Sunil Dutta (courtesy chds.us)
“If you don’t want to get shot, tased, pepper-sprayed, struck with a baton or thrown to the ground, just do what I tell you. Don’t argue with me, don’t call me names, don’t tell me that I can’t stop you, don’t say I’m a racist pig, don’t threaten that you’ll sue me and take away my badge. Don’t scream at me that you pay my salary, and don’t even think of aggressively walking towards me.” – Sunil Dutta, I’m a cop. If you don’t want to get hurt, don’t challenge me. [via washingtonpost.com]

Recommended For You

152 Responses to Quote of the Day: Don’t Give Me Any Lip Edition

    • This is exactly the type of cop the vigilante Huey P. Newton Gun Club of South Dallas, TX is out to protect the black community from.

    • I was so outraged by this person’s article that I contacted the university listed in his article (his ‘creds’).

      http://online.coloradotech.edu/CTU/Colorado-Tech/Home

      They informed me that he is no longer a staff member there. That said, as he is using them as part of his ‘creds I told them I thought they should publicly distance themselves from this person as his outlook on ‘do as I say or I will hurt you’ is a poor reflection on any institute of learning and could indicate that the school supports that line of thinking.

      Phone, live-chat, etc.

      • I’m shocked that this dude is being dishonest and the “newspaper” failed to verify/validate the CV. Did they happen to mention when the separation occurred?

        • They have it up on their facebook page now.

          https://www.facebook.com/notes/colorado-technical-university/message-from-the-university-president/820372037984278

          They are disavowing him at this point it looks like:

          “Colorado Technical University (CTU) has a longstanding commitment to fostering a learning environment that emphasizes tolerance and respect. An adjunct instructor who has taught for CTU has posted an opinion piece that has been widely distributed and drawn significant commentary. Sunil Dutta has taught for us in the past, but has not done so since February and is not currently teaching any CTU courses. The opinions he expressed are his own and do not reflect the views of the University.”

        • Good finds, dook. Interesting read. Yea, they definitely are trying to separate themselves. I wonder if he’ll be invited back to teach. LOL

  1. The whole “If you call me a jerk Imma gunna kick your ass!” thing is always funny.
    Cuz, ya know, assaulting me totally proves you’re not a jerk.
    Seems to me an awful lot of cops should have never been allowed out of 6th grade.

    • For anyone else saying “do want I say or I will hurt you” would be a criminal action. The fact that he so brazenly is willing to tell the world that in the Post article shows how deeply ingrained his outlook is, and his belief that that is an okay position to hold.

      I think he needs a ‘fresher on the term ‘lawful order’. Just because it comes out of your pie hole, does not mean it is lawful. And people wonder why some folks are scared to death of the police. This asshat is the reason.

    • Sunil Dutta,

      I’m a U.S. citizen with natural, civil and Constitutional rights.

      If you don’t want someone to:

      * argue with you
      * call you names
      * call you a racist pig
      * threaten you with a lawsuit and loss of your job
      * scream at you that they pay your salary
      * walk “aggressively” towards you

      then you don’t have the character and self control to be a police officer.

      • The problem isn’t that he doesn’t want people to do that stuff, after all no-one wants that. The problem is his intended overreaction to those situations.

    • The scariest thing about this is…

      “Sunil Dutta, a professor of homeland security at Colorado Tech University,”

      meaning, of course, he is teaching others this tripe from a position of…authority.

      Subscribe to his Statist viewpoints or fail? Nah, that would never happen.

      And by the way, what in the HELL is a “professor of homeland security,” anyway? Back in the day, professors were of things like physics, English literature, world history.

      Academia, ladies and gents…the well of poison feeding the masses disguised as candy called education.

      • What is a “professor of Homeland Security”? – That’s what you get when a University says, “Gee, if we start a “Department of Homeland Security”, we can get a TON of money from the federal government (insert cash register sound effect here).

        • Correct!

          It’s a boutique major that started popping up at disreputable institutions in 2001. It can get you a position as an armored car driver. Cop jobs require a Criminal Justice degree.

        • I am sure that there are only Distinguished Professors of Urban and Suburban Crowd Control, and they may eventually get to be Chairs of the Department of Homeland Security and Eternal Vigilance.

  2. I think somebody got his ass kicked one too many times in high school and is looking for a little payback.

  3. The police should really take this lesson from Ferguson to heart: you are currently seen as oppressors by the people you police. If anything happens while this is true you will be seen as the enemy by those people. God forbid another Katrina type event happens, but I doubt people will take them going door to door and beating up old ladies lying down. Ferguson really wasn’t that bad of a neighborhood and this perceived attack led to all this. If cops don’t want this to happen again maybe they should get involved with the community and show they are part of it and not just rule on high from their station and mraps.

  4. This + government personnel= tyrant. And they wonder why WE fight so hard for 2nd amendment rights to prevent this from taking over!!!

