So....apprently you can be executed if you don't follow orders from police, even when you are a threat to no one.
People should be allowed to tell cops to go stuff it up their hairy as**s. Why should we have to listen to them?
Are you serious?
No.
I find the idea that cops should just let people go on whatever terms they dictate... when they don't feel like being detained... is completely absurd.
It's not that gawddamn hard to comply. You're tempting fate when you don't.
Do you know what probable cause is?
Question time. Great!
Answer: yes
Question: do you understand the threat officers face in the line of duty?
What is considered enough of a threat to kill someone? Honest question. I would argue until someone walking away from you with their hands up towards a car does something sudden or reaches, that is not enough to kill someone. The officers sign up for that threat the first day they show up at the academy and you can't kill someone the second you get scared.
To some degree I would agree. But you would also have to agree that in the moment, exercising too much patience might cost you your life.
We sit on the sidelines and speak to this topic. It's easy to armchair quarterback.
I'd say this: it's far easier to comply with simple orders than it is to discern threat.
So....apprently you can be executed if you don't follow orders from police, even when you are a threat to no one.
People should be allowed to tell cops to go stuff it up their hairy as**s. Why should we have to listen to them?
Are you serious?
No.
I find the idea that cops should just let people go on whatever terms they dictate... when they don't feel like being detained... is completely absurd.
It's not that gawddamn hard to comply. You're tempting fate when you don't.
Do you know what probable cause is?
Question time. Great!
Answer: yes
Question: do you understand the threat officers face in the line of duty?
What is considered enough of a threat to kill someone? Honest question. I would argue until someone walking away from you with their hands up towards a car does something sudden or reaches, that is not enough to kill someone. The officers sign up for that threat the first day they show up at the academy and you can't kill someone the second you get scared.
To some degree I would agree. But you would also have to agree that in the moment, exercising too much patience might cost you your life.
We sit on the sidelines and speak to this topic. It's easy to armchair quarterback.
I'd say this: it's far easier to comply with simple orders than it is to discern threat.
I don't disagree with that, but you are being paid for that patience... that is part of the job description.
Of course. It is very easy. I have said this a number of times but every night one of my best friends in the world puts on a blue uniform and heads to the hood in philly to see shit no one should ever see. She and I do not agree on everything police related, but I certainly understand what she goes through on a nightly basis. She was out of work for almost a year after being beat up by dude out of his mind and has won numerous awards.
So....apprently you can be executed if you don't follow orders from police, even when you are a threat to no one.
People should be allowed to tell cops to go stuff it up their hairy as**s. Why should we have to listen to them?
Are you serious?
No.
I find the idea that cops should just let people go on whatever terms they dictate... when they don't feel like being detained... is completely absurd.
It's not that gawddamn hard to comply. You're tempting fate when you don't.
Do you know what probable cause is?
Question time. Great!
Answer: yes
Question: do you understand the threat officers face in the line of duty?
What is considered enough of a threat to kill someone? Honest question. I would argue until someone walking away from you with their hands up towards a car does something sudden or reaches, that is not enough to kill someone. The officers sign up for that threat the first day they show up at the academy and you can't kill someone the second you get scared.
i get this sentiment but who says it was a shot to kill? i mean if she hit him in the head yea i'd say that was a shot to kill but you can die from a shot anywhere depending on what the bullet hits. a shot to the arm can still kill if hits the right spot but a shot to the arm is not necessarily a shot to kill.
So....apprently you can be executed if you don't follow orders from police, even when you are a threat to no one.
People should be allowed to tell cops to go stuff it up their hairy as**s. Why should we have to listen to them?
Are you serious?
No.
I find the idea that cops should just let people go on whatever terms they dictate... when they don't feel like being detained... is completely absurd.
It's not that gawddamn hard to comply. You're tempting fate when you don't.
Do you know what probable cause is?
Question time. Great!
Answer: yes
Question: do you understand the threat officers face in the line of duty?
