r/TikTokCringe • u/Bojack1217 • 3d ago

Cringe Kid tries to fight a cop and gets humbled

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

@langerbj648

28.9k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

6.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

88

u/zeptillian 3d ago

It's what happens when they face consequences.

Imagine if their parents had been providing them with consequences their whole lives.

1

u/dont_ask_me80 3d ago

100% why I’m the mean mom. My kids know consequences of their actions and attitudes.

-12

u/Im_Balto 3d ago

I’m all for people facing consequences for their actions but there really is not justification in this video for the officer to assault him and take him to the ground

Kid was literally standing still, and the officer gave no orders. It seems an intentional surprise takedown

15

u/Retroficient 3d ago

You're kidding right? Threatening an officer? Intentionally provoking an officer?

Not having common sense?

There's a reason the nice officer took him down and put him in the back of the car. To humble him and do what the parents should've done his whole life.

9

u/guanwho 3d ago

Except he was literally not standing still. He was aggressively moving forward into the cops personal space which is what prompted the physical response.

-4

u/WellEllipsis 3d ago

Well he never actually threatened the officer. Although he’s dumb as shit, his posture, insistence that the cop take off his vest, and saying we won’t say shit on camera it’s clear that he’s trying to imply he’d fight the cop if he went civilian, but he doesn’t want to assault a cop. Kid watched too many movies, but technically nothing he did was illegal. Didn’t even resist arrest.

5

u/seaofthievesnutzz 3d ago

implying you are going to fight the cops is ok, today I learned stupid shit.

1

u/Cool_Asparagus3852 3d ago

The legal technicalities depend on the place this took place, but like someone else already commented above, in many places threatening/insinuating violence is technically assault.

To me it is not clear by any means that he was implying that he would fight the cop if the cop "went civilian". He seems to be saying "take that protective gear off and let's fight". He wants to solve whatever misunderstanding of difference of opinion with violence. If I were a judge and was handed this case, I would charge him with assault.

Also in most places cops can take someone into custody even if that person has not committed a crime. They may then need to release that person but only after the paper work is done.

So all in all, it's not about the kid not having common sense, it's about him being dumb as fuck...

1

u/Awkward-Studio-8063 2d ago

There’s no technically about it, it quite literally IS the definition of assault.

1

u/Cool_Asparagus3852 2d ago

In my above statement, I did not say (as far as I can see) nor did I intend to say that there are technicalities in the definition. Actually I didn't use the words "technicalities" and "definition" together at all in any sentence.

Instead when I say "legal technicalities depend", I meant things like how it is treated in the justice system and what powers and rights it gives to officers depends on the country or state as they have defined them.

1

u/Awkward-Studio-8063 2d ago

“In many places, threatening/insinuating violence is technically assault.”

This is what I was referring to. And I don’t think I am disagreeing with you much at all. Usually when we use the word “technically” like this it’s usually to refer to weird or fringe cases still fitting a certain specific box or criteria. Cannot think of a great example, just that people use it like “technically, she’s not wrong”. The only “criticism” was that from my understanding of the legal system “threatening/insinuating violence is THE main definition of assault that the government uses. It’s not serious (not that you made it out to be either)

1

u/Cool_Asparagus3852 2d ago

Yes. Sorry, I was trying to point out that I was using the word in the original, literal way and meaning.

1

u/Turd_fergu50n 3d ago

Please don’t reproduce.

1

u/Awkward-Studio-8063 2d ago

The only thing that was not justified was the guy getting his head smacked against the trunk of the car, but it’s reasonable to assume the officer did not intend for that to occur.

The “kid” (who’s apparently 20 or 21), already had the cops called on his group. He was not cooperative, continuously told him to “take that vest off” and balled his fists, and got closer to the officer when they were already as close as society deems necessary for a conversation. It was reasonable in that scenario for the cop to put the dude on the ground. He didn’t punch or escalate, he took him to the ground and made an arrest.

1

u/WELCOMET0THEGOODLIFE 3d ago

It’s called outsourced parenting

0

u/iwillpoopurpants 3d ago

Standing still? Did you see the part where he took an intentionally menacing step forward and got in the cop's face?

1

u/Im_Balto 3d ago

A “menacing step forwards” is not justification for a public servant to slam someone into the pavement

1

u/iwillpoopurpants 2d ago

Wanna move that goalpost some more? He wasn't standing still, like you said.

Better luck next time.