Why The Innocent Flee From The Police - by Will Grigg• Pro Liberate
Often that inquiry takes the form that assumes the guilt of the victim: "If he did nothing wrong, why did he run?" It's also common for that second version to contort itself into a nicely circular argument: "Well, he ran, and resisting arrest is a crime, so obviously he got what was coming to him."
For reasons unclear to a mind not enthralled by statist assumptions, most people simply assume that both reason and morality dictate an unqualified duty to surrender without cavil or complaint whenever armed, violence-prone strangers in peculiar government-issued garb seek to restrain one of us.
This is why police are trained to interpret any hesitation, reluctance to cooperate, inhospitable body language, or verbal expression of resentment as "resisting arrest" and thus a justification for the use of "pain compliance" -- or even lethal force. Police and their apologists likewise insist -- contrary to both law and judicial precedent -- that there is no right to resist even a clearly unwarranted or abusive arrest, or even for a citizen to take steps to protect himself when he's on the receiving end of unjustified physical violence from police.
1 Comments in Response to Why The Innocent Flee From The Police - by Will Grigg
>> This is why police are trained to interpret any hesitation, reluctance to cooperate, inhospitable body language,..........a justification for the use of "pain compliance" -- or even lethal force.
With the frequency violence used by police raising in place of people skills it seems that 'pain resistance' might be something the public needs to consider.
While Law Enforcement is about control of the public, rather than assistance to them, it remains the better option to maintaining that control is with non-violent persuasion.