Another fatal police shootin

[Von Tonner]

Here we go again. With the video there appears to be very little wriggle room for the officer.

On one hand I have sympathy for the officer. You are the law and should be obeyed if you tell someone to stop. By running away the fugitive is not only trying to escape but is also directly challenging the officers authority which can, human nature being what it is, make him become angry and over-react. I understand that.

But on the other hand, why fire to kill? Why not shoot for the legs or very least waist down. Why the head? If you can hit his head you can hit his legs.

As the article states the Supreme court has ruled that the law can shoot to kill a fleeing suspect only if he or she is a threat to the officer or those in the immediate area.

I think in SA our police are under similar legislation with a proviso that they have to fire a warning shot first.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/08/us/south-carolina-officer-is-charged-with-murder-in-black-mans-death.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=a-lede-package-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=1

[Jimbuna]

Excessive force may well be viewed as a massive understatement...it certainly doesn't look good for the police officer.

[NeonSamurai]

But on the other hand, why fire to kill? Why not shoot for the legs or very least waist down. Why the head? If you can hit his head you can hit his legs.

No cop should ever attempt something like that. Guns are for killing, not incapacitating. Also most cops are trained to shoot the body not the head; hitting the legs of a running target at distance is a tough shot, and your risk having your rounds ricochet off the ground and possibly hitting someone else.

As the article states the Supreme court has ruled that the law can shoot to kill a fleeing suspect only if he or she is a threat to the officer or those in the immediate area.

Frankly I hope they throw the book at this officer. He had absolutely no justification to shoot that man.

I think in SA our police are under similar legislation with a proviso that they have to fire a warning shot first.

Warning shots are a bad idea written by stupid politicians. There is the strong risk you can injure someone else with a warning shot, even if you fire into the air (the bullet will eventually come back down). Also people are even more likely to flee in panic or shoot back when they hear shots.

[Von Tonner]

Yes. And a few things strike one on viewing the video. One the fugitive is overweight while the officer appears in good shape. So why not holster your gun and chase him calling for back up. As it appears in the video another officer soon appeared in the direction to which the fugitive was running to.

Secondly, it appears it was a park like area with a fence running around it. Not much of a chance for an over weight guy clearing that in a hurry with a police officer on his tail. In fact, no built up area it seems, so little place to run and hide.

[Nippelspanner]

Do they have the death penalty in SC?
Well, doesn't matter, no cop would ever end there, even after such video footage.

I am the first to defend cops in the line of duty, it is a risky job, especially today and you'll never know. But... what the hell!?
He mowed him down like nothing, for nothing.

Good job officer! :/\\!!

[Bilge_Rat]

why chase at all? its a traffic stop and there were no outstanding warrants against the victim.

The officer was not in danger so he cant claim self- defence.

Unless there are facts we don't know, it is a clear case of murder.

[HunterICX]

This is what disturbs me from the video as the officer claimed the suspect had his stun gun.

Right at the start you see something thrown behind the officer which I think is the is taser he used to try to incapicate the suspect who started to run off.
Then after the suspect is down after being shot the officer runs back to where they started out in the video picks up something and walks back dropping it next to the body of the suspect.

If that's the taser..... then it's very disturbing to what this officer was trying to achieve. :nope:

[Rockstar]

Murder is by its very nature disturbing no matter who did it or how they went about it. Based on the information we have so far it may be fair to say authorities are not circling the wagons around one of their own. Instead they are I think taking a step in the right direction by coming right out and charging the shooter with murder.

[Von Tonner]

Murder is by its very nature disturbing no matter who did it or how they went about it. Based on the information we have so far it is fair to say authorities are not circling the wagons around one of their own. Instead they are I think taking a step in the right direction by coming right out and charged the shooter with murder.

