will continue to do so until requested otherwise."


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:42 PM
horizontal rule
271

268: whereas I've noticed when being in a car with someone else driving, and getting pulled over, that when the driver reached for the glovebox the cop's hand tightened on his gun. He was clearly preparing himself to draw if it looked like there was a gun.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:44 PM
horizontal rule
272

Josh, I think you're missing that there are multiple shots fired, including at least one while the guy's hands are in the air and he's stepping backwards. Combined with the fact that the poor fucker is being polite after being shot with for goddamned reason and the apparent decision by the state troopers to cut him loose, even in a world where vigilantes can walk after shooting black kids for the crime of carrying Skittles home from the 7-11 I think there's a fair chance of convicting him of something. (It's an aggrevated assault charge; I don't know what the rules are for that in South Carolina.) On the other hand, maybe not! See the Crawford video.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:49 PM
horizontal rule
273

The thing that doesn't make sense about this is following orders that way still doesn't have any impact on the cop's safety. If you have a gun in your glove box and you want to shoot the cop, you say, "My registration is in the glove box, may I get it?" "Ok." Retrieve gun from glove box. Asking permission is just for show.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:49 PM
horizontal rule
274

I keep my gun on the dashboard so the cop can see at all times whether or not I'm going for it.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:51 PM
horizontal rule
275

There is a "no" sadly missing from the previous. Anyway, I think the audio plus multiple shots fired plus the trooper's previous record of complaints plus the state troopers cutting him loose means that it's at least plausible that he gets convicted (again, of assault, not attempted murder or something). But who knows; my reactions are a bad guide to what juries will believe when cops are on the witness stand.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:53 PM
horizontal rule
276

I assume that a lot of the importance of doing the announcing-what-you'll-do is just to make clear that you are acting calmly and deliberately, and not impulsively. I'm sure that people can (and do) calmly and deliberately shoot police officers sometimes, so it's not obviously safer. But it is a "move slowly and smoothly to avoid alerting or startling them" sort of action.

Which I realized, the second I wrote it, is basically the same as saying "it's like dealing with a wild animal" or something. But we are all animals and a lot of the same kinds of triggers apply.


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:53 PM
horizontal rule
277

"You dove headfirst into the car!"
"Next time I'll slide feet-first."


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:55 PM
horizontal rule
278

272: once you've decided that it's okay for the cop to fire the first shot, I don't see why the subsequent shots make any difference. ("I shot him and he didn't go down! I thought he was on drugs!")


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:55 PM
horizontal rule
279

Each shot increases the chance of killing the guy (or a bystander)?


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:58 PM
horizontal rule
280

It's funny, I talk to my kids about interacting with the police in pretty much those terms "They're tense, frightened people with guns. Move slowly, be completely respectful and compliant, and don't frighten them." But I kind of feel as if I'm being an overblown anti-police jerk saying it. And then we have this sort of conversation.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 1:59 PM
horizontal rule
281

270: Reminds me of the scene in Raising Arizona:

Gale:
Alright ya' hayseeds, it's a stick-up. Everybody freeze. Everybody down on the ground.

Old Man in bank:
Well, which is it young feller? You want I should freeze or get down on the ground? Mean to say, if'n I freeze, I can't rightly drop. And if'n I drop, I'ma gonna be in motion. You see...

Gale:
Shut up!

Old Man in bank:
Okay then.

Gale:
Everybody down on the ground!

Evelle:
Y'all can just forget that part about freezin' now.


Posted by: AcademicLurker | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 2:00 PM
horizontal rule
282

278: Even if you could justify the first shots on the basis that the officer didn't know what the guy was reaching for, the final shots were fired when he was clearly unarmed and attempting to surrender. If you can justify continuing to shoot at a guy under such circumstances, then criminals* would never have any reason to surrender to police, which would surely be a bad precedent to set.

* And to be clear, there's no indication whatsoever that the guy being shot at in this case was a criminal.


