police kill unarmed black man

1…1415171920…22

Comments

  • Go Beavers
    Go Beavers Posts: 9,552
    pjhawks said:

    Go Beavers said:

    mace1229 said:

    JC29856 said:

    mace1229 said:

    JC29856 said:

    mace1229 said:

    ponytd said:

    JC29856 said:

    The reports of officer involved shootings are at least getting creative, the latest in San Diego is a first, assumed a "shooting position".
    Lets see what they call a shooting position once video is released, if released.

    Any guesses what the shooting position was:
    Quick draw McGraw
    Classic Clint Eastwood 357
    Famous kneeling Osama AK47
    Standing Ron Jeremy
    Kobe Bryant step back

    cnn.com/2016/09/28/us/california-police-shooting/index.html

    From the video stills, looks like a shooting position to me. They said he did not have a gun, but he had something. this guy was probably messed up. Whether that be because of drugs, a mental condition, or whatever, he made a move at police. One fired his taser, the other fired his gun. Is it sad that this man died, yes, but what are cops supposed to do? They have a right to protect themselves just as much as anyone else.
    That's why I sometimes hate the media and all the publicity of these shootings. They get people all riled up over, more often then not, what turns out to be a justified shooting. But by the time that has been figured out BLM has already made up their mind on the situation.
    I don't know why anyone would mock a shooting position as a defense. There is definitely a stance most people would take, and from the picture you linked this guy even appears to raise his arms as if he was pointing a gun.
    But that doesn't matter to some, it will still be advertised as "unarmed black man killed by police" in the media and just confirm the false belief of open season and many will protest again over what is another justified shooting.
    Lets go with every shooting in the US since guns were invented was justified, let's just focus on this san diego shooting for now.
    Yes, making a judgement call from the still frame only, without any other information justifies the murder. But, that's not the only information officers had. They were called because of an epileptic seizure, once at the scene they have experience eye ears and instinct.
    Google epileptic seizures and tell me what you find?
    My comment wasn't meant that I am completely convinced this is justified. But from the article headings and your previous comment almost all but ignores that fact he at least to be taking a stance that would be consistent with shooting a gun, and mocked that defense.

    I know people with epileptic seizures, but I googled it anyway. All the articles I read didn't mention seizures, but that he was acting erratically and obstructing traffic. Seems more consistent with someone on drugs, but who knows, I didn't see any further information other than somebody claiming to be his sister said he's mentally ill.
    Didn't people claim the Sandy Hook shooter was mentally ill? Should we wait until he shoots up a school before we intervene? That shouldn't be a defense not to shoot if someone is posing an imminent threat.
    I'm not completely convinced it was justified because there are a lot of facts not out right now. But it is definitely far from mocking the police and hanging them out as murders again. I mean, yes it is only one still photo, but that one still photo does show an image that is consistent the police story and not with his hands up in the air as I'm sure the looters are going to claim.
    Speaking of Sandy Hook and still frame photos...have we ever seen a still of Adam Lanza entering the school or from inside the school like we seen of Harris and Klebold? I was intrigued by that horrible massacre.
    Anyway back to topic... Do you think the police immediately release info that contradicts their story? I would bet they watch the video before and then frame a plausible narrative around the video.
    They shouldn't release information in any scenario if there is a potential investigation that would lead to a trial.

    Weren't they the ones that released the Tulsa video, and that one did look bad. I wouldn't call her a "murderer," but doesn't seem it was necessary. But it got released pretty fast.

    Would you at least agree that an unarmed person can still justifiably be shot it a) the cop perceived he was going for the cop's weapon. b) the cop had reason the believe he was reaching for a gun (maybe reaching for something out of view), c) or in this case took a pose that resembles someone shooting a gun after failing to comply with police orders.

    If you can agree on that, then you can understand why these headings upset me, which was my original post. The media and news reports focus on the "unarmed black" portion. Knowing it will lead to protest that often turn into riots and looting, over something that has in more cases turned out to be justified. Title it the truth, "Potentially dangerous man threatened police and was shot."
    The media should report facts, and armed or unarmed is a fact. "Potentially" is subjective and not a fact, and the potential for danger is swayed by prejudice, which is why we have this thread.
    except the media sometimes reports what the family says as fact i.e. charlotte guy was holding a book before the true facts are actually out
    Did they report it as fact, or as a quote? The media I saw reported it as a quote.
  • pjhawks
    pjhawks Posts: 12,912
    Go Beavers said:

    pjhawks said:

    Go Beavers said:

    mace1229 said:

    JC29856 said:

    mace1229 said:

    JC29856 said:

    mace1229 said:

    ponytd said:

    JC29856 said:

    The reports of officer involved shootings are at least getting creative, the latest in San Diego is a first, assumed a "shooting position".
    Lets see what they call a shooting position once video is released, if released.

