When starting a thread, I almost never open up with an opinion because I don't like having any impact on how the discussion plays out... but if this video is as it appears to be, it's cold blooded attempted murder.
Maybe something threatening was said. I'm open. I want more details. But this video looks like bad, bad news.
Fast forward to 1 minute mark. - (
New Window )
hard to tell because the distance delays the sound of when the gunshot was actually fired, but I do see the suspect bend and reach before the officer shoots...
Definitely doesn't look good, but there is supposedly another video that is much closer. I'm sure we'll see that eventually and if they shot him for no reason, I have no doubt in my mind they will be charged.
-There were two cops who fired basically simultaneously.
-Earlier in the video, before the guy raises his hands, the cops had clear shots at the guy, and you could even see them backpeddle as the guy advances on them. But they held their fire.
The sheriff's office is saying the guy was armed (not sure with what), and that they had tried Tasering him earlier, without success.
This. He had beaten up a woman and a baby and was brandishing a knife from the story I read. He approached the cops several times with the knife and then backed off.
I hate social media getting involved in this shit. A bunch of internet crimesolvers on the case. It's going to be our undoing as a society.
Quote:
...and he brutally had bloodied and harmed two people inside an apartment. The cops were answering a domestic violence call and those are the worse kind. Ask any cop...most cops are killed in domestic calls than any other type.
This. He had beaten up a woman and a baby and was brandishing a knife from the story I read. He approached the cops several times with the knife and then backed off.
I hate social media getting involved in this shit. A bunch of internet crimesolvers on the case. It's going to be our undoing as a society.
I agree completely. This is such a gotcha! society.
Now, for the most part, they just bitch and whine about it.
Want to make a difference? Go sign up for the Police Force. Make a difference.
So Baltimore and Chicago's murder rate was low under George Bush's administration.
If the only cameras are in the hands of third parties, cops will have no control over the content that goes viral.
WideRight, I agree for the need for body cams, but at the same time, states shouldn't be allowed to control the images and shield them from public view, like many are doing it trying to do. It must be put into law that those images are part of the public record and should be accessible on request, the same as police incident reports.
Speaking at the annual Congressional Black Caucus Foundation dinner in Washington on Saturday night, Mr. Obama said the death of Michael Brown “awakened our nation” to a reality that black citizens already understood.
“In too many communities around the country, a gulf of mistrust exists between local residents and law enforcement,” Mr. Obama said. “Too many young men of color feel targeted by law enforcement — guilty of walking while black or driving while black, judged by stereotypes that fuel fear and resentment and hopelessness.”
and he even had Brown's parents as guests at the White House and really made them mini-celebrities for a while.
Now, I might be slightly off in the facts, but hasn't it been proven that Brown had a lengthy criminal history and in this specific case was quite possibly the aggressor with the officer and the shooting was justified? I believe the attorney general even conducted an investigation into civil rights violations.
In either case 8 police officers in 9 days have been murdered and the President doesn't offer one word of support.
I think that's sort of what people refer to.
Here is an excerpt from am article summing up the sentiment:
Noting that President Obama and other administration officials have quickly spoken out after shootings involving black civilians, Ronald T. Hosko, president of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, said officers are yearning to hear similar support when officers are targeted.
“Where are their voices today? Who is going to be the adult in the room to pull these groups together?” Mr. Hosko said. “Somebody needs to do it. I don’t see and hear from the president when a cop gets shot and killed.”
"The State Law Enforcement Division is investigating the shooting but has not released any information, including video of the incident from the officer’s dashboard camera, despite requests from The Greenville News under the state Freedom of Information Act."
So it's been almost one month later and no indicative reports from this investigation? Just how exhaustive an investigation is this, and at nearly a month ongoing I'd have to question the competency of those leading this investigation if a very good grasp of the situation hasn't been determined as of yet.
So, while we hear cries of "waiting for the facts to come out" it begs us to question if/when/how the facts do come out.
I thought people stopped quoting published unemployment rate numbers years ago. There are people smarter than me who can explain this to you, but the unemployment rate published by the government (under any administration) is not a true measure of unemployment for a variety of reasons. E-P ratio (employment-population ratio) is far more meaningful and indicative of the health of the workforce. Maybe kicker can explain it to you if google doesn't.
I will say that video from ordinary citizens has helped dispute/correct police accounts of arrests and/or use of deadly force in some instances. The more videos the merrier. Sorta like instant replay angles.
And Charming is just that, isn't he/she. Internet anonymity, blessing and curse.
The real world number aren't that good, but carry on with your anecdotes...
You are correct, my apologies, 4 murders in 9 days.
Do you really think any president has any effect whatsoever on gas prices? Really? You should do some research as to why the prices are so low.
Quote:
...and he brutally had bloodied and harmed two people inside an apartment. The cops were answering a domestic violence call and those are the worse kind. Ask any cop...most cops are killed in domestic calls than any other type.
This. He had beaten up a woman and a baby and was brandishing a knife from the story I read. He approached the cops several times with the knife and then backed off.
I hate social media getting involved in this shit. A bunch of internet crimesolvers on the case. It's going to be our undoing as a society.
None of this is enough to justify them shooting him while he's standing with his hands up-especially if the knife wasn't in his hands at the time. Last I knew, even attempted murder of his wife and child does not carry the death sentence in any state- and the police aren't judge and jury.
That said- the video is from too far away to say anything conclusive, but it doesn't look good.
Not sure how this devolved into an Obama argument. But this last post is your own visual assessment of a much more sophisticated analysis. But going by your assessment I can counter that with my own. There has been an absolute explosion of panhandlers in the DMV area since 2009. There are, what look to be, recently former middle class people/families (white, black and hispanic) standing on the corners in affluent areas with signs asking for money. Go to the corner of Glebe Road and Lee Hwy and you will see them. Corner of Sycamore and Lee Hwy and you will see them. This is something I have never seen in my 35 years on this planet. I'm not talking about seeing people panhandling, I'm referring to the fact that these people clearly had money not too long ago. And this is due to what I can only assume is a down economy.
Either way, neither of our visual accounts proves anything. And furthermore, presidents have little to no affect on the economy directly. At least in the short term.
the only thing people are holding accountable Obama for (that I've read - and I haven't read every post) is the seeming bias in his support for black victims of law enforcement vs law enforcement as victims.
Racism is a real problem highlighted no better than the high publicity events from Michael Brown to the present day and the people in law enforcement seem to be looking for a strong statement from him in support of the good cops like he came out in support of the good citizens that become victims.
I see no blame being assigned there per se but I believe the message if delivered from the President would help and i believe he's actually said some minor things denouncing the violence against law enforcement, but I'd like to see him come out stronger against it.
As others have said, maybe an all lives matter movement wouldn't seem so divisive.
Ben Carson calls Obama the divider in chief, and I'm not sure I agree, but on this issue he could help shed that label.
Apparently.
"The State Law Enforcement Division is investigating the shooting but has not released any information, including video of the incident from the officer’s dashboard camera, despite requests from The Greenville News under the state Freedom of Information Act."
So it's been almost one month later and no indicative reports from this investigation? Just how exhaustive an investigation is this, and at nearly a month ongoing I'd have to question the competency of those leading this investigation if a very good grasp of the situation hasn't been determined as of yet.
So, while we hear cries of "waiting for the facts to come out" it begs us to question if/when/how the facts do come out.
A month is nothing for an investigation, especially if they had any type of evidence sent to the lab.