Quite right. The police, having charged the officer with murder have done the right thing. Not only is is the right action to take but it also cuts the ground out from any misfits hoping to get mileage out of this for their own dubious gains.


first degree murder
n. although it varies from state to state, it is generally a killing which is deliberate and premeditated (planned, after lying in wait, by poison or as part of a scheme), in conjunction with felonies such as rape, burglary, arson, involving multiple deaths, the killing of certain types of people (such as a child, a police officer, a prison guard, a fellow prisoner), or with certain weapons, particularly a gun. The specific criteria for first degree murder are established by statute in each state and by the United States Code in federal prosecutions. It is distinguished from second degree murder in which premeditation is usually absent, and from manslaughter which lacks premeditation and suggests that at most there was intent to harm rather than to kill."

So would I be correct in my thinking that he will face a first degree charge? His intent was surely to kill - you don't aim for a persons head and try claim you had no intention to kill them.

[Rockstar]

Did read an article saying bond was denied and if convicted the shooter could face the death penalty or a term of 30 years to life in prison.

[August]

you don't aim for a persons head and try claim you had no intention to kill them.

I'd say it'd be very difficult to prove that the cop actually aimed for the victims head. That's an Annie Oakley type of shot that most people, including cops don't have the skill to pull off. He most likely just aimed for center mass and that's where one of the rounds happened to land.

[Bilge_Rat]

I don't see how you could justify 1st degree murder, this does not fit the criteria of premeditated which requires advance planning.

More likely it is 2nd degree murder, namely intentional killing in the heat of the action. Note that murder does not require the person to deliberately want to kill, if you commit an act which you know can cause death (i.e. 8 shots to the back) and are indifferent to the consequences, that will also constitute murder. That is the common law definition anyway, I do not know what S.C. law provides.

[Von Tonner]

I don't see how you could justify 1st degree murder, this does not fit the criteria of premeditated which requires advance planning

If first degree murder is based solely on the premise of premeditated then yes you would be correct. But is it? I see there are different definitions of it in as many States. As per the quote I posted:

first degree murder
n. although it varies from state to state, it is generally a killing which is deliberate and premeditated (planned, after lying in wait, by poison or as part of a scheme), in conjunction with felonies such as rape, burglary, arson, involving multiple deaths, the killing of certain types of people (such as a child, a police officer, a prison guard, a fellow prisoner), or with certain weapons, particularly a gun. The specific criteria for first degree murder are established by statute in each state and by the United States Code in federal prosecutions. It is distinguished from second degree murder in which premeditation is usually absent,

So my understanding would be the concept of "first degree" does appear to come with varying degrees of legal provisos. If "premeditation" is not an overriding condition but simply one of - then the officer is in serious trouble. If too, as the video seems to show, is that after killing the suspect he goes back to pick up the taser and then walks back to the body and drops it alongside - those actions, though after the incident are definitely premeditated to impact on outcome.

The question of "the intention to kill" is one that prosecutors and defence teams the world over fight over daily in the courts in order to secure conviction or release.

Firing 8 bullets at a man running away from you can that be considered intention to kill? Given the area that the bullets hit the deceased. Whether one is a marksman or not, a bullet only hits the persons head if you pointed your gun at it.

A case on the ultimate culpability in taking another human life through ones own deliberate actions is the recent case here in SA of Oscar Pistorious. The prosecutors wanted a murder verdict based on the argument that any reasonable person would have foreseen that firing 4 shots into an enclosed toilet door at someone you know was hiding behind could have resulted in death.

The judge handed down a verdict of culpable homicide (the illegal killing of a person with or without intention)

The prosecutors to the Oscar Pistorious case have won their appeal on the judges verdict and may now take it to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The issue at the heart of the prosecution's argument was Judge Thokozile Masipa's application of "dolus eventualis", a legal term for when the perpetrator foresees the possibility of his action causing death and persists regardless.
In September, Masipa ruled that the prosecution had not provided enough evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Pistorius foresaw that he might kill somebody when he fired four shots into his toilet door. Therefore, Pistorius was cleared of murder and convicted on the lesser charge of culpable homicide.
Today, Masipa said prosecutor Gerrie Nel had persuaded her that there were still questions on points of law to be answered.

