A Tale of Two Snowballs

by Corey Robin on February 1, 2015

I grew up in Chappaqua, New York, which is 20 miles northwest of New Rochelle. Both towns are in Westchester County, but they’re different.

Chappaqua’s population is 81% white, 12% Asian, and 2% black. Its median household income is $100,000. Its poverty rate is less than 4%. New Rochelle’s population is 47% white, 19% black, and 28% Latino/a. Its poverty rate is more than 12%. Its median household income is $67,000.

But here’s how I really know the difference between the two towns.

When I was growing up, my friend Mario, who’s no longer alive, came over to play. It was a snowy day. We decided to throw snowballs at cars. Our position protected by a tall hedge, we packed the snowballs tight and started hurling them onto the street. We did it for a while, till we heard a car screech and stop. And then we ran like hell.

About five or ten minutes later, my dad called out for us. The police were in the driveway. We got a stern talking-to, my parents yelled at us, and that was that.

Last Wednesday, a group of kids (it’s hard to say for sure, but they seem to be black; they’re definitely not white) were having a snowball fight in New Rochelle, somewhere near Lincoln Avenue and Hemingway Avenue. A snowball fight with each other.

A cop showed up, the kids dropped to their knees, and as this video shows, the cop drew his gun, shouting, “Don’t fucking move, guys.” He proceeded to frisk one of them, while keeping his gun on him, and then another.

There’s a report that the cops were responding to a call about a gun, but no one has confirmed it. The person taking the video, a woman, says, “They were having a snowball fight. This group of guys was having a snowball fight and now a cop has a gun on them.”

Update (8:30 pm)

I just found a Daily News report on the incident, which came out after I posted this. According to the News, the cops are claiming they responded to a 911 call about a teenager pointing a gun, in a group of teenagers, at someone else. They also claim that they have a transcript confirming the call, which they may release. As soon as the cops arrived, they claim, the kid with the gun took off. That is the point, they say, where the video begins. They also say there was no snowball fight going on prior to their arrival. I have no idea what the basis of that claim is.




mattski 02.01.15 at 6:20 pm

Not for nothing, but I grew up throwing snowballs at cars in Pleasantville.


Dr. Hilarius 02.01.15 at 7:15 pm

Out of school or in school, minor mischief by juveniles now treated as a criminal offense requiring prosecution. I can’t cite any studies off-hand but my friends who do juvenile offender cases all agree there is a huge racial disparity in who ends up getting a talking-to vs. who is charged with a crime.

I suspect some of the change is due to increased diversity in some areas. When the offenders were members of the dominant community, it was “kids will be kids” but when the offenders aren’t “our children” then no leniency is called for.


Main Street Muse 02.01.15 at 7:21 pm

I can’t stop thinking about John Crawford, shot in an Ohio Walmart for caring a Walmart BB gun while talking on the phone in the store. And I cannot stop thinking about Tamir Rice, shot dead at 12-years-old for brandishing a toy gun in the park.

And then I think about Elf, where the snowball fight was a funny bit in the story.

I don’t know what the hell is going on.


Dr. Hilarius 02.01.15 at 7:36 pm


cassander 02.01.15 at 7:49 pm

Just out of curiosity, what is the crime victimization rate in Chappaqua? In New Rochelle? And do you think it’s possible that the different rates influence police behavior, or is “Pigs hate the darkies” the only possible explanation for differing responses?


bianca steele 02.01.15 at 8:06 pm

The guy who wrote Elf grew up around the corner from me and went to school with my brother. Though I haven’t seen it.

I was hoping this post would be about my kid’s school’s Kindergarten Snow Ball, which was supposed to take place last week, and is now supposed to take place this week if they ever open the schools again, but not really.


chairman 02.01.15 at 8:08 pm

New Rochelle still has an awfully high median income.


NomadUK 02.01.15 at 8:35 pm

cassander@5: Just out of curiosity, what crime victimisation rate, short of open rioting in the streets, do you think justifies a cop pulling a weapon on a group of kids having a snowball fight and telling them not to f*cking move? And do you think there’s some other explanation other than ‘pigs hate the darkies’ that could reasonably apply?