  5. “cops are not murderers. No officer goes out in the field wishing to shoot anyone, armed or unarmed.”
    Chris Dorner, et al?
    So the rest of what he says is negated.
    And to think this guy is a trainer. Good grief.

    • Chris Dorner was not a cop. Do we talk about Marines wanting to go out and shoot the president because Oswald served?

        • Like I said, he was not a cop when he did that any more than Oswald was a Marine when he killed Kennedy.

        • @ Hannibal- That’s the hair you’re going to split? How about let’s just agree the subject “officer” represents law enforcement very, very poorly. Not a trustworthy figure. Not apparently interested in public service. Not aware he is held to a higher standard as a civil servant. Not aware that he doesn’t get to just go with violence as a default response. Completely full of beans.

      • “Once a cop, always a cop” – that’s how it goes … Otherwise the police unions would not lobby for special provisions (aka: “carve outs”) in multiple laws for retired or former cops.

        It was a retired cop that shot a guy in the face for talking on his phone in a movie theater. The special carve-outs let that violent killer carry a concealed gun without the usual licensing requirements and in a place where everyone else was systematically prohibited from carrying.

  6. LA cop huh? Reminds me of Training Day “a Los Angeles narcotics officer was killed today serving a high risk felony warrant”

    Dude needs to be careful. He is gonna get his partner shot talking that smack esp on the streets for some young banger looking for a little street cred. Just sayin

  7. So essentially that cop is saying that you will get shot, tased, pepper sprayed, or physically assaulted for simply exercising your freedom of speech.

  8. Honestly sounds like someone who’s committed a few forcible rapes during his career. I’m not saying that for laughs, the demeanor of his speach screams rape. Yes, if we all do as you say women and men being raped by cops will increase 10x. Sounds like he’s a little upset someone is going mess with his main way of getting some. Freakin sicko needs to be put away with those of his kind.

  9. “If they hadn’t done what I told them not to do, they’d still be alive today.” – Mr. Blonde, Reservior Dogs

    When your entire argument can be summed up by a line from a psychopath from a Tarantino movie, maybe you have a problem with your way of thinking.

    • You miss the fact that this quote it not his entire argument. He wrote an entire article over at WaPo that’s worth reading.

      • Yeah, except it really isn’t.

        Like a stopped clock can be right twice a day, a dude with this sh1t in his brain can stumble upon a valid point. That happens sometimes when people ramble, but you can count on them to reveal their true stripes.

  10. Anyone else feel we’ve become a one-note anti-cop website? Can we bring back Shannon quotes? Or I don’t know, gun related reviews?

    • We all got sucked into the Officer Wilson MSM narrative. Again. The thought of an officer executing someone is a powerful image that makes people angry. Hopefully its wrong. Not all cops are bad, but we need to point out those that are or they are gonna end up being chief of Hazard county. Someone has to weed out the bad apples. The police don’t seem to want to, so its up to new media and public outrage.

    • You’re seriously defending this guy?

      There need to be limits. Cops ~like this guy~ are the “only ones” antis feel should have access to guns. So it’s relevant.

      So much damn defense of our “noble, well trained, upstanding police”, but it seems every other day an “LEO” opens his mouth and says stuff like this.

      Which really, is indefensible. His job at worst is to enforce the law (even if we have thrown out the ‘public servant’ stuff, which we have ) — not to be Judge Dredd.

      • I’d like to point out that Judge Dredd doesn’t say anything like this to innocent people. He even gave a hobo time to clear out.

        • Point taken – I stand corrected, Michael. Indeed, an ED209 would be more gracious than this before opening fire.

      • He doesn’t have to defend him to think it’s getting old to constantly have “truth about cops” articles on “truth about guns.” I’m sure I could find the most racist, homophobic and wife-beatingest hunter somewhere and it would have as much to do with guns as this.

        • “I’m sure I could find the most racist, homophobic and wife-beatingest hunter somewhere and it would have as much to do with guns as this.”

          Those mentioned above are not those who are supposed to protect and defect our Constitution, the protect civil rights, and are not agents of the government. Nor do they have access to media in which to espouse their misbegotten values. As previously stated, LEs like the author, who the progressives would have as the only armed individuals in the country, should not hold this outlook as it ultimately endangers several of your protect rights, one of which is most certainly 2A.

        • @Hannibal

          This site has been covering law enforcement issues as long as I’ve been reading it.

    • We are discussing douchebags like the one in the article in order to keep our public servants in line, not villify the entire police force.

    • I can post some pics of shannon wearing a one piece on family vacation or her very contrived/staged wedding pics. 🙂

    • Dear God, for every time a douchbag cop makes Napoleonic rants like this please give Robert Farago the strength and courage to report it on TTAG. Amen.

    • Nope, sure don’t see that. I see it more as dedication to the “Truth” part in the title.

      Perhaps there’s a market for a site called “Pleasing Lies That Don’t Challenge My Worldview About Guns”?