If I was a member of the jury hearing Michael T. Slager's charge I do not think I would be able, given the evidence so far presented, not believe he fired his weapon with the intention to kill.

[Bilge_Rat]

I found the S.C. Act:

http://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t16c003.php

They don't have degrees of murder, just:

-murder;
-manslaughter;
-involontary manslaughter;

murder is defined as:

"Murder" is the killing of any person with malice aforethought, either express or implied.

which basically brings it back to the English common law notion.

Technically, I would think "Manslaughter" fits the facts better:

A person convicted of manslaughter, or the unlawful killing of another without malice, express or implied, must be imprisoned not more than thirty years or less than two years.

unless they can prove mr. Slager deliberately wanted to kill mr. Scott.

[Nippelspanner]

unless they can prove mr. Slager deliberately wanted to kill mr. Scott.
Which they won't but... popping a barrage of bullets into ones back is a rather obvious intention - in my books.
He can hardly defend himself saying that he was unaware of a possible deadly outcome, being a cop trained with firearms.

He will get his 2-5 years and that's it, cause he's a cop and cops are good guys, aren't they.

He ended a life like it's nothing.
I struggle to understand things like that... baffles me. :nope:

[Bilge_Rat]

I'm sure Slager will claim self-defence. Obviously the claim won't stand up, but in some jurisdiction, even a mistaken belief in self-defence can get murder bumped down to manslaughter:


For example, in the U.S. state of California (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California) a defendant can be convicted of manslaughter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manslaughter) but not murder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder) when imperfect self-defense applies.[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperfect_self-defense#cite_note-2)[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperfect_self-defense#cite_note-3)

The doctrine of imperfect self-defense recognizes a defendant’s honest but unreasonable belief that deadly force is needed. An appellate court in Kansas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas) held that "Imperfect self defense is an intentional killing committed with an unreasonable but honest belief that circumstances justified deadly force."[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperfect_self-defense#cite_note-4)

Another court, in Maryland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland), held that:
When evidence is presented showing the defendant’s subjective belief that the use of force was necessary to prevent imminent death or serious bodily harm, the defendant is entitled to a proper instruction on imperfect self defense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_defense)....The theory underlying the doctrine is that when a defendant uses deadly force with an honest but unreasonable belief that it is necessary to defend himself, the element of malice, necessary for a murder conviction, is lacking.
—State v. Faulkner, 483 A.2d 759,769 (Md. 1984) [5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperfect_self-defense#cite_note-5)Michigan also recognizes imperfect self-defense as a qualified defense that can mitigate second-degree murder to voluntary manslaughter.[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperfect_self-defense#cite_note-6) However, the doctrine can only be used where the defendant would have had a right to self-defense but for the fact that the defendant was the initial aggressor.[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperfect_self-defense#cite_note-7)




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperfect_self-defense

[Von Tonner]

unless they can prove mr. Slager deliberately wanted to kill mr. Scott.

Obviously Officer Slager's whole persona is going to come under intense scrutiny but I must confess let us put ourselves in his or any other law enforcement officers shoes. You are trained to enforce the law. You go about your duties and given what town, city, area you work you will undoubetedely come under abuse. Being called a pig, spat at, derided, mocked can after a stressful day make you do things you would not normally do.

Unfortunately an incident like this really does not address any issues other than race.

While I type this I am listening to our TV news and no surprises, of all the major news breaking out in the world and at home the news reader reads out what is coming up in the news. Coming up she reads, "A white policeman shoots a black man in the back in USA."

Notice the emphasis on race. Why define the race of the policeman or victim if not to stoke it up.

Of course nothing on Iran, UK, or any other issue impacting or might impact on our lives on the tip of SA. It is sickening that a news agency will take an item such as this shooting in the USA and prominently give it airtime - for what? - other than we are a country still sitting on a powder keg of coming to terms with our racial past and they see this as a golden opportunity in putting the white man in the worst possible light.