    Any guesses what the shooting position was:
    Quick draw McGraw
    Classic Clint Eastwood 357
    Famous kneeling Osama AK47
    Standing Ron Jeremy
    Kobe Bryant step back

    cnn.com/2016/09/28/us/california-police-shooting/index.html

    From the video stills, looks like a shooting position to me. They said he did not have a gun, but he had something. this guy was probably messed up. Whether that be because of drugs, a mental condition, or whatever, he made a move at police. One fired his taser, the other fired his gun. Is it sad that this man died, yes, but what are cops supposed to do? They have a right to protect themselves just as much as anyone else.
    That's why I sometimes hate the media and all the publicity of these shootings. They get people all riled up over, more often then not, what turns out to be a justified shooting. But by the time that has been figured out BLM has already made up their mind on the situation.
    I don't know why anyone would mock a shooting position as a defense. There is definitely a stance most people would take, and from the picture you linked this guy even appears to raise his arms as if he was pointing a gun.
    But that doesn't matter to some, it will still be advertised as "unarmed black man killed by police" in the media and just confirm the false belief of open season and many will protest again over what is another justified shooting.
    Lets go with every shooting in the US since guns were invented was justified, let's just focus on this san diego shooting for now.
    Yes, making a judgement call from the still frame only, without any other information justifies the murder. But, that's not the only information officers had. They were called because of an epileptic seizure, once at the scene they have experience eye ears and instinct.
    Google epileptic seizures and tell me what you find?
    My comment wasn't meant that I am completely convinced this is justified. But from the article headings and your previous comment almost all but ignores that fact he at least to be taking a stance that would be consistent with shooting a gun, and mocked that defense.

    I know people with epileptic seizures, but I googled it anyway. All the articles I read didn't mention seizures, but that he was acting erratically and obstructing traffic. Seems more consistent with someone on drugs, but who knows, I didn't see any further information other than somebody claiming to be his sister said he's mentally ill.
    Didn't people claim the Sandy Hook shooter was mentally ill? Should we wait until he shoots up a school before we intervene? That shouldn't be a defense not to shoot if someone is posing an imminent threat.
    I'm not completely convinced it was justified because there are a lot of facts not out right now. But it is definitely far from mocking the police and hanging them out as murders again. I mean, yes it is only one still photo, but that one still photo does show an image that is consistent the police story and not with his hands up in the air as I'm sure the looters are going to claim.
    Speaking of Sandy Hook and still frame photos...have we ever seen a still of Adam Lanza entering the school or from inside the school like we seen of Harris and Klebold? I was intrigued by that horrible massacre.
    Anyway back to topic... Do you think the police immediately release info that contradicts their story? I would bet they watch the video before and then frame a plausible narrative around the video.
    They shouldn't release information in any scenario if there is a potential investigation that would lead to a trial.

    Weren't they the ones that released the Tulsa video, and that one did look bad. I wouldn't call her a "murderer," but doesn't seem it was necessary. But it got released pretty fast.

    Would you at least agree that an unarmed person can still justifiably be shot it a) the cop perceived he was going for the cop's weapon. b) the cop had reason the believe he was reaching for a gun (maybe reaching for something out of view), c) or in this case took a pose that resembles someone shooting a gun after failing to comply with police orders.

    If you can agree on that, then you can understand why these headings upset me, which was my original post. The media and news reports focus on the "unarmed black" portion. Knowing it will lead to protest that often turn into riots and looting, over something that has in more cases turned out to be justified. Title it the truth, "Potentially dangerous man threatened police and was shot."
    The media should report facts, and armed or unarmed is a fact. "Potentially" is subjective and not a fact, and the potential for danger is swayed by prejudice, which is why we have this thread.
    except the media sometimes reports what the family says as fact i.e. charlotte guy was holding a book before the true facts are actually out
    Did they report it as fact, or as a quote? The media I saw reported it as a quote.
    come on man now you are just using semantics. the armed vs. unarmed isn't really a fact until it's fully investigated either is it not?
  • mace1229
    mace1229 Posts: 9,829
    pjhawks said:

    Go Beavers said:

    pjhawks said:

    Go Beavers said:

    mace1229 said:

    JC29856 said:

    mace1229 said:

    JC29856 said:

    mace1229 said:

    ponytd said:

    JC29856 said:

    The reports of officer involved shootings are at least getting creative, the latest in San Diego is a first, assumed a "shooting position".
    Lets see what they call a shooting position once video is released, if released.