What is considered enough of a threat to kill someone? Honest question. I would argue until someone walking away from you with their hands up towards a car does something sudden or reaches, that is not enough to kill someone. The officers sign up for that threat the first day they show up at the academy and you can't kill someone the second you get scared.
i get this sentiment but who says it was a shot to kill? i mean if she hit him in the head yea i'd say that was a shot to kill but you can die from a shot anywhere depending on what the bullet hits. a shot to the arm can still kill if hits the right spot but a shot to the arm is not necessarily a shot to kill.
Where did she shoot him? How many times? I don't know enough about this story to comment too much.
So....apprently you can be executed if you don't follow orders from police, even when you are a threat to no one.
People should be allowed to tell cops to go stuff it up their hairy as**s. Why should we have to listen to them?
Are you serious?
No.
I find the idea that cops should just let people go on whatever terms they dictate... when they don't feel like being detained... is completely absurd.
It's not that gawddamn hard to comply. You're tempting fate when you don't.
Do you know what probable cause is?
Question time. Great!
Answer: yes
Question: do you understand the threat officers face in the line of duty?
What is considered enough of a threat to kill someone? Honest question. I would argue until someone walking away from you with their hands up towards a car does something sudden or reaches, that is not enough to kill someone. The officers sign up for that threat the first day they show up at the academy and you can't kill someone the second you get scared.
Most definitions would be fear of death or great injury to you or someone else. Most cases walking away would not count as a great threat, but if you had reason to believe there was a weapon in the car he was walking toward, that could easily be argued (not saying there just, just answering the question).
It is very difficult to prove what a person was feeling. In many cases, officer or civilian, it is the first few sentences in the statement given that determines the level of threat. Two exact same scenarios may have 2 different outcomes based on the person's statement. One person breaks into a house, the owner says "I was so scared, even though he turned around I just had this feeling he was coming back and all I could think about were my kids upstairs so I just I shot." He may get away with it. The next person may say "My house was broken in last week and I know it was him, he wasn't going to break into my house ever again!" probably would be charged with murder. I've seen cases where someone shot in the back and no charges were filed, and some where they were shot in the front and he was charged with murder.
I had a friend who thought some local kids were breaking into his house. He used some racial slurs describing how he would protect himself and I told him if it comes to that, don't use any of those words. It could even be language like that that would sway a prosecutor that you weren't really in fear but acted out of anger, even though they were breaking into your house.
So....apprently you can be executed if you don't follow orders from police, even when you are a threat to no one.
People should be allowed to tell cops to go stuff it up their hairy as**s. Why should we have to listen to them?
Are you serious?
No.
I find the idea that cops should just let people go on whatever terms they dictate... when they don't feel like being detained... is completely absurd.
It's not that gawddamn hard to comply. You're tempting fate when you don't.
Do you know what probable cause is?
Question time. Great!
Answer: yes
Question: do you understand the threat officers face in the line of duty?
What is considered enough of a threat to kill someone? Honest question. I would argue until someone walking away from you with their hands up towards a car does something sudden or reaches, that is not enough to kill someone. The officers sign up for that threat the first day they show up at the academy and you can't kill someone the second you get scared.
i get this sentiment but who says it was a shot to kill? i mean if she hit him in the head yea i'd say that was a shot to kill but you can die from a shot anywhere depending on what the bullet hits. a shot to the arm can still kill if hits the right spot but a shot to the arm is not necessarily a shot to kill.
Police officers are trained when in a situation where their lives are threatened they shoot center mass. When they squeeze that trigger the intent is to kill. Yes, it is true a shot just about anywhere on the body can kill ex: the Redskin player that was shot in his leg in his home. The bullet hit a major artery and he quickly bled to death. In this situation it appears the victim suffered chest wounds, the officer appeared to be shooting to kill as she is trained to do.
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
So....apprently you can be executed if you don't follow orders from police, even when you are a threat to no one.
People should be allowed to tell cops to go stuff it up their hairy as**s. Why should we have to listen to them?
Are you serious?
No.
I find the idea that cops should just let people go on whatever terms they dictate... when they don't feel like being detained... is completely absurd.
It's not that gawddamn hard to comply. You're tempting fate when you don't.
Do you know what probable cause is?
Question time. Great!
Answer: yes
Question: do you understand the threat officers face in the line of duty?