    • I agree, Liljoe, sometimes the groupthink here at TTAG gets a bit …thick.
      Did anyone read the whole WAPO article?

      Note for the record I am not defending the subject, but 3/4 s of the article is pretty basic common-sense,
      and you could even look at his “not poltically correct” choice of words as imprudent snark, as well as call it outright arrogance. I appreciate getting both sides of an issue, and have more often than not, overdone the snark myself. Mea Culpa.

      I for one am getting a bit bored with the predictable mass pile-ons in the comment section, if not the editorial choices, that make it ‘seem’ like TTAG is OCD anti-cop. I know its not, and I realize I am treading treacherous ground, so let me hasten to say, hey, Its your barbeque, RF, and I’m honored to come eat the dogmeat. But I know there is more out there, gun-stuff-wise.

      And at some point the reflexive cop-bashing becomes about as fair as MDA calling all gun owners loose-screw murderers because …Elliot Rodgers. !

      • Now, having spoken to the 3/4s of the reasonable sounding and good advice in the WAPO article,
        and my humble opinion and constructive criticism about tone, here at TTAG, and YMMV…

        Let me return to Officer Dutta. You sir, besmirch the image of fine hard-working cops everywhere, and the discovery of the misrepresented status of your “professorship” at CTA further impugns your own reputation, and that of the LAPD, which has suffered some dings lately. As a 17 year veteran of a highly sophisticated urban metro PD, in a highly politicized town like LA, you should know better to choose your words with care, on the street as tactic and tool on the force continuum, and in communicating with the public at large, and in print, ESPECIALLY if you are going to cite your status, and experience as the inferred appeal to authority in your article.

        In other words, Officer Dutta …you blew it, despite meaning well, and having a lot to offer. That CTU disavowed you is not surprising, nor would I be surprised if LAPD supports you. There’s lots I dont know about you from this one article. But first impressions matter, and now you have more work to do.

        I hope you willl comment, here, and help us understand better. We are lucky to have some outstanding LEOs sharing here from time to time, rare except for cop-shop type blogs, and I for one look forward to what they have to say.

        And thanks for your service, protecting all of us, and our families.

  11. After reading his asinine tyrade yesterday, all i could do was was laugh and think “well, seig f*cking heil, you freaking douchebag.”

    Yet another example of the “us versus them” mentality. Assholes like thia guy give goos cops a bad name.

  12. Officer. I am a citizen and I carry concealed. I have lived most of my life and I have never been issued a warrant, Either arrest me or carry on. If you tell me I am under arrest I will offer no resistance. Don’t argue with me, don’t call me names, don’t attack my character, don’t say I’m a racist pig and don’t threaten me. Don’t scream at me that you have authority over me, and don’t even think of aggressively walking towards me. Don’t draw a weapon

  13. Well, this ‘cop’ has illustrated why the level of distrust of LEOs continues to grow, despite the fact that most LEOs are decent people who do their jobs well. The ‘i’m a cop, do what i say or else’ mentality reinforces the public fear of authority, rightfully so. Cops are entrusted with enforcing laws (many of which are garbage, as we all know) and frequently find themselves in dangerous situations. As a result, they are entrusted with firearms and authority. But when they betray the public trust, the public begins to perceive them as the enemy. Which is where we increasingly find ourselves today. The unfortunate reality is that it only takes a few bad actors, like this guy, to tarnish the entire profession. And this is part of the reason we are experiencing the unrest in Missouri. Regardless of whether or not that particular cop was justified when he shot Brown, much of the public is out for retribution for the sins of the bad cops.

  14. A few decades ago, I had been an SP (military cop). I look back and wonder if military cops are better tuned to the constitution than civilian police officers, or has things changed that much. At the time, I discovered that each civilian police department seemed to have a different perspective on enforcing law, training, and discipline in the ranks. I am sure it is still the same. After thinking it through a bit, I am wondering if our disgust with some law enforcement foibles has more to do with our disgust with the first imperial president in the history of the US, and the over-reach of the federal government. Yesterday, a liberal suggested to me that we should disband local, county, and state police departments and replace them with a federal police force. I am starting to wonder if our federal government wants us to attack our local police departments so they can replace them. 10 years ago, I would have called that crazy talk, but interestingly, not today. Anyway, I wonder if it is time we take back our local political machine, and take an active role in deciding how our local police operate…and resist any attempt to nationalize our police.

      • Hadn’t thought of it that way. Federal government dumps fully auto weapons and tanks on local cops then sits back and watches them use them. Local PD screws up since they aren’t trained to use any of the new toys, people die, public unrest occurs. AG Holder steps in and saves the day, dismisses local PD, replaces them with DHS personnel reporting to the Federal government. Sounds alot like the Hegelian Dialectic. Think about it then say its crazy.

