What the hell happened in Wisconsin?

Last-12-Exit

So a cop is responding to a disturbance call. He hears a commotion in the house or apartment. Opens the door. A scuffle ensues in which an 18 year old assaulted a police officer. The police officer shot the guy.

When are people going to understand that you can NOT punch, push, kick, slap, lick, or grab a police officers gun. This will be the end result.


Has somebody heard a different story than this?

rgambs

Last-12-Exit said:

So a cop is responding to a disturbance call. He hears a commotion in the house or apartment. Opens the door. A scuffle ensues in which an 18 year old assaulted a police officer. The police officer shot the guy.

When are people going to understand that you can NOT punch, push, kick, slap, lick, or grab a police officers gun. This will be the end result.


Has somebody heard a different story than this?

Yeah its dumb to scuffle with police, and you are likely to get shot, but that doesn't make it right. Lots of people, of all races and places, don't respond well to another person laying hands on them, cop or not... Should they die for that?
Are you saying that pushes and slaps of officers should be punished with death?

PJfanwillneverleave1

Not sure where it says that licking a police officers gun will result in death.

backseatLover12

Oh great, another cop thread of the same shit, different day...

Last-12-Exit

backseatLover12 said:

Oh great, another cop thread of the same shit, different day...

I know. You'd think people would learn that fighting with the cops won't end well for the citizen most of the time.

backseatLover12

And one should know that cops aren't above the law to dictate death to anyone who dares not to obey and comply...

There's a reason why there are no statistics on national deaths by police brutality. Cops have gotten away with it for this long, well, no more...

Last-12-Exit

The cops have every right to defend themselves by using deadly force.

backseatLover12

it's like talking to a wall, you just refuse to let it sink in.

Whatever, man. Enjoy your screwed up view of the cops vs. the rest of us. I'm done talking to a wall.

Last-12-Exit

There's nothing that needs to sink in here. Your judge, jury, executioner cries don't fit here. We, the citizens of this country, give the police this right. Every single time a cop shoots a dumb ass for hitting him, the cop is supposed to burn in hell?

Thirty Bills Unpaid

Last-12-Exit said:

There's nothing that needs to sink in here. Your judge, jury, executioner cries don't fit here. We, the citizens of this country, give the police this right. Every single time a cop shoots a dumb ass for hitting him, the cop is supposed to burn in hell?

I'm pretty sure some would prefer cop funerals versus idiot criminal funerals.

Better safe than sorry... meaning: it's better the cop die or get severely hurt instead of some idiot that engages a cop in a fight at the scene of an investigation getting shot or killed.

Stupidity.

Bentleyspop

Last-12-Exit said:

There's nothing that needs to sink in here. Your judge, jury, executioner cries don't fit here. We, the citizens of this country, give the police this right. Every single time a cop shoots a dumb ass for hitting him, the cop is supposed to burn in hell?

If you were attacked by that kid you would be fully within your rights to defend yourself. And if that act of self defense meant your attacker dies then that would be within the boundaries set by self-defense laws.

However there are some people on here who believe that all police officers are evil.
And if a cop defends himself and kills his attacker that cop must die a fiery death in hell.

HughFreakingDillon

If i am getting detained by a cop, even if totally wrong, i would NOT fucking resist. He carries a gun to protect those around him, and if he believes you are trying to get his gun or harm him, you are going to get shot. Your fault.

rr165892

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Last-12-Exit said:

There's nothing that needs to sink in here. Your judge, jury, executioner cries don't fit here. We, the citizens of this country, give the police this right. Every single time a cop shoots a dumb ass for hitting him, the cop is supposed to burn in hell?

I'm pretty sure some would prefer cop funerals versus idiot criminal funerals.

Better safe than sorry... meaning: it's better the cop die or get severely hurt instead of some idiot that engages a cop in a fight at the scene of an investigation getting shot or killed.

Stupidity.

Since it's always the same posters on here on the same sides of the issue.Can we agree that those of us who live in reality,understand that assaulting an officer could and most likely get u killed,much like running around inside a tiger cage with a meat suit on will likely get you eatin.