    Any guesses what the shooting position was:
    Quick draw McGraw
    Classic Clint Eastwood 357
    Famous kneeling Osama AK47
    Standing Ron Jeremy
    Kobe Bryant step back

    cnn.com/2016/09/28/us/california-police-shooting/index.html

    From the video stills, looks like a shooting position to me. They said he did not have a gun, but he had something. this guy was probably messed up. Whether that be because of drugs, a mental condition, or whatever, he made a move at police. One fired his taser, the other fired his gun. Is it sad that this man died, yes, but what are cops supposed to do? They have a right to protect themselves just as much as anyone else.
    That's why I sometimes hate the media and all the publicity of these shootings. They get people all riled up over, more often then not, what turns out to be a justified shooting. But by the time that has been figured out BLM has already made up their mind on the situation.
    I don't know why anyone would mock a shooting position as a defense. There is definitely a stance most people would take, and from the picture you linked this guy even appears to raise his arms as if he was pointing a gun.
    But that doesn't matter to some, it will still be advertised as "unarmed black man killed by police" in the media and just confirm the false belief of open season and many will protest again over what is another justified shooting.
    Lets go with every shooting in the US since guns were invented was justified, let's just focus on this san diego shooting for now.
    Yes, making a judgement call from the still frame only, without any other information justifies the murder. But, that's not the only information officers had. They were called because of an epileptic seizure, once at the scene they have experience eye ears and instinct.
    Google epileptic seizures and tell me what you find?
    My comment wasn't meant that I am completely convinced this is justified. But from the article headings and your previous comment almost all but ignores that fact he at least to be taking a stance that would be consistent with shooting a gun, and mocked that defense.

    I know people with epileptic seizures, but I googled it anyway. All the articles I read didn't mention seizures, but that he was acting erratically and obstructing traffic. Seems more consistent with someone on drugs, but who knows, I didn't see any further information other than somebody claiming to be his sister said he's mentally ill.
    Didn't people claim the Sandy Hook shooter was mentally ill? Should we wait until he shoots up a school before we intervene? That shouldn't be a defense not to shoot if someone is posing an imminent threat.
    I'm not completely convinced it was justified because there are a lot of facts not out right now. But it is definitely far from mocking the police and hanging them out as murders again. I mean, yes it is only one still photo, but that one still photo does show an image that is consistent the police story and not with his hands up in the air as I'm sure the looters are going to claim.
    Speaking of Sandy Hook and still frame photos...have we ever seen a still of Adam Lanza entering the school or from inside the school like we seen of Harris and Klebold? I was intrigued by that horrible massacre.
    Anyway back to topic... Do you think the police immediately release info that contradicts their story? I would bet they watch the video before and then frame a plausible narrative around the video.
    They shouldn't release information in any scenario if there is a potential investigation that would lead to a trial.

    Weren't they the ones that released the Tulsa video, and that one did look bad. I wouldn't call her a "murderer," but doesn't seem it was necessary. But it got released pretty fast.

    Would you at least agree that an unarmed person can still justifiably be shot it a) the cop perceived he was going for the cop's weapon. b) the cop had reason the believe he was reaching for a gun (maybe reaching for something out of view), c) or in this case took a pose that resembles someone shooting a gun after failing to comply with police orders.

    If you can agree on that, then you can understand why these headings upset me, which was my original post. The media and news reports focus on the "unarmed black" portion. Knowing it will lead to protest that often turn into riots and looting, over something that has in more cases turned out to be justified. Title it the truth, "Potentially dangerous man threatened police and was shot."
    The media should report facts, and armed or unarmed is a fact. "Potentially" is subjective and not a fact, and the potential for danger is swayed by prejudice, which is why we have this thread.
    except the media sometimes reports what the family says as fact i.e. charlotte guy was holding a book before the true facts are actually out
    Did they report it as fact, or as a quote? The media I saw reported it as a quote.
    come on man now you are just using semantics. the armed vs. unarmed isn't really a fact until it's fully investigated either is it not?
    just like "hands up don't shoot" was taken as fact
  • Jason P
    Jason P Posts: 19,302
    ponytd said:

    Go Beavers said:

    mcgruff10 said:

    RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

    mcgruff10 said:

    does anybody have any reliable data to answer the following:
    how many people were killed by cops this year?
    of that total:
    how many were white?
    how many were black?
    how many had weapons on them?
    how many had prior criminal records?
    how many were on drugs or mentally ill?
    female?
    male?