Posted by: MAE | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 2:05 PM
horizontal rule
283

280: "..and if he becomes threatening, raise your hands above your head to make yourself seem taller.


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 2:06 PM
horizontal rule
284

Hell, "Drop the gunbelt! Slowly, and keep your hands where I can see them" was wisdom imparted when I was seven and we got the first TV on the block. That's what all the sheriffs, marshals, white hats, and black hats said, and I've seen no contradictions in the real world since.


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 2:10 PM
horizontal rule
285

Huh? 284 (and this) is from Biohaz, as if you couldn't guess. Some damned to eternal hell fiend is screwing around with the id fields 'cause I haven't changed anything.


Posted by: biohazard | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 2:16 PM
horizontal rule
286

282.last - If he didn't want to get shot, he should have kept his seatbelt buckled or at least been born white.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 2:34 PM
horizontal rule
287

On top of everything else, why the fuck would this guy reach into his car to pull out a gun? The most suspicious thing he's done so far is not have his seat belt on at the gas station. He's not suspected of having two tons of heroin in his trunk, he's not being appprehended after a shootout and car chase, he's just a black guy at the gas station. Even the world's most hardened criminal wouldn't think it's smart to pull out a gun in this situation.


Posted by: Disingenuous Bastard | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 2:46 PM
horizontal rule
288

I'm so glad the guy at the gas station recovered, because it lets me find the humor in the cop asking "Are you hit?" The guy was right in front of you when you shot him! Did you have your eyes closed?


Posted by: Todd | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 2:52 PM
horizontal rule
289

The cop doesn't seem to be all that highly skilled at doing the cop thing -- he might have been genuinely surprised to have hit what he was aiming at.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 2:53 PM
horizontal rule
290

Did you have your eyes closed?
Probably?
I'll just note that this guy did exactly what everyone was calling for in the Crawford thread and shot a leg instead of chest or head, and you're still all up in his business. There's no pleasing you people.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 3:27 PM
horizontal rule
291

The guy who is shot seems genuinely surprised and indignant about the seat belt thing, and when the cop says it, it just sounds like a practiced lie: this is what we say when the answer is "because I felt like it." So I doubt that the guy had even violated the seat belt law.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 3:31 PM
horizontal rule
292

The guy who is shot seems genuinely surprised and indignant about the seat belt thing

I felt like such a terrible person laughing at this, but I did. "Not only did you just shoot me, but you're bullshitting about my violating the seat belt law?"


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 3:35 PM
horizontal rule
293

288/9: This is about how I interpreted that question.


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 3:37 PM
horizontal rule
294

The cop doesn't seem to be all that highly skilled at doing the cop thing

Jesus, right? He's not telling the guy why he's stopping him, running around the front of the car like an idiot while he's shooting, continuing to crank rounds at a dude with empty hands, etc. Although that second one probably saved the guy's life. The speed of it is totally nuts. The guy reaching in his car would have made me tense up for sure but holy shit there buddy, you told him to get something. Back up and tell him to stop and keep your car between you and him and clarify your instructions. But he charges in there instantly cranking rounds. I'm guessing he's one of those guys who is just on a hair trigger all the time because the job scares him.

A guy in my academy class was like that. They never should have kept him on and sure enough, he got fired a couple years in after he fired on a 16 year old in a stolen car with his rifle. Crazily bad marksmanship too. A couple of the rounds missed entirely and went through the windshield of one of our K9 officers who was following the stolen car. The job terrified him. He was notorious for having that godamn rifle out at inappropriate times.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 4:28 PM
horizontal rule
295

I'm guessing he's one of those guys who is just on a hair trigger all the time because the job scares him.

Seriously, I get this impression from a lot of the shootings that come up. And I'm not judging anyone for being scared, I'm scared of my own shadow, but find a different job -- one of the basic qualifications for being a police officer is being able to stay competent and reasonable in violent, stressful situations. If that's not you, and it really doesn't look like it's this guy, do something else.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 5:05 PM
horizontal rule
296

Holy, holy, holy wow. Did somebody already link the slides of the "active shooter" training that the Ohio police received shortly before the Crawford killing? Just appalling.

