A video has been taken in which a uniformed “BART” Police Officer uses physical force to remove a disorderly man from a subway train. ( for the video see http://officer.com/web/online/Top-News-Stories/New-Video-Puts-BART-Police-on-Guard/1$49478 )
The Officer responded to multiple 911 calls of an intoxicated man eschewing racial profanity on board a public train. Armed with those facts he went to the assistance of the public who had called him for help. And the Officer did just that by himself he removed a disorderly persons who now drinks on the train most likely because his previous venue for being an A-HOLE was taken away as legitimate bar owners, bouncers and bartenders banned him from their establishments because of his uncivil behavior. ( Lawyers never sue those places just the government in hopes they settle out of court )
Officer’s are permitted under the law to use physical force to restrain a person. Just as an emergency physician makes decisions based upon training and experience, so do police officers. While verbal communications are frequently used to command an individual they are only used where feasible. Here the Officer makes a decision to remove the man rapidly and thus protect the citizens from potential harm.
Police misconduct which is now labeled “brutality” ( defined as ruthless, cruel or harsh see http://www.thefreedictionary.com/brutality) is over and misused by those who are anti police. In this video nothing ruthless, cruel or harsh intentionally took place. The Officer correctly took physical charge of an apparent emotionally charged individual. The Officer doesn’t know if he is high on a controlled substance, armed with a weapon or in need of medical treatment. Removing him from the train protects citizens from a possible dangerous man and the Officer places himself at physical risk in a possible mano e mano encounter.
If the window was made out of shatter proof glass such as plexi- glass I doubt this video would have raised an eye. It is standard police procedure to “brace” a person against a wall. This allows a Police Officer to protect himself and the subject from injury. Here the Officer used the lowest level of force “physical” to control the subject but for the glass shattering no one would have been injured.
Police supervisors and elected officials have an affirmative obligation to support the police when they act properly. I see nothing in this video which displays aggressive misconduct. In fact the Officer himself was injured the video recording has witnesses stating the police acted properly and the officer quickly handcuffed the man to prevent further injury.
If San Francisco as a city is opposed to this encounter they will chill officers from doing their duty. They will not proactively engage criminals nor put themselves at risk for fear of civil lawsuits, personal injury and loss of employment.
This was an unforeseeable accident in which glass shattered. This is not police misconduct and far from police brutality. For the local tv coverage see http://cbs5.com/local/bart.officer.injured.2.1328017.html