Very true. New cars are looking nicer and nicer. I see so many chevy impalas, buick regals, ford taurus, ford explorers, jeep grand cherokees, durangos.I just don't want a car payment.Anyway,I don't remember republicans during the bush administration saying that's really not the unemployment rate. Did they just start a new equation under the Obama Administration when coming up with the unemployment rate. My co worker said Obama is spending like crazy. "He increased the debt by more than all the president's combined". I asked him what's the cost of Obama's policies in referenced to the debt.He never answered me. He said," Obama should of left the soldiers in iraq so we wouldn't have isis". I Smh and went on BBI.
I thought that was the mantra for Black Lives Matter.
Yet you're willing to credit the president for other peoples good fortunes in life out of the other side of your mouth.
I do agree with your post here, just wanted to point out the double standard.
Headhunter : 9:11 am : link : reply
more responsible for the sins of the Black community. I'm always reminded of the Chris Rock line "Black Muggers don't give a hometown discount to Black victims"
Where's Obama being held responsible for the sins of the black community?
He's being called on the carpet for coming out against shootings of Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin, but has no commentary on the police shootings.
Furthermore, while he made it a point to give a eulogy in Charleston, I don't think the racially motivated shootings of the TV crew will get his time and energy.
In fact, we heard what a racist piece of shit the Charleston shooter was but so far, all we're hearing about the TV crew shooter is that he was batshit crazy.
"The State Law Enforcement Division is investigating the shooting but has not released any information, including video of the incident from the officer’s dashboard camera, despite requests from The Greenville News under the state Freedom of Information Act."
So it's been almost one month later and no indicative reports from this investigation? Just how exhaustive an investigation is this, and at nearly a month ongoing I'd have to question the competency of those leading this investigation if a very good grasp of the situation hasn't been determined as of yet.
So, while we hear cries of "waiting for the facts to come out" it begs us to question if/when/how the facts do come out.
Yeah. I forgot about that. I was also thinking about Tamir Rice. Is the cop who murdered him within 2 seconds still free. It's been almost a year.
Gushing over the amazing malls filled with people, new cars on the road and whatever else you said in your previous post. What was the point of that post if it wasn't you crediting the president? Just giving everyone an update of where you live?
Don't forget Fox news Also blamed the President when the stock market Lost over 400 points.
Quote:
for anything? I question why every thing bad is Obama's fault
Gushing over the amazing malls filled with people, new cars on the road and whatever else you said in your previous post. What was the point of that post if it wasn't you crediting the president? Just giving everyone an update of where you live?
Just headhunter being headhunter
Nothing better than some early morning "crazy" with your coffee....good lord.
Quote:
In comment 12448414 Headhunter said:
Quote:
for anything? I question why every thing bad is Obama's fault
Gushing over the amazing malls filled with people, new cars on the road and whatever else you said in your previous post. What was the point of that post if it wasn't you crediting the president? Just giving everyone an update of where you live?
Just headhunter being headhunter
Very true.
Guess what? Every President for the last umpteenth number of years has sucked, especially if you identify yourself on either side of the aisle. So why bother discussing it (especially on a thread not dedicated towards it)?
Quote:
I saw an article about the recent cop deaths. 1 was a heart attack and 3 were vehicle crashes (non-chase).
You are correct, my apologies, 4 murders in 9 days.
And I didnt mean to demean the deaths of these officers. Just correcting a fact.
But while Im at it, you're also wrong (as are others) when you say these cops were murdered and "the President doesn't offer one word of support." That's just false made up criticism, and it happens to Obama all the time.
“On behalf of the American people, I offered Mrs. Goforth my condolences and told her that Michelle and I would keep her and her family in our prayers,” Obama said in a statement released this evening.
Obama said that he promised Goforth’s widow that he would continue to praise bravery of police officers who served their communities.
“Targeting police officers is completely unacceptable — an affront to civilized society,” Obama said....
“As I said in my State of the Union Address, we’ve got to be able to put ourselves in the shoes of the wife who won’t rest until the police officer she married walks through the door at the end of his shift,” he said. “That comfort has been taken from Mrs. Goforth. So we must offer her our comfort – and continue to stand up for the safety of police officers wherever they serve.”
Im somewhat at a loss as to why you'd post this president bashing nonsense.
Link - ( New Window )
Quote:
It looks bad obviously. If there was more to it, cams on the cops would show it. If it really was as bad as it looks, putting cams on those guys would have made them less likely to do that. Could have saved a life under that scenario.
WideRight, I agree for the need for body cams, but at the same time, states shouldn't be allowed to control the images and shield them from public view, like many are doing it trying to do. It must be put into law that those images are part of the public record and should be accessible on request, the same as police incident reports.
whew. That's a relief.
Quote:
In comment 12448357 Deej said:
Quote:
I saw an article about the recent cop deaths. 1 was a heart attack and 3 were vehicle crashes (non-chase).
You are correct, my apologies, 4 murders in 9 days.
And I didnt mean to demean the deaths of these officers. Just correcting a fact.
But while Im at it, you're also wrong (as are others) when you say these cops were murdered and "the President doesn't offer one word of support." That's just false made up criticism, and it happens to Obama all the time.
Quote:
On his way to Alaska this afternoon, President Obama called Kathleen Goforth, the widow of the slain Texas Deputy Sheriff Darren Goforth who was shot and killed at a gas station while he was fueling a police cruiser.
“On behalf of the American people, I offered Mrs. Goforth my condolences and told her that Michelle and I would keep her and her family in our prayers,” Obama said in a statement released this evening.
Obama said that he promised Goforth’s widow that he would continue to praise bravery of police officers who served their communities.
“Targeting police officers is completely unacceptable — an affront to civilized society,” Obama said....
“As I said in my State of the Union Address, we’ve got to be able to put ourselves in the shoes of the wife who won’t rest until the police officer she married walks through the door at the end of his shift,” he said. “That comfort has been taken from Mrs. Goforth. So we must offer her our comfort – and continue to stand up for the safety of police officers wherever they serve.”
Im somewhat at a loss as to why you'd post this president bashing nonsense. Link - ( New Window )
yeah, I shouldn't have said no support, it's just not close to his support for Brown who was a criminal and in the wrong, he crusaded against on the topic for days.
from my later post:
This is a dog-bites-man issue to me. You all are getting upset that he commented more in a man-bites-dog situation and doesnt give equal air time to dog-bites-man stories. He doesnt go on again and again and again in a murdered cop case because there isnt much to say. PEOPLE SHOULDNT MURDER COPS. That's fucking obvious. Police shootings that some believe are unjustified is a much more necessary topic to address.
As for Brown, what in particular did Obama say that is so upsetting?
I understand it was all I said. It's not a mystery to me based on perception.
The people in law enforcement (in the quote at least) believe the president crusading against law enforcement violence against black citizens spawned the black lives matter movement or at least contributed to the creation. and that movement has spawned some extreme violence against law enforcement.
Stronger sentiment from the President would appease them.
if you're saying Trayvon Martin (which wasn't even LE related), Michael Brown, Walter Scott (the police officer was indicted on murder charges there), and others where Obama commented strongly are somehow different.
In your example why should the President have to say police shouldn't murder unarmed citizens any more than he says citizens shouldn't murder police, yet on one of them he chose to speak out.
Obviously that is what I was saying, if you don't agree or couldn't figure that out, no wonder why you're so continually confused.
that's fair, I didn't mean the noun where Christians tried to reclaim the holy land in the 12th century.