(And to gswift's earlier point, not much attention if any paid to how you determine if it IS an active shooter situation.)


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 5:08 PM
horizontal rule
297
"We should be saying 'This is the day I took my oath, trained and prepared for my entire career,'" said one of the slides,

Jeez, that's not exactly the way I'd want people training police officers to be talking about using lethal force. "Always remember: your job is to kill!"


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 5:21 PM
horizontal rule
298

Active shooter scenarios really are different in that regard. You're almost certainly going in to kill someone and time is a factor.

But again, it doesn't mean all other judgements go out the window. This is a large busy public store and it's been five minutes since the initial 911 call. As you arrive you should be noticing things like how no one else has called in, you're not hearing any shots, and people are coming and going from the store like it's business as usual. It's also a store that sells guns and for fuck's sake you need to slow your roll and start evaluating what's right in front of you.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 5:36 PM
horizontal rule
299

And there has to be a "hear hoofbeats, think horses not zebras" aspect to it -- there are just very few 'active shooter' situations nationwide in any year. If you're not sure whether you're dealing with an 'active shooter' situation I'd think the overwhelmingly safe guess would be that you aren't.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 5:51 PM
horizontal rule
300

Vaguely related: am I the only one who was dismayed to hear that Eric Holder is resigning?


Posted by: parsimon | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:00 PM
horizontal rule
301

I THINK OF ZEBRAS.


Posted by: OPINIONATED ZEBRA | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:00 PM
horizontal rule
302

Hear hoofbeats, think horses not zebras

Depends if you're in the tsetse fly belt.


Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:06 PM
horizontal rule
303

There aren't any zebras in Guatemala.


Posted by: Opinionated Vince Ricardo | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:16 PM
horizontal rule
304

300: No. But am I the only one wishing he'd go out like that Alaskan tv presenter, "Fuck this! I can't take all the racist bullshit anymore!"


Posted by: Thorn | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:17 PM
horizontal rule
305

304: Mm, that would probably be a bad plan. But: I've thought he's been one of the better Attorneys General in recent memory. I confess I'm not sure I was paying attention to Janet Reno's tenure.

I found myself surprised that Holder's among the longest-serving AG's. Is there something about that office that keeps people from serving for much more than a few years? Just opposition from the, y'know, opposition party, mayhap; there seem to have been a lot of AGs who were merely "acting".


Posted by: parsimon | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:30 PM
horizontal rule
306

I don't see how Obama gets anyone confirmed who's to the left of Edwin Meese.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:51 PM
horizontal rule
307

And wow, I knew vaguely that Meese was a piece of shit since I was only in elementary school then but reading his wikipedia page he's really behind a lot of the crappy aspects of contemporary law enforcement.

"You criticize the Miranda ruling, which gives suspects the right to have a lawyer present before police questioning. Shouldn't people, who may be innocent, have such protection?
Meese: Suspects who are innocent of a crime should. But the thing is, you don't have many suspects who are innocent of a crime. That's contradictory. If a person is innocent of a crime, then he is not a suspect."

"One of our most effective weapons against drug traffickers," Meese wrote in his autobiography, "was to confiscate the assets of their criminal activity, such as expensive autos, yachts, businesses, and homes... To make this technique even more effective, we shared the proceeds with cooperating local law enforcement agencies to enhance their drug-fighting activities"."