  15. Sounds like some commentors here do not understand the life of a LEO. They don’t say these things out of arrogance. You don’t know why you’ve been stopped. You don’t know if a robbery or assault has been committed nearby and you fit the description. You are being stopped and talked to to determine if you should be detained further or to rule you out as a person of interest. The LEO has no time to fuck around with your stupid bravado so drop it. He/she may have an armed criminal to find and that criminal may be nearby so answer the questions and if you are truly innocent you will be on your way soon enough.

    • That’s nice.

      An individuals rights can be thrown out if a cop is looking for a bad guy. Got it.

      How does that boot leather taste?

    • Woah there! Be careful where you point that common sense!

      Seriously though, “The Truth About Cops” posts always bring out the “best” of TTAG comments, it’s hardly worth commenting unless you like arguing with bone heads.

      • You’re an idiot. Do you also believe that due process only gets in the way of punishing criminals, and that if we could just dispense with such stupid things as Habeas Corpus and innocent until proven guilty, we’d all be much better off? Give me a break.

    • As a retired LE I understand quite well, thank you.

      It is asshats like this person who make a ‘good’ cop’s life that much harder. Officer safety is one thing (which all LEs should take quite seriously); however, ‘do as I say or I will hurt you’ is another thing entirely. He needs a refresher on what a ‘lawful order’ is. You don’t get to abuse people’s rights without due cause. His lengthy explanation goes beyond due cause.

      LEs MUST be held to a higher standard. LEs are sworn to protect and defend our Constitution, and to protect civil rights, not abuse them under the color of law. It is something that I accepted when I put on the uniform and something that others must wrestle with as well. This outlook ultimately endangers several of your protect rights, one of which is most certainly 2A.

  16. He should not be addressed with the status of “professor”….he is not…he is an adjunct instructor. True professors have doctorate degrees, must publish peer reviewed papers. this is a part time teacher with credit given for “life experience”.

    He may not think I am his boss, but he is also not mine. The LEO’s have lost respect on a whole for numerous reasons, what this asshat has glossed over is NOT addressing bad apples. They may not make up big part (debatable), but find me an example of something worse than a paid vacation for an officers wrongful actions. And in the case of lawsuits, the taxpayer pays it anyway…the lack of personal accountability is astounding for a position with the power it has. Either the level of power, or the accountability (or both) need to be addressed.

    • Well, in fairness, he does reportedly hold a Master’s from U. of Florida and a doctorate from UC-Davis in Biology, but you’re right, he’s not at all a professor. He has no serious publications. He teaches at Colorado Tech, which, despite its official sounding name, is more akin to U. of Phoenix and similar schools, than anything else. I’m seeing a desperately insecure man with no real world accomplishments, but rather a whole lot of fluff and attachments to external institutions, hoping some prestige and respect will accrue to him from them.

  17. Two words: arrogant prick

    You sir and your mindset are the problem with LEOs today. I’m not anti-cop. I’ve dealt with and know plenty of good ones. A good cop, soldier, leader, etcetera… has a full box of personalities, tools and techniques appropriate for the situation at hand and knows when and how to apply them. Your kit sir, apparently only has hammers. Living proof that those who can’t, teach.

  18. I saw this guy yesterday. What a waste of oxygen. If this ain’t tyranny of an a###ole I don’t know what is. The POlice are not your buddies. I’m not a rabble rouser. I’m an OFWG over 60.

  19. Judging from the majority of the comments here, few actually read the entire article he wrote.

    I’m not a fan of highlighting the most extreme phrase the man said for effect. If you read the article, he believes that police stops are charged situations, and both parties need to treat each other with respect during them. I agree. I think that’s the case with any potentially violent situation. You throw fuel on the fire, you’re asking to get burned. If you’ve had training in dealing with violent situations, nearly every training discusses this. If you beat the macho drum instead of deliberately attempt to diffuse, you escalate the possibility of things going wrong. The term “cooler heads prevail” is a truism for a reason.

    Does that mean that if a cop abuses his authority, everyone should go along to get along? Of course not. There are certainly bad cops out there, and Patel even states that he was a prior IA guy. Highlighting this article as “COPS WILL DO AS THEY LIKE AND YOU BETTER NOT OFFER RESISTANCE” is bullshit. He also said this: “Community members deserve courtesy, respect and professionalism from their officers. Every person stopped by a cop should feel safe instead of feeling that their wellbeing is in jeopardy. Shouldn’t the community members extend the same courtesy to their officers and project that the officer’s safety is not threatened by their actions?” Why not highlight that phrase, Dan?

