Failure to Use Turn Signal Leads To….

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Video shows a Texas trooper trying to pull Bland out of her car after she refused to put out her cigarette

  • Some debate whether she should have been arrested
  • Bland died three days later in a Texas jail; authorities said she committed suicide, but her family doubts
  • Anger over Sandra Bland’s death in a Texas jailhas boiled over after newly released video showed what happened at the traffic stop that led to her arrest.

    Now, many question whether she should have been arrested at all. The video released also appears to have been edited.

    Share Button


    1. It surprises me that these incidents occur so often and the debate usually dies very quickly or the main topic in mainstream media gyrates to race and brutality.

      If people see it as fellow American being violated, it might lead to unity in fighting back.

    2. Ms. Bland was a vocal critic of police brutality. Given the petty, vindictive sociopathy endemic to modern “heroes”, it may be that she was targeted intentionally.

      Mith, at least from this video, I fail to see how Ms. Bland contributed to the escalation. While the officer had the right to ask that she put out her cigarette, he did not possess any legitimate authority to compel her to do so. If the tender, overly sensitive nostrils of this “hero” were so offended by the cigarette smoke, then he could have simply made a comment about the importance of signal use, then let her go. Instead, the officer demands, again without legitimate authority, that she “get out of the car”. When she correctly refuses, he trespasses against her property and then assaults her.

      While it may have been prudent for her to comply, it is not clear that things would have turned out differently for her. After all this cop, as is common, was clearly looking for a fight. Finally, sociopathic thugs are not pacified by immediate submission; they are emboldened by it.


      • Hi Jeremy,


        Trivial “violation” – one apparently (according to news reports) set up by the cop. He ran up behind her, she moved into another lane to get out of the way… but failed to signal.

        Big whoop.

        The cop was a dick for pulling her over in the first place, but I suspect he was itching to do so, looking for an excuse.

        Then, he treats her like a piece of garbage – like a massa ordering his slave about. Demands she put out her cigarette, which she was smoking in her private car. Not only isn’t that illegal, she had every moral right to keep on smoking.

        Not surprisingly, she took umbrage – and made the mistake of talking back.

        This was what the Hero was looking for. His excuse to escalate.

        These incidents would not be possible if the NAP were the universal law. Not only that, this woman would have had the legal right to defend herself against this assault.

        • Hi Eric,

          Thanks for the response. What happened to Ms. Bland is tragic, and my sympathies lie 100% on her side. The problem is that most Americans still fail what William Grigg calls the “Tom Joad” test. Namely, when witnessing or hearing about an instance of police brutality does one instinctively side with “authority”, or with the victim. I admire Ms. Bland for asserting her rights. I recoil at suggestions that if she had “just followed orders” she would be OK. This claim is false. Numerous videos attest to the fact that “following orders” is not a guarantee of safety nor, in many cases, is it even possible.

          Reflexive submission is what “authority” wants. Until the average American sides with the victim and refuses to engage in “blame the victim” rationalizations for the crimes committed by the government class, no positive change will happen. The government class and its’ enforcers are cowards. They must inculcate a perverse understanding of reality to maintain their power. It is the duty of decent people to resist this indoctrination.


          • From the point of the government employee it’s “look at what you made me do”. The victim didn’t do what he was supposed to so the government employee had to do it. I picked it up from an article on how the nazis could get ordinary people to do horrible things. Blaming the victim for not following these rituals of what we are supposed to do interacting with cops is just the beginning of it.

            • Funny thing is, that, “Look what you made me do!” is a “tell” of an abusive relationship.
              It’s what the abuser does, to justify their actions: “I have no control, YOU pushed me into this.”

              I am really getting to the limits, here…. They violate Peele’s Principles; they violate our rights, as specified in the Constitution; they violate the Declaration o Independence’s words, too – the founding document of the US, and part of law. They break THEIR OWN laws, frequently – and complain when they’re called on the carpet for it!

