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 278

post #4156 of 6080
Quote:
Originally Posted by suited View Post

There's a new video, pretty graphic. Much better angle and closer to the scuffle. You see the guy being shot and bleeding out. The cop pulls the gun out of the dead suspect's pocket after the shooting.

Along with a rabbit, a couple of doves, and the Ace of Spades?
post #4157 of 6080
Quote:
Originally Posted by venividivicibj View Post

Uhh, you must not have seen the video or read anything about the case. Seems like you only read the police 'report'

The video isn't that cut and dry. The cop obviously felt the gun through his pants. You can't see if the suspect is reaching for it. If the suspect was trying to pull the gun out of his pocket, should the cop have waited for the gun to come out before firing?
post #4158 of 6080
In the first video you can't see much. In the second one you can clearly see that the guy's right hand isn't in the cops' control and that right after the shooting, the cops remove something that's protruding from his right pocket.

And right before Cop #1 shoots the guy, cop #2 yells something like "He's going for the gun!" It seems to me that from a legal standpoint it doesn't even matter if the guy was going for the gun or not since cop #1 probably couldn't see what was happening. He's just aware that the other cop isn't controlling the guy when he yells "he's going for the gun!" Is that a good shoot? Almost certainly.
post #4159 of 6080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

In the first video you can't see much. In the second one you can clearly see that the guy's right hand isn't in the cops' control and that right after the shooting, the cops remove something that's protruding from his right pocket.

And right before Cop #1 shoots the guy, cop #2 yells something like "He's going for the gun!" It seems to me that from a legal standpoint it doesn't even matter if the guy was going for the gun or not since cop #1 probably couldn't see what was happening. He's just aware that the other cop isn't controlling the guy when he yells "he's going for the gun!" Is that a good shoot? Almost certainly.
Also in the second video you can clearly see the cop that is on top of sterling in a half guard position getting reversed right before cop 2 shoots him. If he wasn't shot cop 2 would be handling a suspect on top of his partner.
post #4160 of 6080
When a decent person and not someone that is "turning his life around", is shot, then it will get my attention.

The guy shot by an off duty cop on Atlantic Ave, a few days ago, was also of the turning his life around variety.

So were 99.99% of the poor "unarmed black men" killed by cops that are protested by BLM and the usual suspects.

Seriously, can anyone name a productive citizen without a criminal record that was shot by police in an incident like this one in LA?
post #4161 of 6080

What does it matter what his position in life is?

post #4162 of 6080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

And right before Cop #1 shoots the guy, cop #2 yells something like "He's going for the gun!" It seems to me that from a legal standpoint it doesn't even matter if the guy was going for the gun or not since cop #1 probably couldn't see what was happening. He's just aware that the other cop isn't controlling the guy when he yells "he's going for the gun!" Is that a good shoot? Almost certainly.

Lol - so if two cops walk up to you, one yells 'he has a gun' and the other shoots you, thats okay? I mean - your hands are free, and clearly when the cop yells 'he's going for the gun' it means its okay to kill.

 

I guess you haven't heard the 1,000 times cops yell 'STOP RESISTING' even when suspects are lying prone on the ground not moving.

post #4163 of 6080
Quote:
Originally Posted by venividivicibj View Post

Lol - so if two cops walk up to you, one yells 'he has a gun' and the other shoots you, thats okay? I mean - your hands are free, and clearly when the cop yells 'he's going for the gun' it means its okay to kill.

I guess you haven't heard the 1,000 times cops yell 'STOP RESISTING' even when suspects are lying prone on the ground not moving.

If the cops had been called on me because I was threatening people with a gun, and I was fighting the with the cops while it happened, and cop #1 can't see what's happening during the fight, and they take a gun off my corpse, then, yeah, cop #1 is entitled to rely on his partner's cries. And there's no way that we've seen so far to know what cop #2 did or didn't see or feel, and there probably never will be, so he walks too.