No different to a movie I once watched (cannot remember the name) where a film crew from a TV station actually went out and created the news.

[Captain Vlad]

I don't see how you could justify 1st degree murder, this does not fit the criteria of premeditated which requires advance planning.

Premeditation isn't the only criteria for first-degree murder in all states. If the officer was in fact putting the taser near the victim's body in this instance, that amounts to attempting to cover up the crime, which makes it a first-degree murder charge regardless of whether it was planned, at least in some locations.

[danasan]

I beg your pardon, but 8 (eight!) shots fireing after a person running away?

(Are those cops trained in using firearms at all? I mean, seriously, at that given distance, 8 shots? )

If I was a cop and that guy were running towards me (with or without a weapon in his hands), I would feel myself in trouble and the need to stop him, not to kill him intentionally.

On a sidenote: I've been to America and I've been stopped by the police at night, while driving a car. It was a normal stop; we were eight German soldiers in a van we had rent: It is absolutely no good idea to do anything else but what the officer tells you to do. While the second officer is standing there, aiming in combat style...

I think, the footage prooves there is absolutely no justification for a deadly shot in this case. Edit: The only danger to the public seemed to be the cop fireing like an idiot.

[Onkel Neal]

This looks cut and dried. Cop will be in prison for the rest of his life.

[CaptainHaplo]

This will be a capital murder trial. The action of moving the stun gun to the body is what is termed an act of knowledgeable guilt. It shows the officer knew the situation showed guilt so he attempted to modify the scene to bolster his story. That action is enough to make it a capital case.

[Rockstar]

If you look close you can see the taser leads appear to be attached to the taser unit and the victim. It is possible he may have moved it to prevent others yet to arrive on scene from getting entangled.

[Aktungbby]

I think, the footage prooves there is absolutely no justification for a deadly shot in this case. Edit: The only danger to the public seemed to be the cop fireing like an idiot.

This looks cut and dried. Cop will be in prison for the rest of his life.
Not so clearcut! After several reviewing's: The taser falls behind the officer and so it would not be clear at that point that it's not in the suspects hands as he running away. As in a previous thread, tasers are dangerous deadly weapons themselves decried by International Amnesty. I won't and don't carry one. It must not leave the officer's control as with any weapon he's responsible for to the public safety. The officers subsequent conduct including checking his pistol mag; he moved the now distant taser but later (appears) reholsters that as well...so evidence tampering or sloppy evidence handling but under post-shooting stress, not so unusual but not "leaving it to be found" either by a post-shoot team. He shoots for body mass: unfortunate S.O.P till the suspect falls; properly voice commands and cuffs the suspect and the black officer arrives to render first aid, displaying no concern over his colleague's conduct (body English as with SF's B.A.R.T station shooting)... all officers must be aware by now they're on camera. After Ferguson, no white officer does these things without cause. By-by 20 year retirement- alway$ #1 on all PD mind$! The video does not show what caused the officer to deploy a dangerous weapon initially; escalating above level one: his presence; level two: voice command to a sublethal (but not always) taser, level three...before resorting to deadly force, level four, as the belief the taser, (now actually three feet behind him ) compels him to stop a fleeing suspect...and who makes such a fuss over a broken taillight ticket to flee? I would be suspicious too. My Wife is the head of an entire child support division and that's no cause to fail to obey a peace officer. Two things: bottom line: this will be a police training film at academies by tonight; and the 50% (at least) African-American jury will be out on this till all the facts are in. Unlike the 'clean' Texas Convenience store-shoot out thread posted by Neal, not a clean shoot...but a lot of grey areas here.

[August]

Which they won't but... popping a barrage of bullets into ones back is a rather obvious intention - in my books.
He can hardly defend himself saying that he was unaware of a possible deadly outcome, being a cop trained with firearms.

Agree 100% One bullet should be enough but 8 could hardly be considered anything else but an attempt to kill the victim.