    I was just interested in the breakdown.

    Here you go:

    In 2016, total is 708. In 2015 it was 990.

    Male:679
    Female: 29
    White:325
    Black:173
    Hispanic: 111
    Victim had Mental illness :169 no:539
    Had a weapon?:
    Gun:389
    Knife: 127
    Toy weapon:28
    Vehicle:43
    Unarmed:42

    No data on drug usage or criminal records that I could find


    https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2016/





    nice research bud. so only 42 were unarmed but of the 42 we aren't sure how many were under the influence of drugs.

    breaking the 2016 numbers down further:
    blacks make up 12.2% of the u.s. population but account for 24.4% shooting deaths by police.
    hispanic: 15.6% of shooting deaths by police and 12.5% of the american population.
    white: 63.7% of the total u.s. population and accounts for 45.9% of shooting deaths by police.
    Unarmed blacks are over three times more likely to be shot by cops than unarmed whites.
    Of the 42 "Unarmed" people that were killed by police this year:
    19 were white
    15 were black
    5 were hispanic
    3 were unknown

    You can look at each of the unarmed deaths on the Post website. It gives a brief description of each. Some of them were pure crap. some said the victim charged or got into a fight with an officer.
    That is an interesting statistic. But people will break down that statistic with another statistic so it can be disregarded.

    They probably don't track it, but I would like to see statistics of how many times police have drawn their weapon per year.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • Godfather.
    Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    another one bites the dust in El Cajon Ca. pointing a gun at a police officer is good way to get dead...El Cajon has turned into a shithole
    I grew up in east county and remember when things were different.

    Godfather.
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,668
    pjhawks said:

    Go Beavers said:

    pjhawks said:

    Go Beavers said:

    mace1229 said:

    JC29856 said:

    mace1229 said:

    JC29856 said:

    mace1229 said:

    ponytd said:

    JC29856 said:

    The reports of officer involved shootings are at least getting creative, the latest in San Diego is a first, assumed a "shooting position".
    Lets see what they call a shooting position once video is released, if released.

    Any guesses what the shooting position was:
    Quick draw McGraw
    Classic Clint Eastwood 357
    Famous kneeling Osama AK47
    Standing Ron Jeremy
    Kobe Bryant step back

    cnn.com/2016/09/28/us/california-police-shooting/index.html

    From the video stills, looks like a shooting position to me. They said he did not have a gun, but he had something. this guy was probably messed up. Whether that be because of drugs, a mental condition, or whatever, he made a move at police. One fired his taser, the other fired his gun. Is it sad that this man died, yes, but what are cops supposed to do? They have a right to protect themselves just as much as anyone else.
    That's why I sometimes hate the media and all the publicity of these shootings. They get people all riled up over, more often then not, what turns out to be a justified shooting. But by the time that has been figured out BLM has already made up their mind on the situation.
    I don't know why anyone would mock a shooting position as a defense. There is definitely a stance most people would take, and from the picture you linked this guy even appears to raise his arms as if he was pointing a gun.
    But that doesn't matter to some, it will still be advertised as "unarmed black man killed by police" in the media and just confirm the false belief of open season and many will protest again over what is another justified shooting.
    Lets go with every shooting in the US since guns were invented was justified, let's just focus on this san diego shooting for now.
    Yes, making a judgement call from the still frame only, without any other information justifies the murder. But, that's not the only information officers had. They were called because of an epileptic seizure, once at the scene they have experience eye ears and instinct.
    Google epileptic seizures and tell me what you find?
    My comment wasn't meant that I am completely convinced this is justified. But from the article headings and your previous comment almost all but ignores that fact he at least to be taking a stance that would be consistent with shooting a gun, and mocked that defense.

    I know people with epileptic seizures, but I googled it anyway. All the articles I read didn't mention seizures, but that he was acting erratically and obstructing traffic. Seems more consistent with someone on drugs, but who knows, I didn't see any further information other than somebody claiming to be his sister said he's mentally ill.
    Didn't people claim the Sandy Hook shooter was mentally ill? Should we wait until he shoots up a school before we intervene? That shouldn't be a defense not to shoot if someone is posing an imminent threat.
    I'm not completely convinced it was justified because there are a lot of facts not out right now. But it is definitely far from mocking the police and hanging them out as murders again. I mean, yes it is only one still photo, but that one still photo does show an image that is consistent the police story and not with his hands up in the air as I'm sure the looters are going to claim.
    Speaking of Sandy Hook and still frame photos...have we ever seen a still of Adam Lanza entering the school or from inside the school like we seen of Harris and Klebold? I was intrigued by that horrible massacre.
    Anyway back to topic... Do you think the police immediately release info that contradicts their story? I would bet they watch the video before and then frame a plausible narrative around the video.
    They shouldn't release information in any scenario if there is a potential investigation that would lead to a trial.