Holder had enough integrity to accept the obvious in the Mike Brown case, Trayvon Martin, Eric Garner, etc. Hopefully Lynch does too. This case looks like a slam dunk (for the cops) by comparison.
post #4164 of 6080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

If the cops had been called on me because I was threatening people with a gun
not true. the call was that he had a gun - not threatening someone with a gun.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

 and I was fighting the with the cops while it happened

fighting? a tased guy was twitching/moving, how strange

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

cop #1 can't see what's happening during the fight, and they take a gun off my corpse, then, yeah, cop #1 is entitled to rely on his partner's cries.
Cop #1 was standing 2 feet away from cop #2.
 
If the cops tase someone, and then shoot him because he twitched, that's okay?
 
 
Also - how can taking the gun out of a corpse's pocket after the fact give someone reasonable cause beforehand?

Edited by venividivicibj - 7/6/16 at 9:35pm
post #4165 of 6080
Whether he was two feet or two inches doesn't matter when there's something solid and opaque between him and the threat.
Quote:
not true. the call was that he had a gun - not threatening someone with a gun.

The news reports say the caller said he was "brandishing" a gun. The word implies a threat rather than mere display. But, regardless, he was previously reported to have a gun.
Quote:
Originally Posted by venividivicibj View Post

Also - how can taking the gun out of a corpse's pocket after the fact give someone reasonable cause beforehand?

That's actually a very smart observation (in fact, I hesitated to add that bit). But it's certainly relevant in the "duh" sense, in that it helps to fill in gaps if one accepts that the second cop was sincere, which he almost certainly was.
Quote:
If the cops tase someone, and then shoot him because he twitched, that's okay?

He doesn't seem to be twitching. He was no longer being zapped and would have regained muscle control (if he ever lost it; tasers don't always work). You can see his right arm moving in and out a few seconds before he was shot.

Again, it doesn't really matter what he was actually doing, just whether the police were reasonable in what they did, given the the broad latitude they have to have to be cops.They confronted him because they had to, because it was their job, and they're innocent in that regard. Mistakes, accidents, miscommunications, mispeaking, those things happen in extreme circumstances. The real fault likes not with the person who made the honest mistake under duress, but the person who induced the circumstances in the first place. The cops didn't decide to tackle this guy out of nowhere (though we don't have video of the whole encounter, so you can't know exactly happened before).
post #4166 of 6080
it was unreasonable to shoot him juding from the video, i'm pretty sure nowhere in EU he would get shot for ressesting like that.
post #4167 of 6080


I think the larger issue at stake here, and one that isn't being sufficiently discussed in this thread, is that police encounters involving white suspects are significantly less likely to end in the police killing the suspect.  It's easy to get caught in this trap of arguing over whether or not an individual use of force was legally justified. It's an argument that doesn't mean much, because the rules we've set up for ourselves as a society and for the officers who serve us mean that the answer is almost always - yes, the use of force was legally justified. The problem is the mounting evidence that when white suspects are involved, officers use more discretion and ere on the side of less use of force, and when black suspects are involved, officers ere on the side of more force. 

post #4168 of 6080

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

 

Half of those killed by the police this year were white, a quarter were black.

post #4169 of 6080
Quote:
Originally Posted by venividivicibj View Post

What does it matter what his position in life is?


Have to agree with this. Justifying the use of deadly force should be based solely on the circumstances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshuadowen View Post

when white suspects are involved, officers use more discretion and ere on the side of less use of force, and when black suspects are involved, officers ere on the side of more force. 

We only hear about the latter, so I doubt many people are capable of accurately determining this, at least not without more evidence. Remember that black Americans are 13% of the population and according to the DOJ committed roughly 50% of all murders in the U.S. between 1980 and 2008 (I think it was closer to 40% in 2013). That is a staggering statistic, and is factual evidence that on average black suspects are more dangerous than white suspects. If you were a cop, I'd have to assume you would behave differently based on who you were approaching. That does not justify the abuse of force, but something to consider when you mention how things escalate.
post #4170 of 6080
White people: you really need a gun to protect yourself. Everyone should have one.

Black people: if you didn't want to get shot, you shouldn't have been carrying a gun.
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?