Granny slammin' . A new sport

[paratrooper]

I watched the news and saw something about a granny waving a gun during a parade in Texas . When ordered to put it down she complied . The officer then instructed her to turn around and he started to cuff her . Then he grabbed her and slammed her onto the ground . Did any of you see anything to justify that ? Maybe I missed something .

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I saw it and didn't see anything wrong with what the officer did. Contrary to a lot of folks who feel that the old, the small, or females (primarily because of their small size) should be treated gently, I see no need for such kindness. The notion that somebody like that old lady, who was waving a gun around and threatening to shoot people in a parade, should be treated as if she was overly feeble or weak is a huge tactical blunder. There is no reason to assume that the old lady would be safe, docile, or compliant once she got rid of her gun. More over, nobody knew if she had any other weapons on her. Considering the facts, if the lady was willing to threaten folks with one gun, then you gotta figure she might be crazy enough to have more or in an unstable mental state and become quite combative.

In the video (from memory), the old lady put down her gun, but only after numerous commands to do so. With gun drawn, the officer advanced on her, giving her direction to get down on the ground, as apparently was policy. The old lady failed to comply and seemed confused by the officer advancing on her and seemed to side step away. Still being order down, she did not go. So the officer holstered his gun, grabbed her, brought her arms back, still repeating the command to get down. When the old lady would not go down, he put one leg out and used it to trip the old lady, taking her off balance, and then the officer basically controlled her decent and placed her on the ground. There was no granny-slamming. She was not harmed in the take down. I saw her in an interview after she bonded out and she stated she was not injured, but she also stated that she had no idea why she got her gun out and was threatening the parade participants with it other than the noise had upset her.

So basically, the old lady was apparently in a confused mental state at the time and as such, her lack of compliance to officer commands to get down were definitely a potential risk to the officer and bystanders. As she was apparently confused, there was no reason to believe that she would be fully compliant or docile and the officers could not ascertain if she had any other weapons until they searched her.

Never underestimate a threat. Yes, she was an old lady. Yes, she seemed frail. Yes, she pointed a loaded revolver at a crowd of people and threatened to kill them. Why would you NOT follow full dangerous felony procedures with the old lady? Why would you be so naive as to assume that she had only one weapon?

Every year, cops get killed when they are caught off guard by supposedly non-threatening individuals such as the elderly, women, or folks who appear to comply and then after having suckered officers into a false sense of security, attack.

If you don't like grannies being taken down by officers after they commit felonies with guns, then by golly don't give grannies guns.

 

[JerryM]

I did not see the video, but from what I have read it was a gross over-reaction by the officer. After she has put her gun down, and considering here age and physical capabilities, to consider her a threat that required such stuff is nonsense, and inexcusible. It is a disgraceful act, and should not be tolerated.

Jerry

 

[Don Gwinn]

I didn't see the full video, but Jimmy Kimmel's Uncle Sal was a cop in New York City for 20 years and he says the officer in the video is a. . . . um. . . . act of male auto-eroticism of which Art's Grammaw might not approve.

I thought that was fairly funny.

 

[Mike_B]

I saw that video. It was more of a controlled descent than a slam, like a previous poster has stated. The officer used his foot to trip her and held onto her arms as she went to the ground. He didn't tackle her or anything like that.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Right, so for those of you who did not see the video, you can't judge what really happened. Sure enough, many people were apalled at the notion that the granny was taken down hard because some printed accounts described the action inaccurately. Those descriptions, like so much other sensationalism, was to give the story more umph than it would have had if they said the officer lowered the old lady to the ground. It is already a pretty interesting story, but the idiot media apparently thinks they need to make it more interesting with sensationalism.

JerryM, your comments are specifically what I was referring to above about underestimating opposition. You think that just because she put her gun down and that she is old and probably lacking much in physical capabilities that she was no longer a threat. Had you seen the video, you would know that she definitely was not spry. Even so, if the old lady grabbed one gun and threatened to kill people, how do you know she didn't have another gun or knife? How do you know that her apparent feebleness isn't part of an act? You don't. You can't be sure of any of that until AFTER the lady is secured and checked for weapons. As I said, underestimating the opposition and feeling that someone is no longer a threat is what gets cops and some civilians killed. Along the same lines, there are instances of cops getting killed in a situation where they think the battle is over. Something happens and the cops shoot the suspect COM and then go to reholster their own gun, only then to realize that their suspect not only isn't down, but is then returning fire at the officer whose gun is holstered. Just because you shoot a suspect does not mean they are down, out of the fight, or a non threat. The same holds for other suspects such as old people or ones that don't appear to have the ability to put up a fight. Remember that guns are a great equalizer that allows the old, weak, petite, etc. fight on a more equal level with those that are young, strong, and large.