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 6:56 PM
horizontal rule
308

Late to the stick-shift party (ATM), but I do the heel-toe thing on hills, too. I did the parking-brake thing the first month or so, as I was getting used to driving a manual. But now it's almost always heel-toe, unless it's something unusual, like parked curbside facing uphill, and the car behind me has parked really close. Then I'll still do the parking-brake thing.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 7:01 PM
horizontal rule
309

When I was learning to drive, the books I consulted were referring to the world before synchromesh, when heel-and-toe was necessary particularly when downshifting and engine breaking. I experienced non-synchromesh shifting with the heavy trucks I drove, where you needed some feel for the time and speed to shift. My mother was the only member of our family who'd driven a lot of none-synchromesh, when she delivered milk in a Model A in the thirties, and she was easily the best shifter in my family.

Over the years, I gave up a lot of that stuff, as no longer necessary or appropriate. When I taught my daughter I didn't do any of that heal-and-toe, and she got very good fast.

Columbus is hillier than Chicago, where I use my handbrake essentially never. I used to park on Iuka sometimes to go to class at OSU and needed to use hill-holding techniques.


Posted by: idp | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 8:43 PM
horizontal rule
310

Coming in late, but standard SAABs used to be set up so you couldn't remove the key unless the car was in reverse. I think that they are still made that way.


Posted by: md 20/400 | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:17 PM
horizontal rule
311

I went to Reddit just to check what the best way to handle this situation would be. The cops there said,

"The trooper should have controlled the situation better from the beginning. Situations like this are so easy to avoid.
Instead of "Let me see your ID," he should open with a greeting, as if the other guy were a human being. "Hey, how are you doing this afternoon?" Make the normal smalltalk and get a feel for the situation/encounter before you start demanding ID. It's not hard. It's what thousands of officers do every day, and for good reason."

Maybe a little more social skills training for police after this and a little less target practice.


Posted by: Noumenon | Link to this comment | 09-25-14 9:28 PM
horizontal rule
312

This is new to me. My driving instructor certainly said that you park (stick, not automatic gear) in neutral with the brake applied. (And turn the wheels in to the kerb on a slope.)

Ditto. In fact, I've [personally] had bad consequences happen to me from parking a car in gear.*

* as in, stumble downstairs half asleep on a freezing cold day, open door and start car to de-ice windscreen. Car in reverse [which I never normally do]. Car shoots backwards. Smash.**

** stupid, yes. But in my defence it was pitch black, very early in the morning, and about 5 degrees below freezing.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 12:00 AM
horizontal rule
313

Hear hoofbeats, think horses not zebras
Depends if you're in the tsetse fly belt.

Related: did you see the latest research on why zebras are striped? Turns out that the black and white areas reflect light with different polarisations and it really confuses tsetses and other biting insects, which can see polarisation.

Not disruptive camouflage at all...


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 1:44 AM
horizontal rule
314

I found myself surprised that Holder's among the longest-serving AG's. Is there something about that office that keeps people from serving for much more than a few years?

A conscience? Or, conversely, a lack of one that inevitably results in scandal?


Posted by: Ginger Yellow | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 2:59 AM
horizontal rule
315

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL: "It is very depressing to us to be the means whereby our fellow creature are deprived of their liberty -"

FIRST ASSISTANT ATTORNEY-GENERAL: "- but we should have thought of that before we joined the Department of Justice."

CHORUS OF ASSISTANT ATTORNEYS-GENERAL: (in unison) "We should."

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL: "It is too late now."

CHORUS: (in unison) "It is."


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 3:41 AM
horizontal rule
316

I think that they are still made that way.

SAAB's long dead.


Posted by: Martin Wisse | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 4:03 AM
horizontal rule
317

I don't see how Obama gets anyone confirmed who's to the left of Edwin Meese.

Holder's resignation isn't effective until his successor is confirmed. That puts the wingnuts in a little bit of a bind, because they have convinced themselves that Holder is the devil incarnate. Imagine if John Yoo were AG and you had a chance to replace him with John Ashcroft. I'd bite.

It's fair to say that if the GOP takes the Senate, things get more complicated, and we probably end up with a Joe Lieberman type, or even a moderate Republican, as the compromise candidate. But as long as the Dems hold on, I don't see why they couldn't confirm, say, Deval Patrick in the lame duck session.


Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 4:32 AM
horizontal rule
318

American Cabinets have a very high turnover, don't they? If a UK cabinet had that high turnover, people would suspect there to be some kind of brain eating monster living in the garden at No 10.


Posted by: Keir | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 4:35 AM
horizontal rule
319

I guess people move between posts in the UK, which you can't do in the US. So time in post might be similar. Still, they do seem a bit expendable.


Posted by: Keir | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 4:36 AM
horizontal rule
320

...though it's a safe prediction that the wingnuts will have the same melanin-related problem with Deval that they had with Holder.


Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 4:37 AM
horizontal rule
321

I guess people move between posts in the UK, which you can't do in the US.

It does happen (see, for example, Sylvia Matthews Burwell's move from Office of Management and Budget to Health and Human Services, or James Baker's move from Secretary of State to White House Chief of Staff under George H.W. Bush), but not as part of a generalized cabinet shuffle like you see in the U.K. The giant hassle of Senate confirmation would make such as thing impractical.


Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 4:43 AM
horizontal rule
322

313 Turns out that the black and white areas reflect light with different polarisations and it really confuses tsetses and other biting insects, which can see polarisation.

To this day, the tsetse flies aren't sure if they really found primordial gravitational waves or not.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 4:52 AM
horizontal rule
323

American Cabinets have a very high turnover, don't they? If a UK cabinet had that high turnover, people would suspect there to be some kind of brain eating monster living in the garden at No 10.

That wasn't my initial impression - the US cabinet secretaries I've heard of seem to be there for a while.

Let's have a look though:

since 1993 there have been two complete changes of government in the US (Clinton-Bush-Obama) and in the UK (Conservative-Labour-Coalition). The US has had seven Secretaries of Defense in that period; the UK has had eleven Secretaries of State for Defence.
The US has had six Secretaries of State in that period; the UK has had eight Foreign Secretaries.

Seems like there actually might be a brain eating monster...


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 5:18 AM
horizontal rule
324

It's possible that turnover is higher in the less prominent US cabinet members. I haven't looked...


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 5:19 AM
horizontal rule
325

Nobody here knows who they are either.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 5:39 AM
horizontal rule
326

HOLY SHIT OF CHRIST JESUS. I just watched the video. I'd read this whole thread, and based on the descriptions here I thought I had a pretty good idea what the video was like. I did not. All of you who are defending this cop, even partially, or suggesting there is anything the victim could or should have done differently, are completely insane. The guy did EXACTLY what the cop asked him to do. He didn't make any sudden movements. He didn't make any unexpected movements. He slowly, calmly and deliberately did EXACTLY what the cop asked him to do, without even so much as a question why. (Which of course is sad in its own right. If a cop approached me at a gas station and asked to see my license, the first thing I would do is ask why. But that's beside the point.) Pinning any fragment of the blame on the victim here is horrible.

Someone please at least assure that this poor gentleman will fully recover and will receive an eight-figure payout when he sues. Please at least assure me of that.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 5:47 AM
horizontal rule
327

(The guy did actually make one sudden movement--he snapped back out of the car immediately when the cop ran up frantically screaming "GET OUT OF THE CAR! GET OUT OF THE CAR!" He snapped out of the car in perfect obedience, with his hands up in the fucking air. Jesus.)


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 6:05 AM
horizontal rule
328

I suspect that the reason he was fired had little to do with the fact that he was clearly unjustified when he shot the guy on camera. It was because he was such screaming ninny about it. Usually the people doing the shooting manage to put on the "stern authoritarian" facade when they're doing it (no matter how much cowardice is behind their actions). But he's practically sobbing in fear when he runs over to shoot the guy. It's just plain embarrassing looking.


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 6:12 AM
horizontal rule
329

328: For a moment I thought that comment reaced Maximum Cynic -- then I realized I was way wrong.

Maximum Cynic -- the cop was fired because he failed at killing him.


