Saturday, January 27, 2007

The only ones qualified to jump to conclusions

A 74-year-old Korean War veteran was held at gunpoint and then tackled by Salt Lake City police officers after he refused to comply with orders to raise his hands above his head.
Miles Lund said he tried to tell the officers - who believed he was carrying a gun - that his war injuries rendered his right arm immobile.
"But they just wouldn't listen," he said.
Instead, according to witness accounts and a police report, at least three officers tackled the man, wrestling him to the ground at Liberty Park and wrenching his arms behind his back to handcuff him.
Lund said at least one officer also kicked him in the ribs.
When they found no gun - only a retired military police officer's badge - the officers let Lund go.
"They didn't even apologize," said Lund, who suffered strains to his injured arm along with cuts and bruises. Lund said he is now also suffering a twitch in his left eye that Veterans Affairs doctors have been unable to diagnose.

This happened back in November, and the police involved still haven't suffered any repercussions from the incident, and it looks as if the department is just waiting for people to forget about it so they can sweep it under the rug.
The victim was held at gun point and beat up by the police just because someone called the police and said he had a gun (which he did not have). So, someone's unsupported word, with no description of the gun, is good enough to treat an elderly citizen as a criminal? If I knocked someone down, the first thing the police would ask me is whether I actually saw the gun he had. But they're the only one who are allowed to jump to conclusions. I hope he hauls them to court.


B&N said...

You know, it's a funny thing. I am, what most would probably agree to a description of as "in my prime", and the people who I run across on a daily basis really don't give me much cause for alarm. So how is it that a bunch of cops (how many were there?) think the need to pounce a geriatric, who probably couldn't have torn the petal off of a rose? I am wondering about all of this "training" that they are suppose to have, and how "professional" police forces are these days.

Is it really all that hard to walk up to someone, who is obviously physically weaker, with a numerically superior force, and just ask them if they're armed in a situation like this? Is it too much for the cops to do that? My only conclusion is that it is, because they just didn't do it.

Ace said...

It must be something that they drink. It trickles down too, even to our local highway patrol. My father was killed in a car accident. The guy who hit him got to walk free. Why? Well our state highway patrol wrote me a letter telling me that since they messed up the investigation of the accident scene, it was there fault. They did say however that they were sorry for the loss of my father.

All I have to say? :flip:

Kenny said...

Going against anybody that you believed is armed is a scary thing. 74 or 17 years old, a gun makes you equal. Maybe they may have used to much force, maybe not. None of us where there and know the whole story. Unless there is repeated incidents of abuse from a department I tend to lean in favor of the cops. The cop on the street is the only thing between us and Anarchy

GUYK said...

I tend to support the police but I also know that there are some young men on the police forces who figure that the barrel of their pistol is the extension of their dick..I know a few of them..

Looks like the old man has a good case for a law suit..

BobG said...

From what I can see, there was NO REASON to consider him armed or dangerous. They had a phone call from someone who did NOT see a gun, and didn't really have a legitimate reason to suspect him of anything. I'm a little curious why nothing seems to have happened to the caller, who obviously lied to the police. The victim was neither armed or threatening, so there was no real cause to pull a gun on him. Something like this sets a bad precedent; got a grudge against someone? Just call the police and say that the person is armed. Sounds like a good way to harass someone you don't like.
Just my opinion.

Hammer said...

I hear about the heavy handed stuff all too often. I hope someone gets punished.

-B said...


I have to disagree with almost all the you say here.

Sorry, but the cops are NOT all that stand between me, or us, and anarchy. You have got to start thinking more critically about this. If you doubt this, ask yourself this question, "if the cops were gone tomorrow, if all the laws in the land were rescinded, if there were no more LEGAL obstacles preventing people from doing absolutely as they pleased, would society be in enough chaos to be judged as completely broken down?"

The answer to that question is NO, and I'll tell you why. People, for the most part, don't need laws to govern their actions, they have morals and ethics which do a far better job at controlling behavior than any law ever has.

What's with the fawning over state authority anyway? You don't seem too keen on individual rights, if your comment says anything about your views. Why else would you claim, "I tend to lean in favor of the cops"?

I do agree that going up against somebody WITH a gun does tend to make the issue of age a moot point, and they ARE great equalizers, but not only DIDN'T the cops see one, the geezer DIDN'T have one. So, how is it that ANY claim could even be made to the contrary? It just erodes the already shaky credibility of the clowns in uniform to say such non-sense.

Another point, though I admit this is nitpicking, would you please crack the encyclopedia and look up "to" versus "too"? Sorry, the lack of correct usage irritates me.

The Cynical Libertarian said...

Sad story.

Here in the UK, you are ten times more likely to be shot dead by an armed psycho from SO19 (the armed paramilitary wing of the unarmed British police force) than by a crook with a gun.

And what’s more, these pieces of garbage always get away with it. Not a single prosecution has ever been brought against British police involved in what can only be described as murder in many cases.

Kenny said...


Just looked at what happened in New Orleans and tell me that there would not be anarchy. I don't think looking in the encyclopedia would help me as much as the dictionary. Don't mean to nitpick. But recommending the wrong book and double posting irritates me.

-B said...


Look at New Orleans. Police were there, and there was still chaos.

What's your point?

I didn't double post, even though it's there, for all to see. Take the issue up with the wizards at Blogger.

You could use the encyclopedia to do what I'd ask you to do, but you are right, the dictionary would be easier.

The cops still won't save you.

Kenny said...


Have a nice day

The Other Mike S. said...

I come from a "cop family". Dad was an Oakland PD cop in the 60's and 70's, and one of my younger brothers is a Captain for a large Bay Area force. It seems as though there are only two types of cops (I throw DA's and prosecutors into this "cop" grouping): Great or Psycho. I know lots of both types.

The Psychos have me, for the first time in my life, on the side of the, "I don't trust the cops" crowd. Too many stories of people being gunned down, lives turned upside down, etc. It is happening too often to be an aberation. It's becoming the norm.

I think when you have a federal government that disregards the rule of law - the ends justify the means mentality - that trickles down to the state and local level. The whole "Absolute Power" gig. If some cop or government dweeb wants to make your life a living hell, they can do it, and there is very little you can do to stop it. They generally have to step on their dick - publicly - for you to get justice.

Good luck with that.

Stu said...

My right arm is paralyzed. Based on what I've seen on Cops (the TV show) and stories I've heard, I'm scared to death of being mistaken by the police for some psycho that refuses to follow orders when instructed to put my arms up.

I try to tell myself, "I'll just tell the cops that I can't." But based on this incident, my fear that they wouldn't pay me any attention or simply disregard my comments as the rantings of a lying crook are quite valid.

I don't live a criminal life and I try real hard to get along with my neighbors, so the odds are slim I'll ever have to worry about it (though I do own guns). But I hear stories all the time about cops who bust down the wrong door. Or worse, cops who pull some over and are just being BA's and throwing their weight around. My best friend is a cop, so I often hear these stories straight from the source.

The older I get, the less I trust the people who are supposed to "protect and serve."

TC said...

Recommended reading.

Don't forget these as well.

And it goes on and on and on and on and on!!!!!!!

Cops and as someone recommended such all the way to the DA and if you live in NC seems to flow upward right into the Gov's mansion as well! Well this club sticks out for themselves.

to Protect and to serve? Yes indeed, THEMSELVES!

I'll stop as most of these simple minded strong of arm types are totally and completely out of control across this nation.

"The Cynical Libertarian said...

Sad story.

Here in the UK, you are ten times more likely to be shot dead by an armed psycho from SO19 (the armed paramilitary wing of the unarmed British police force) than by a crook with a gun."

Oh it seems the Aussies as well have some challenges of recent. Seems the SN #'s of the guns the govt purchased to get them off the streets are showing up in the hands of criminals! Oh of course being used in the commission of crimes as well.

Seems that thousands of them are MIA!

later.. And flip is not a correct spelling!

Laurel said...

Hey buddy - I was just doing some clean-up around the web to make sure everyone has updated links to PGB.

If you would, please update the link on your blogroll (and any particular posts that might be linked to me) from to - you can just change the domain, the rest of it remains the same.

Laurel @ PGB