I don't know what the big deal is about taking an old lady suspect to the ground in a controlled manner where she was unharmed after she threatened parade goers with her gun. Personally, I would say she is lucky that officers did not shoot her while she initially failed to comply with their commands to drop the gun. Probably the standard to guage things by is how the event affected the old lady. She wasn't harmed and she made no complaints about how the police handled the situation. If she isn't outraged, then when should anyone else be? She was the one taken to the ground and arrested, not us.

 

[paratrooper]

I think that the most confusing for me was because all the cop had to do was put the cuffs on her .It LOOKED like she put the weapon down , turned around and put her hands behind her . It looked (and I could be wrong) that her hands were together and the cop had the cuffs in position to just snap on her and lead her away . That was the basis for my initial question . It appeared that he was one nanosecond from rendering her helpless and decided to go for the take down . The cop here in CA that slammed the kid on the car hood AFTER he was cuffed was run through the wringer . That was because he was still fighting . This old lady never offered a drop of resistance . If she was black , Al (NOT TOO) Sharpton and Jesse Jackson would both be running full throttle down there to call press confrences and defend the poor old lady .

 

[wingman]

The problems I see with "new age" officers is they arent allowed any discretion, I have law enforcement people in my family and see much of the
training they receive. I have concerns like much of society there is a lack of
common sense. To be honest I would not take the "job" now, I don't like what
I see.

 

[Don Gwinn]

Wingman, is that not more of a problem with all of us than with those officers? The majority in this country doesn't seem to embrace the concept of "discretion" with much enthusiasm.
Zero tolerance is not the way to go because a small minority likes it. Zero tolerance is the way to go because the majority of Americans are only against it when it inconveniences them personally.

 

[Quartus]

I didn't see the video, so I don't have an opinion. I still haven't seen the Rodney King video, so I still don't have an opinion on that one, either.


I guess that makes me a very unpatriotic American, because everybody knows that the First Amendment guarantees everyone the right to have an opinion on every subject, whether they know anything about it or not!



Well, that's my opinion, anyway.

 

[gburner]

I used to work in a psych ward and, at that time, held
on to rather naive notions that the appearance of age/infirmity/disbility equated to docility and physical weakness. This misconception put a patient and two staff in the ER one night when they severely underestimated an older, aparrently feeble yet fiesty
older woman. When provoked, she packed a lunch. Like the referee says before the fight...protect yourself at all times.

 

[wingman]

"is that not more of a problem with all of us than with those officers"


Don, you have a point on that, which comes first the chicken or the egg.

My concerns is the them vs us thinking on both sides, many dept's seem
to be gearing up with toys and training that is military like, while I know sometimes it is needed I see a lot of misuse. It is a problem and I feel as
the population grows it will become worse.

 

[Long Path]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6180118/

Gun-Toting Grandma Back Home After Arrest
KXAS-TV
An 83-year-old woman arrested after wielding a gun and allegedly threatening parade watchers in White Settlement was back at home Monday after posting a $2,500 bond the day before.

Despite the weekend ordeal resulting in a charge of assault with a deadly weapon, Hazel Yost doesn't seem fazed by the experience.

"Oh, I don't think it's such a big deal," she said. "Worse happens every day, don't it?"

However, parade goers sitting on a curb in front of Yost's house Saturday have a different take on the events. As the annual White Settlement Day parade rolled down the street, an armed and animated Yost approached them.


Felipe Zamora's home video camera captured Yost as she waved the pistol.

"Everybody started taking cover and I got behind that red truck," Zamora said.

The tape captured the sounds of horrified onlookers screaming.

Moments later, a plainclothes officer with gun drawn ordered Yost to put the gun down.

Once she complied, the officer forced her to the ground and arrested her (pictured).

Yost spent the night in jail, but insists she did nothing wrong.

"I shouldn't have been locked up because everybody out here knows me and they know I am not a ... I won't kill anybody, probably, unless they're trying to kill me," she said.

However, Yost's longtime friend, Jerry Whalen, couldn't say with certainty that she would not have fired.

"I think probably just to scare them off. I don't think she would have pulled the trigger, and then I can't really say for sure," he said.

And despite her arrest, Yost remains steadfast.

When asked by an NBC 5 reporter if she still plans to keep a gun in her house, Yost ended her interview.

"That's none of your business, and you can hit the road right now. I'm tired of talking to you," she said.

Looks pretty clear that she needed to be disarmed and brought to answer for threatening the crowd with the gun. Too bad her age is seen as a mitigating factor for the need to secure the safety of the others.

Folks, this is where the cop gets to earn his pay. This is the part where the cop has to be the guy that some people aren't going to like. If I walked down Main Street waving a gun at people and scaring them, I'd be taken into custody and disarmed and held for bond. Why? Because it's a danger to the public at large, and I'd need to answer for it. Why is it less of a danger, when the woman isn't entirely lucid?

