or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › WTF over-zealous police?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

WTF over-zealous police? - Page 189

post #2821 of 6083
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

I don't see how either of you can say the car was or wasn't moving given the motion of the camera. If you've done a frame-by-frame analysis (or seen one) by all means share it. Clearly, the guy had put the car into drive and had his foot on the accelerator, as you hear the engine and the car drives down the road a ways before hitting a light pole.

The issue then would be imminence, I guess, if the cop's arm is stuck (or even if he's holding on and refuses to let go, which I think he has a right to do), how long does he have to wait before it becomes reasonable to believe he's facing imminent death or great bodily injury? Should the cop have to wait until the car is moving more than five miles per hour? Ten? Perhaps he has to give the guy five seconds to stop the vehicle?

Is the analysis different if it's a car instead of any other deadly weapon? If he'd pulled a gun does the cop have to wait until it's pointed at him, until the guy fires a shot at him, until he's actually shot?


The cop's arm never should have been in the car in the first place. That's a big no-no. If the cop's life was in danger, IF, it's because he violated protocol for a traffic stop and put his own life in danger. Fuck him.

How about 1 mph?
post #2822 of 6083
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post

Was he a security officer? A lot of universities have actual police departments.
They call themselves police officers but they are not public employees.

Actually, it looks like the DA agrees

"Deters, a UC graduate, said the city of Cincinnati should take over campus patrols and the UC police force should be disbanded.

"They're not cops," he said of UC police. "Being a police officer shouldn't be the role of this university."

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2015/07/29/publish/30830777/
Edited by AldenPyle - 7/30/15 at 7:30am
post #2823 of 6083
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

I guess
That's just a conclusory statement, an announcement of a position.

It is. I'm not an attorney, but I am drawing a conclusion based on the entire situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

I guess
Why don't you try forming an argument based on the applicable standard, which is that lethal force may be used if reasonably perceived to be necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily injury.

Concealed carry and defense laws state similar requirements. I can use deadly force if it's reasonable to assume that I am in danger of great body injury or death. That doesn't mean I'm going to shoot someone who throws a punch at me, despite the fact that I could technically die from a single punch, or receive great bodily injury. To say that this cop's life was in immediate danger is outrageous. He put a head shot on the guy because he tried to drive away.
post #2824 of 6083
Quote:
Originally Posted by suited View Post

It is. I'm not an attorney, but I am drawing a conclusion based on the entire situation.


Concealed carry and defense laws state similar requirements. I can use deadly force if it's reasonable to assume that I am in danger of great body injury or death. That doesn't mean I'm going to shoot someone who throws a punch at me, despite the fact that I could technically die from a single punch, or receive great bodily injury. To say that this cop's life was in immediate danger is outrageous. He put a head shot on the guy because he tried to drive away.

Hurting a cop's feelings is even worse than hurting him physically.
post #2825 of 6083
Given what seems to be the level for a cop to have reasonable fear for his life I've concluded that the Ninja roll cop that tripped in that Texas pool party should have just opened fire on the crowd.
post #2826 of 6083
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Given what seems to be the level for a cop to have reasonable fear for his life I've concluded that the Ninja roll cop that tripped in that Texas pool party should have just opened fire on the crowd.

Agree. It was a momentary lapse in judgment that saved the lives of many.
post #2827 of 6083
post #2828 of 6083
See? He could have hurt himself badly or been killed. Do you know how many cops a year end up in the hospital due to tripping?
post #2829 of 6083

All of our dogs were trained to nail anyone who reached into our cars whether we were in them or not. Almost killed a homeless window washer who touched my car while at a light and didn't notice the 100lb Corso in sleeping in the front seat. He cartwheeled back into a car after she exploded on him.

 

While I could control the dogs I'm sure a traffic stop would have gone badly. Or well, depending on your perspective.

 

lefty

post #2830 of 6083
Quote:
Originally Posted by suited View Post

It is. I'm not an attorney, but I am drawing a conclusion based on the entire situation.


Concealed carry and defense laws state similar requirements. I can use deadly force if it's reasonable to assume that I am in danger of great body injury or death. That doesn't mean I'm going to shoot someone who throws a punch at me, despite the fact that I could technically die from a single punch, or receive great bodily injury. To say that this cop's life was in immediate danger is outrageous. He put a head shot on the guy because he tried to drive away.

Help me out here. Assume the cop is stuck to the car since we're talking about danger and not whether the cop should have put his hand in the car, whether he should have held on, etc. You can say he shouldn't have done those things as a matter of prudence, but the fact is that he had the right to, and he did.

So, the driver has started the engine. He has put the car in gear. It's moving forward, say, just a little. Do you deny that the cop can be killed or injured if the car reaches a high speed? Even slower sedans can go from rolling to ten miles per hour in a second or less. In two seconds they can be going twenty miles per hour or more. And there is no guarantee that one shot from the cop will stop the vehicle, as the video clearly shows, given that the car went barreling down the road after he shot the driver. The danger of the car speeding up was, in fact, realized, in this very case. If he cop had not broken loose of the car he probably would have been seriously injured or killed.
post #2831 of 6083
Somehow the reference to the cop's being "stuck" to the car brought this to mind:

post #2832 of 6083
Screen grabs from the cop's camera at

1:54



and 1:56



Still think he wasn't moving?

http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/07/sam-dubose-shooting-lets-go-to-the-video-tape/
post #2833 of 6083
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

Help me out here. Assume the cop is stuck to the car since we're talking about danger and not whether the cop should have put his hand in the car, whether he should have held on, etc. You can say he shouldn't have done those things as a matter of prudence, but the fact is that he had the right to, and he did.

You keep harping on this that the cop had the right to reach into the car. His "right" to do so is irrelevant. It's not how he's supposed to handle a traffic stop. That's not "prudence". That's the training these fucks are supposed to receive to be put in the position of being allowed to enforce the law in the first place. The cop fucked up and put himself in this position. If he wasn't such a goddamn moron he wouldn't be charged with murder at this very moment.

Also, there's no reason to assume the cop was stuck to the car. The cop appeared to be intentionally holding on.
Quote:
The danger of the car speeding up was, in fact, realized, in this very case. If he cop had not broken loose of the car he probably would have been seriously injured or killed.

I wonder if it sped up because the driver was just shot in the head and had next to no control over it anymore.
post #2834 of 6083
Come on... we all know this interaction should have started with the shot to the head
post #2835 of 6083
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

Screen grabs from the cop's camera at

1:54



and 1:56



Still think he wasn't moving?

http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/07/sam-dubose-shooting-lets-go-to-the-video-tape/

If you had taken a few more seconds of your oh-so-precious time to read further into that article you posted, there is a truck parked in a driveway to the side of the car which remains in the same position, visible through the front passenger window, just as DuBose was shot. Seems to indicate that there was no movement of the car until after the shot was fired, which is when the dragging then occurred.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › WTF over-zealous police?