Philip 02.01.15 at 8:35 pm

I grew up in Durham in England. It has one of the oldest university’s in the UK and the stereotypical student is a rich kid who couldn’t get into Oxford or Cambridge. The outlying areas are working class and some are very deprived and it is surrounded by ex-mining villages. My dad was a policemen there and through the police he gained a scholarship at the university in the late 70s early 80s. One of his colleagues wouldn’t talk to him for the three years he was a student because he hated the way the university would try and keep minor crimes in-house while local kids were labelled has hooligans for the same things.

The video doesn’t show the kids having a snowball fight and the kids being frisked are already on their knees when they come into shot, to me it doesn’t really show if the cop was out of order without knowing more of the context. But cassander do you think affluent white areas are policed differently to poorer less white areas, and also this can affect crime detection and reporting statistics, or is the only explanation that the kids were asking for it?


cassander 02.01.15 at 8:43 pm


>I Just out of curiosity, what crime victimisation rate, short of open rioting in the streets, do you think justifies a cop pulling a weapon on a group of kids having a snowball fight and telling them not to f*cking move?

Why did the cop show up, did someone report an actual fight? A gun? How many violent incidents have there been in the town, especially compared to Chappaqua? Are we even sure the people in question were black or hispanic? I didn’t see any faces in that video. We know basically nothing at this incident, why leap immediately to Racism! (TM) as the obvious and inarguable cause?


david 02.01.15 at 8:44 pm


M.Jamison 02.01.15 at 9:00 pm

New Yorker has an article on killings by Albuquerque police that’s as terrifying as it is depressing.
Is what we’re seeing with policing another twist of the Dick Cheyney 1% mentality, the idea that even if there is a one percent chance of terrorism that virtually any means are justified in preventing something bad from happening?
Is this a reflection of a society so reactionary where the police power is used to intimidate and control the 90%? Race is an element but there’s more to it than that. I live in a very rural county that is hardly diverse and yet the mentality of the local sheriff’s department seems more like that of an occupying force rather than an element of community.


Philip 02.01.15 at 9:03 pm

Cassander, Corey should have a good idea about the difference in policing in the two towns having grown up there. He gives statistics on race and wealth and either could be a reason for the difference but the only way the cop’s behaviour is justified is if he had some specific information about the actual kids that make his actions reasonable and not general crime statistics relative to other areas.


Eszter 02.01.15 at 9:41 pm

These stories seem to be endless, it’s all very discouraging and heartbreaking. One source of frustration is that I don’t know what we can do about it on the ground in our everyday lives. Ideas?


MPAVictoria 02.01.15 at 9:49 pm

None at all Eszter. :-(


Peter T 02.01.15 at 10:01 pm

Cue Brett to turn up with a bucket-load of information proving (to him) that the kids were Black Panthers in training, and then Andrew F saying, yes, all very unfortunate but proper process was followed so no need for indignation….


MPAVictoria 02.01.15 at 10:03 pm

Bang on Peter.


Corey Robin 02.01.15 at 10:19 pm

chairman: “New Rochelle still has an awfully high median income.”

The town is actually quite divided. One part of it, the north side, is very wealthy and white (like Chappaqua), one part is very poor and black. Very segregated, almost two towns in one. That explains the high median income.


ZM 02.01.15 at 10:36 pm


Bryan Stevenson who wrote a book about his work Just Mercy is visiting Australia this month I think , he founded the Equal Justice Initiative which would take donations I think. It says on the website that the U.S. prison population in the 1970s was around 300,000 and is now 2,300,000 – that is a really scary increase. There was an article in the Guardian about his work with a black youth who at 13 was sentenced to life improsonment and put in solitary confinement at an adult gaol for a non-homicide conviction http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/feb/01/just-mercy-extract-bryan-stevenson-ian-manuel?CMP=share_btn_tw

“The Equal Justice Initiative is a private, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that provides legal representation to indigent defendants and prisoners who have been denied fair and just treatment in the legal system.

We litigate on behalf of condemned prisoners, juvenile offenders, people wrongly convicted or charged with violent crimes, poor people denied effective representation, and others whose trials are marked by racial bias or prosecutorial misconduct. EJI works with communities that have been marginalized by poverty and discouraged by unequal treatment.

EJI also prepares reports, newsletters, and manuals to assist advocates and policymakers in the critically important work of reforming the administration of criminal justice”


Main Street Muse 02.01.15 at 10:54 pm

Dick Van Dyke lived in New Rochelle with Mary Tyler Moore (in the TV show…)


gianni 02.01.15 at 11:25 pm

” Pigs hate the darkies” ; ” Racism! (TM) ”

This really is quite obnoxious. Please stop. If you want to push back against the OP’s suggestion that these events were motivated by racial factors, feel free to do so, just try better to use positive arguments. The whole ‘just raising questions’ routine, followed by your pithy mockery, contributes nothing to the discussion, other than signalling that you are a crank.


Corey Robin 02.01.15 at 11:29 pm

Gianni’s right. Any further comments in that vein, Cassander, will be deleted. Argue substance, and don’t use the ventriloquizing of your opponents’ claims as an opportunity for racist language.


Andrew F. 02.02.15 at 12:57 am

The New Rochelle Police Department says that they sent several patrol cars in response to a 911 call concerning a firearm. One of the group fled on foot, pursued by the officers responding, while the others were held by the officer you see in the video.

In the video, no snowball fight is shown. Instead you see one cop holding several individuals at gunpoint, and you see two police vehicles in the background.

The New Rochelle Police Department says that they will release a transcript of the 911 call.

Unless you think two separate patrol vehicles pulled up from separate directions and blocked streets, as displayed in the video, for a snowball fight, and that the New Rochelle Police Department would be foolish enough to create as a cover-up a fairly detailed and easily falsified narrative about events involving lots of different people with the need to fabricate additional evidence, I’d say the voice-over at the very best presents an incomplete account of events. If you listen carefully, the voice-over actually sounds deceptive and lacks conviction.

My only objection to the OP is that as written it gives the impression (as one is reading it) that the video captures the snowball fight and a cop arriving (notwithstanding the last paragraph), and that these matters are facts, when in fact the video shows neither of these matters.

It’s possible that the group was having a snowball fight, and that a 911 call was received, and that one of the group tucked something into his waistband and fled when the police arrived, and that the narrator truly believed that the group was just having a snowball fight. But the presentation in the video seems deliberately inflammatory. Even if based on an honest set of beliefs of events, it was reckless to create and post this without including qualifications about what the narrator actually knows and doesn’t know.


Corey Robin 02.02.15 at 1:26 am

Andrew F.: “My only objection to the OP is that as written it gives the impression (as one is reading it) that the video captures the snowball fight and a cop arriving (notwithstanding the last paragraph), and that these matters are facts, when in fact the video shows neither of these matters.”

I quite deliberately did not make any mention of the video in my OP until I got to the point, in the narrative, where the video shows precisely what I report that it shows: “the cop drew his gun, shouting, ‘Don’t fucking move, guys.’ He proceeded to frisk one of them, while keeping his gun on him, and then another.” I did that for the simple reason that I did not at all want to convey that the video showed a snowball fight was going on. instead, like multiple news sources throughout the past day, I linked to the source that claimed there had been a snowball fight going on.

And I also quite deliberately report in the very last paragraph (i.e., I didn’t tuck it away somewhere that people wouldn’t notice) what some folks were claiming — according to the links — re the cops responding to a call about someone with a gun.

So your “only objection of the OP” has zero standing.

I just found the Daily News report on the incident, which came out after I posted this, and it reports that the cops are claiming they responded to a 911 call about a teenager, in a group of teenagers, pointing a gun at someone else. They say, as Andrew says, that they have a transcript confirming the call. The video, they claim, begins just after the cops arrived and the kid with the gun took off. They also say there was no snowball fight going on prior to their arrival. I have no idea how they know that or what the basis of that claim is.


Had I had access to this report before I posted my post, I would have included it. I will now include it as an update.


RJL 02.02.15 at 1:46 am

While we’re not talking about the Superbowl, I thought I would share this little anecdote: George Steiner won his Rhodes scholarship because he could explain offensive patterns.

From his interview with the Paris Review:

“They interviewed you until deep into the night at a country club. It was like the foreign service. They called me in, with the other finalist, who had the gold star on his West Point collar and was a double-varsity man, and they said it’s going to be “one of you two. You have ten minutes to prepare a brief statement to this committee about your views on the Hiss case.” (This was December 1950, between the first trial and the second.) That lovely gentleman went in and more or less came to attention and said, “Excuse me, I’d rather not answer this question as a future commissioned officer since it’s still under legal review.” They called me in, and without any such scruple I developed my long answer: I was passionately convinced that she was the guilty party and that he was exercising his paradoxical right of perjury to shield her. I developed this far beyond any knowledge, but they were absolutely intrigued.

Then they said to me, “Now we want to give it to you, but because of your physical handicap, there are no sports. Does any sport interest you?” “Apart from chess,” I said, “American football fascinates me.” They gave me a piece of chalk — this is all true — and asked if I could show them the difference between a split-T, a T, and a single-wing formation. I said, “That’s too easy,” and I immediately began, and they said, “All right, you’ve got the Rhodes.” That’s a totally true story.”


ZM 02.02.15 at 1:54 am

I always wondered how our Prime Minister got his Rhodes scholarship – if this is a usual method it all makes sense :/


Layman 02.02.15 at 2:08 am

It seems to me that part of what’s happened is that law enforcement, as an institution, has arrived at the view that the first priority is to prevent any harm to law enforcement officials. Thus police officers pull their guns before anyone else does, and even trivial offenses are met with brandished weapons, frisking, and arrest. Because police officers must be protected from harm, they meet citizens wearing body armor. Arrests are carried out in military fashion, and the standard for use of deadly force has evolved from self- or bystander- defence, to whether or not the officer felt fear of potential harm. This can’t help but end with cops shooting citizens, because the standard of what passes for proper behavior is so skewed in that direction.


Gareth Wilson 02.02.15 at 3:53 am

Since we’re comparing last Wednesday and your childhood, how old are you?


Peter T 02.02.15 at 3:58 am

And Andrew F shows up, as predicted, saying what was predicted. Last name Baggins, maybe?


cheryl 02.02.15 at 4:10 am

Honestly if what people are saying (or suggesting) about that video is true, then… I am just so appalled. The very idea that a cop would unholster his weapon and point it at a group of boys innocently playing with snowballs… just… no words. So depressing I actually couldn’t watch. My heart is with the families of these boys.

Anyway, found this at Digby and I agree: “The swearing at suspects has got to stop, by the way. I’m not a member of the language police and I’m anything but offended by it in friendly personal talk, but I think it’s unprofessional and raises the volume of these incidents. Cops are being filmed now and they should know that they aren’t just saying this stuff to the alleged criminal snowball throwers. They’re saying it to the general public and it makes them look like thuggish amateurs. If they want respect from the public they need to sound like respectful adults who are in control. ”

Yep. It’s difficult for me to believe that an officer is in control of himself if he can’t control his language. Do these cops imagine themselves to be in a television show, is that part of the problem?


Palindrome 02.02.15 at 5:14 am

@RJL #25: Thanks for that anecdote, though I wish you had also provided the link to the article. One thing about it confuses me: who is the “she” to whom Steiner is referring here? Elizabeth Bentley? Hede Massing? Is it possible he is confusing the Hiss trial with the Rosenberg trial? I’m thinking it’s the last one, since otherwise this story makes little sense …


Watson Ladd 02.02.15 at 6:12 am

Layman, look at section 197 of the California Penal Code, which I’ve helpfully linked here the law in question. I’m sure other states are similar.

Sadly, the statute is a mess, but as I read it, a police officer is authorized to use deadly force in the course of making an arrest if such force is necessary. Everyone is authorized to use deadly force in self-defense to prevent a felony, or against an intruder in the house.

It’s true that prosecutors rarely prosecute cops, and there are many scumbag cops. But they aren’t outlaws: the legislature of the State of California (and no doubt New York) has given them the power to kill in order to make arrests. The police are defined by this power.

You also argue that self-defense was more restrictive than subjective fear of harm. Well, it’s not enough to say “I was scared so I shot him”. It is enough to say, in some states, “I was scared because he came up to me on a dark street and grabbed me” even if that fear is ultimately felt, in the light of day in the prosecutors office, to be unfounded.

This is not about a few bad cops, but the powers the police are given.


Peter T 02.02.15 at 6:45 am


I am not a lawyer, but my lawyer friends tell me that all the words are important when it comes to the law.

“When necessarily committed in attempting, by lawful ways and means, to apprehend any person for any felony committed”.

“Necessarily” includes breaking up a snowball fight?


Mike Schilling 02.02.15 at 7:25 am

@30 Priscilla Hiss?


magistra 02.02.15 at 7:45 am

On the 1% mentality, the Police Federation (effectively the British trade union for police officers) is now calling for all officers to be given tasers because of a supposed threat to them by terrorists. What’s the betting if this happens that an increasing number of non-terrorists will be tasered and some of them die as a result?


Meredith 02.02.15 at 7:56 am

In the spirit of RJL (though I certainly did watch, rapt — go Pats yes!). I remember the policeman at the door when my brother had been throwing chestnuts at some cars driving by (ah, that lost beautiful tree down the street on a hill overlooking it — I remember that tree so well, that beautiful tree — long gone, though the road, a few hundred years old at least, remains, now a busy NJ street). I was maybe 5 and my brother was 11. I remember the policeman’s menace. (He was probably Irish or Italian.) But all was well. My mother handled it. This around 1955 in another NY/NJ somewhat inland from the harbor towns.

Handling country club types, well, I (WASP myself) brushed up against them regularly without being of them. I have to admire Steiner his fortitude (not to mention his brilliance). Each of us thinks about a lot things, and enjoys them. Or about nothing much at all, when we throw some chestnuts or snowballs. Whence the future.


Sancho 02.02.15 at 8:14 am

This “car-toon”, of the sort the youth enjoy, teaches a relevant lesson.



Theophylact 02.02.15 at 4:43 pm

Couldn’t be the Rosenbergs, as (a) there wasn’t a second trial and (b) if anyone was innocent, it was Ethel Rosenberg rather than Julius.


Andrew F. 02.02.15 at 7:25 pm

Corey, just to be clear (since my comment wasn’t on this point), when I wrote Even if based on an honest set of beliefs of events, it was reckless to create and post this without including qualifications about what the narrator actually knows and doesn’t know, I was referring to the person who created and posted the video, not to your post. The OP wasn’t reckless at all.

My very limited criticism of it is that, as one is reading it for the first time, one transitions from your personal story to the narrative of New Rochelle without any sense that the New Rochelle narrative is in question. One transitions from your story, to “[l]ast Wednesday a group of kids…were having a snowball fight…. A snowball fight with each other.” For someone reading your post for the first time, this is stated as a fact, in the same tone with which you told the story of your childhood.

It was not until I hit the last paragraph that I understood there might be some question as to what actually happened – and by this point I already had the image of an angry, vicious cop arriving to harass and threaten a group of kids having a snowball fight, all captured on video.

The experience of reading it a second time, or no doubt the experience of reading it after having written it, is different, since one knows there’s more to the story and the post even while one is just at the point where the post transitions from your snowball fight as a kid to the contemporary snowball fight.

As I said, it’s a very limited criticism.


Palindrome 02.02.15 at 8:43 pm

@34 Mike Schilling: Oh, I forgot about his wife, and the whole “re-typing” allegation. Now it makes sense. Thanks.


Layman 02.02.15 at 10:33 pm

Watson Ladd @ 32

To be clear, I’m suggesting a shift in the view of policing, from ‘recognition that policing is dangerous and acceptance that some cops will be harmed in the course of protecting citizens’, to ‘determination to making policing harm-free to policeman by endangering citizens instead’.

By way of analogy, the avowed trade-off in the legal process is supposed to be to err on the side of not punishing the innocent. Every system has a failure rate, and failing by allowing criminals to walk is better than failing by incarcerating innocent people. Now, before someone objects that the criminal justice system doesn’t seem to work this way, I’m talking about its stated goal, not whether it achieves that goal. Because jailing the innocent is anti-freedom, the goal must be to avoid jailing the innocent.

I’d argue that the public view of policing was once quite similar. The police exist to ‘serve and protect’ the public, and shooting members of the public is antithetical to that purpose. When the system fails, it should fail at the expense of the cop, not at the expense of an innocent party. The system should err on the side of protecting the innocent, even if that endangers the cop. Thus cops don’t pull guns on citizens absent a genuine threat, e.g. The production of a weapon by the citizen. Cops don’t escalate altercations. Cops don’t shoot fleeing strangers. Cops don’t patrol in body armor. Cops don’t carry assault weapons, or drive tanks. Cops effect arrests by knocking on doors, not executing special operations assaults on the citizens behind the doors, because those citizens are innocent until proven guilty, and attacking them with military tactics makes it quite likely they’ll be killed. Cops don’t shoot children in playgrounds within 5 seconds of arriving on the scene.

Somewhere along the way this changed. Was it the language – War on Drugs, anyone? Popular culture, from Dirty Harry on down? Politics, and the need to be seen as tough on crime? When did we decide that, on balance, it is better that an innocent citizen dies than that a cop does? Remember, they’re all innocent until proven guilty – isn’t that supposed to be the rule?