I guess I'm a bad guy, then, with "no sense of discretion." I would have done the same thing, I believe (based on the report that I read here, which may or may not be entirely accurate.). I also have been known to write citations to 90 year old grannies for speeding on wet roads, who weren't altogether sure where they were when they were clocked. A dangerous situation occured, and it needed documenting, for the public's safety and for hers.

What if the cop just said "Now Granny! Take that shootin' iron on home, and let's have no more of this!"... and she shot someone?

What if he just disarmed her but let her go, and she went and got her other gun and did it again... and someone got hurt?

What if he failed to take her seriously, and another bystander got hurt, because he didn't take action to prevent it?

What if he failed to take her seriously and control her, and she attempted to resist and had enough room to hurt herself, or create a situation in which the officer ended up hurting her?

Is it her dignity that we're trying to protect? Hadn't she already lost that, for whatever reason? Now let's try to restore the safety, at least.

 

[magooch]

Granny is lucky she wasn't doing her thing in Portland Ore. The cops there would have just blown her away and asked questions later.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I still don't get it. What is the preoccupation with putting the granny down on the ground as somehow wrong? She had a friggin' gun and was threatening to shoot people! So what if she was old. Her age didn't seem to be a point of concern for the parade watchers who went running away when she threatened them.

I see nothing wrong with putting a felon down on the ground. The police were overly kind and gentle with the crazy old hag. Had she been a younger man, there is a strong likelihood that after dropping the gun, she/he would have been tackled, head driven into the ground to hold the person in place as the officer forcefully stripped out each hand to cuff it.

As previously noted, the woman had to go away and her comments in the post arrent interview really drive home the point. She apparently has no concept of legality of pointing guns at people. She claims she would not have shot anyone unless they tried to hurt her. She first came out and yelled at people. Not getting the response she liked, she went in and got a gun and came back out, yelled at people with the gun pointing at them. Here is the key point, she INSISTS she did nothing wrong. Sure, she did nothing wrong and I am the Double Naught Spy Fairy Princess.

Just because people say they will comply and look like they will comply does not mean they are willing to do so or actually understand what it is that they are agreeing to when they do.

A buddy of mine spent many years on the Dallas Vice squad. He was a big teddy bear of a man with a great sense of humor and a strong military background. As he told me on several occasions, he would rather fight big tough bikers in a biker bar than fight little bitty hookers. With the bikers, he claimed, at least you had a chance and they fought fair compared to what those tiny hookers could do to you. More than once he went to the emergency room for injuries sustained from women that he could have picked up with one hand. As he noted, they don't look tough, but they will hurt you.

Granny didn't look tough either and didn't think she was doing anything wrong. Your call.

 

[JerryM]

I did not see the video, but from what has been said, the 83 year old woman did not offer resistance.
I suspect that there was more than one cop there, but even if not, when she offered no resistance to being cuffed, it is excessive force to take her to the ground.

Assuming there was more than one cop, how many does it take to cuff a woman of 83 years who offers no resistance?

I am not impressed with the danger she could pose after putting down the gun.

Jerry

 

[Roadkill Coyote]

I haven't seen the video, so I can't comment on whether there was time for Grandma Goodcookies to comply with verbal commands, or on how she got placed on the ground.

But the reason she was placed on the ground is relatively obvious. The rule for dealing with an armed suspect is simple, one plus one. When you see or find a weapon, you look for another one. The best way to control a suspects actions while your doing that is by having them prone out on the ground. Someone who won't prone out, is trying to retain options and mobility, for whatever reason. Regardless of whether they are planning an assault, are confused, or just don't want to back down in front of a crowd, allowing a felony suspect to dictate the terms of his or her arrest creates unacceptable risks for everyone in the vicinity.

 

[larryf1952]

"Grandma Goodcookies"? ROTFLMAO!!

All jocularity aside, I think I understand what Double Naught is saying, and I agree with him. An 83 year old granny with a gun can still pull the trigger and take out any number of innocent bystanders. If she's nutty enough to be yelling at people with a gun in her hand, who's to say she doesn't have another one tucked under her apron? It could reasonably be argued that elderly people are more dangerous, due to their often erratic behavior and thought processes...it's harder to anticipate what they're going to do. The news is rife with accounts of elderly persons who turn their automobiles into killing machines, simply because they suddenly can't remember which is the GAS pedal (lest I be misunderstood, I'm no young whippersnapper...I'm in my 50's). If the LEO took the woman down with some modicum of restraint, as DNS says, I believe that he actually exercised more discretion than he was required to show. If someone's waving a gun around, I want the officer to neutralize the threat, and we'll worry about who gets their mouth full of mud later, after everyone is OK.