There sure is a lot of excuses for law breakers,terrorist and folks who don't control there own actions on these boards.ACCOUNTABILITY,people.

benjs

Mandate the wide-angle, always-on filming of police visits with audio. Refuse the police access to said recordings and provide a process for citizens to access their own footage (supervised) to use in the case of conflict resolution requirements. Assume the police are guilty until proven innocent (because in such a case, that would mean a citizen is innocent until proven guilty - a proper filming process would ensure this remains reasonable).

Why do we need to be binary about what police can or can't do? I'd rather say that we should dedicate our energy towards baking accountability into police jobs. With all due respect, I don't complain about a high car insurance premium because I'm a 25 year old man and my fellow 25 year old men are statistically more likely to be in car accidents. If there's a skewing of data suggesting police are abusing power and acting with brutality: sorry officers, you've earned the obligation of being subjected to public scrutiny with always-on evidence gathering tools. And if you have nothing to hide, why would you care?

benjs

An afterthought: police ought to be able to file claims against citizens as well, just their access to evidence video should be monitored just as closely as citizens'.

rgambs

rr165892 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Last-12-Exit said:

There's nothing that needs to sink in here. Your judge, jury, executioner cries don't fit here. We, the citizens of this country, give the police this right. Every single time a cop shoots a dumb ass for hitting him, the cop is supposed to burn in hell?

I'm pretty sure some would prefer cop funerals versus idiot criminal funerals.

Better safe than sorry... meaning: it's better the cop die or get severely hurt instead of some idiot that engages a cop in a fight at the scene of an investigation getting shot or killed.

Stupidity.

Since it's always the same posters on here on the same sides of the issue.Can we agree that those of us who live in reality,understand that assaulting an officer could and most likely get u killed,much like running around inside a tiger cage with a meat suit on will likely get you eatin.

There sure is a lot of excuses for law breakers,terrorist and folks who don't control there own actions on these boards.ACCOUNTABILITY,people.

Where is the ACCOUNTABILITY in giving police free reign to end the life of anyone they claim is assaulting them?

rgambs

Bentleyspop said:

Last-12-Exit said:

There's nothing that needs to sink in here. Your judge, jury, executioner cries don't fit here. We, the citizens of this country, give the police this right. Every single time a cop shoots a dumb ass for hitting him, the cop is supposed to burn in hell?

If you were attacked by that kid you would be fully within your rights to defend yourself. And if that act of self defense meant your attacker dies then that would be within the boundaries set by self-defense laws.

However there are some people on here who believe that all police officers are evil.
And if a cop defends himself and kills his attacker that cop must die a fiery death in hell.

This just isn't accurate. In civillian life, where people have to answer for what they do, you can't kill someone for slapping you. It just doesn't work that way.

Indifference71

rgambs said:

rr165892 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Last-12-Exit said:

There's nothing that needs to sink in here. Your judge, jury, executioner cries don't fit here. We, the citizens of this country, give the police this right. Every single time a cop shoots a dumb ass for hitting him, the cop is supposed to burn in hell?

I'm pretty sure some would prefer cop funerals versus idiot criminal funerals.

Better safe than sorry... meaning: it's better the cop die or get severely hurt instead of some idiot that engages a cop in a fight at the scene of an investigation getting shot or killed.

Stupidity.

Since it's always the same posters on here on the same sides of the issue.Can we agree that those of us who live in reality,understand that assaulting an officer could and most likely get u killed,much like running around inside a tiger cage with a meat suit on will likely get you eatin.

There sure is a lot of excuses for law breakers,terrorist and folks who don't control there own actions on these boards.ACCOUNTABILITY,people.

Where is the ACCOUNTABILITY in giving police free reign to end the life of anyone they claim is assaulting them?

Just curious....what is a cop supposed to do if someone attacks them? Do you think it's ever acceptable for a cop to shoot someone if they feel their life or people in the area's lives are in danger?

It's easy to just scream about cops shooting people....what's the answer?

rgambs

Indifference71 said:

rgambs said:

rr165892 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Last-12-Exit said:

There's nothing that needs to sink in here. Your judge, jury, executioner cries don't fit here. We, the citizens of this country, give the police this right. Every single time a cop shoots a dumb ass for hitting him, the cop is supposed to burn in hell?