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 6:20 AM
horizontal rule
330

329.1: Add an "h" please.


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 6:21 AM
horizontal rule
331

326: I feel like you don't rely on me unquestioningly, Urple.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 6:21 AM
horizontal rule
332

From what I've seen of the world there is no maximum cynic.


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 6:25 AM
horizontal rule
333

"Holder's resignation isn't effective until his successor is confirmed."
Is that legal? How can you formally confirm someone to a position that isn't actually empty? I can see Republicans filing a lawsuit over that one, "confirming" someone, Holder submits his resignation, then they argue Backsies because it wasn't a real confirmation because the post wasn't actually empty when they voted.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 6:55 AM
horizontal rule
334

Is that legal?

If it isn't, I'm sure the attorney general will press charges.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 6:57 AM
horizontal rule
335

I'm not sure I understand what 331 is supposed to mean. You may it seem as if there was some ambiguity in the scene. There really isn't.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 7:09 AM
horizontal rule
336

Well, okay, not you exactly, but other commenters with whom you engaged as if they maybe had a valid point.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 7:12 AM
horizontal rule
337

333: Why can't they confirm someone for an office that's currently filled? So they're confirming someone as the next AG; same difference.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 7:14 AM
horizontal rule
338

Resignation effective upon a successor's confirmation is pretty standard on the Supreme Court, and I think fairly common for cabinet posts. I don't see what would be gained by challenging the practice (and I think such a challenge would be exceptionally stupid, even taking into account how well stupid ideological lawsuits have been doing these days), you'd just have more frequent acting AGs or whatever.

Also, re: 306/317, didn't filibuster reform cover cabinet appointments? What would stop the lame duck Senate from confirming Patrick or whoever even if the Republicans take it in November? Just standard Democratic crouching in anticipation of the coming beating?


Posted by: potchkeh | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 7:39 AM
horizontal rule
339

336: To you "Seriously? Seriously?" comes across as "Maybe you have a valid point?" I think you've been misinterpreting things people have said to you about your eating habits.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 7:45 AM
horizontal rule
340


Also, re: 306/317, didn't filibuster reform cover cabinet appointments? What would stop the lame duck Senate from confirming Patrick or whoever even if the Republicans take it in November? Just standard Democratic crouching in anticipation of the coming beating?

You could be right. I was thinking that even with filibuster reform, the GOP could drag out the proceedings long enough to run out the clock, at least if the Senate leadership prioritizes getting any other business done in the lame duck session. But that was mostly ill-informed conjecture.


Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 7:46 AM
horizontal rule
341

Further to 340, Ted Cruz claims to agree, but of course I don't take anything he says at face value.



Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 7:58 AM
horizontal rule
342

He's a Canadian anyway, I've heard.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 7:59 AM
horizontal rule
343

AAgreed with 325 and others. The video is literally surreal, unless A) this is the cop's first and only traffic stop, or B) he is in a drug-addled stupor and played by Harvey Keitel, Nicolas Cage or Robert Z'Dar.


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 8:01 AM
horizontal rule
344

340. I think filibuster reform only covered judicial appointments. It could certainly be extended (the "nuclear option") but that would (a) further enrage the Republicans and (b) shoot the Dems in their feet if the GOP takes the Senate.

Patrick has said (yesterday?) he isn't interested in the job.


Posted by: DaveLMA | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 8:08 AM
horizontal rule
345

344 - Nope, no filibuster any more on executive appointments other than the Supreme Court (and possibly ambassadors, I can't recall).


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 8:12 AM
horizontal rule
346

Executive too:
"On November 21, 2013, the Senate voted 52-48, with all Republicans and 3 Democrats voting against, to eliminate the use of the filibuster against all executive branch nominees and judicial nominees other than to the Supreme Court."