    • Reference to your post … “Does that mean that if a cop abuses his authority, everyone should go along to get along? Of course not.” If we choose not to “go along”, then we’re in serious trouble, as the excerpt above is demonstrating. Any issues I’ve ever had with the LEOs is when they abuse their “authority” … and all “authority” is with them. If there isn’t any abuse, there isn’t any issue. However, the reality from my perspective always appears to be something abusive as I recall. I have quite a few of those stories to share (but I don’t bother). I want to emphasize that if everything was lawfully on the ‘up and up’ then regular citizens should have no complaints. The overwhelming attitude of distain for their “authority” stems from a regular treatment of abuse associated with that authority. If you’ve never had a questionable issue with a cop, that would lead me to believe that you reflect a particular demographic. My testimony that I’ve had such issues most likely reveals my demographic. Consider the perspective of those doing the complaining.

    • Nope, I don’t buy it. We all know cops. Some are friends, neighbors, budddies. Some here are themselves cops. This guy isn’t simply making a cold hard observation about a serious subject. He’s using that subject as cover for his cold and cruel and wicked desires. That monstrous mentality of his is both a cause and a consequence of his being a cop, and which is why he shouldn’t be one for even one minute longer.

      • Exactly. While there are MANY valid things that are served up in the article. They cannot be used as justification for abuse of a person’s civil rights (or their health and welfare for that matter). All of the valid items do not justify his final position of ‘do as I say or I will hurt you’. LE’s may give lawful orders. He would have that extend beyond that.

    • Agree 100%. Clear case of cherry picking the most inflammatory part of a good article, arguably out of context.
      Dan, why the cop hate?

  20. What’s really sad is that much of his essay is reasonable and based in law, echoing some of the things we’d see posted here (bodycameras, etc). It seems to be that one paragraph where it all goes off the rails. No one is going to take anything else away from it, and that’s a shame, because there’s a point there… the place for arguing and fighting is court, not on the side of the road.

    Oh, and the title… wtf. But I wonder if he coined that title or if that was the Washington Post, as often titles are created by the paper and not the author.

  21. In an alternate light to the comments above, Cops spend 90%+ of their time dealing with the scumbags, jerks and criminals, who comprise a small percentage of the population. This leaves a small percentage of their time and effort to “be nice” to the vastly larger percentage of the population. It also, places every interaction they have into a highly probable adversarial potential, which can include verbal abuse, resistance and physical assault. Nonetheless, many Cops make as best an effort as they can to interact positively with the general public, do community service and cultivate better community relations. And in the meantime try to be husbands, wives, fathers, mothers and children to their own parents.

    Yes, the famous “bell curve” will show that a small percentage of Cops don’t balance all these things well, while many manage it more successfully and some excel in the endeavor. The fact is that everyone in every endeavor will expend more time dealing with the small percentage of people they encounter who are jerks and idiots than with the rest of the people they encounter. I learned this quite clearly as a manager of people for more than twenty years in my career life, and, in fact, it finally drove me to change careers for the last twenty years of my career life, where I found peace of mind and felt like I was accomplishing worthwhile things instead of dealing incessantly with idiots, malcontents and the unruly. At times, those types of people can “suck the life” out of you.

    So, I cannot criticize this guy for his statement, although he might have worded it a little less strongly. Just look at what a few people, relative to the size of the general population in Ferguson, MO, have done because of the actions of a thief and petty thug who initiated a fatal incident with a Cop because that thief and petty thug knew he was guilty of a stupid crime and thought he could escape arrest by aggressive resistance.

    [There are, to be sure, many as yet unsettled factors in the Michael Brown/Darren Wilson incident and a Grand Jury is now reviewing the evidence, so my description (above) is meant only to reflect the known facts, not constitute a judgement or speculation about the incident.]

    There are problems with Police Departments, to be sure, which originate with the politicians and bureaucrats who manage the Officers on the street. Those street Cops serve two masters, their management and the public, and are caught in the middle of a conflict not of their making and have to deal with it in trying to do their job as best they can. Murphy’s Law will apply despite their best attempts and intentions.

    I am sure some/many of you will not like my general comment, which is okay with me. The one thing I would challenge all of you with is to think about the general premise that the excessive amount of time you spend dealing with the small percentage of troublesome people you encounter does take away from the time and effort you’d rather expend on the larger number of good people you encounter.

    Finally, Sunil Dutta is not saying anything much different than what we say when we express our thoughts about personal defense of self and family against intruders and aggressors in our homes, and you would not begrudge him what he says if he was referring to defense of himself and his family at home. What he is saying is not much different than what we say in reference to our rights and desires to be able to defend ourselves in public as we go about our business, and he has the right to think and do the same, particularly since his “business” is to deal with the scumbags and jerks who plague all of us.

    • “At times, those types of people can “suck the life” out of you.”

      If you’re at that point you should re-evaluate your career and definitely should NOT pen an op-ed to the Washington Post at the time.

      • I already did about twenty-four years ago, changed my career and spent the remaining twenty one years of my work life in peaceful happiness and personally satisfying accomplishment. Now I am retired for nearly three years.

    • “Cops spend 90%+ of their time dealing with the scumbags, jerks and criminals”

      If true then it is time to find a new “community”.