What is considered enough of a threat to kill someone? Honest question. I would argue until someone walking away from you with their hands up towards a car does something sudden or reaches, that is not enough to kill someone. The officers sign up for that threat the first day they show up at the academy and you can't kill someone the second you get scared.
i get this sentiment but who says it was a shot to kill? i mean if she hit him in the head yea i'd say that was a shot to kill but you can die from a shot anywhere depending on what the bullet hits. a shot to the arm can still kill if hits the right spot but a shot to the arm is not necessarily a shot to kill.
Police officers are trained when in a situation where their lives are threatened they shoot center mass. When they squeeze that trigger the intent is to kill. Yes, it is true a shot just about anywhere on the body can kill ex: the Redskin player that was shot in his leg in his home. The bullet hit a major artery and he quickly bled to death. In this situation it appears the victim suffered chest wounds, the officer appeared to be shooting to kill as she is trained to do.
Peace
They are also not allowed to "shoot to injure" in a sense. A gun is considered lethal force, and in no way are you suppose to use lethal force unless you are intending to kill. If you don't want to kill someone, use some other means than lethal force. A cop would be fired and charged with a crime if he admitted to shooting someone in the leg with intentions to just injure him because he was running away.
This question came up before and many thought it didn't make sense to not try and injure first. But it is a really good thing, you don't want people going around using lethal force with the intentions to just injure. If you pull the trigger you need to have enough reason to justify killing someone. Which is why I don't get those complaints about how many times someone was shot. My thoughts are if you pull the trigger once you must want the person dead otherwise don't shoot, so may as well pull it 14 more times.
So....apprently you can be executed if you don't follow orders from police, even when you are a threat to no one.
People should be allowed to tell cops to go stuff it up their hairy as**s. Why should we have to listen to them?
Are you serious?
No.
I find the idea that cops should just let people go on whatever terms they dictate... when they don't feel like being detained... is completely absurd.
It's not that gawddamn hard to comply. You're tempting fate when you don't.
Do you know what probable cause is?
Question time. Great!
Answer: yes
Question: do you understand the threat officers face in the line of duty?
What is considered enough of a threat to kill someone? Honest question. I would argue until someone walking away from you with their hands up towards a car does something sudden or reaches, that is not enough to kill someone. The officers sign up for that threat the first day they show up at the academy and you can't kill someone the second you get scared.
Most definitions would be fear of death or great injury to you or someone else. Most cases walking away would not count as a great threat, but if you had reason to believe there was a weapon in the car he was walking toward, that could easily be argued (not saying there just, just answering the question).
It is very difficult to prove what a person was feeling. In many cases, officer or civilian, it is the first few sentences in the statement given that determines the level of threat. Two exact same scenarios may have 2 different outcomes based on the person's statement. One person breaks into a house, the owner says "I was so scared, even though he turned around I just had this feeling he was coming back and all I could think about were my kids upstairs so I just I shot." He may get away with it. The next person may say "My house was broken in last week and I know it was him, he wasn't going to break into my house ever again!" probably would be charged with murder. I've seen cases where someone shot in the back and no charges were filed, and some where they were shot in the front and he was charged with murder.
I had a friend who thought some local kids were breaking into his house. He used some racial slurs describing how he would protect himself and I told him if it comes to that, don't use any of those words. It could even be language like that that would sway a prosecutor that you weren't really in fear but acted out of anger, even though they were breaking into your house.
I imagine the cop who shot the guy walking to his car felt threatened, the problem is, due to prejudice blacks are perceived as a greater threat. If he was white, more likely other reasons go through their brain: he's on drugs, he's psychotic, he is deaf etc.
So....apprently you can be executed if you don't follow orders from police, even when you are a threat to no one.
People should be allowed to tell cops to go stuff it up their hairy as**s. Why should we have to listen to them?
Are you serious?
No.
I find the idea that cops should just let people go on whatever terms they dictate... when they don't feel like being detained... is completely absurd.
It's not that gawddamn hard to comply. You're tempting fate when you don't.
Do you know what probable cause is?
Question time. Great!
Answer: yes
Question: do you understand the threat officers face in the line of duty?
What is considered enough of a threat to kill someone? Honest question. I would argue until someone walking away from you with their hands up towards a car does something sudden or reaches, that is not enough to kill someone. The officers sign up for that threat the first day they show up at the academy and you can't kill someone the second you get scared.