NomadUK 02.03.15 at 12:50 am

Layman@41: Preach it, brother.


Peter T 02.03.15 at 9:50 am

A quick google tells me that in the US around 10 times more people are shot by police than police are shot by people. Here in Australia, the police are armed but guns are rare among ordinary folk (and handguns very rare). The risk of death from police is a tenth of that in the US in the state with the highest rate of police shootings. If it was people shooting police (or fear of this) driving police tactics, then you would expect the police death toll to be higher.


NomadUK 02.03.15 at 4:40 pm

On the other hand, say what you will about Harry Callahan, but at least he went after the bad guys with only his .44 Magnum*, no flak vest, no pansy taser, and (after the sidekick inevitably gets gunned down) no backup. Protectin’ and servin’.

* I don’t count that elephant gun or the .44 Auto-Mag; they’re just not elegant.


NomadUK 02.03.15 at 4:41 pm

* Or the TOW rocket launcher, for that matter.


J Thomas 02.03.15 at 5:11 pm

#43 Peter T

A quick google tells me that in the US around 10 times more people are shot by police than police are shot by people. Here in Australia, the police are armed but guns are rare among ordinary folk (and handguns very rare). The risk of death from police is a tenth of that in the US in the state with the highest rate of police shootings.

Would you mind repeating that, with clearer syntax? I’m pretty sure I didn’t get your meaning.


J Thomas 02.03.15 at 11:13 pm

USA: police shoot 10 times as many civilians as civilians shoot police.

Australia: Police have guns, civilians mostly don’t.

US state with most police shooting civilians is 10 times as much as Australia?
US state with most civilians shooting police, has 10 times as many police killing civilians as Australia does?


js. 02.03.15 at 11:23 pm

The risk of death from police is a tenth of that in the US in the state with the highest rate of police shootings.

Surely, the above is saying:

In the [Australian] state with the highest rate of police shootings, the risk of death from [being shot by the] police is a tenth of that in the US.


Peter T 02.03.15 at 11:33 pm

J Thomas

Sorry. It was rather confused.

USA: police shoot 10 times as many “civilians” as civilians shoot police (I dislike the term “civilians”. Police are civilians).

Australia: Police are several times more likely to die at the hands of civilians than civilians at the hands of police.

USA vs Australia: Civilians are 10 times more likely to be shot by police in the US than in the Australian state with the worst record for police shootings.

US vs Australia: Civilians are much more likely to be armed in the US than in Australia. This seems to lead to them being shot more, but not to them shooting back more.


J Thomas 02.04.15 at 1:02 am

Thank you, Peter T!

I didn’t much like “civilian” but I couldn’t think of a good word. Sometimes police shoot noncitizens.

Let f be the frequency that non-police shoot police in the USA.
f is also the frequency that police shoot non-police in the killingest Australian state.
10*f is the frequency that police shoot non-police in the USA.
3*f is the frequency that non-police shoot police in Australia.

So if I got this right, police in the USA are 1/3 as likely to get shot, and 10 times as likely to shoot people. Assuming the worst australian state for police shooting isn’t too different from the rest of Australia for the other statistics.


Peter T 02.04.15 at 4:50 am

Police are citizens too.

That’s right. Numbers in the ballpark, not to the second decimal place. The worst Australian state for police shootings changes over time. Currently it’s NSW. Victoria Police were notoriously trigger-happy a few years back, but they never came near the US record.


mittelwerk 02.04.15 at 6:22 pm

” … and then we went inside, to warm up by the fire. my mother had prepared matzoh brei, from scratch; and there was swiss miss hot chocolate. mario and i began to talk about the moral necessity of israel’s non-existence. he vowed that, when he grew up, he was going to go stand in front of bulldozers in the golan heights.”


Ogden Wernstrom 02.04.15 at 9:18 pm

“…an increasing number of non-terrorists will be tasered and some of them die as a result?”

That can’t happen in the U.S., because the attorneys for taser make certain that the cause of death is some medical condition which already existed in the recently-deceased.


Will Boisvert 02.05.15 at 12:24 am

When I was a kid in Detroit we used to throw snowballs at cars and the cops never came. They had their hands full. Nowadays the cops in Detroit sure won’t show up for a snowball fight, or for a kid just holding a gun. They might, emphasis on might, show up if the kid opened fire.

Comments on this entry are closed.