I'm pretty sure some would prefer cop funerals versus idiot criminal funerals.

Better safe than sorry... meaning: it's better the cop die or get severely hurt instead of some idiot that engages a cop in a fight at the scene of an investigation getting shot or killed.

Stupidity.

Since it's always the same posters on here on the same sides of the issue.Can we agree that those of us who live in reality,understand that assaulting an officer could and most likely get u killed,much like running around inside a tiger cage with a meat suit on will likely get you eatin.

There sure is a lot of excuses for law breakers,terrorist and folks who don't control there own actions on these boards.ACCOUNTABILITY,people.

Where is the ACCOUNTABILITY in giving police free reign to end the life of anyone they claim is assaulting them?

Just curious....what is a cop supposed to do if someone attacks them? Do you think it's ever acceptable for a cop to shoot someone if they feel their life or people in the area's lives are in danger?

It's easy to just scream about cops shooting people....what's the answer?

A cop should do the same when attacked as you or I should do when attacked...apply force at a level which ends the threat without escalating to fatal force immediately.
Of course I think it's USUALLY acceptable for a cop to shoot someone when they feel their life is in danger!
The problem is that there is no process which actually attempts to determine if their life was in danger or not. The investigations into these shootings are a show and nothing more in most cases, if they weren't, we would see cops losing their jobs more often.

There are plenty of answers, which we list frequently and then have to list again because cop defenders ignore them.
Train police better...much better!
Pay police better...much much better!
Body cameras
Non-lethal methods on unarmed suspects
Independent investigations of fatal shootings and allegations of excessive force
Remove from the fforce, or at least "street duty" individuals who unnecessarily kill unarmed suspects
That's a good start.

callen

Last-12-Exit said:

So a cop is responding to a disturbance call. He hears a commotion in the house or apartment. Opens the door. A scuffle ensues in which an 18 year old assaulted a police officer. The police officer shot the guy.

When are people going to understand that you can NOT punch, push, kick, slap, lick, or grab a police officers gun. This will be the end result.


Has somebody heard a different story than this?

Agree that this is being blown out of proportions.

Indifference71

rgambs said:

Indifference71 said:

rgambs said:

rr165892 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Last-12-Exit said:

There's nothing that needs to sink in here. Your judge, jury, executioner cries don't fit here. We, the citizens of this country, give the police this right. Every single time a cop shoots a dumb ass for hitting him, the cop is supposed to burn in hell?

I'm pretty sure some would prefer cop funerals versus idiot criminal funerals.

Better safe than sorry... meaning: it's better the cop die or get severely hurt instead of some idiot that engages a cop in a fight at the scene of an investigation getting shot or killed.

Stupidity.

Since it's always the same posters on here on the same sides of the issue.Can we agree that those of us who live in reality,understand that assaulting an officer could and most likely get u killed,much like running around inside a tiger cage with a meat suit on will likely get you eatin.

There sure is a lot of excuses for law breakers,terrorist and folks who don't control there own actions on these boards.ACCOUNTABILITY,people.

Where is the ACCOUNTABILITY in giving police free reign to end the life of anyone they claim is assaulting them?

Just curious....what is a cop supposed to do if someone attacks them? Do you think it's ever acceptable for a cop to shoot someone if they feel their life or people in the area's lives are in danger?

It's easy to just scream about cops shooting people....what's the answer?

A cop should do the same when attacked as you or I should do when attacked...apply force at a level which ends the threat without escalating to fatal force immediately.
Of course I think it's USUALLY acceptable for a cop to shoot someone when they feel their life is in danger!
The problem is that there is no process which actually attempts to determine if their life was in danger or not. The investigations into these shootings are a show and nothing more in most cases, if they weren't, we would see cops losing their jobs more often.

.

I don't think there's a process that will ever be able to determine that 100%. Anytime someone attacks a cop, the cop's life is in danger. So what are they supposed to do? Reach for their taser and hope that the person attacking them doesn't get their gun?

rgambs

Of course not 100% but we could at least TRY for fucking 50% that would be a nice change.