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 8:12 AM
horizontal rule
347

Who's crouching? Not Leahy, who'll get it through in 2014 if the Pres gets a nomination in quickly.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 8:16 AM
horizontal rule
348

Holy Shit. At least it wasn't a cop shooting.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 8:34 AM
horizontal rule
349

I didn't even know anything was in season.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 8:37 AM
horizontal rule
350

And even if infants were in season it would have been an amazing shot: "Nobody would be able to make that shot if they tried," he said. "It's unbelievable."


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 8:44 AM
horizontal rule
351

Criminal charges have not been ruled out, Dougherty said. Investigators are looking into whether the hunters were following all regulations.

Yes, because they might have been illegitimately hunting on private property, or without the relevant hunting licenses. That's clearly the worrying bit here.


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 8:57 AM
horizontal rule
352

The baby's antlers have to have at least two points each, or be at least three inches long if a spike.


Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 9:02 AM
horizontal rule
353

The law was very firm, it
Took away my permit -
It's the worst punishment I ever endured!
It turns out there was a reason,
Cows were out of season,
And one of the hunters wasn't insured...


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 9:10 AM
horizontal rule
354

351: The Post Gazette story says they were legally on the land. I'm assuming there is a regulation about not shooting at a house, but I admit I haven't looked up to see if that is the case. There should probably be a regulation that the deer can't run away toward a house.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 9:17 AM
horizontal rule
355

There should probably be a regulation that the deer can't run away toward a house.

Another commenter once sent me a link to a letter to the editor from a local newspaper in Deep Redstatia in which the letter writer complained about the "Deer Xing" sign that had been installed on a road near her house. In her opinion, that particular spot was a blind curve and therefore a completely inappropriate place for deer to cross, and any sensible person would have installed the deer crossing in a safer spot.


Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 10:43 AM
horizontal rule
356

There's usually something about not firing within 500 feet of a road or residence. Although I'm pretty sure bullets can go further than that.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 12:56 PM
horizontal rule
357

This makes it sound like they were professional hunters. Or at least that something different from the usual hunting was happening.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 12:59 PM
horizontal rule
358

WalMart now privatizing the shooting of unarmed individuals. Turns out it was all just a big mix-up: "The security guard told police it was an accidental discharge. He said he didn't remember firing the weapon into the car and that he didn't mean to."


Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 2:14 PM
horizontal rule
359

The level of passive voice in that article is amazing: As Peoples' car was exiting the parking space, Williams' gun discharged..

Also he also drew it accidentally and it was purely a coincidence that it ended up pointed at the car. But why would Walmart security even have guns? Surely if it's dangerous enough that they'd need something like that the answer would be to call the police a lot, not to have mall cops walking around with deadly weapons.


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 2:26 PM
horizontal rule
360

The security guard did not actually kill anybody, so that's at least one up on the police in Ohio.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 2:30 PM
horizontal rule
361

323 - but apparently there are only four of the original Obama Cabinet still in his Cabinet. I'd expect most British Cabinets to have 10 or so core members that persist for 6-8 years (and looking at Cameron / Blair Cabinets, that seems to be true.)

But in the UK they do shuffle within Cabinet, so time in each post may be the same.


Posted by: Keir | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 3:14 PM
horizontal rule
362

Back to the parking brake question, I was taught to drive on a stick shift with a foot-pedal parking brake and a manual release, and was definitely advised to use that when starting uphill. The first time I drove a VW (with a hand brake), I was all "ah, German engineers expect drivers to use a stick shift, unlike their Detroit counterparts. Much easier to use a hand brake, where you can ease off the brake gently while applying the gas, as opposed to the all-or-nothing of the manual brake release I trained on."


Posted by: Dave W. | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 6:24 PM
horizontal rule
363

348: COW.


Posted by: clew | Link to this comment | 09-26-14 8:48 PM
horizontal rule
364

Variations on the theme.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-27-14 9:22 PM
horizontal rule
365

Since nobody reads links, a police officer is reported to have been shot in Ferguson.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-27-14 9:36 PM
horizontal rule