I meant this:
verb: crusade; 3rd person present: crusades; past tense: crusaded; past participle: crusaded; gerund or present participle: crusading
1. lead or take part in an energetic and organized campaign concerning a social, political, or religious issue.
In your example why should the President have to say police shouldn't murder unarmed citizens any more than he says citizens shouldn't murder police, yet on one of them he chose to speak out.
Did Obama say police shouldnt murder unarmed citizens? Show me that quote.
I haven no idea what point you're making. I think you took a swing at the president for not speaking out, you were wrong, and now you're just flailing. Bitching about how much he talks about X vs. Y with no specifics.
Quote:
I saw an article about the recent cop deaths. 1 was a heart attack and 3 were vehicle crashes (non-chase).
You are correct, my apologies, 4 murders in 9 days.
Actually, the potential murder in Abilene might make it 5 in 9 days. I know nobody posting here is denigrating the victims but 202 murdered police on an annualized basis is cause for concern.
I haven no idea what point you're making. I think you took a swing at the president for not speaking out, you were wrong, and now you're just flailing. Bitching about how much he talks about X vs. Y with no specifics.
Don't you have better things to do than analyze every word of my posts?
I began by posting a quote to explain how/why people blame Obama for the violence recent spate of violence against police.
And then I posted my sentiment that he has not come out as strongly against the violence against police as he did the violence against Michael Brown (for example).
If you want specifics, google them. My explanation stands, I'm not in any way wrong as to why people blame Obama and my "shot" against him is legit.
Quote:
In comment 12448357 Deej said:
Quote:
I saw an article about the recent cop deaths. 1 was a heart attack and 3 were vehicle crashes (non-chase).
You are correct, my apologies, 4 murders in 9 days.
Actually, the potential murder in Abilene might make it 5 in 9 days. I know nobody posting here is denigrating the victims but 202 murdered police on an annualized basis is cause for concern.
Murdered cops are at a 26% low this year as supposed to this time last year.
Quote:
but he sure got a lot of blame when it passed $4.00 a gallon. Proving that anything bad is Obama's fault, anything good is due to factors beyond his control.
Don't forget Fox news Also blamed the President when the stock market Lost over 400 points.
Actually, in this case the president did have an influence on gas prices. As the Iranian nuclear deal was being finalized and it became apparent that the agreement was imminent many experts predicted that an immediate result would be a lowering of gas prices in the US as Iran, the 4th biggest supplier of crude oil in the world, would be prospected to once again flood the euro zone with oil having had their sanctions lifted on exports, which in turn would affect the global market. The rapid drop in gas prices that we're seeing now is partially related to a foreign policy decision by the president to negotiate with Iran.
from my later post:
Quote:
I see no blame being assigned there per se but I believe the message if delivered from the President would help and i believe he's actually said some minor things denouncing the violence against law enforcement, but I'd like to see him come out stronger against it
The President issued an executive order last year that establishes a task force with the sole goal of finding methods to enhance police training and tactics and researching practices and policies that would promote further safety and wellness of people who serve in those positions. I think the president has made quite a bit of effort to not only support police with his words but also with action.
Quote:
In comment 12448373 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
In comment 12448357 Deej said:
Quote:
I saw an article about the recent cop deaths. 1 was a heart attack and 3 were vehicle crashes (non-chase).
You are correct, my apologies, 4 murders in 9 days.
Actually, the potential murder in Abilene might make it 5 in 9 days. I know nobody posting here is denigrating the victims but 202 murdered police on an annualized basis is cause for concern.
Murdered cops are at a 26% low this year as supposed to this time last year.
Charlito, what is your source? Not saying it's wrong, only I read something very different in a recent article.
Twenty-three police officers have been killed by gunfire this year, with three targeted because they were officers, Canterbury said. He included Goforth in that count. In 2014, nine officers were ambushed and killed.
"They were killed because their murderers had one purpose -- to kill a cop," he said.
Link - ( New Window )
Yeah, its Obamas fault. The stupidity/Lunacy just never ends
Link - ( New Window )
Adding up the violent death categories (gunfire, assault, vehicular assault...), it looks looks like 30 police have died violently on duty thru 2/3 of the year (simple annualization = 45). Obviously I'd like to see that number at zero. 2014 that number was 59. 2013 was 35. 2012 was 65. 2011 was 87. 2010 was 78. 2009 was 57. 2008 was 60. Im not a statistician, but nothing jumps off the page there as a trend; the deaths are going down, but you'd need to look longer term and have a sense of the # of police interactions to draw any real conclusions. I went back to the year of my birth randomly (1979), and there were 2 police killed by assult, 112 by gunfire (non-accidental), 8 stabbed, and 13 by vehicular assault.
Link - ( New Window )
Clearly the citizen cams cut both ways. We all know that for as long as there have been cops, there have been some bad ones and they have killed people who should not have died. We also all know that sensationalized reporting sells more papers than responsible reporting and that can hurt all cops.
Maybe if everybody calms down and cuts out the hysterical shit we can see these recently recorded events for what they are. Which is not all that different from what they've always been.
In an earlier statement, the Bexar County Police claimed that “deputies attempted to arrest the armed suspect, but he resisted. The deputies used non-lethal weapons to try and detain the man. When those efforts failed, the deputies fired shots hitting the man.”
Remember this guy beat up his wife and a baby, not losing any sleep over this.
"Gilbert Flores, was shot outside a home in the 24400 block of Walnut Pass. The video also shows what deputies Greg Vasquez and Robert Sanchez...."
In an earlier statement, the Bexar County Police claimed that “deputies attempted to arrest the armed suspect, but he resisted. The deputies used non-lethal weapons to try and detain the man. When those efforts failed, the deputies fired shots hitting the man.”
Remember this guy beat up his wife and a baby, not losing any sleep over this.
Wait, so now we shouldn't be outraged anymore? It's not the "worst one yet"?
What is back up going to do if stun guns don't work and he refuses to put down the knife?
It was an "unarmed" black man shot by a white officer (the taser was fired by a black officer). The past half year, we've been subjected to the Media showing the deceased in a football uniform from years ago while the officer is always shown in a mugshot. Initial reports had the man putting his hands up when the officers arrived. It wasn't until the trial that we saw the dashcam footage that showed his ignoring commands and running straight for the officer who shot him.
The verdict was a hung jury 8-4 in favor of the officer. The last few weeks, we've had to listen to the victim's family continually get in front of the cameras to say that their innocent son was murdered in cold blood and how justice won't be served until there is a conviction.
And the Media doesn't do much to refute that storyline.
It kind of looks that way to me as well, but I think he's actually responding to being shot -- the sound of the shot would take a split second or two to reach the person filming it.
What he did previous to this is immaterial, that includes the alleged crime and previous resisting. At the time of the shooting he was surrendering.
The shooting was unjustified....it's open and shut.
What he did previous to this is immaterial, that includes the alleged crime and previous resisting. At the time of the shooting he was surrendering.
The shooting was unjustified....it's open and shut.
Based on just this video- yep, doesn't look justified regardless of if he had a knife in his hand. Even the worst scumbags deserve their day in court. AFAIK, unless you're an imminent threat to the officers or others (which the video shows he wasn't at the time of the shooting-hands up and not advancing), lethal force isn't warranted.
Of course my opinion may change as more information comes out.
And no report of a knife being recovered.
Even while I was watching this video, as bad as the shooting looked I thought maybe I missed something. However, when I saw them mishandling the body, assuming he was even dead at that point clinched it for me:
This was an execution, pure and simple.
Without cameras POLICE WILL LIE to protect themselves and each other. They will withhold information, plant weapons and tamper with evidence, especially if the person in question is dead.
The public is subject to propaganda tactics, the strongest of which is the criminalization angle. Using codewords such as "thug" "rap sheet" "troubled" "angry" etc., makes the "victim" less than human and turns a subset of the population vocalize their assent to the outcome.
In Americas history, every immigrant group has been subject to this media castigation which is used to justify the tough law enforcement stances of the communities policing the immigrant population. It happened to the Irish, Italians, Jews, Poles etc.
However, because of skin color mostly, most other immigrant groups can effectively assimilate themselves into the mainstream. Blacks can't ever do that so they are effectively stuck visually as a criminalized underclass deserving of brutal police tactics to keep them in line.
Life is hard enough without being upon SIGHT being saddled with expectations of ignorance, lack of education, bad speech, over sexuality, muscular athleticism, minstrel show talent and worst of criminality.
From shop vendors locking you out and following you around, to women who grab their purses more tightly as you enter an elevator or shifting uncomfortably. You have to disarm everyone around you perpetually in order to be normal.
Imagine the psychological and emotional toll of living like that your entire life... school, work, play or just driving or walking down the street. I've seen it and experienced it first hand and as a way of life it sucks.
Usual suspects indeed.
It was an "unarmed" black man shot by a white officer (the taser was fired by a black officer). The past half year, we've been subjected to the Media showing the deceased in a football uniform from years ago while the officer is always shown in a mugshot. Initial reports had the man putting his hands up when the officers arrived. It wasn't until the trial that we saw the dashcam footage that showed his ignoring commands and running straight for the officer who shot him.
The verdict was a hung jury 8-4 in favor of the officer. The last few weeks, we've had to listen to the victim's family continually get in front of the cameras to say that their innocent son was murdered in cold blood and how justice won't be served until there is a conviction.
And the Media doesn't do much to refute that storyline.
I remembered this incident, so I googled it. I didn't find a report that said that the guy in the car crash was drinking or smoking pot all day (not really sure what smoking pot in the daytime has to do with a crash in the morning, anyway).
Didn't find the whole "pounding at the door thing" in an article either. Just saw he went to a door.
Also, the only article I found said that the dashcam did nothing to clear up the stark contrasts between the two accounts.
I did see that the state decided not to put the case onto a second trial after a juror told them "if you get 12 people in here, it will always be divided".
I specifically left out Asians out of my statement because they are different case. Although they did suffer through considerable bias and maybe even racism in America (detainment camps out west for Japanese, relegation of Chinatowns etch) the benefits that Asians have had are two fold.
1. They come from respected active cultures which while colonized weren't enslaved. Slavery was much more than simple corporal larceny; the institution of racism erased any sense of belonging to greater humanity. Cultures, names, family ties genealogies were systematically and purposely erased so that the only bond was to the captor.
Imagine the impact of waking up belonging to someone who can do with your life and your families lives whatever they wanted through force of law (US Constriction even).
The civil war was fought to preserve an economic model based on enslavement for the continued production of rawer materials... much of the rollback of the Reconstruction era was done by creating fear in the American population that newly freed individuals have no culture, no couth no learning are dumb, lazy and criminal.
At the same time any attempt to be normal was met with laws criminalizing black equality.. his lasted at least 100 years and was ingrained in the American institutions, laws and society. Black is bad, lazy, criminal and dumb...
Asians did not have to overcome that as the high cultures of Asia were considered relatively equal to European society. Chinese, Japanese ,Korean, Indian cultures all had elements to be revered, so descendants of those cultures couldn't be but so bad...
Meanwhile in Africa - "wild", "dark", "uncivilized" Africa... blacks are supposed to connect to what? The pyramids? Since the 1700s a movement amongst European archaeologists sought to find any other rationale for the construction of the pyramids other than Black Africans.
Where else is that culture which Euro-Americans could point to say African Americans come from high civilization and culture? The rise of language, writing, astronomy, law, civil management... all the records were either destroyed stolen or never existed.
Secondly, the historicity of trade between Europe and Asia is well documented. So being able to understand Asian culture and goals was not only easy for Europeans but fundamental to European growth through the dark, Middle Renaissance and explorer Ages. There is a romanticism about Asia steeped in mysticism and exotic fantasy that humanizes Asians more that those of African descent. So when Asian show scholastic and quantitative aptitude, Americans do not find it out of the ordinary. In fact an Indian scoring perfect quant on the GMAT is seen as passe...
So the amount of cultural bias and baggage to overcome is a magnitude lower for Asians than African Americans.
Link - ( New Window )
Quote:
Arby’s earned itself a new mortal enemy after initiating beef with a Florida police officer. The fast food restaurant, archenemy of Jon Stewart, reportedly refused service to an uniformed Pembroke Pines police officer on Tuesday evening for being a police officer.
Link - ( New Window )
It's obviously idiotic to refuse service to a cop, let alone anyone IMO.
But the blame for the current climate does not fall squarely on the shoulders of social media or the media in general. We can't absolve the legal system of blame. These things don't exist in a vacuum, and the way our justice system and law enforcement has operated has had a MUCH larger hand in creating the current atmosphere than simply social media... can't just use social media as a scapegoat.
FMiC, I want to come back to the Charlotte case for a minute. I'm not trying to call you out or anything, I just want to state that your post has seemingly far more bias than any of the news reports I've read online regarding the recent decisions surrounding the case. I never saw anything about marijuana, or the insinuation that the guy was in a drunk driving crash, didn't see that he was banging on the door in a threatening manner either. I did see that he moved towards the cops, but didn't see that he charged them. I also read that the cop was so bad that the driver had to crawl out from underneath the car. I wouldn't be surprised if he was disoriented, injured, concussed, or not in the right frame of mind.
But the biggest thing that popped to mind about your post is that you implied the dashcam proved the cops to be correct. I haven't found an article that states that. The articles I've found simply say that the dashcam didn't corroborate either sides version of the events.
I don't know why you put "unarmed" in quotes either. He was unarmed. There's no quotation marks needed.
Part of me doesn't doubt that the officer may have actually feared for his life. But think about the underlying implication... late at night, black man knocking on a door, moving towards me = fear for my life, pull the trigger.
That speaks volumes about the problem itself.
Maybe I'm wrong. I only spent like 20 minutes Googling news articles about the case It just seems that you presented it in a very specific light to prove a very specific point.
Initially, the city charged the officer for the shooting before reviewing all the facts and they settled a $2.5M lawsuit with the victim's family before the criminal case went to trial. Subsequantly, the Chief of Police resigned for personal reasons, though many believe it is because of this case.
Leading up to the trial, the victim was always referred to as a former football player (at Florida A&M) and shown in his jersey. Initially the news made it sound like he had a minor car accident and went to a house for help and almost made it seem like the police happened upon him.
In the trial (and I'm sure I can find references to this), the reason the police came is because he pounded on a woman's door at 3AM. Her testimony said that she feared for herself and her child as the man became more aggressive in trying to get in, so she called 911. When the police arrived, initial reports had him complying with the police and having his hands up. The dashcam video shows officers ordering him to freeze. He advances, gets hits by a taser but keeps running and then he goes out of the frame as he confronts the officer that fatally shot him. Because it doesn't show the finality, the dashcam video isn't conclusive, but what it did do was contradict the Media-told events prior to the case. The officer who fired the taser claims that the victim yelled "Shoot me", but that is not able to be confirmed or heard in the video.
What the case really highlighted was how it was portrayed in the Media vs. how it actually happened. The State has concluded that because the trial resulted in an 8-4 hung jury in favor of the officer and taht the evidence to get a conviction isn't good enough that they would not retry the case.
I'll see what other inofrmation I can find as the attached article is biased as it is coming from the officer's defense team. Many points are valid, but it is biased.
here is an excerpt:
Wes Kerrick Defense Team Response - ( New Window )
911 Call - ( New Window )
During cross-examination by prosecutor Adren Harris, Little was shown the dashcam video of the incident. In it, the red dots from Little's Taser lights are visible, but there's nothing on the audio portion to suggest that Ferrell asked the officer to shoot him.
Little says he gave Ferrell the command to stop, but that wasn't heard on the dashcam video, either.
shooting article - ( New Window )
Yeah, sounds like he's just looking for help. Home alarm going off, dude is screaming in the background, repeatedly kicking the door.
Poor woman with her kids in the house crying on the phone.
Give me a FUCKING break.
'This confirms everything we've been saying since the day that Jonathan was killed: That this was an All-American guy who gave a friend a ride home and was just trying to get home himself when he had a car accident. And when he was runs to the officer for help, the officer shoots him 10 times,' Chestnut told The Associated Press.
This was the narrative the public was given for almost a year. The victim was often referred to as a former college football player and an "All-American" guy.
We're screwed as a society if we give another inch to any of this horseshit.
Then we'll see how sympathetic you are to their plight.
In court, Ferrell's girlfriend testified that he had been smoking pot that afternoon and went to a friend's house. The friend then testified that they hung out that night having "a few beers".
The narrative is that a man politely knocks on a door at 3AM and the police are called simply because he was black. This was the narrative we all were given until the court case. Why didn't anyone report on the 911 call prior? It sure would've painted a different picture.
Man "knocked on door" - ( New Window )
Now, you're away on business. That's your wife on the phone. Your kid/s are upstairs in the house.
How much sympathy do you have for that guy, now?
And that goes all the way back to my original point on this thread.
I wonder how that woman would have reacted if he actually came "knocking" on the door like he did.
This is part of the issue with drawing conclusions without the facts. Without knowing the contents of the 911 call - it is easy to assume a man was simply asking for help and white fear is what drove the police to be called and white fear is what drove the officer to kill him.
Knowing the facts, that becomes a false narrative.
Most of these facts didn't come out until a trial despite there being a 911 call that the Media could have obtained as well as the dashcam footage.
Then we'll see how sympathetic you are to their plight.
Wait a second. I'm supposed to feel unsympathetic to the dead guy, who died younger than me, who wasn't committing a crime (that I've read of), because of this 911 call?
So this woman is scared, so this "clown" needed to die.
I just read the transcript. The woman said he kicked down the door. So logically, I guess this guy deserves no sympathy and should have been shot.
also not sure what the cop excerpt is supposed to prove. You posted a cops testimony that the guy said SHOOT ME that's uncorroborated. That testimony is supposed to prove what? It's the cop's testimony. Why am I to automatically believe that?
Britt, what the fuck is the heinous action that you can PROVE that made this guy a "clown" who deserved to die?
I'm not even passing judgement on this. All I said was that FMiC's post seeemed to have a hell of a lot more bias in it than the articles I read online.
But somehow it turns into another discussion of "hey, this is why this unarmed black guy deserved to get shot by the police".
I can't even compute how that 911 call is supposed to make me feel like it's okay that this guy got shot and killed.
Quote:
where the woman claims he is trying to kick down her door 911 Call - ( New Window )
Yeah, sounds like he's just looking for help. Home alarm going off, dude is screaming in the background, repeatedly kicking the door.
Poor woman with her kids in the house crying on the phone.
Give me a FUCKING break.
Wait, so he wasn't looking for help? So what was he doing? Trying to rob the fucking house?
Hey, I just crashed my car, let me go and try and break into a house just for the fuck of it.
Obviously the woman is scared and crying, but that has absolutely NO bearing on whether or not this guy deserved to die. It can appeal to your emotion all you want but whether or not this woman is crying is totally irrelevant.
She has every right to be scared shitless. She did the right thing for herself by calling the police. Still doesn't mean jack shit regarding whether he should have died.
Out of curiosity, I wonder if any reports have indicated how many police were on the scene.
Now, you're away on business. That's your wife on the phone. Your kid/s are upstairs in the house.
How much sympathy do you have for that guy, now?
And that goes all the way back to my original point on this thread.
Please connect what this woman's 911 call has to do with sympathy for the guy who was shot dead by the police after a car accident, while unarmed and not doing anything illegal.
This woman's 911 call somehow makes you lack sympathy for the dead man? What the fuck? It's like your fishing and looking for reasons to convince yourself that it's okay that this dude was killed.
In court, Ferrell's girlfriend testified that he had been smoking pot that afternoon and went to a friend's house. The friend then testified that they hung out that night having "a few beers".
So smoking weed and drinking "a few beers" somehow turned into the implication that he was driving around drunk or inebriated when he crashed his car...
Also, smoking pot in the afternoon has exactly a 0% affect on you 12 hours later, so it's completely irrelevant
I'm not even sure what I'm trying to defend here. I don't even know what position I'm trying to argue.
As I think it through, the only two things I'm contending here is:
1) FMiC's post had a fair bit of slant to it, so I don't think the fact that the media didn't report it the way he posted about it is fair criticism.
2) There is nothing that proves this guy deserves to die... ESPECIALLY that fucking 911 call.
I think the 911 call isn't to be used as evidence that somebody deserves to die - it is evidence that the police are most likely not looking for a car crash victim, but rather a possible break-in suspect at 3AM.
The car accident was never called in or reported.
The difference in those two scenarios means that the police are going to be looking at a suspect differently.
Hey, my position is that killing a guy with 10 shots is overkill and that training among all police in this country needs to get better from a scene recognition standpoint, but what this case also highlighted is how the Media's initial reporting of stories affects how people perceive this situation.
Frankly, if I've just had 911 called on me at 3AM and I charge an officer, I'd expect one possible outcome to be serious injury or death. I think the jury saw it that way as well.
Be as incredulous as you fucking like.
I'm not the one trying to turn a dead guy into a villain based on a 911 call.
"Did you hear how scared that lady is? How could you have sympathy for someone who caused a woman to be so scared!!!"
That's pretty much what you just said. No crime, no weapon, but he scared the woman, so why have sympathy for the dead guy?
What an unbelievable reaction. How can you not be aware that you are looking for reasons to believe this guy should have died?
I am not sympathetic to this particular "victim's" plight because of the way he conducted himself.
What are you going to do about beyond bitch on a message board and perpetuate a culture that at best gets an innocent cop not served at a restaurant, and at worse gets innocent cops executed.
Nothing.
He died because he:
1) Had actions that resulted in 911 involving the police
2) Failed to comply when the police arrived
3) Charged at an officer leading to the deadly shooting
There are a number of ways this could have been avoided, including the officer not using deadly force. Ultimately, a jury had a majority belief that he should have been acquitted.
after reading this board on almost any social issue it's obviously a microcosm of society.
I think the 911 call isn't to be used as evidence that somebody deserves to die - it is evidence that the police are most likely not looking for a car crash victim, but rather a possible break-in suspect at 3AM.
The car accident was never called in or reported.
The difference in those two scenarios means that the police are going to be looking at a suspect differently.
Hey, my position is that killing a guy with 10 shots is overkill and that training among all police in this country needs to get better from a scene recognition standpoint, but what this case also highlighted is how the Media's initial reporting of stories affects how people perceive this situation.