Most definitions would be fear of death or great injury to you or someone else. Most cases walking away would not count as a great threat, but if you had reason to believe there was a weapon in the car he was walking toward, that could easily be argued (not saying there just, just answering the question).
It is very difficult to prove what a person was feeling. In many cases, officer or civilian, it is the first few sentences in the statement given that determines the level of threat. Two exact same scenarios may have 2 different outcomes based on the person's statement. One person breaks into a house, the owner says "I was so scared, even though he turned around I just had this feeling he was coming back and all I could think about were my kids upstairs so I just I shot." He may get away with it. The next person may say "My house was broken in last week and I know it was him, he wasn't going to break into my house ever again!" probably would be charged with murder. I've seen cases where someone shot in the back and no charges were filed, and some where they were shot in the front and he was charged with murder.
I had a friend who thought some local kids were breaking into his house. He used some racial slurs describing how he would protect himself and I told him if it comes to that, don't use any of those words. It could even be language like that that would sway a prosecutor that you weren't really in fear but acted out of anger, even though they were breaking into your house.
I would agree with all of what you said....language, words used to describe situations can make a case or not.
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
I'm not necessarily suggesting that. I'm saying there's a little more to this than 'white woman cop gets a black guy'.
I mean... the cop bashers have been really quick out of the gates on this one- somebody even cited the helicopter pilot's commentary as evidence to complicity.
Somebody also said his hands were up and they shot him in the back. The video I saw was as I described and his hands were not up- they were reaching into his vehicle.
One cop shot a taser and the woman cop shot her gun at the same time. Something triggered a response. Optic wise... it's not a clear cut case of cop abuse. I would say that with four cops there... non lethal methods should have been exercised (as the one cop that shot his taser attempted); however, with that said... just stop f**king with the police. Maybe he did exactly what they told him to do and they shot him anyways. But maybe, in that odd scenario, he acted in such a way that the officers on the scene grew taut. In that case, it's not murder as much as it is overreacting to the possibility of a threat.
1. Cops stop at an unusual site: a suv is parked directly in the middle of a two way, single lane highway.
2. A man approaches the officers, but when they (she) issues commands... he ignores them and walks to his suv.
3. He continues to ignore them and reaches into his suv for something.
4. Cops shoot.
Does this sum it up about right?
Except his windows were up.
All accounts say he was reaching inside his vehicle. Can you please direct me to this piece? If true... that changes my perspective.
Correction: you mean from the cops account not all accounts. Also, she shoots him and they then let him lay there to die, as usual. Not that this has anything to do with this case but cop has two other excessive force complaints and has been disciplined for drawing fire arm.
I'm not necessarily suggesting that. I'm saying there's a little more to this than 'white woman cop gets a black guy'.
I mean... the cop bashers have been really quick out of the gates on this one- somebody even cited the helicopter pilot's commentary as evidence to complicity.
Somebody also said his hands were up and they shot him in the back. The video I saw was as I described and his hands were not up- they were reaching into his vehicle.
One cop shot a taser and the woman cop shot her gun at the same time. Something triggered a response. Optic wise... it's not a clear cut case of cop abuse. I would say that with four cops there... non lethal methods should have been exercised (as the one cop that shot his taser attempted); however, with that said... just stop f**king with the police. Maybe he did exactly what they told him to do and they shot him anyways. But maybe, in that odd scenario, he acted in such a way that the officers on the scene grew taut. In that case, it's not murder as much as it is overreacting to the possibility of a threat.
1. Cops stop at an unusual site: a suv is parked directly in the middle of a two way, single lane highway.
2. A man approaches the officers, but when they (she) issues commands... he ignores them and walks to his suv.
3. He continues to ignore them and reaches into his suv for something.
4. Cops shoot.
Does this sum it up about right?
Except his windows were up.
All accounts say he was reaching inside his vehicle. Can you please direct me to this piece? If true... that changes my perspective.
Correction: you mean from the cops account not all accounts. Also, she shoots him and they then let him lay there to die, as usual. Not that this has anything to do with this case but cop has two other excessive force complaints and has been disciplined for drawing fire arm.