He will get his 2-5 years and that's it, cause he's a cop and cops are good guys, aren't they.

He ended a life like it's nothing.
I struggle to understand things like that... baffles me. :nope:

Maybe, but given the current political climate he might also be made an example of. At least that's the hope.

[Nippelspanner]

Maybe, but given the current political climate he might also be made an example of. At least that's the hope.
True.
Also in this case, the evidence is clearly visible.
We'll see.

[Bilge_Rat]

NBC has a better look at the video. It looks like whatever Slager dropped near the victim, most likely the Taser, he picks up and puts back in his belt after a few seconds and before the rest of the cops arrive. I don't see how you can make a case he was trying to "plant" evidence just based on the video.

link:

http://www.nbcnews.com/watch/nbcnews-com/a-closer-look-at-the-walter-scott-shooting-424905283706

[Aktungbby]

NBC has a better look at the video. It looks like whatever Slager dropped near the victim, most likely the Taser, he picks up and puts back in his belt after a few seconds and before the rest of the cops arrive. I don't see how you can make a case he was trying to "plant" evidence just based on the video.

link:

http://www.nbcnews.com/watch/nbcnews-com/a-closer-look-at-the-walter-scott-shooting-424905283706

Precisely! he moved the now distant taser but later (appears) reholsters that as well...so evidence tampering or sloppy evidence handling but under post-shooting stress, not so unusual but not "leaving it to be found" either by a post-shoot team. He's concerned more with the first aid to the victim,( checking pulse), and not thinking crime scene management till conducted away by a fourth officer.

[vienna]

Two thoughts:

1. Some states do have laws covering crimes committed under color of authority (i.e., officer in uniform, on duty, during performance of otherwise lawful duty). Often, this used to enhance whatever sentence the convicted person may receive or is treated as a separate crime. Does SC have such a law or laws?

2. The other officers who arrived on scene almost immediately after the shooting: what is in their reports regarding the incident? Did they make an attempt to shield the officer from possible culpability? If so, are they then accomplices after the fact?


<O>

[NeonSamurai]

Firing 8 bullets at a man running away from you can that be considered intention to kill? Given the area that the bullets hit the deceased. Whether one is a marksman or not, a bullet only hits the persons head if you pointed your gun at it.

Pistols are not lasers, they actually don't necessarily hit where you are aiming at. Its not unheard of to have shot groupings of a foot or more at 20 yards. Cops are also trained to aim for the center mass, and your aiming point will tend to drift upwards when firing multiple shots in rapid succession.

Obviously Officer Slager's whole persona is going to come under intense scrutiny but I must confess let us put ourselves in his or any other law enforcement officers shoes. You are trained to enforce the law. You go about your duties and given what town, city, area you work you will undoubetedely come under abuse. Being called a pig, spat at, derided, mocked can after a stressful day make you do things you would not normally do.

The thing is though, I have met so many police officers where the term pig totally applies. Because they abuse their power (how many times have you seen a police officer go through a red light when they are clearly not responding to a call, or threaten you with arrest if you dare question them in any way). I could tell you about friends that had been assaulted by police officers, I've personally been harassed by them on numerous occasions when I was younger. Then there is the issues with corruption and criminality, and problems with racism in many police forces. Then throw on top of that, the blue wall.

This is not to say that all police officers are bad people, but I do think that the inherent power differential between police officers and the civilian populace is problematic.

Unfortunately an incident like this really does not address any issues other than race.

While I type this I am listening to our TV news and no surprises, of all the major news breaking out in the world and at home the news reader reads out what is coming up in the news. Coming up she reads, "A white policeman shoots a black man in the back in USA."

Notice the emphasis on race. Why define the race of the policeman or victim if not to stoke it up.Well given the long and extensive history of police forces regularly shooting unarmed black men to death (and not just in the US for that matter either). Race is very important in this case, I mean do you think this event would have happened if the person were white? When do you ever hear of a case involving a white officer shooting an unarmed white suspect? I feel a lot of this stems from the old problem of white people tending to assume criminality when meeting an unknown black man. This is why white women will cross the street when encountering a black man, and why officers are more prone to shooting, as they already have it in their mind that this person is a dangerous criminal.