Frankly, if I've just had 911 called on me at 3AM and I charge an officer, I'd expect one possible outcome to be serious injury or death. I think the jury saw it that way as well.
Yeah, that's a fair point, and definitely is something that makes me reconsider a post I made earlier in this thread (the one about how the initial reaction of the police was indicative of a larger problem... they were looking for a possible burglar, so it makes sense they'd come out aggressively).
Having said that, if there's 3 trained cops with guns, and 1 guy, unarmed, who has already been tased, why was shooting him 10 times the next logical course of action?
One thing I am also curious about is how serious his injuries from the car crash were. On one hand, I think that's a huge variable in understanding how the situation went down. On the other hand, it's probably somewhat irrelevant as I don't think this guy should have been shot to begin with. That doesn't mean the cops need to be convicted of a crime... it just means that this guy didn't need to be shot. I don't see where there's any proof that he posed a mortal threat to the police,.
Physically, he seemed fine, but one has to wonder if disorientation or mentally there was an effect.
I don't know if that ever came out.
They are trained that if a taser has no apparent effect on stopping a person, deadly force can be used if there is an immediate threat.
Again - that's why I say training needs to be reviewed. I'd rather see people subdued instead of killed. Also, because of the darkness, it could not be known if he had a weapon on him. There might have been an assumption that if he was openly trying to break into a house, he probably was armed - that point was made at trial.
He died because he:
1) Had actions that resulted in 911 involving the police
2) Failed to comply when the police arrived
3) Charged at an officer leading to the deadly shooting
There are a number of ways this could have been avoided, including the officer not using deadly force. Ultimately, a jury had a majority belief that he should have been acquitted.
It's not about a white cop wanting a black guy dead. That's not how it works, it's not so cut and dry. It's about a white cop probably factoring in this guy's race into his assessment of how much of a threat he posed.
This is what the CNN article states happened on the dashcam:
Someone shouts, "Get on the ground!" three times, and shots are heard.
There's no command for the dead guy to stay still. If he moves away from the officers, he's trying to get away. He walks toward them, and they raise a taser.
I just watched the dashcam video. Seems the other car had the dashcam off, but some of the incident is still visible. He's walking pretty calmly towards the police, then begins to run. At that point, they take out their gun and shoot him.
That's the thing that gets me... he's moving towards the police. And the police construed this as "he's going to try to take my gun".
The statement.... "IF he got into a tussle with him, he MAY have tried to take one of our guns" is a pretty weak ass excuse to put 10 bullets in someone. That's two variables in one sentence that equated into an unarmed dead guy.
Physically, he seemed fine, but one has to wonder if disorientation or mentally there was an effect.
I don't know if that ever came out.
Yeah I just watched the video and honestly he doesn't look that badly hurt.
As I rewatch the video, I wonder:
1) why do people put themselves in bad situations by making stupid decisions like running? Did something cause him to run? did he see a taser raised, think it was a gun, and try to GTFO?
2) why do these cops have to fire two separate rounds of fire?
When I watch that video, I do not see the mortal danger posted to police that caused them to have to kill this guy.
The training is definitely a good point. People have spoken about the insular, bunker mentality that are in some police stations. I wonder if training can mitigate some of that, but truth be told, I have absolutely no idea.
It's just a very glum realization to think that there isn't really a crime this guy could have even be charged with (I guess kicking a door), but somehow he ends up dead because he scared the cops.
And this goes back to what I was saying about race. It's not about white cops looking to kill black people outright. But I don't think it's beyond reason to say that this guy's size and race probably played into the threat assessment of him, which probably lead to the officers "fearing for their life" (still dubious, IMO..you may have struggled with him and during that struggle he may have taken your gun?)...which lead to him getting shot.
People who try to deduce these things, on both sides, into singular statements such as "white cops looking to kill black guys" or "don't be a criminal / don't surprise cops or you deserve to get shot" are doing the entire discussion a disservice by trying to boil down a complicated issue and oversimplifying it.
The following statement is obviously not 100% true, but is true enough that it is a big part of this problem: cops perceive black people as bigger threats than white people, and black people have zero trust that the police are actually there to help them, or won't do something to harm them.
The jury also considered the fact that even though the deceased was shot ten times, he still made it to the officer enough to tackle him in a ditch and ended up dead on top of him. The officer did have a fat lip and abrasions to his head
The jury also considered the fact that even though the deceased was shot ten times, he still made it to the officer enough to tackle him in a ditch and ended up dead on top of him. The officer did have a fat lip and abrasions to his head
Regarding your first paragraph, that's exactly my point. I have always maintained that this isn't an issue solely about white cops and black citizens. It's about police interactions with society in general, particularly minorities, and particularly black people.
In terms of your second paragraph, well yeah, I'm not surprised that after being shot 10 times the guy may have tried to fight back and end up dead on the cop. I don't feel the dashcam video shows any indication that this guy was trying to fight three cops and take their guns and murder them, and I don't think any of his behavior up to that point indicates that this dude was going to try and fight and murder 3 cops.
And yeah, lastly, that 911 call does absolutely NOTHING to remove the sympathy I have for this dead guy who shouldn't be dead... and if the 911 call somehow makes someone think it's okay that this guy died.... then the people who feel that way are just looking for an excuse to justify this shooting.
Did I read that he charged at police and one ended up with a fat lip...? Isn't that something he could have been arrested for?
There are several things I could think of that he COULD have been arrested for, prior to even attacking the police. Some of those would depend on whether or not he was intoxicated.
In my opinion, for some unknown reason and rash decision by the deceased,it became a case of 'suicide by cop'.
Police should be held to a higher standard. I think we can agree on that. But police officers should be granted greater leeway based on their responsibilities and duties, which the average citizen is not entrusted with. And that especially holds true in split second decisions.
At that exact point in time, the second or two that the officer had to react to the would-be defendant, what exactly should the officer had done? Remember, retreating is not an option. What would you have done in that second?
Is it reasonable to believe that you were about to be assaulted? Is it reasonable to believe that the person charging at you has regard for his own safety or life? Is it reasonable to believe that had he overpowered you he would have taken your gun and likely used it against you?
A super majority of the jury seemed to think so.
So what decision would you have made in that split second?
Is there a right answer? Probably not.
Was the officer justified in his actions? A jury decided yes.
Did I read that he charged at police and one ended up with a fat lip...? Isn't that something he could have been arrested for?
Apparently this was after he was shot. The video is pretty easy to find, check it out.
There are several things I could think of that he COULD have been arrested for, prior to even attacking the police. Some of those would depend on whether or not he was intoxicated.
I haven't found any reference to his BAL or anything like that online. Either way, even if there was something he could have been arrested for, he shouldn't have been shot dead.
Watching the video, I think it's pretty clear that there were other outcomes that could have been achieved. Even through the disagreement FMiC and I are having (btw, thank you for being civil even as we disagree), we both feel that there were probably other avenues that this incident could have and should have gone in that wouldn't leave this guy dead.
In my opinion, for some unknown reason and rash decision by the deceased,it became a case of 'suicide by cop'.
Police should be held to a higher standard. I think we can agree on that. But police officers should be granted greater leeway based on their responsibilities and duties, which the average citizen is not entrusted with. And that especially holds true in split second decisions.
At that exact point in time, the second or two that the officer had to react to the would-be defendant, what exactly should the officer had done? Remember, retreating is not an option. What would you have done in that second?