      • The vast majority of “communities” are the same. Look around you and you will see the same dynamics in small towns and megalopolises, You will see the same dynamics in businesses, clubs, churches and any other human organization/institution you can find, So, “finding a new ‘community'”, or trying different ones is an option, but will not likely yield the result you desire [adverting to the axiom of an exception existing to {most} every rule] . The key is changing your own circumstances, so a better option would be to find a new career, or a new perspective on what you have to deal with. I tried the latter, then finally accepted the former was the answer for me. It worked. YMMV.

  22. Nice soft sell with the “some cops behave like criminals” bit. Um…..how about some cops are the worst criminals out there? How about some people become cops because it’s a very effective venue for committing crimes?

    We had a Houston P.D. traffic cop blow his head off in his car, at the station, as recently as, Monday, because he’d just been relieved of duty and learned he’d become the target of a criminal investigation. Seems he liked overtime pay ($158K in overtime pay alone in the last three years), so he would generate phony tickets to justify his having to attend traffic court on overtime. Phony as in completely fabricated, with no actual traffic stop having taken place, not simply trumped up.

    I.A.D. had him dead to rights, with his own tickets documenting him supposedly being on many occasions in two vastly different locations writing tickets at the same time. A thief and liar like that, as desperate as he’d become, would have done anything, and did, to escape responsibility. What would someone like that do if you and your family somehow were the key to his being exposed? Does the phrase “I was in fear for my life” ring a bell?

  23. Does he have a cobra snake for a necktie?

    “Take it easy, baby. Don’t ya give me no lip. Who do you love?”
    -Bo Diddley

  24. This is somewhat of the theme of the original article / post by Sunil Dutta

    “Community members deserve courtesy, respect and professionalism from their officers. Every person stopped by a cop should feel safe instead of feeling that their wellbeing is in jeopardy. Shouldn’t the community members extend the same courtesy to their officers and project that the officer’s safety is not threatened by their actions?”

    The context of the ‘heated statement’ is much the same as we have said here. If you are told to put the gun down, put it down. The context is subtle but I read that he is saying ‘in context’ that when you are engaged with the police don’t then be aggressive rather than the image of a bully and taunting person as reading only the ‘heated statement’ triggers.

  25. I found of what he said to be mostly reasonable, even if brutally honest.

    Most of my interactions with police have been professional, polite and they would often give me a verbal warning instead of a ticket for minor traffic violations. Then they have been nothing but polite and professional as I have OC’d for the last 7 years.

    Are there times when refusing a cops order is appropriate? Sure; during a no knock home invasion when you don’t know if the cops are “legal” home invaders or the illegal kind, and if you survive the encounter; fighting it out in court is the next step.

    But normally; the place to fight what you feel is an unlawful order is in court, not in the street. Most cops won’t beat the crap out of you if you don’t resist what they think is a lawful order. (until they do). The key is to remember I believe, most cops do try to stay within what they think is the law, (until they don’t).

    Which is why making sure to have a audio/video recorder. Is so important.

  26. And yet he has a point. I’ve never understood why someone would smart off to a cop. You’re just asking for trouble. I’ve been a manager for 25 years and nothing will get an employee on my shit list faster than being a arrogant smart ass.
    Even if the cop is a total jackass, why would you antagonize him?
    I have friends that are or were cops and most will be respectful of you if you are respectful of them.

    • I get the sense the officer is saying, maybe a bit bluntly, that cooperation with the police is the best course. Start a physical confrontation with an officer, you will lose. Period. Injury, death, or jail time is the booby prize, so the best course of action is to cooperate. Sign the citation, step out of the car, place your hands behind your back, whatever the case may be. If you are innocent, if you feel you are being wronged, the proper place to address it is not at the scene. We have courts, civil and criminal, for that. Michael Brown would be alive right now if he had followed this advice.

      • In theory, that’s a fair point. But addressing issues in court takes time and an obscene amount of money. Not trying to come down on either side, but I’ve seen the sentiment echoed on here a few times that you’re better off cooperating on the side of the road and fighting in court. Just wanted to point out that that’s not always viable. Now, I’m certainly not saying folks should try to fight a cop for a wrongful speeding ticket or whatever. Just trying to add another perspective to the discussion.

      • @jerry

        “Sign the citation, step out of the car,”

        I’ll sign the citation as that is not an acknowledgement of guilt, but too many people have been framed, injured, assaulted or murdered by corrupt, incompetent or bigoted LEOs to blindly comply with each and every order they issue. One cannot simply expect the best outcome, even in court, and there are some things a court can’t restore.

        Therefore, I will not step out of my vehicle, allow entry into my domicile, consent to any search, move away from any cameras or answer any questions unless I there is a warrant or I am under arrest and have spoken with my attorney. I will calmly and politely refuse any request I am not obligated to make under the law.

  27. Do I just have to call him names before he uses deadly force? Or everything in his list? Or mix and match any three?

    Just would be good to know… Like for “name calling” does “pig” get me a gut punch, “racist pig” get me tased, and “racist f*ing pig” gets me shot?