              If the cop, tasked with enforcing the law (we’ll even leave it at that!), doesn’t need to KNOW the law, nor does he need to OBEY the law – who the FUCK is he to enforce the law?
              He’s a criminal, BY DEFINITION, and Criminals are anathema to a civil society – and should be shot, basically. No criminal, no problem.

              And we could certainly refine the point a great deal, but the point stands “as is.” They are attacking us; we – because of “color of law” and “backed by the state” – are justified in pre-emptive “defence” against the costumed gang. No different from the Bloods or Crips putting a hit out on you, except the “PoLeese” have a different set of colors and a different backer – but the same backer, too, “Violence”, just from “the State” instead of “the Gang.”
              So, if you could use a radar jammer, say, or an EMP…? Or maybe even more!
              Fine by me.

              The “honest” ones will disassociate themselves quickly. The vile ones will probably fight it out.
              And those that turn in corrupt or violent cops?
              Aren’t cops any more.
              Or prosecutors, or judges, for that matter. (Meme’s been going around Facebook, it lists cops who turned in the “bad” cops, or prosecutors who prosecuted the cases. NOT ONE is still employed in that capacity. In fact, they’re all in some other field, and often in a different location, just for safety.)

              Every organism has an immune system to protect said system. When that system goes haywire – e.g., lymphoma – the body fails.
              We aren’t a single organism; we can devise backups.

              It is, in fact, our RESPONSIBILITY to do so, per Jefferson.
              We just can’t get enough of the Feebs to wake up and smell the manure that is our society…

              • Of course it’s an abusive relationship but the problem, so long as such an overwhelming percentage of the people want it this way, will continue. It ends when this authority cult is overthrown in people’s minds.

        • So true.

          There is of course an underlying reason for these abuses, one that has to do with fundamental principles.

          The reason is that the entire system is predicated upon a grotesque logical and moral fallacy, known as the “Myth of Authority”.

          No good can ever come from a system that presumes that some people have the right to initiate brute force coercion against others “in order to establish an orderly society”.

          An orderly society is absolutely essential. But any system that that presumes that some people have the right to initiate brute force coercion against others, can only result in an utterly chaotic society, the very kind of society we have now, where everyone is at everyone else’s throats., and where “law enforcement” is presume to have the right to murder us at its discretion.

          • bevin, so true. I can’t help but wonder how the public can NOT, at some point, admonish a politician when one utters that ubiquitous line about a safe and orderly society. I’m here to say, as they often spout, I will make it my personal priority to “get tough on crime”. No shit? I guess you’re gonna turn yourself in since you’re the incumbent.

            “Hey pappy, maybe we should get us some of that Reform”.

    3. When the man says jump, one must respond “How high!” and give no lip. [
      Stupid waste of life over such a minor thing. Neither was willing to deescalate the situation, which quickly became a much bigger issue than it should have been.
      Unfortunately for the lady, the LEO had the full weight of the state behind him.

      • Hi Mith,

        From what I know about the situation, the stop was contrived and then the cop escalated by demanding that the woman (already angry about being hassled) stop smoking in her own car. Knowing (he had to) this would annoy her further and likely provoke just the response he needed to squeal “resisting” and proceed to bushwhack her.

        • Eric,

          This stop definitely appears contrived from my viewing as well.

          Although it may not be the most honorable thing, when I am pulled over an important goal is to leave the highwayman as soon as safely feasible. There is a very small chance of not receiving any paying paper once I a pulled over by a highwayman.

          Most likely extended discussion with mr 82 airborne can only make things worse for me. I need to leave ASA safely possible. If feasible, fight the ticket in court.

          Regardless of how right the lady may have been, she was cuffed and stuffed for her trouble.


          I took another look at the video. I am more inclined to agree with you regarding the escalation of this stop. The phero was definitely appeared ready for a confrontation. Even though she was under no obligation to put out the cigarette, it did give the phero a flimsy pretext to demand her out of the car.

          You are correct that there is no guarantee that events would have been better if she did comply with each whim of the phero.


    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here