Is it reasonable to believe that you were about to be assaulted? Is it reasonable to believe that the person charging at you has regard for his own safety or life? Is it reasonable to believe that had he overpowered you he would have taken your gun and likely used it against you?
A super majority of the jury seemed to think so.
So what decision would you have made in that split second?
Is there a right answer? Probably not.
Was the officer justified in his actions? A jury decided yes.
Actually, the jury wasn't unanimous, and instead of opting for a retrial, the prosecution decided to stop pursuing the case due to the difficulty of finding a jury that would actually be unanimous.
Why don't you watch the video and tell me that this unarmed guy posted a mortal threat to the police?
This isn't going to go anywhere because you're spitting out the same tired platitudes that people always do in these situations.
I'm not a trained officer, so it doesn't matter what I'd do in that situation. But you're going to tell me that there's no better training that could be given to the police so that this situation didn't unravel as it did?
Like I said, this is all based on mistrust. Officers of ALL races look at black people differently, and black people look at cops VERY differently than a white person does. There are reasons for this on both sides. Black people commit most crime than other races, and black people are also at the receiving end of police misconduct and systemic inequity than white people, so I think there's validity on both ends.
Having said that, nobody deserves to be sized up and treated like a threat based on how they looked. The question becomes "How do we find a way to mitigate and fight the mistrust and inequity?".
Remember, the rationale for shooting this guy dead was that they MIGHT get in a tussle, and if they did, he MIGHT try and take a cops gun.
Honest question: if someone punches a cop, do you think they deserve to be shot dead on the spot? I don't, personally. I think they should be arrested and have the book thrown at them for assaulting a police officer, but I do not think they should be shot dead. That's what we have a legal system for.
If the perp immediately starts running away, no. If he is throwing another punch or looks like he will the answer's yes. There's a possibility he will be knocked silly and the perp will get his gun.
The legal system doesn't do jack shit for a cop who's shot dead with his own gun.
Quote:
Honest question: if someone punches a cop, do you think they deserve to be shot dead on the spot? I don't, personally. I think they should be arrested and have the book thrown at them for assaulting a police officer, but I do not think they should be shot dead. That's what we have a legal system for.
If the perp immediately starts running away, no. If he is throwing another punch or looks like he will the answer's yes. There's a possibility he will be knocked silly and the perp will get his gun.
The legal system doesn't do jack shit for a cop who's shot dead with his own gun.
Not saying I disagree with you, but to play devil's advocate.
If someone punches another civilian, does that civilian have the right to pull out a gun and shoot his attacker? And yes, this is under the assumption said civilian owns the gun legally.
Quote:
Honest question: if someone punches a cop, do you think they deserve to be shot dead on the spot? I don't, personally. I think they should be arrested and have the book thrown at them for assaulting a police officer, but I do not think they should be shot dead. That's what we have a legal system for.
If the perp immediately starts running away, no. If he is throwing another punch or looks like he will the answer's yes. There's a possibility he will be knocked silly and the perp will get his gun.
The legal system doesn't do jack shit for a cop who's shot dead with his own gun.
Ok, I can buy that. That makes sense. I don't think that applies in this case, though.
Either way, I don't want to start arguing over minute dissections of this one incident. It's not a gigantic stretch of the imagination to say that there are outcomes where this guy didn't have to be killed. I'm hoping we can all agree on that.
Quote:
In comment 12454000 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
Honest question: if someone punches a cop, do you think they deserve to be shot dead on the spot? I don't, personally. I think they should be arrested and have the book thrown at them for assaulting a police officer, but I do not think they should be shot dead. That's what we have a legal system for.
If the perp immediately starts running away, no. If he is throwing another punch or looks like he will the answer's yes. There's a possibility he will be knocked silly and the perp will get his gun.
The legal system doesn't do jack shit for a cop who's shot dead with his own gun.
Not saying I disagree with you, but to play devil's advocate.
If someone punches another civilian, does that civilian have the right to pull out a gun and shoot his attacker? And yes, this is under the assumption said civilian owns the gun legally.
I'll let any criminal law attorney's who post here answer definitively, but I believe a civilian is allowed to use deadly force if he/she reasonably believes they are in danger of being killed or seriously injured. And I don't think that changes if the gun is illegal, though they would likely face criminal prosecution for possessing an illegal weapon.
Quote:
In comment 12454074 njm said:
Quote:
In comment 12454000 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
Honest question: if someone punches a cop, do you think they deserve to be shot dead on the spot? I don't, personally. I think they should be arrested and have the book thrown at them for assaulting a police officer, but I do not think they should be shot dead. That's what we have a legal system for.
If the perp immediately starts running away, no. If he is throwing another punch or looks like he will the answer's yes. There's a possibility he will be knocked silly and the perp will get his gun.
The legal system doesn't do jack shit for a cop who's shot dead with his own gun.
Not saying I disagree with you, but to play devil's advocate.
If someone punches another civilian, does that civilian have the right to pull out a gun and shoot his attacker? And yes, this is under the assumption said civilian owns the gun legally.
I'll let any criminal law attorney's who post here answer definitively, but I believe a civilian is allowed to use deadly force if he/she reasonably believes they are in danger of being killed or seriously injured. And I don't think that changes if the gun is illegal, though they would likely face criminal prosecution for possessing an illegal weapon.
It varies by state, there are different standards and it is not terribly useful to try to glean common threads when they don't exist.
What I think is extremely underestimated in all this is how often law enforcement is in situations where they could easily pull the trigger and not be seriously questioned on the decision and they don't. And it has been my experience that the cases that they are most animated about aren't the cases where they had to physically subdue someone, or where they were punched or kicked or otherwise assaulted, but the cases where they came very close to pulling the trigger because of something the individual was doing or failing to do.
Quote:
The deceased put himself in a no win situation when he charged at the police officer, who was at the scene of a burglary in progress.
In my opinion, for some unknown reason and rash decision by the deceased,it became a case of 'suicide by cop'.
Police should be held to a higher standard. I think we can agree on that. But police officers should be granted greater leeway based on their responsibilities and duties, which the average citizen is not entrusted with. And that especially holds true in split second decisions.
At that exact point in time, the second or two that the officer had to react to the would-be defendant, what exactly should the officer had done? Remember, retreating is not an option. What would you have done in that second?
Is it reasonable to believe that you were about to be assaulted? Is it reasonable to believe that the person charging at you has regard for his own safety or life? Is it reasonable to believe that had he overpowered you he would have taken your gun and likely used it against you?
A super majority of the jury seemed to think so.
So what decision would you have made in that split second?
Is there a right answer? Probably not.
Was the officer justified in his actions? A jury decided yes.
Actually, the jury wasn't unanimous, and instead of opting for a retrial, the prosecution decided to stop pursuing the case due to the difficulty of finding a jury that would actually be unanimous.
Why don't you watch the video and tell me that this unarmed guy posted a mortal threat to the police?
This isn't going to go anywhere because you're spitting out the same tired platitudes that people always do in these situations.
I'm not a trained officer, so it doesn't matter what I'd do in that situation. But you're going to tell me that there's no better training that could be given to the police so that this situation didn't unravel as it did?
Like I said, this is all based on mistrust. Officers of ALL races look at black people differently, and black people look at cops VERY differently than a white person does. There are reasons for this on both sides. Black people commit most crime than other races, and black people are also at the receiving end of police misconduct and systemic inequity than white people, so I think there's validity on both ends.
Having said that, nobody deserves to be sized up and treated like a threat based on how they looked. The question becomes "How do we find a way to mitigate and fight the mistrust and inequity?".
Remember, the rationale for shooting this guy dead was that they MIGHT get in a tussle, and if they did, he MIGHT try and take a cops gun.
Honest question: if someone punches a cop, do you think they deserve to be shot dead on the spot? I don't, personally. I think they should be arrested and have the book thrown at them for assaulting a police officer, but I do not think they should be shot dead. That's what we have a legal system for.
First, I never said unanimous, you did. I said super-majority, which it was.
Second, I watched the video. I don't think it would be difficult at all to articulate why the officer used deadly physical force in that situation.
And once again the jury, in a SUPER-MAJORITY vote, decided that the officer was justified in using DPF.
Third, I really think you are mistaking tired platitudes for common sense and reasonableness, because you have no clue whatsoever as to how the officer should have reacted and you have no desire to respond as to how you would have reacted to that immediate threat.
Next, how do you mitigate a fight when possible a burglary suspect charges at you and tackles you? Whether the deceased was black or white, do you really think the outcome would have been different in this case?
Finally, police practices and use of force are based on laws in place, reasonableness and common sense.
The jury decided, in a SUPER-MAJORITY fashion, that the officer was justified in his actions.
And if you said super majority, I missed that. My point was moreso that, from my understanding, it wasn't so much an exoneration as it was that a jury couldn't reach a decision either way, and prosecutors chose not to retry the case. I may have been mistake and misunderstood, as I admittedly only read a few articles over a few minutes and didn't take the time to fully understand that segment of the article. if that's the case, okay, maybe a jury exonerated him. But there's been plenty of times where I don't agree with a jury's decision, and I feel that they typically err on the side of the police, so I still disagree with it.
My interpretation of the video is the dude started running when he saw something raised at him. I'm guessing what was raised at him was a tazer. Whatever the case may be, it's a dead 24 year old kid, so I still wish it didn't happen, i still don't feel the video showed a clear cut case of why this 24 year old had to die, and even though it's not related to this conversation thread you and I are having, I DEFINITELY don't think the 911 call affects my sympathy for a dead guy my age. It's understandable that a woman is scared if a stranger is at her door and kicking/knocking, but he's just that - a STRANGER - and I'm not prepared to pass judgement on whether someone should literally stop living based on a strangers 911 call.
Sorry about that last part. I was going off on a tangent, and while the rest of this thread has been mostly people civilly sharing perspectives, that comment about the 911 call and sympathy for the dead person really, really, really irked me.
I'm just going by government definition that is currently being used on a daily basis.
And if you said super majority, I missed that. My point was moreso that, from my understanding, it wasn't so much an exoneration as it was that a jury couldn't reach a decision either way, and prosecutors chose not to retry the case. I may have been mistake and misunderstood, as I admittedly only read a few articles over a few minutes and didn't take the time to fully understand that segment of the article. if that's the case, okay, maybe a jury exonerated him. But there's been plenty of times where I don't agree with a jury's decision, and I feel that they typically err on the side of the police, so I still disagree with it.
My interpretation of the video is the dude started running when he saw something raised at him. I'm guessing what was raised at him was a tazer. Whatever the case may be, it's a dead 24 year old kid, so I still wish it didn't happen, i still don't feel the video showed a clear cut case of why this 24 year old had to die, and even though it's not related to this conversation thread you and I are having, I DEFINITELY don't think the 911 call affects my sympathy for a dead guy my age. It's understandable that a woman is scared if a stranger is at her door and kicking/knocking, but he's just that - a STRANGER - and I'm not prepared to pass judgement on whether someone should literally stop living based on a strangers 911 call.
Sorry about that last part. I was going off on a tangent, and while the rest of this thread has been mostly people civilly sharing perspectives, that comment about the 911 call and sympathy for the dead person really, really, really irked me.
I don't think the kid deserved to die. What I do think is the kid made a conscious decision to engage in an overt action that a reasonable person would construe as an imminent threat, and if properly articulated that threat could easily be elevated to the level of imminent threat of deadly physical force. In other words, the police officer made a split second decision that his life was in danger.
A majority of the jury agreed.
Quote:
on a road about a mile from where he ended up. He walked through a small woods to get to a subdivision.
Physically, he seemed fine, but one has to wonder if disorientation or mentally there was an effect.
I don't know if that ever came out.
Yeah I just watched the video and honestly he doesn't look that badly hurt.
As I rewatch the video, I wonder:
1) why do people put themselves in bad situations by making stupid decisions like running? Did something cause him to run? did he see a taser raised, think it was a gun, and try to GTFO?
2) why do these cops have to fire two separate rounds of fire?
When I watch that video, I do not see the mortal danger posted to police that caused them to have to kill this guy.
The training is definitely a good point. People have spoken about the insular, bunker mentality that are in some police stations. I wonder if training can mitigate some of that, but truth be told, I have absolutely no idea.
It's just a very glum realization to think that there isn't really a crime this guy could have even be charged with (I guess kicking a door), but somehow he ends up dead because he scared the cops.
And this goes back to what I was saying about race. It's not about white cops looking to kill black people outright. But I don't think it's beyond reason to say that this guy's size and race probably played into the threat assessment of him, which probably lead to the officers "fearing for their life" (still dubious, IMO..you may have struggled with him and during that struggle he may have taken your gun?)...which lead to him getting shot.
People who try to deduce these things, on both sides, into singular statements such as "white cops looking to kill black guys" or "don't be a criminal / don't surprise cops or you deserve to get shot" are doing the entire discussion a disservice by trying to boil down a complicated issue and oversimplifying it.
The following statement is obviously not 100% true, but is true enough that it is a big part of this problem: cops perceive black people as bigger threats than white people, and black people have zero trust that the police are actually there to help them, or won't do something to harm them.
Have you ever been in an argument that lead to a fist fight?
Have you ever been in a life threatening situation?
I ask because in my experience (except when I've been drunk) the adrenaline and 'Rush' that you get when fisticuffs begin are the exact se feeling as the 'Rush' you get when you narrowly avoid a car accident.
As an outsider it's easy to say "how were they in fear of their lives- he didn't even have a gun?"
Just something to consider.
I just don't think having two conditional phrases in the justification for ending someone's life is enough. Maybe I should have explained that previously, but that's what get's me about the explanation
He MAY have been trying to engage me, and if he did engage me, he MAY have tried to take my gun, so I shot him before he even got to me.
That really rubs me the wrong way.
I agree with you an extent. I said in one of my previous posts that I don't understand why people behave the way they do to put themselves in worse situations than the already bad circumstances they are in. But the same way that I don't know how it is to be a cop making that split second decision, I can truly say that I don't know what it feels like to be a black person being approached by a cop after you heard an alarm go off in the middle of night and then subsequently seeing them raise a weapon (taser) as you are walking towards them relatively slowly. I have no idea, man. I may have ran also. And if I was in the cops shoes, I may have shot also.
But only one of the two parties is dead.
The thing is that I'm not a police officer. Like I said, I don't know if it's training or some type of selection process that can simulate who can stay cool under pressure, but I do think that law enforcement officers should be held to a higher standard of decisions under pressure.
Having said that, I also understand what Duned said regarding the actual percentage of the time that these incidents end up fatal. But I personally feel that if an unarmed person is shot dead, with ten bullets, in 2 bursts, by 3 cops, there needs to be a pretty clear and present danger.
Also, in case anyone didn't come across the same articles I did... the reason I'm repeating the "he may have charged me and if he did he may have taken the gun" repeatedly is because that was the defense posited by the officers at the scene.