    I think he’s got a great start here but would like more specifics.

  28. Huh. Saw it here first! Just now heard Rush talking about this guy’s column…

    It worries me that CNN and MSNBC are just as angry about this piece as most of the bone head commentors here.

    • A rapist cop can edit the quote and state to his victim “If you don’t want to get shot, just do what I tell you.”
      A rapist cop could also say to his victim don’t resist.

    • The fact that you repeatedly call people with whom you disagree “bone head” says a lot about you, actually.

      To put this cop’s comments into perspective, when I was in law enforcement, nearly 20 years ago, we had a younger whippersnapper who got all indignant and ‘went after’ a kid in his own yard for flipping him a bird as he drove by in the patrol car.

      The older, more experienced cops in the unit raked him over the coals. Among the older guys, there was none of this chip-on-the-shoulder attitude that is so prevalent today.

      In the “good old days,” cops were taught to be a bit thicker skinned, and not so quick to establish “me vs you, and you will lose” as part of the game.

      Maybe some will say I’m romanticizing the past, and there is no doubt some truth to that. But, there is also no doubt that the attitude in law enforcement has dramatically changed.

      I saw the changes happening during Clinton’s administration and the whole “anti-militia” movement that was in full swing after Ruby Ridge, Waco and OK City. I don’t know if the attitude change began then, but it has certainly continued and solidified into an ‘anti-community’ elitist view, and this officer’s words show he has clearly been brought up into THAT system, and not the system I remember.

  29. And with attitudes like this so prevalent, it’s no wonder people love the police! This guy sums up everything that’s wrong with cops today. People who get off on abusing power get into positions of authority & then run rough-shod over everyone they can.

  30. This guy sure has a Gestapo mentality and a God complex. He seems to not be aware of abusive LEO`s like Sergeant Brett McKnight and Charlette Marshall-Jones who escaped felony convictions and prison time.

  31. I am actually quite astonished by the responses here. Yes, this guy should probably keep his mouth shut. And yes, the CTU fail does not help his cause.

    But take a step back and put yourself in an officer’s shoes for a second. First thing to realize is that you have a target painted on your back both from ciminals and anti-law enforcement folks. So if your life isn’t in danger, your career is… constantly. When was the last time you had to worry about not coming home to your kids or loosing your job because some low life went to an even lower life lawyer to sue/procecute you for simply doing your job?

    I get it, as does everyone else, power corrupts. Just look at the White House. But not every cop is bad, not every cop is racist, not every cop is drunk with power. I would wager most simply want to make their communities safer.

    If I were in an officer’s shoes, I am pretty sure I would feel somewhat supportive of Dutta’s statements. Hell, even Chris Rock made light of the Rodney King beatings with his “How to not get your ass beat by the Police” skit, which, in essence, said the exact same thing. Because Dutta speaks out loud what other police officers are thinking he is wrong?

    When was the last time you fought with a police officer?
    When was the last time you charged a police officer?
    When was the last time you verbally berated a police officer?

    I hope the answer to those questions is never for anyone here, for obvious reasons. Yet when Dutta essentially spells out the writing between those lines (e.g. be respectful to those that protect you) he is a piece of garbage???

    And here’s the clincher. What if you read his statement out of context. Read it as if some non LEO spoke these words on the street… how would you respond? Is it your place to judge another person’s desire to protect him/herself. Why do we carry firearms? What is the purpose of this site again?

    • Because no one read the whole article.

      And they probably think holding court with the police on the scene is a good idea. I’ve had police muzzles pointed in my face a few times over misunderstandings that were cleared up in the next five minutes. Telling them that they were wrong was lower on my list of priorities than not getting shot right then.

      How not to get your ass kicked by the police:

  32. Here’s the most important paragraph in the article:

    “But if you believe (or know) that the cop stopping you is violating your rights or is acting like a bully, I guarantee that the situation will not become easier if you show your anger and resentment. Worse, initiating a physical confrontation is a sure recipe for getting hurt. Police are legally permitted to use deadly force when they assess a serious threat to their or someone else’s life. Save your anger for later, and channel it appropriately. Do what the officer tells you to and it will end safely for both of you. We have a justice system in which you are presumed innocent; if a cop can do his or her job unmolested, that system can run its course. Later, you can ask for a supervisor, lodge a complaint or contact civil rights organizations if you believe your rights were violated. Feel free to sue the police! Just don’t challenge a cop during a stop.”

    His advice is pragmatic and still encourages legal recourse. I’ll comply and not get killed, then sue the police later myself.

    Way to cherry pick the article TTAG.

    • His “advice” is missing some crucial facts. For example, Police are legally permitted to use deadly force when they assess a serious threat to their or someone else’s life. That assessment must have been reasonable at the time, otherwise, no dice; the officer can face discipline and the department can face civil suit. If the officers actions are grossly unreasonable, even deadly force might be used by the victim. We’ve witnessed non-cops being no billed by grand juries.