    Weren't they the ones that released the Tulsa video, and that one did look bad. I wouldn't call her a "murderer," but doesn't seem it was necessary. But it got released pretty fast.

    Would you at least agree that an unarmed person can still justifiably be shot it a) the cop perceived he was going for the cop's weapon. b) the cop had reason the believe he was reaching for a gun (maybe reaching for something out of view), c) or in this case took a pose that resembles someone shooting a gun after failing to comply with police orders.

    If you can agree on that, then you can understand why these headings upset me, which was my original post. The media and news reports focus on the "unarmed black" portion. Knowing it will lead to protest that often turn into riots and looting, over something that has in more cases turned out to be justified. Title it the truth, "Potentially dangerous man threatened police and was shot."
    The media should report facts, and armed or unarmed is a fact. "Potentially" is subjective and not a fact, and the potential for danger is swayed by prejudice, which is why we have this thread.
    except the media sometimes reports what the family says as fact i.e. charlotte guy was holding a book before the true facts are actually out
    Did they report it as fact, or as a quote? The media I saw reported it as a quote.
    come on man now you are just using semantics. the armed vs. unarmed isn't really a fact until it's fully investigated either is it not?
    Ummmm, that is not semantics at all. I think you need to learn what facts vs quotes are, and how to tell the difference between the two!
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • mace1229
    mace1229 Posts: 9,829
    PJ_Soul said:

    pjhawks said:

    Go Beavers said:

    pjhawks said:

    Go Beavers said:

    mace1229 said:

    JC29856 said:

    mace1229 said:

    JC29856 said:

    mace1229 said:

    ponytd said:

    JC29856 said:

    The reports of officer involved shootings are at least getting creative, the latest in San Diego is a first, assumed a "shooting position".
    Lets see what they call a shooting position once video is released, if released.

    Any guesses what the shooting position was:
    Quick draw McGraw
    Classic Clint Eastwood 357
    Famous kneeling Osama AK47
    Standing Ron Jeremy
    Kobe Bryant step back

    cnn.com/2016/09/28/us/california-police-shooting/index.html

    From the video stills, looks like a shooting position to me. They said he did not have a gun, but he had something. this guy was probably messed up. Whether that be because of drugs, a mental condition, or whatever, he made a move at police. One fired his taser, the other fired his gun. Is it sad that this man died, yes, but what are cops supposed to do? They have a right to protect themselves just as much as anyone else.
    That's why I sometimes hate the media and all the publicity of these shootings. They get people all riled up over, more often then not, what turns out to be a justified shooting. But by the time that has been figured out BLM has already made up their mind on the situation.
    I don't know why anyone would mock a shooting position as a defense. There is definitely a stance most people would take, and from the picture you linked this guy even appears to raise his arms as if he was pointing a gun.
    But that doesn't matter to some, it will still be advertised as "unarmed black man killed by police" in the media and just confirm the false belief of open season and many will protest again over what is another justified shooting.
    Lets go with every shooting in the US since guns were invented was justified, let's just focus on this san diego shooting for now.
    Yes, making a judgement call from the still frame only, without any other information justifies the murder. But, that's not the only information officers had. They were called because of an epileptic seizure, once at the scene they have experience eye ears and instinct.
    Google epileptic seizures and tell me what you find?
    My comment wasn't meant that I am completely convinced this is justified. But from the article headings and your previous comment almost all but ignores that fact he at least to be taking a stance that would be consistent with shooting a gun, and mocked that defense.

    I know people with epileptic seizures, but I googled it anyway. All the articles I read didn't mention seizures, but that he was acting erratically and obstructing traffic. Seems more consistent with someone on drugs, but who knows, I didn't see any further information other than somebody claiming to be his sister said he's mentally ill.
    Didn't people claim the Sandy Hook shooter was mentally ill? Should we wait until he shoots up a school before we intervene? That shouldn't be a defense not to shoot if someone is posing an imminent threat.
    I'm not completely convinced it was justified because there are a lot of facts not out right now. But it is definitely far from mocking the police and hanging them out as murders again. I mean, yes it is only one still photo, but that one still photo does show an image that is consistent the police story and not with his hands up in the air as I'm sure the looters are going to claim.
    Speaking of Sandy Hook and still frame photos...have we ever seen a still of Adam Lanza entering the school or from inside the school like we seen of Harris and Klebold? I was intrigued by that horrible massacre.
    Anyway back to topic... Do you think the police immediately release info that contradicts their story? I would bet they watch the video before and then frame a plausible narrative around the video.
    They shouldn't release information in any scenario if there is a potential investigation that would lead to a trial.

    Weren't they the ones that released the Tulsa video, and that one did look bad. I wouldn't call her a "murderer," but doesn't seem it was necessary. But it got released pretty fast.

    Would you at least agree that an unarmed person can still justifiably be shot it a) the cop perceived he was going for the cop's weapon. b) the cop had reason the believe he was reaching for a gun (maybe reaching for something out of view), c) or in this case took a pose that resembles someone shooting a gun after failing to comply with police orders.

    If you can agree on that, then you can understand why these headings upset me, which was my original post. The media and news reports focus on the "unarmed black" portion. Knowing it will lead to protest that often turn into riots and looting, over something that has in more cases turned out to be justified. Title it the truth, "Potentially dangerous man threatened police and was shot."
    The media should report facts, and armed or unarmed is a fact. "Potentially" is subjective and not a fact, and the potential for danger is swayed by prejudice, which is why we have this thread.
    except the media sometimes reports what the family says as fact i.e. charlotte guy was holding a book before the true facts are actually out
    Did they report it as fact, or as a quote? The media I saw reported it as a quote.
    come on man now you are just using semantics. the armed vs. unarmed isn't really a fact until it's fully investigated either is it not?
    Ummmm, that is not semantics at all. I think you need to learn what facts vs quotes are, and how to tell the difference between the two!
    We all here might be able to tell the difference between the two, but this also goes to my original point. When something like that is printed in the news many take it as fact. Ferguson was burned down because they allowed themselves to believe those lies, many of the "witnesses" weren't even at the scene. And many of the incidents since are just a repeat of that. Statements are made before facts are known, and by the time they are known its too late.
    It seems like you were willing to take the statements of the San Diego situation as fact and ignore the photo of the guy in a "shooting position" and criticize the police for using that as a defense though, is that not correct? You mentioned seizures and told me to look it up as if I didn't know, and used that as your argument, so you clearly took that at more than just a statement, all while mocking even such a thing as shooting stance even existed, even though there is a photo of it. I haven't seen video, or any other proof of seizures, only statements of witnesses, most who used the term "erratic behavior." So what are you considering fact in this case?
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,668
    edited September 2016
    mace1229 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    pjhawks said:

    Go Beavers said:

    pjhawks said:

    Go Beavers said:

    mace1229 said:

    JC29856 said:

    mace1229 said:

    JC29856 said:

    mace1229 said:

    ponytd said:

    JC29856 said:

    The reports of officer involved shootings are at least getting creative, the latest in San Diego is a first, assumed a "shooting position".
    Lets see what they call a shooting position once video is released, if released.

    Any guesses what the shooting position was:
    Quick draw McGraw
    Classic Clint Eastwood 357
    Famous kneeling Osama AK47
    Standing Ron Jeremy
    Kobe Bryant step back

    cnn.com/2016/09/28/us/california-police-shooting/index.html

    From the video stills, looks like a shooting position to me. They said he did not have a gun, but he had something. this guy was probably messed up. Whether that be because of drugs, a mental condition, or whatever, he made a move at police. One fired his taser, the other fired his gun. Is it sad that this man died, yes, but what are cops supposed to do? They have a right to protect themselves just as much as anyone else.
    That's why I sometimes hate the media and all the publicity of these shootings. They get people all riled up over, more often then not, what turns out to be a justified shooting. But by the time that has been figured out BLM has already made up their mind on the situation.
    I don't know why anyone would mock a shooting position as a defense. There is definitely a stance most people would take, and from the picture you linked this guy even appears to raise his arms as if he was pointing a gun.
    But that doesn't matter to some, it will still be advertised as "unarmed black man killed by police" in the media and just confirm the false belief of open season and many will protest again over what is another justified shooting.
    Lets go with every shooting in the US since guns were invented was justified, let's just focus on this san diego shooting for now.
    Yes, making a judgement call from the still frame only, without any other information justifies the murder. But, that's not the only information officers had. They were called because of an epileptic seizure, once at the scene they have experience eye ears and instinct.
    Google epileptic seizures and tell me what you find?
    My comment wasn't meant that I am completely convinced this is justified. But from the article headings and your previous comment almost all but ignores that fact he at least to be taking a stance that would be consistent with shooting a gun, and mocked that defense.