Did you watch the video from the helicopter perspective? It looks to me like he's reaching inside his vehicle.
Murder is often an overreaction to a perceived threat.
Yeah sure. But let's not discount all the events that led up to that moment.
Parked vehicle in the middle of a highway. Man acting 'out of sorts'. Man disobeying law enforcement checking on vehicle stopped in middle of highway. Man moving to parked vehicle ignoring police commands. Man reaches inside vehicle once gets to vehicle.
As I said, with four police officers... I think non lethal tactics could easily have been employed and I wish they were; however, it all could have been prevented if the guy had just been compliant.
There are two schools of thought for cops which are intensifying every event:
1. Cops are ultra cautious with people given recent cop shootings and the general cop hating attitudes which are prevalent.
2. Cops are ultra cautious to not wrongfully shoot someone given the exposure they'll face in light of doing so.
Which school of thought one might subscribe to really depends on each individual cop's perspective (shaped by their experiences to this point in time). Someone earlier shared a story where one of their friends got the shit kicked out of her and was badly hurt. She likely isn't going to take much of a chance in a similar situation. And I wouldn't blame her.
And your wish for non lethal tactics would be the truth much more often if there was consequences for police over-reactions.
I hear what you're saying. But it's a double edged sword: we ask these people to do the job... and ask them to take risks when it might be their life at stake?
Would it be preferable for you if patience became the tactic, fewer wrongful shootings occurred, only there were more cop deaths given errors in assessment of risk given the latitude police are demanded to provide?
So....apprently you can be executed if you don't follow orders from police, even when you are a threat to no one.
People should be allowed to tell cops to go stuff it up their hairy as**s. Why should we have to listen to them?
Are you serious?
No.
I find the idea that cops should just let people go on whatever terms they dictate... when they don't feel like being detained... is completely absurd.
It's not that gawddamn hard to comply. You're tempting fate when you don't.
Do you know what probable cause is?
Question time. Great!
Answer: yes
Question: do you understand the threat officers face in the line of duty?
What is considered enough of a threat to kill someone? Honest question. I would argue until someone walking away from you with their hands up towards a car does something sudden or reaches, that is not enough to kill someone. The officers sign up for that threat the first day they show up at the academy and you can't kill someone the second you get scared.
Most definitions would be fear of death or great injury to you or someone else. Most cases walking away would not count as a great threat, but if you had reason to believe there was a weapon in the car he was walking toward, that could easily be argued (not saying there just, just answering the question).
It is very difficult to prove what a person was feeling. In many cases, officer or civilian, it is the first few sentences in the statement given that determines the level of threat. Two exact same scenarios may have 2 different outcomes based on the person's statement. One person breaks into a house, the owner says "I was so scared, even though he turned around I just had this feeling he was coming back and all I could think about were my kids upstairs so I just I shot." He may get away with it. The next person may say "My house was broken in last week and I know it was him, he wasn't going to break into my house ever again!" probably would be charged with murder. I've seen cases where someone shot in the back and no charges were filed, and some where they were shot in the front and he was charged with murder.
I had a friend who thought some local kids were breaking into his house. He used some racial slurs describing how he would protect himself and I told him if it comes to that, don't use any of those words. It could even be language like that that would sway a prosecutor that you weren't really in fear but acted out of anger, even though they were breaking into your house.
I imagine the cop who shot the guy walking to his car felt threatened, the problem is, due to prejudice blacks are perceived as a greater threat. If he was white, more likely other reasons go through their brain: he's on drugs, he's psychotic, he is deaf etc.
I've thought the same thing before. There are far more great people of all races than bad. But also, per capita there are more violent crimes committed by blacks and attacks on cops than whites. So regardless of training, it is only natural to be more cautious when approaching someone of color when you are a police officer. Not saying its right, its just reality.
So....apprently you can be executed if you don't follow orders from police, even when you are a threat to no one.
People should be allowed to tell cops to go stuff it up their hairy as**s. Why should we have to listen to them?
Are you serious?
No.
I find the idea that cops should just let people go on whatever terms they dictate... when they don't feel like being detained... is completely absurd.