      Just don’t challenge a cop during a stop.

      I do it and so do many others. We typically do so in the most reasoned tone and action that we can muster, but we do it. If I didn’t, I would’ve gone broke and exhausted myself on legal fees and aggravation. Government has big money backing it in court. I don’t.

      Lastly, the less day-to-day non-cops resist badly behaving officers, the more officers come to expect their behavior to be allowed. When it’s a PITA for them to behave in inappropriate ways on the job, in the moment, the less likely the ones that can be encouraged to proper behavior will continue poor performance of duty. Those who get worse as a result of a little reasoned resistance probably couldn’t be trained to be good cops anyway.

  33. How many actually clicked through to read the original article?

    His argument is not “RESPECT MAH AUTHORITAH”. His argument is “Don’t be a dick- even if the cop is in the wrong. Cooperate and then sue them.” Honestly I lose a lot of respect for TTAG for bandwagoning with the “let’s take a part out of context and bitch about evil cops”

    Punish bad cops. By all means. Actually I’m a proponent of tossing them in jail instead of suing the city. That said if a cop pulls a gun on me I’m not going to lecture on Tennessee vs Garner and the force continuum. I’m going to cooperate. Because I’m not a moron.

    • His argument is “Don’t be a dick- even if the cop is in the wrong. Cooperate and then sue them.”

      Cooperating in certain ways at the encounter can weaken or even destroy the case later. If rights aren’t asserted, they can be considered by some courts to have been waived and as consent given. “Only belligerents have rights.” Merely asserting the reservation of one’s rights has been seen as “being a dick” by many. “Am I being detained or am I free to go?” is a perfectly acceptable answer but I’ve heard too many consider that as unnecessarily hostile.

      He’s blaming the victim, IMHO. This “professor” can crawl right back into the Ministry of Love where he belongs.

      • assert your rights- but don’t be a dick. I’ve seen plenty of people who thought they were asserting their rights when they were in fact being dicks. Absolutely say “I don’t consent to any searches” but a little respect goes a long way.

        Instead of “am I being detained or am I free to go?” asking “officer- my wife is expecting me soon [or my shift starts soon, or my class or whatever your goal is]- is it alright if I leave?” and then if told “no” then saying “then, am I being officially detained?” comes across better.

        • There is no need for a qualifier. An officer who is attempting to bully someone out of their freedom of movement or other rights is violating rights. I don’t negotiate. Any extraneous information has potential to be misconstrued into something that might warrant further investigation. If it’s obvious that the cop is fishing or on a power trip, it is my choice to simple ask the question. That’s the end of the discussion. If I’m free to go then I leave. If I’m not then I don’t say a word (except to verbally re-assert my rights) until after I’ve had time to read the charges and go through arraignment. If one of my attorney friends can be there or I can afford one at the time, I pay attention to their legal counsel. There is no need to give excuses to an officer. That straightforward question potentially divulges nothing and any officer that knows the job and their lawful boundaries will let it go at that. It’s the officer that believes he or she is entitled to something beyond their position who are the ones that will take offense and have a problem. Their problem is not my problem. 😉

  34. According the anti’s then:

    If held up at gunpoint by a criminal- cooperate because it’s not worth your life.

    If held at gunpoint by a cop- object vociferously and loudly because they don’t have the right to do that to you.

      • No I’m just saying that the antigun folks argue against self defense. They urge compliance with street thugs. Because whatever they want it’s not worth your life. But if a cop points a gun at you then you should do any number of things (except cooperate).

        This strikes me as incoherent.

        The opposite though is coherent. ie, if a street thug points a gun at you (most likely) self defense is fine. If a cop points a gun at you- comply.

        • let me try again: if you think it is moral to resist against unlawful police action but immoral to resist regular criminal activity- you should get your philosophy checked.

  35. Assert your rights, but don’t be a dick.
    Also for pity sake don’t go toe to toe with a cop! sheesh, its simple really.

  36. Sunil Dutta, a professor of homeland security at Colorado Tech University,” meaning, of course, he is teaching others this tripe from a position of…authority. He needs to be in charge of things in Ferguson. That would work well.

  37. Listening to a California police officer about the law is like asking a priest for advice on pleasing a woman. You aren’t going to hear anything worthwhile.

  38. This guy = Contempt Of Cop, personified.

    Sorry, bud, but as a law-abiding citizen I have the right to go about my business without harassment or molestation. You, not I, bear the burden to show cause for you to interfere with my lawful conduct of my business. You demand politeness, respect, and deference from me; that’s fine. But you owe me the same.

    Fortunately, his views do not represent those of the vast majority of officers with whom I’ve interacted.

  39. What is his thoughts on refusing to consent to a search and/or stating that you are exercising your right to remain silent.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *