Police shooting in North Charleston

1…567911

Comments

  • PJfanwillneverleave1
    PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 12,885
    edited April 2015
    Well the mourning has started.

    Good thing the priest explains why it happened.
    5th paragraph
    fuck me

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/hundreds-attend-funeral-for-police-shooting-victim-walter-scott/article23888904/
    Post edited by PJfanwillneverleave1 on
  • josevolution
    josevolution Posts: 31,784
    badbrains said:

    dignin said:

    For someone who was acting so irrational he looked pretty cool, calm and collected as he shot 8 times at a man running away from him. Then pretty calm as he walked to the victim and handcuffed him. He looked a little more hurried when he went back to grab an object to then later throw it beside the victim. Then he looked pretty calm as he stood over the victim as he died. I don't think I would have my shit together like that, but I'm not him.

    Imagine if he used that run to get the victim instead of running to plant evidence? We wouldn't be having this thread. Although the new one with the man and horse is pretty fucked up.
    Oh don't worry BB will be having similar discussion again soon you can take that to the bank
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • eddiec
    eddiec Posts: 3,962
    I am in no way saying what the officer did was right but...
    I live in Ireland, the cops don't have guns. If I'm committing a crime and the police show up and tell me to freeze, well, I may have a run for it. It's not like they can shoot me. At most they'll tackle me if they catch me, maybe beat me a little and then arrest me. It's worth the risk.
  • Thirty Bills Unpaid
    Thirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    eddiec said:

    I am in no way saying what the officer did was right but...
    I live in Ireland, the cops don't have guns. If I'm committing a crime and the police show up and tell me to freeze, well, I may have a run for it. It's not like they can shoot me. At most they'll tackle me if they catch me, maybe beat me a little and then arrest me. It's worth the risk.

    Do you prefer your law enforcement operating this way?

    Everyone is armed in the US. It's a mess. The police would be rendered useless and at risk with a no gun policy of law enforcement.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • eddiec
    eddiec Posts: 3,962
    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    eddiec said:

    I am in no way saying what the officer did was right but...
    I live in Ireland, the cops don't have guns. If I'm committing a crime and the police show up and tell me to freeze, well, I may have a run for it. It's not like they can shoot me. At most they'll tackle me if they catch me, maybe beat me a little and then arrest me. It's worth the risk.

    Do you prefer your law enforcement operating this way?

    Everyone is armed in the US. It's a mess. The police would be rendered useless and at risk with a no gun policy of law enforcement.
    I'm in favor of police having guns but the no gun thing seems to work here. I'm from NY but I've been here 10 years. It's something I haven't really put a lot of thought into. I will say this, the cops here are much different than in the States. In the States I always feel cops treat you like a criminal and enforce this superiority complex over you. In Ireland they are much more approachable. Unless of course you're a scumbag, then you're in the same boat.

  • Thirty Bills Unpaid
    Thirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    eddiec said:

    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    eddiec said:

    I am in no way saying what the officer did was right but...
    I live in Ireland, the cops don't have guns. If I'm committing a crime and the police show up and tell me to freeze, well, I may have a run for it. It's not like they can shoot me. At most they'll tackle me if they catch me, maybe beat me a little and then arrest me. It's worth the risk.

    Do you prefer your law enforcement operating this way?

    Everyone is armed in the US. It's a mess. The police would be rendered useless and at risk with a no gun policy of law enforcement.
    I'm in favor of police having guns but the no gun thing seems to work here. I'm from NY but I've been here 10 years. It's something I haven't really put a lot of thought into. I will say this, the cops here are much different than in the States. In the States I always feel cops treat you like a criminal and enforce this superiority complex over you. In Ireland they are much more approachable. Unless of course you're a scumbag, then you're in the same boat.

    Gun problems of the US aside, what other observations could you make comparing the country's two cultures?

    For example, would you say your country has a drug problem? If so, does crime manifest itself supporting an illegal drug trade? What does this crime look like?
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • eddiec
    eddiec Posts: 3,962
    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    eddiec said:

    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    eddiec said:

    I am in no way saying what the officer did was right but...
    I live in Ireland, the cops don't have guns. If I'm committing a crime and the police show up and tell me to freeze, well, I may have a run for it. It's not like they can shoot me. At most they'll tackle me if they catch me, maybe beat me a little and then arrest me. It's worth the risk.

    Do you prefer your law enforcement operating this way?

    Everyone is armed in the US. It's a mess. The police would be rendered useless and at risk with a no gun policy of law enforcement.
    I'm in favor of police having guns but the no gun thing seems to work here. I'm from NY but I've been here 10 years. It's something I haven't really put a lot of thought into. I will say this, the cops here are much different than in the States. In the States I always feel cops treat you like a criminal and enforce this superiority complex over you. In Ireland they are much more approachable. Unless of course you're a scumbag, then you're in the same boat.

    Gun problems of the US aside, what other observations could you make comparing the country's two cultures?

    For example, would you say your country has a drug problem? If so, does crime manifest itself supporting an illegal drug trade? What does this crime look like?
    I'm in the west of Ireland. If I was in Dublin I could probably answer that better. I know Dublin has had big issues with heroin. Limerick has constant gang wars over drugs. I believe there are certain cops on task forces who carry guns in Limerick and Dublin.


  • callen
    callen Posts: 6,388
    Ed thanks for adding your perspective.
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • Last-12-Exit
    Last-12-Exit Charleston, SC Posts: 8,661
    Interesting.

    http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/04/12/game-changer-or-paradigm-shift-walter-scott-shooting-enhanced-video-shows-officer-slager-with-taser-darts/



  • g under p
    g under p Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,237
    Last-12-Exit said:

    Interesting.

    http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/04/12/game-changer-or-paradigm-shift-walter-scott-shooting-enhanced-video-shows-officer-slager-with-taser-darts/



    You see now this will surely be the source his defense of former officer Slager. Which in turn justified him to shoot what appeared to be an unarmed man fleeing from the officer.

    Also if there's no video there would never be a thread here on AMT, it wouldn't even be a news story.

    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)


  • Last-12-Exit
    Last-12-Exit Charleston, SC Posts: 8,661
    The "if there was no video" argument is a non-argument. There is video. And there is a body with 5 bullets in his back. Why nobody thinks that is relevant is beyond me.
  • WhatYouTaughtMe
    WhatYouTaughtMe Posts: 4,957
    Last-12-Exit said:

    The "if there was no video" argument is a non-argument. There is video. And there is a body with 5 bullets in his back. Why nobody thinks that is relevant is beyond me.

    I think it's relevant. No matter what transpired prior, the officer murdered him while he was running away unarmed.
  • Thirty Bills Unpaid
    Thirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    This fight occurred in various stages over 100s of yards. The cop had deployed non-lethal tactics to detain the guy, but failed in each attempt. The cop no longer had his taser because it was used against him as he wrestled with the guy (which speaks to the problems inherent with choosing to engage a hostile suspect in such a manner). Right up to the point where he shot him, the cop had performed admirably- including at the stop.

    To me, the cop had the following options at the point where he drew his pistol:
    1. Shoot him.
    2. Track him down again and get into another fight.
    3. Let him run away.

    If the recent developments are accurate and options 2 and 3 not really options, option number one doesn't seem as ridiculous as it originally did; however, the choice to not let off a warning shot and choosing to shoot multiple times is where this cop screwed things up in my mind.

    Sad on so many levels.

    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • oftenreading
    oftenreading Victoria, BC Posts: 12,856
    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    This fight occurred in various stages over 100s of yards. The cop had deployed non-lethal tactics to detain the guy, but failed in each attempt. The cop no longer had his taser because it was used against him as he wrestled with the guy (which speaks to the problems inherent with choosing to engage a hostile suspect in such a manner). Right up to the point where he shot him, the cop had performed admirably- including at the stop.

    To me, the cop had the following options at the point where he drew his pistol:
    1. Shoot him.
    2. Track him down again and get into another fight.
    3. Let him run away.

    If the recent developments are accurate and options 2 and 3 not really options, option number one doesn't seem as ridiculous as it originally did; however, the choice to not let off a warning shot and choosing to shoot multiple times is where this cop screwed things up in my mind.

    Sad on so many levels.

    Option 3 is definitely an option. Remember this is a routine traffic stop. He was not stopped for any violent crime, or even any urgent issues. There is no reason that this needed to lead to him being shot, as opposed to the cop calling for reinforcements. The worst that would have have happened was that they failed to find him, at which point they are no worse off than before he was stopped.

    In our jurisdiction there is a police policy not to engage in high speed chases with suspects in cars. If the suspect races away, then the following cop slows and calls for reinforcements to try to block the driver up ahead. They had found in several cases that engaging in a high speed chase simply increases risk for everyone, including innocent drivers on the road. This is similar - no need to escalate a routine situation into an emergency.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • Thirty Bills Unpaid
    Thirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    oftenreading said:

    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    This fight occurred in various stages over 100s of yards. The cop had deployed non-lethal tactics to detain the guy, but failed in each attempt. The cop no longer had his taser because it was used against him as he wrestled with the guy (which speaks to the problems inherent with choosing to engage a hostile suspect in such a manner). Right up to the point where he shot him, the cop had performed admirably- including at the stop.

    To me, the cop had the following options at the point where he drew his pistol:
    1. Shoot him.
    2. Track him down again and get into another fight.
    3. Let him run away.

    If the recent developments are accurate and options 2 and 3 not really options, option number one doesn't seem as ridiculous as it originally did; however, the choice to not let off a warning shot and choosing to shoot multiple times is where this cop screwed things up in my mind.

    Sad on so many levels.

    Option 3 is definitely an option. Remember this is a routine traffic stop. He was not stopped for any violent crime, or even any urgent issues. There is no reason that this needed to lead to him being shot, as opposed to the cop calling for reinforcements. The worst that would have have happened was that they failed to find him, at which point they are no worse off than before he was stopped.

    In our jurisdiction there is a police policy not to engage in high speed chases with suspects in cars. If the suspect races away, then the following cop slows and calls for reinforcements to try to block the driver up ahead. They had found in several cases that engaging in a high speed chase simply increases risk for everyone, including innocent drivers on the road. This is similar - no need to escalate a routine situation into an emergency.
    I'm not sure I'm inclined to agree with you here.

    Cops choosing not to endanger people's lives with a high speed car chase is quite a bit different than 'giving up' trying to detain a person resisting arrest in a situation where nobody else is at risk. They aren't similar at all in my mind.

    How sympathetic would the public be if it was discovered that an innocent person was hurt as a result of a cop electing to let a guy run away as in this scenario?

    I might be in the minority, but I don't want police to give up trying to secure a person resisting arrest because they have made it difficult. If that becomes the policy, it goes without saying the standard operating procedure for many criminals would be to resist.

    I would prefer people to stop resisting arrest. Better yet... I'd prefer people stop doing things that require cops to arrest them.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • oftenreading
    oftenreading Victoria, BC Posts: 12,856
    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    oftenreading said:

    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    This fight occurred in various stages over 100s of yards. The cop had deployed non-lethal tactics to detain the guy, but failed in each attempt. The cop no longer had his taser because it was used against him as he wrestled with the guy (which speaks to the problems inherent with choosing to engage a hostile suspect in such a manner). Right up to the point where he shot him, the cop had performed admirably- including at the stop.

    To me, the cop had the following options at the point where he drew his pistol:
    1. Shoot him.
    2. Track him down again and get into another fight.
    3. Let him run away.

    If the recent developments are accurate and options 2 and 3 not really options, option number one doesn't seem as ridiculous as it originally did; however, the choice to not let off a warning shot and choosing to shoot multiple times is where this cop screwed things up in my mind.

    Sad on so many levels.

    Option 3 is definitely an option. Remember this is a routine traffic stop. He was not stopped for any violent crime, or even any urgent issues. There is no reason that this needed to lead to him being shot, as opposed to the cop calling for reinforcements. The worst that would have have happened was that they failed to find him, at which point they are no worse off than before he was stopped.

    In our jurisdiction there is a police policy not to engage in high speed chases with suspects in cars. If the suspect races away, then the following cop slows and calls for reinforcements to try to block the driver up ahead. They had found in several cases that engaging in a high speed chase simply increases risk for everyone, including innocent drivers on the road. This is similar - no need to escalate a routine situation into an emergency.
    I'm not sure I'm inclined to agree with you here.

    Cops choosing not to endanger people's lives with a high speed car chase is quite a bit different than 'giving up' trying to detain a person resisting arrest in a situation where nobody else is at risk. They aren't similar at all in my mind.

    How sympathetic would the public be if it was discovered that an innocent person was hurt as a result of a cop electing to let a guy run away as in this scenario?

    I might be in the minority, but I don't want police to give up trying to secure a person resisting arrest because they have made it difficult. If that becomes the policy, it goes without saying the standard operating procedure for many criminals would be to resist.

    I would prefer people to stop resisting arrest. Better yet... I'd prefer people stop doing things that require cops to arrest them.
    There is absolutely nothing in this story to suggest he posed a risk to any innocent bystander if allowed to continue to run while the first officer continues to follow as the other officers gather; clearly they would have been there in about a minute anyway, given the video. I have seen police detain people many times and it's pretty much standard to gather reinforcements if someone has resisted one officer, or even if they haven't but the officer isn't sure of their ability to contain the situation.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • Last-12-Exit
    Last-12-Exit Charleston, SC Posts: 8,661
    It's irrelevant that this was a routine traffic stop. Once that guy decided to take off, this incident ceased to be routine.
  • Thirty Bills Unpaid
    Thirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    oftenreading said:

    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    oftenreading said:

    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    This fight occurred in various stages over 100s of yards. The cop had deployed non-lethal tactics to detain the guy, but failed in each attempt. The cop no longer had his taser because it was used against him as he wrestled with the guy (which speaks to the problems inherent with choosing to engage a hostile suspect in such a manner). Right up to the point where he shot him, the cop had performed admirably- including at the stop.

    To me, the cop had the following options at the point where he drew his pistol:
    1. Shoot him.
    2. Track him down again and get into another fight.
    3. Let him run away.

    If the recent developments are accurate and options 2 and 3 not really options, option number one doesn't seem as ridiculous as it originally did; however, the choice to not let off a warning shot and choosing to shoot multiple times is where this cop screwed things up in my mind.

    Sad on so many levels.

    Option 3 is definitely an option. Remember this is a routine traffic stop. He was not stopped for any violent crime, or even any urgent issues. There is no reason that this needed to lead to him being shot, as opposed to the cop calling for reinforcements. The worst that would have have happened was that they failed to find him, at which point they are no worse off than before he was stopped.

    In our jurisdiction there is a police policy not to engage in high speed chases with suspects in cars. If the suspect races away, then the following cop slows and calls for reinforcements to try to block the driver up ahead. They had found in several cases that engaging in a high speed chase simply increases risk for everyone, including innocent drivers on the road. This is similar - no need to escalate a routine situation into an emergency.
    I'm not sure I'm inclined to agree with you here.

    Cops choosing not to endanger people's lives with a high speed car chase is quite a bit different than 'giving up' trying to detain a person resisting arrest in a situation where nobody else is at risk. They aren't similar at all in my mind.

    How sympathetic would the public be if it was discovered that an innocent person was hurt as a result of a cop electing to let a guy run away as in this scenario?

    I might be in the minority, but I don't want police to give up trying to secure a person resisting arrest because they have made it difficult. If that becomes the policy, it goes without saying the standard operating procedure for many criminals would be to resist.

    I would prefer people to stop resisting arrest. Better yet... I'd prefer people stop doing things that require cops to arrest them.
    There is absolutely nothing in this story to suggest he posed a risk to any innocent bystander if allowed to continue to run while the first officer continues to follow as the other officers gather; clearly they would have been there in about a minute anyway, given the video. I have seen police detain people many times and it's pretty much standard to gather reinforcements if someone has resisted one officer, or even if they haven't but the officer isn't sure of their ability to contain the situation.
    You mean outside of violently resisting arrest and fleeing in a highly agitated state and ultimately knowing how things played out.

    What if the second cop had tried, like the first cop, to wrestle him down and his service revolver instead of the taser was taken and used against him?

    How many larger cases have been solved as a result of routine traffic stops? When he ran, as 12 said, this became a highly unusual situation.

    Do you feel he has any culpability in this incident at all? If the officer had drawn his pistol and shot him as he stole his taser and began using it on him... would this be excessive force?
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • Last-12-Exit
    Last-12-Exit Charleston, SC Posts: 8,661
    The common denominator in EVERY one of these police shootings has been these guys were resisting arrest. When will some of you realize that you can't do this. That your chances of being shot or killed increase dramatically when you resist.

    Andy Savage is a GREAT defense attorney. I just wonder if there will be riots here in Charleston when this guy gets a second degree manslaughter conviction. Better yet for the defense, if the prosecution goes for first degree murder, there very well could be an acquittal.
  • i_lov_it
    i_lov_it Perth, Western Australia Posts: 4,007
    edited April 2015
    Last-12-Exit said:

    The common denominator in EVERY one of these police shootings has been these guys were resisting arrest. When will some of you realize that you can't do this. That your chances of being shot or killed increase dramatically when you resist.

    Andy Savage is a GREAT defense attorney. I just wonder if there will be riots here in Charleston when this guy gets a second degree manslaughter conviction. Better yet for the defense, if the prosecution goes for first degree murder, there very well could be an acquittal.

    But he wasn't being arrested though...it was just a routine traffic stop.
    Post edited by i_lov_it on

Categories