I beg your pardon, but 8 (eight!) shots fireing after a person running away?

(Are those cops trained in using firearms at all? I mean, seriously, at that given distance, 8 shots? )

Police training with firearms can vary quite a bit between different police forces. Some get a lot of range time, others get almost none. There have also been lots of examples of police panic firing where 50+ shots are fired between a handful of officers at one suspect, generally emptying their magazines (sometimes even reloading and emptying a second mag). To me 8 shots seems reasonable at the range he opened up at, if he were trying to put the subject down. Keep in mind that his pistol would probably not have been overly accurate at that range given that officers are not generally supplied with match grade ammo, and who knows when he last fired that weapon.

Not so clearcut! After several reviewing's: The taser falls behind the officer and so it would not be clear at that point that it's not in the suspects hands as he running away. As in a previous thread, tasers are dangerous deadly weapons themselves decried by International Amnesty. I won't and don't carry one. It must not leave the officer's control as with any weapon he's responsible for to the public safety.

Tasers are not a deadly weapon (I don't care what Amnesty International claims, I would hardly call them a knowledgeable source for weaponry). They are an LTL (Less Than Lethal) weapon, that is designed to temporarily incapacitate by muscle paralysis/disruption. This doesn't mean that it is not possible to kill someone with a taser, just that the weapon is not designed to kill, and has a very low probability of inducing death barring certain medical conditions. I do think however that police are far too inclined to use LTLs, particularly in situations where that level of force was not warranted.

Also FYI the officer had already expended the ranged payload of the taser into the suspect (he twice fired the taser) so the taser was at that point mostly inert (it would still be able to direct contact stun). So even if the suspect did have it, it would not have been of much threat to the officer or the populace.

The video does not show what caused the officer to deploy a dangerous weapon initially; escalating above level one: his presence; level two: voice command to a sublethal (but not always) taser, level three...before resorting to deadly force, level four, as the belief the taser, (now actually three feet behind him ) compels him to stop a fleeing suspect...and who makes such a fuss over a broken taillight ticket to flee? I would be suspicious too. My Wife is the head of an entire child support division and that's no cause to fail to obey a peace officer.
Under most cases police officers are not allowed to shoot fleeing suspects unless that person has already shot at or threatened to shoot someone (which the officer witnessed), or is presently pointing a weapon at either the officer or any other person in the area or has started to raise their weapon. Simply being armed is not sufficient justification to open fire. Also attempting to flee from police does not indicate criminality, people panic and run from police all the time who were not guilty of any major crimes.

Also your chain of steps is highly inaccurate. Officers are not trained to react in steps, they are supposed to react based on the situation at hand as it evolves, including jumping to lethal response right away, or not escalating at all. Using LTL's does not come before resorting to deadly force. It's not about following steps, its about adapting to the present situation and the degree of force that can and should be legally applied.

Honestly in this case with the present evidence I feel this officer gravely overreacted from the start, which resulted in this man's death, all for a broken tail light.

[Nippelspanner]

He's concerned more with the first aid to the victim
Uh what?
There was nothing that I'd call "first aid" at all.
During the video I was thinking "Dude, you shot him, now at least try to help!" and he was just... waiting.

That's not first aid, that is watching someone die.

[Catfish]

How would all this be handled now, if there was no video .. :shifty:

[Wolferz]

How would all this be handled now, if there was no video .. :shifty:


Broom and a rug.:-?

[corporalspiffy]

looks staged.

more race baiting propaganda intended to fire up "youths" resulting in more riots and a weaker police force.

cops are the good guys. without law and law enforcement there is no civilized order.

[Oberon]

looks staged.

http://mssv.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/tommy-lee-jones-header.jpg

[Subnuts]

looks staged.