It's not that gawddamn hard to comply. You're tempting fate when you don't.
Do you know what probable cause is?
Question time. Great!
Answer: yes
Question: do you understand the threat officers face in the line of duty?
What is considered enough of a threat to kill someone? Honest question. I would argue until someone walking away from you with their hands up towards a car does something sudden or reaches, that is not enough to kill someone. The officers sign up for that threat the first day they show up at the academy and you can't kill someone the second you get scared.
Most definitions would be fear of death or great injury to you or someone else. Most cases walking away would not count as a great threat, but if you had reason to believe there was a weapon in the car he was walking toward, that could easily be argued (not saying there just, just answering the question).
It is very difficult to prove what a person was feeling. In many cases, officer or civilian, it is the first few sentences in the statement given that determines the level of threat. Two exact same scenarios may have 2 different outcomes based on the person's statement. One person breaks into a house, the owner says "I was so scared, even though he turned around I just had this feeling he was coming back and all I could think about were my kids upstairs so I just I shot." He may get away with it. The next person may say "My house was broken in last week and I know it was him, he wasn't going to break into my house ever again!" probably would be charged with murder. I've seen cases where someone shot in the back and no charges were filed, and some where they were shot in the front and he was charged with murder.
I had a friend who thought some local kids were breaking into his house. He used some racial slurs describing how he would protect himself and I told him if it comes to that, don't use any of those words. It could even be language like that that would sway a prosecutor that you weren't really in fear but acted out of anger, even though they were breaking into your house.
I imagine the cop who shot the guy walking to his car felt threatened, the problem is, due to prejudice blacks are perceived as a greater threat. If he was white, more likely other reasons go through their brain: he's on drugs, he's psychotic, he is deaf etc.
I've thought the same thing before. There are far more great people of all races than bad. But also, per capita there are more violent crimes committed by blacks and attacks on cops than whites. So regardless of training, it is only natural to be more cautious when approaching someone of color when you are a police officer. Not saying its right, its just reality.
That's one way the prejudice will come to be. It's the cops job to essentially over-ride this prejudice. The dilemma is that this is even harder when under stress, because the brain loses it's ability to make higher level cognitive decisions.
Unless you can't read only a book can be an imminent threat.
Black guy broke down in road shot is old news, new dead black guy is Keith Lamont Scott. Disabled? Gun or book? Daughter Facebook'd Riots Tear gas Flipped cop cars Injured officer
All this happening under the leadership of a black president. Of course Clinton has all the answers and will bring unity to all something that Obama couldn't. What a joke. From the outside looking in Trump is looking more and more better.
London Ontario 2013, Buffalo New York 2013, Lincoln Nebraska 2014, Quebec City 2016
1. Cops stop at an unusual site: a suv is parked directly in the middle of a two way, single lane highway.
2. A man approaches the officers, but when they (she) issues commands... he ignores them and walks to his suv.
3. He continues to ignore them and reaches into his suv for something.
4. Cops shoot.
Does this sum it up about right?
Of course, you would sum it up without a mention of his hands in the air and his slow, deliberate movements.
There was a brief moment when he had his hands in the air as he walked away from the cops (supposedly when he was snubbing their requests) until he dropped them to reach into his vehicle.
I also didn't mention details like officer had their weapons drawn, his movements were erratic, and other items. Sheesh. Can a guy keep things concise at times or not?
Black men who try to avoid an encounter with Boston police by fleeing may have a legitimate reason to do so — and should not be deemed suspicious — according to a ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
Citing Boston police data and a 2014 report by the ACLU of Massachusetts that found blacks were disproportionately stopped by the city's police, the state’s highest court on Tuesday
Comments
Of course. It is very easy. I have said this a number of times but every night one of my best friends in the world puts on a blue uniform and heads to the hood in philly to see shit no one should ever see. She and I do not agree on everything police related, but I certainly understand what she goes through on a nightly basis. She was out of work for almost a year after being beat up by dude out of his mind and has won numerous awards.
