zlacker

Ok, your correction is - one guy is doing it, not a bunch. I agree with your correction.

Other than that, the point remains.

They "arrest" the driver, because he is not following the police instructions to get out of the car, and is actively resisting the police. We don't know if he was actually arrested or just detained. I got handcuffed once and then let go, it wasn't an arrest.

>>buffer+(OP)
Can you explain to me why the driver needed to be arrested, and why it was considered 'resisting arrest'? Try again, because you seem to still be spinning the story in a way as to try to favor the police. Even though I can agree the person running shouldn't have jumped into cars, why do you think the person driving deserve to be beaten too? If that was you in that situation, do you think you would deserve to be beaten up and arrested too?

And try not putting 'arrest' in fear quotes, because they literally yanked him out of his car, threw him against his vehicle and arrested him.

>>fzeror+7
We don't know if he was arrested. And if he was, and he did nothing wrong, he gets to sue the state for a nice payout.

I would not sit in the car if the police ordered me out. So I wouldn't get beaten. I don't mess with the police.

> And try not putting 'arrest' in fear quotes, because they literally yanked him out of his car, threw him against his vehicle and arrested him.

As I told you. I got handcuffed and put in the back of a police car once. But it wasn't an arrest. They let me go. As a lawyer explained to me later, an arrest is a specific procedure, not just the fact of getting detained/handcuffed.