Indifference71 said:

rgambs said:

Indifference71 said:

rgambs said:

rr165892 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Last-12-Exit said:

There's nothing that needs to sink in here. Your judge, jury, executioner cries don't fit here. We, the citizens of this country, give the police this right. Every single time a cop shoots a dumb ass for hitting him, the cop is supposed to burn in hell?

I'm pretty sure some would prefer cop funerals versus idiot criminal funerals.

Better safe than sorry... meaning: it's better the cop die or get severely hurt instead of some idiot that engages a cop in a fight at the scene of an investigation getting shot or killed.

Stupidity.

Since it's always the same posters on here on the same sides of the issue.Can we agree that those of us who live in reality,understand that assaulting an officer could and most likely get u killed,much like running around inside a tiger cage with a meat suit on will likely get you eatin.

There sure is a lot of excuses for law breakers,terrorist and folks who don't control there own actions on these boards.ACCOUNTABILITY,people.

Where is the ACCOUNTABILITY in giving police free reign to end the life of anyone they claim is assaulting them?

Just curious....what is a cop supposed to do if someone attacks them? Do you think it's ever acceptable for a cop to shoot someone if they feel their life or people in the area's lives are in danger?

It's easy to just scream about cops shooting people....what's the answer?

A cop should do the same when attacked as you or I should do when attacked...apply force at a level which ends the threat without escalating to fatal force immediately.
Of course I think it's USUALLY acceptable for a cop to shoot someone when they feel their life is in danger!
The problem is that there is no process which actually attempts to determine if their life was in danger or not. The investigations into these shootings are a show and nothing more in most cases, if they weren't, we would see cops losing their jobs more often.

.

I don't think there's a process that will ever be able to determine that 100%. Anytime someone attacks a cop, the cop's life is in danger. So what are they supposed to do? Reach for their taser and hope that the person attacking them doesn't get their gun?

That's just a fluffy pile of stinky poo. Seriously?
Prison guards don't just shoot to kill every time they get molested and somehow, they get on ok without being murdered cconstantly.

Last-12-Exit

Did you just say prison guards don't shoot every time they're molested?

rgambs

And what about all the folks who get gunned down cuz they had a wallet or,cellphone in their hands... Where is the ACCOUNTABILITY for their killers?

Indifference71

rgambs said:

Of course not 100% but we could at least TRY for fucking 50% that would be a nice change.

Indifference71 said:

rgambs said:

Indifference71 said:

rgambs said:

rr165892 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Last-12-Exit said:

There's nothing that needs to sink in here. Your judge, jury, executioner cries don't fit here. We, the citizens of this country, give the police this right. Every single time a cop shoots a dumb ass for hitting him, the cop is supposed to burn in hell?

I'm pretty sure some would prefer cop funerals versus idiot criminal funerals.

Better safe than sorry... meaning: it's better the cop die or get severely hurt instead of some idiot that engages a cop in a fight at the scene of an investigation getting shot or killed.

Stupidity.

Since it's always the same posters on here on the same sides of the issue.Can we agree that those of us who live in reality,understand that assaulting an officer could and most likely get u killed,much like running around inside a tiger cage with a meat suit on will likely get you eatin.

There sure is a lot of excuses for law breakers,terrorist and folks who don't control there own actions on these boards.ACCOUNTABILITY,people.

Where is the ACCOUNTABILITY in giving police free reign to end the life of anyone they claim is assaulting them?

Just curious....what is a cop supposed to do if someone attacks them? Do you think it's ever acceptable for a cop to shoot someone if they feel their life or people in the area's lives are in danger?

It's easy to just scream about cops shooting people....what's the answer?

A cop should do the same when attacked as you or I should do when attacked...apply force at a level which ends the threat without escalating to fatal force immediately.
Of course I think it's USUALLY acceptable for a cop to shoot someone when they feel their life is in danger!
The problem is that there is no process which actually attempts to determine if their life was in danger or not. The investigations into these shootings are a show and nothing more in most cases, if they weren't, we would see cops losing their jobs more often.

.

I don't think there's a process that will ever be able to determine that 100%. Anytime someone attacks a cop, the cop's life is in danger. So what are they supposed to do? Reach for their taser and hope that the person attacking them doesn't get their gun?

That's just a fluffy pile of stinky poo. Seriously?
Prison guards don't just shoot to kill every time they get molested and somehow, they get on ok without being murdered cconstantly.

So you're saying that someone attacking you and trying to steal your gun doesn't put your life in danger?

Also- don't prison guards not carry guns?

rgambs

Last-12-Exit said:

Did you just say prison guards don't shoot every time they're molested?

I didn't mean sexually obviously lol

rr165892

rgambs said:

And what about all the folks who get gunned down cuz they had a wallet or,cellphone in their hands... Where is the ACCOUNTABILITY for their killers?

You see now that is valid point.If the person isn't attacking the officer,and an officer shoots a guy just holding his wallet/phone/keys etc.Then that officer should be held to answer for his actions.No question,no argument.Im not advocating that police get to run rough shot in every case.But this discussion is yet another case of a person who physically assaults the officer.Police are trIned to draw their weapons in those situations and in a split second have to not only decide the best course of action for himself and those in proximity .You can't expect them to have the luxury of hindsight in these split second decisions.Bottom line if the punk had not jumped the cop he would be alive.Lets not blame the officer for this kids poor descisions.

rgambs

Indifference71 said:

rgambs said:

Of course not 100% but we could at least TRY for fucking 50% that would be a nice change.

Indifference71 said:

rgambs said:

Indifference71 said:

rgambs said:

rr165892 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Last-12-Exit said:

There's nothing that needs to sink in here. Your judge, jury, executioner cries don't fit here. We, the citizens of this country, give the police this right. Every single time a cop shoots a dumb ass for hitting him, the cop is supposed to burn in hell?

I'm pretty sure some would prefer cop funerals versus idiot criminal funerals.

Better safe than sorry... meaning: it's better the cop die or get severely hurt instead of some idiot that engages a cop in a fight at the scene of an investigation getting shot or killed.

Stupidity.

Since it's always the same posters on here on the same sides of the issue.Can we agree that those of us who live in reality,understand that assaulting an officer could and most likely get u killed,much like running around inside a tiger cage with a meat suit on will likely get you eatin.

There sure is a lot of excuses for law breakers,terrorist and folks who don't control there own actions on these boards.ACCOUNTABILITY,people.

Where is the ACCOUNTABILITY in giving police free reign to end the life of anyone they claim is assaulting them?

Just curious....what is a cop supposed to do if someone attacks them? Do you think it's ever acceptable for a cop to shoot someone if they feel their life or people in the area's lives are in danger?

It's easy to just scream about cops shooting people....what's the answer?

A cop should do the same when attacked as you or I should do when attacked...apply force at a level which ends the threat without escalating to fatal force immediately.
Of course I think it's USUALLY acceptable for a cop to shoot someone when they feel their life is in danger!
The problem is that there is no process which actually attempts to determine if their life was in danger or not. The investigations into these shootings are a show and nothing more in most cases, if they weren't, we would see cops losing their jobs more often.

.

I don't think there's a process that will ever be able to determine that 100%. Anytime someone attacks a cop, the cop's life is in danger. So what are they supposed to do? Reach for their taser and hope that the person attacking them doesn't get their gun?

That's just a fluffy pile of stinky poo. Seriously?
Prison guards don't just shoot to kill every time they get molested and somehow, they get on ok without being murdered cconstantly.

So you're saying that someone attacking you and trying to steal your gun doesn't put your life in danger?

Also- don't prison guards not carry guns?

I'm saying that just because the cops get impunity by claiming there was an attempt at the weapon doesn't make it true. Body cams would help alot. Do you really think everyone is always reaching for the gun?

HughFreakingDillon

put yourself in their situation for a milisecond; they see someone..a possibly shady character who may or may not have just gunned down a kid.....you live in a world where everyone and their dog carries and conceals.......the person refuses to obey your orders, and reaches into their inside jacket pocket when you tell them to put their hands behind their head....it's dark......your child and wife and whole life flash before your eyes......what would YOU do?

You have a SPLIT SECOND to decide if you or someone with you/around you is going to die. That is the reality that cops live in. A split fucking second. All because some dipshit is thinking "but I was just reaching for my phone when you told me to put my hands up! I was getting a TEXT, muthafucka!".

sorry, but in my eyes, you obey the police and their requests. everything else is on you. they do what they do to protect you.

in other scenarios, like being pulled over for no reason, yes, you have every right to question your constitutional rights and if they are being violated, but only do that in a normal, low-stress situation.

rgambs

rr165892 said:

rgambs said:

And what about all the folks who get gunned down cuz they had a wallet or,cellphone in their hands... Where is the ACCOUNTABILITY for their killers?

You see now that is valid point.If the person isn't attacking the officer,and an officer shoots a guy just holding his wallet/phone/keys etc.Then that officer should be held to answer for his actions.No question,no argument.Im not advocating that police get to run rough shot in every case.But this discussion is yet another case of a person who physically assaults the officer.Police are trIned to draw their weapons in those situations and in a split second have to not only decide the best course of action for himself and those in proximity .You can't expect them to have the luxury of hindsight in these split second decisions.Bottom line if the punk had not jumped the cop he would be alive.Lets not blame the officer for this kids poor descisions.

The problem here is that there is no evidence that the punk jumped the cop aside from his word.

And yes, I do hold them accountable for split second decisions...it's their job. An anesthesiologist is responsible for their split second dedecisions of life and death, many doctors are. Accountability is all around us, but not so much in the police force.

Indifference71

rgambs said:

Indifference71 said:

rgambs said:

Of course not 100% but we could at least TRY for fucking 50% that would be a nice change.

Indifference71 said:

rgambs said:

Indifference71 said:

rgambs said:

rr165892 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Last-12-Exit said:

There's nothing that needs to sink in here. Your judge, jury, executioner cries don't fit here. We, the citizens of this country, give the police this right. Every single time a cop shoots a dumb ass for hitting him, the cop is supposed to burn in hell?

I'm pretty sure some would prefer cop funerals versus idiot criminal funerals.

Better safe than sorry... meaning: it's better the cop die or get severely hurt instead of some idiot that engages a cop in a fight at the scene of an investigation getting shot or killed.

Stupidity.

Since it's always the same posters on here on the same sides of the issue.Can we agree that those of us who live in reality,understand that assaulting an officer could and most likely get u killed,much like running around inside a tiger cage with a meat suit on will likely get you eatin.

There sure is a lot of excuses for law breakers,terrorist and folks who don't control there own actions on these boards.ACCOUNTABILITY,people.

Where is the ACCOUNTABILITY in giving police free reign to end the life of anyone they claim is assaulting them?

Just curious....what is a cop supposed to do if someone attacks them? Do you think it's ever acceptable for a cop to shoot someone if they feel their life or people in the area's lives are in danger?

It's easy to just scream about cops shooting people....what's the answer?

A cop should do the same when attacked as you or I should do when attacked...apply force at a level which ends the threat without escalating to fatal force immediately.
Of course I think it's USUALLY acceptable for a cop to shoot someone when they feel their life is in danger!
The problem is that there is no process which actually attempts to determine if their life was in danger or not. The investigations into these shootings are a show and nothing more in most cases, if they weren't, we would see cops losing their jobs more often.

.

I don't think there's a process that will ever be able to determine that 100%. Anytime someone attacks a cop, the cop's life is in danger. So what are they supposed to do? Reach for their taser and hope that the person attacking them doesn't get their gun?

That's just a fluffy pile of stinky poo. Seriously?
Prison guards don't just shoot to kill every time they get molested and somehow, they get on ok without being murdered cconstantly.

So you're saying that someone attacking you and trying to steal your gun doesn't put your life in danger?

Also- don't prison guards not carry guns?

I'm saying that just because the cops get impunity by claiming there was an attempt at the weapon doesn't make it true. Body cams would help alot. Do you really think everyone is always reaching for the gun?

Oh yeah- I'm all for body cams. I think some of the constant outrage would go away when people see exactly what some of these cops are dealing with. And it would also weed out the cops that use their weapons when it's unnecessary.

I don't know if people are always reaching for a cops gun. But in order to protect themselves, don't cops have to assume that? I don't know...I don't think there's a perfect solution