    I know people with epileptic seizures, but I googled it anyway. All the articles I read didn't mention seizures, but that he was acting erratically and obstructing traffic. Seems more consistent with someone on drugs, but who knows, I didn't see any further information other than somebody claiming to be his sister said he's mentally ill.
    Didn't people claim the Sandy Hook shooter was mentally ill? Should we wait until he shoots up a school before we intervene? That shouldn't be a defense not to shoot if someone is posing an imminent threat.
    I'm not completely convinced it was justified because there are a lot of facts not out right now. But it is definitely far from mocking the police and hanging them out as murders again. I mean, yes it is only one still photo, but that one still photo does show an image that is consistent the police story and not with his hands up in the air as I'm sure the looters are going to claim.
    Speaking of Sandy Hook and still frame photos...have we ever seen a still of Adam Lanza entering the school or from inside the school like we seen of Harris and Klebold? I was intrigued by that horrible massacre.
    Anyway back to topic... Do you think the police immediately release info that contradicts their story? I would bet they watch the video before and then frame a plausible narrative around the video.
    They shouldn't release information in any scenario if there is a potential investigation that would lead to a trial.

    Weren't they the ones that released the Tulsa video, and that one did look bad. I wouldn't call her a "murderer," but doesn't seem it was necessary. But it got released pretty fast.

    Would you at least agree that an unarmed person can still justifiably be shot it a) the cop perceived he was going for the cop's weapon. b) the cop had reason the believe he was reaching for a gun (maybe reaching for something out of view), c) or in this case took a pose that resembles someone shooting a gun after failing to comply with police orders.

    If you can agree on that, then you can understand why these headings upset me, which was my original post. The media and news reports focus on the "unarmed black" portion. Knowing it will lead to protest that often turn into riots and looting, over something that has in more cases turned out to be justified. Title it the truth, "Potentially dangerous man threatened police and was shot."
    The media should report facts, and armed or unarmed is a fact. "Potentially" is subjective and not a fact, and the potential for danger is swayed by prejudice, which is why we have this thread.
    except the media sometimes reports what the family says as fact i.e. charlotte guy was holding a book before the true facts are actually out
    Did they report it as fact, or as a quote? The media I saw reported it as a quote.
    come on man now you are just using semantics. the armed vs. unarmed isn't really a fact until it's fully investigated either is it not?
    Ummmm, that is not semantics at all. I think you need to learn what facts vs quotes are, and how to tell the difference between the two!
    We all here might be able to tell the difference between the two, but this also goes to my original point. When something like that is printed in the news many take it as fact. Ferguson was burned down because they allowed themselves to believe those lies, many of the "witnesses" weren't even at the scene. And many of the incidents since are just a repeat of that. Statements are made before facts are known, and by the time they are known its too late.
    It seems like you were willing to take the statements of the San Diego situation as fact and ignore the photo of the guy in a "shooting position" and criticize the police for using that as a defense though, is that not correct? You mentioned seizures and told me to look it up as if I didn't know, and used that as your argument, so you clearly took that at more than just a statement, all while mocking even such a thing as shooting stance even existed, even though there is a photo of it. I haven't seen video, or any other proof of seizures, only statements of witnesses, most who used the term "erratic behavior." So what are you considering fact in this case?
    I am not following the particular case closely enough to say.

    As for how folks are interpreting the news.... yeah, it's a massive problem. I think the education system and government actually need to make media literacy and awareness a massive priority in our society, because right now the way a lot of people are doing it is actually starting to fuck shit up.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • mace1229
    mace1229 Posts: 9,829
    I also just realized I accidentally combined your comments with another. I was referring to a few different comments from a few people by mistake.
  • ponytd
    ponytd Nashville Posts: 671
    Jason P said:


    That is an interesting statistic. But people will break down that statistic with another statistic so it can be disregarded.

    They probably don't track it, but I would like to see statistics of how many times police have drawn their weapon per year.

    Yeah, I don't think they track the stats of how many times a weapon has been drawn by police. It may be, but I haven't found it.

  • CM189191
    CM189191 Posts: 6,927
    Hey look, police manage to take armed shooting suspect into custody without killing him! 3 people injured
  • ponytd
    ponytd Nashville Posts: 671
    PJ_Soul said:



    I am not following the particular case closely enough to say.

    As for how folks are interpreting the news.... yeah, it's a massive problem. I think the education system and government actually need to make media literacy and awareness a massive priority in our society, because right now the way a lot of people are doing it is actually starting to fuck shit up.

    While I somewhat agree that the media needs to be more in control, the biggest problem is social media. That has caused way more problems than anything. Many people nowadays get their news from Facebook and twitter and take it as fact when most of it is complete BS. From most social media I see, it seems that unarmed black people are being hunted by cops and they are killing them at an alarming rate. In reality, 15 unarmed black people have been killed by police. And not all of them were innocent. Several attacked police, or made a threatening move.

    I'm definitely not saying we should just overlook all of these shootings, but statistics and facts get thrown out the window with most media and pretty much all social media and it drives hysteria.
  • mace1229
    mace1229 Posts: 9,829
    CM189191 said:

    Hey look, police manage to take armed shooting suspect into custody without killing him! 3 people injured

    Yeah, but looks like 1 dead and 3 others injured. But the guy with the gun is okay!
  • 2-feign-reluctance
    2-feign-reluctance TigerTown, USA Posts: 23,460
    Are people getting desensitized thanks to social media?
    www.cluthelee.com
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,668
    edited September 2016
    ponytd said:

    PJ_Soul said:



    I am not following the particular case closely enough to say.

    As for how folks are interpreting the news.... yeah, it's a massive problem. I think the education system and government actually need to make media literacy and awareness a massive priority in our society, because right now the way a lot of people are doing it is actually starting to fuck shit up.

    While I somewhat agree that the media needs to be more in control, the biggest problem is social media. That has caused way more problems than anything. Many people nowadays get their news from Facebook and twitter and take it as fact when most of it is complete BS. From most social media I see, it seems that unarmed black people are being hunted by cops and they are killing them at an alarming rate. In reality, 15 unarmed black people have been killed by police. And not all of them were innocent. Several attacked police, or made a threatening move.

    I'm definitely not saying we should just overlook all of these shootings, but statistics and facts get thrown out the window with most media and pretty much all social media and it drives hysteria.
    Indeed. Sorry, by media literacy I meant social media as well. That is one of the most important parts because too many people can't distinguish fact from fiction. There are still people out there who believe The Onion FFS, and basically think that if it's on the internet it must be true. They don't know how to tell the difference between reality, satire, propaganda, biased rhetoric, and falsehood. They don't even usually bother to check to see if something is true before sharing it as fact. All of this can be taught and needs to be, but no one is bothering.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • CM189191
    CM189191 Posts: 6,927
    mace1229 said:

    CM189191 said:

    Hey look, police manage to take armed shooting suspect into custody without killing him! 3 people injured

    Yeah, but looks like 1 dead and 3 others injured. But the guy with the gun is okay!
    how are the guns? are the guns safe?

    Have we determined the race of the individual yet? I need to know if it's a thug, an illegal, or just some poor troubled youth.
  • CM189191
    CM189191 Posts: 6,927
    ponytd said:

    Jason P said:


    That is an interesting statistic. But people will break down that statistic with another statistic so it can be disregarded.

    They probably don't track it, but I would like to see statistics of how many times police have drawn their weapon per year.

    Yeah, I don't think they track the stats of how many times a weapon has been drawn by police. It may be, but I haven't found it.

    I'd like to see some more stats behind police training:
    States require more training time to become a barber than a police officer
  • JC29856
    JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    Guy with epilepsy in SD is murdered by officer involved shooting, eye witnesses say police confiscated their cell phones, police say NO cell phones were confiscated but ACLU has one eye witness that says her phone was taken by police and are talking to others that say the same.
    WTF
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,668
    edited September 2016
    JC29856 said:

    Guy with epilepsy in SD is murdered by officer involved shooting, eye witnesses say police confiscated their cell phones, police say NO cell phones were confiscated but ACLU has one eye witness that says her phone was taken by police and are talking to others that say the same.
    WTF

    Is the epilepsy part relevant? If so, how so? Was he having a seizure when they killed him???

    The police backlash against video evidence is certainly getting more and more and disturbing.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • PJPOWER
    PJPOWER Posts: 6,499
    Here's another take on the incident...
    http://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2016/09/28/unarmed-black-man-alfred-olango-killed-el-cajon-police-feigned-drawing-gun/

Categories