It is very difficult to prove what a person was feeling. In many cases, officer or civilian, it is the first few sentences in the statement given that determines the level of threat. Two exact same scenarios may have 2 different outcomes based on the person's statement. One person breaks into a house, the owner says "I was so scared, even though he turned around I just had this feeling he was coming back and all I could think about were my kids upstairs so I just I shot." He may get away with it. The next person may say "My house was broken in last week and I know it was him, he wasn't going to break into my house ever again!" probably would be charged with murder. I've seen cases where someone shot in the back and no charges were filed, and some where they were shot in the front and he was charged with murder.
I had a friend who thought some local kids were breaking into his house. He used some racial slurs describing how he would protect himself and I told him if it comes to that, don't use any of those words. It could even be language like that that would sway a prosecutor that you weren't really in fear but acted out of anger, even though they were breaking into your house.
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
This question came up before and many thought it didn't make sense to not try and injure first. But it is a really good thing, you don't want people going around using lethal force with the intentions to just injure. If you pull the trigger you need to have enough reason to justify killing someone.
Which is why I don't get those complaints about how many times someone was shot. My thoughts are if you pull the trigger once you must want the person dead otherwise don't shoot, so may as well pull it 14 more times.
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
Any details yet?
I read the officer was placed on administrative leave and pay I believe during the pending investigation.
Female officer?
Those that can be trusted can change their mind.
1. Cops stop at an unusual site: a suv is parked directly in the middle of a two way, single lane highway.
2. A man approaches the officers, but when they (she) issues commands... he ignores them and walks to his suv.
3. He continues to ignore them and reaches into his suv for something.
4. Cops shoot.
Does this sum it up about right?
"He is a bad dude" from 75 feet in the air.
I mean... the cop bashers have been really quick out of the gates on this one- somebody even cited the helicopter pilot's commentary as evidence to complicity.
Somebody also said his hands were up and they shot him in the back. The video I saw was as I described and his hands were not up- they were reaching into his vehicle.
One cop shot a taser and the woman cop shot her gun at the same time. Something triggered a response. Optic wise... it's not a clear cut case of cop abuse. I would say that with four cops there... non lethal methods should have been exercised (as the one cop that shot his taser attempted); however, with that said... just stop f**king with the police. Maybe he did exactly what they told him to do and they shot him anyways. But maybe, in that odd scenario, he acted in such a way that the officers on the scene grew taut. In that case, it's not murder as much as it is overreacting to the possibility of a threat.
Not that this has anything to do with this case but cop has two other excessive force complaints and has been disciplined for drawing fire arm.
Unless you can't read only a book can be an imminent threat.
Parked vehicle in the middle of a highway. Man acting 'out of sorts'. Man disobeying law enforcement checking on vehicle stopped in middle of highway. Man moving to parked vehicle ignoring police commands. Man reaches inside vehicle once gets to vehicle.
As I said, with four police officers... I think non lethal tactics could easily have been employed and I wish they were; however, it all could have been prevented if the guy had just been compliant.
There are two schools of thought for cops which are intensifying every event:
1. Cops are ultra cautious with people given recent cop shootings and the general cop hating attitudes which are prevalent.
2. Cops are ultra cautious to not wrongfully shoot someone given the exposure they'll face in light of doing so.
Which school of thought one might subscribe to really depends on each individual cop's perspective (shaped by their experiences to this point in time). Someone earlier shared a story where one of their friends got the shit kicked out of her and was badly hurt. She likely isn't going to take much of a chance in a similar situation. And I wouldn't blame her.
Would it be preferable for you if patience became the tactic, fewer wrongful shootings occurred, only there were more cop deaths given errors in assessment of risk given the latitude police are demanded to provide?
There are far more great people of all races than bad. But also, per capita there are more violent crimes committed by blacks and attacks on cops than whites. So regardless of training, it is only natural to be more cautious when approaching someone of color when you are a police officer. Not saying its right, its just reality.
Disabled?
Gun or book?
Daughter Facebook'd
Riots
Tear gas
Flipped cop cars
Injured officer
From the outside looking in Trump is looking more and more better.
I also didn't mention details like officer had their weapons drawn, his movements were erratic, and other items. Sheesh. Can a guy keep things concise at times or not?
Citing Boston police data and a 2014 report by the ACLU of Massachusetts that found blacks were disproportionately stopped by the city's police, the state’s highest court on Tuesday