Do police in all U.S.A kick&punch suspects out of revenge like in California?
469707
This is called police brutality, it is not condone anywhere in the United States. If you experience this, and you get no satisfaction for the internal affairs division of the local police department, I would suggest you contact the FBI and have it investigated under the civil rights statutes. You civil rights may have been violated by this brutality.
486780
It sounds like an assault and battery, if it's a physical fight. (Not based on law of Illinois specifically; just a general observation.)
888769
Unfortunately, that can be true.  There are people who somehow think they deserve a "break" because they are famous.  Then of course there are those who are majorly tough and throw the book at them..to make an example as with Winona Ryder...frankly if they broke the law, they should be treated the same as everyone else.  Cops are usually decent (at least where I live) and if you are a decent person, they pick up on it, and often cut you a break if it is a minor offense such as a traffic ticket.  It all depends on the individual.  \n\nBut people can be corrupted, and for the most part, I think that celebrities DO get away with a lot more than they should..get treated better...get priority everywhere they go...it's a business after all and proprieters go for the attention so even if they trash a hotel or something...they suck it up and not say anything or risk losing other "valuable" celebrities as customers.\n\nWhere I think the system sucks is when they get to the courts, and their fancy lawyers play a song and dance and get them off...that is the REAL crime.  I will never forget the ugly people I worked with in government and how they reacted and jumped for joy (yes half were minorities) when OJ Simpson got off for murder...they jumped for JOY.  I hope they come back in another lifetime as victims who get their throats slashed so someone else can "jump for joy" when their likely murderer got off scot free.
339852
Firstly, Cops (nor anyone else) do not piss you off. You choose to be. If you choose not to be pissed off, then you won't be. It's called a Victim mentality. You own your emotions, no one else.\n\nSecondly, since I am a cop I can say this much… I remove skaters from areas that are posted with no skateboarding signs, where vandalism is a common occurrence or where there are trespass warnings (both the kind you see and the kind you never knew). I do not, nor do I know any other officers, that set out to “piss” people off. It is merely enforcing the laws that are applied upon them. You may not be a problem, but the two dozen other skateboarders before you might have been.
618336
yes. legally they get charged w murder.
557574
If you're asking about a California *Penal* Code section, there is no such section.\n\nIf you're asking about a California *Evidence* Code section, the answer is above mine.
1023919
No, unless he commits a serious crime ...  does one detect a whiff of revenge here?
1094846
A us marshal and a bounty hunter are not bound by the same rules as a regular police officer. They can and will kick down your door at 2 am and haul you off.
597548
Yes.\n\nI witnessed an altercation between people in two cars.  One car had a 20-something guy and his mother, and the other had this muscle-head/roid-ragey dude.  The first people pulled to the median after this guy was tailgating them and honking and stuff, and the other guy pulled into a parking lot nearby.  He got out of his car in a rage, ripped off his shirt (he was very muscular and apparently really proud of it), and he went running over to the other car and slammed his hand into the side of it so hard that it put a dent in the metal of the door.  He also reached in and tried to punch the guy inside the car.\nI called the police and reported the incident.  They took a statement from me at the scene.\nMonths later, someone served a subpoena on me (I was going to have to testify about the incident) but then I called back and they said it had been resolved.\n\nI also witnessed a hit-and-run accident involving minimal damage.  I turned around and followed the car that had broken the right-of-way (he ran a red light and got clipped by someone who had the green, but he kept going).  I got his license number, went home and called the local police for that area.  They thanked me and told me that someone had indeed reported being hit there.  I told them what I'd seen and offered to be a witness but they did not end up needing me, apparently.\n\nI'm no snitch, but I don't like it when people do harm to other people, or get all aggro on them, and don't get in trouble for it.  People need to be responsible for their actions, and I have no qualms about telling what I saw when someone does a dickish thing to someone else.\n\n\n-Jeffrey
921459
probably.  ask your local city government/police.
83981
yes and kill him even \n\nyou can do so much damage with physical violence and a little fight could land you in jail for life...just don't do it
854725
No. Officers use what is referred to as the +1 (Plus One) Force Continuum. That means that whatever level of force a suspect is using, the officer can go one step above that to contain the situation or make the arrest.\n\nIf a suspect is yelling, shouting, cursing, etc., the officer can use physical force to restrain the suspect with his hands and handcuffs. If the suspect attempts to physically resist by fighting, pushing, running, etc., the officer can go up to the next level of force by using non-lethal weapons, such as batons, mace/pepper spray, taser, etc. If the suspect is using any object as a weapon to attack the officer, like a stick, bat, pipe, etc., then the officer is allowed to use deadly force. If the suspect is using a real weapon, like a gun or knife, then the officer is still using deadly force, because there is no step up from that.\n\nAs an extra note, an officer can only truly use deadly force if they can articulate that at that moment, they feel that the suspect has the ability (he's got a weapon) and opportunity (he's right in front of me) to kill the officer or some other person, and there is jeopardy (this guy's gonna kill me!). But if you put an average adult in front of me with a pipe, who's running at me and yelling, "F*** the police!" (it's happened), that fits the +1 level of force and I can articulate that my life was in imminent danger. Deadly force is justified.
878738
All across the country huh?  Every cop is violent and aggressive over a poor little marijuan user?  Right!!!  I guess the cops are going to always be able to deal with vilolent criminals with words like please and thankyou!!!  That will work 100% of the time!!  NOT.  \n\n"Pretty please, with a freaking cherry on top, drop the gun!  OK, you can shoot me once before I shoot back, that is only fair.!!"  Is this what the cops should say?\n\n\nCriminals have no regard for the law or the people who uphold it.  Criminals don't respect the rules society has put in place, however, cry like little freaking sissys when they get caught.  They love to cry foul play and play innocent and make out like a victim.  That is because they are worthless and incapable of doing anything else with their life other than try to figure out ways to get away with crime.  The fact of the matter is cops are expected to play by the rules, and idiots, I mean criminals, don't.
100999
Not without knowing what state you're seeing this in.\n\nMy guess is that it's section 500 of some code in your state and that it has to do with interfering with someone or something.  In California, section 148 of the Penal Code talks about interfering with cops or firefighters (or a few others), so it might be something along those lines.\n\nProbably not going to get an answer without knowing what state you're in.
789117
GO KICK A COP IN THE NUTS
646710
Oddly, there are some really good answers here.  I usually have to wade through all the donut cracks and Patriot Act garbage to see anything worth reading.\n\nHowever, the question leaves something to be desired.\n\nYou've said you hate to generalize, but that's exactly what you done, and you've done it on a grand scale.  On what do you base your hypothesis that cops get annoyed when people exercise their rights?  Talking about the Los Angeles Police Department alone, there's right around 10,000 cops there.  Your question makes it sound like you've witnessed an awful lot of them get annoyed when people exercise their rights...and that's just Los Angeles.  I'm assuming you don't know, and haven't watched, even 0.01% of the law enforcement officers in this country do their jobs and yet your question assumes cops get annoyed when people exercise their rights, that "almost all" law enforcement officers want people to know as little as possible about their rights, and that "every" time people exercise their rights, the police are "always" there ready to violate them.\n\nSounds to me like you have an agenda.\n\nHaving said that, I'm sure some cops do get annoyed, that they do it for the reasons others have mentioned here, and probably for other reasons as well.  Some cops are jerks...and so are some lawyers, some dentists, some plumbers, some senators and some housewives.  As a group, though, we take an awful lot of precautions in the hiring practices for people who are given the authority they are...something few other career fields do.  \n\nPersonally, I am one of the exceptions you say "may" exist.  I dealt with a 16 year old kid recently who adamantly refused to allow me to search his car.  I was very impressed with the way he communicated his wishes to me and his exercise of his right to be free from unreasonable search - and I told him so.  Then I searched his car, because it reeked of marijuana (which, as it turned out, is because marijuana was in it).  And no, he didn't get a ticket...the weed was destroyed, I thanked him for his time, and he drove away somewhat surprised.  I know I am not alone in my profession when it comes to my respect for people exercising their rights.\n\nAnd having said that, I have two last comments:\n\nI have been annoyed by people who *thought* they were exercising their rights.  People who stand there and demand to have a lawyer before they decide which chemical test to take (no such right in California), people who demand to see a search warrant that allows me to search a vehicle (don't need one, in 99% of cases), people who think they know the laws of arrest ("you can't arrest me, you didn't see me do it") when very often we don't have to actually witness a crime to make an arrest.  I don't mind people asking, and I will bend over backwards to answer and educate them, but this holier-than-thou, I'll-have-your-badge, I-know-the-law-better-than-you, and of course, I-know-my-rights-and-you-can't-do-that attitude does get annoying after a while.  \n\nI don't make enough money to go around violating someone's rights because I couldn't afford the punishment if I did...I don't know a single cop who does.  I know there are certainly some idiots out there who have, but if you consider the total number of police officers in this country, and the relative scarcity of news related to this topic, I hope you'll see that perhaps you aren't giving the profession a fair shake.  Sure...when we screw up we do it BIG...but we really don't do it as often as you're making it sound.  \n\nSorry for the length...it's a subject I could talk about for quite a while.
182320
It is not swept under the rug, at all. In CA, if there is a domestic violence incident without injury, the police still have to take a report. If there is even a slight injury, including scratches, then it is a mandatory arrest of the "dominanat aggressor". Even violation of a DV restraining order is a mandatory arrest.