If you fired a handgun eight times, it would melt from the heat of the gunpowder fires inside.

For more info, visit http://www.copsfor44truth.com

[Gargamel]

If you fired a handgun eight times, it would melt from the heat of the gunpowder fires inside.

http://mssv.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/tommy-lee-jones-header.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QhmSg3UjEU

I don't see the pistol melting.

I was looking for a video where a cop is at the range and reloads his service pistol 3 times while firing. His gun doesn't melt either, and it's a standard issue weapon.

[Rockstar]

looks staged. Yep, anyday now Scott Walker and Micheal Slager will be holding a joint news conference telling us it was just staged to teach everyone a lesson in race relations.

more race baiting propaganda intended to fire up "youths" resulting in more riots and a weaker police force. We need to get Scott Walker on national TV to tell those youths they have no right to be angry because he really isnt dead.

cops are the good guys. without law and law enforcement there is no civilized order. Are you accusing Oberon of being uncivilized?

[Dowly]

looks staged.

more race baiting propaganda intended to fire up "youths" resulting in more riots and a weaker police force.

cops are the good guys. without law and law enforcement there is no civilized order.
http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/eddie1.gif

[Nippelspanner]

looks staged.

more race baiting propaganda intended to fire up "youths" resulting in more riots and a weaker police force.

cops are the good guys. without law and law enforcement there is no civilized order.
I don't even know what to say. :haha:

[antikristuseke]

I don't even know what to say. :haha:

Short answer: No.
Long answer: fudge no.

[Betonov]

He's right about the last third.
Cops are the good guys, but you can't have bad people inside the force. Unfortunately someone died before one was weeded out.

[corporalspiffy]

I don't even know what to say. :haha:


say "without law and law enforcement there would be no civilized order. cops are the good guys. criminals are the bad guys"

[u crank]

say "without law and law enforcement there would be no civilized order. cops are the good guys. criminals are the bad guys"

There are good citizens and there are bad citizens. Same is true for cops.

[Nippelspanner]

say "without law and law enforcement there would be no civilized order. cops are the good guys. criminals are the bad guys"
No, no, I meant in regards of your advanced delusional condition. :up:

[Oberon]

say "without law and law enforcement there would be no civilized order. cops are the good guys. criminals are the bad guys"

So, the KGB were good guys? :hmmm:

[Sailor Steve]

So, the KGB were good guys? :hmmm:
Yep. So were the Gestapo.

And the "heroes" who beat Rodney King.

[Oberon]

Yep. So were the Gestapo.

And the "heroes" who beat Rodney King.

http://weknowmemes.com/generator/uploads/generated/g1402940280932139417.jpg

[vienna]

There are good cops and bad cops and a lot of the good cops have to put up with and are tainted by the bad ones. I used to go to a coffee shop and donut store a couple of blocks from my house here in Hollywood (LAPD territory) during the 70s and 80s and would often see a few cops there on break. I got to know a few of them and would sometimes converse with them and listen to what they had to say. More than a few times I would hear them complain about fellow officers who were acting out of line (a major source of complaints were about the 'elite' Metro Squad and their very heavy-handed tactics for which the patrol officer often suffered) and how the LAPD brass would often ignore their complaints. They said it made their jobs much more difficult when they were lumped in with the bad cops by the public. In the 90s, some of the activities led to a large civil rights suit brought by the Federal Justice Department. In 2001, the LAPD, the City of LA, and the DOJ entered into a court monitored consent decree and many changes were made to weed out the worst cases. Since then, and with a change of top leadership, the LAPD has overcome a lot of the stigmas and the court decree was lifted. Not all cops are bad, but a police force is much better off when the bad cops are gone...


<O>

[Platapus]

My point is that since it is the police who have the authority to directly infringe on more of our civil rights than other officials, the police must be held to a higher standard of conduct not less of a standard.

There must be a direct link between power and responsibility; authority and accountability.

Once you have a police force that feels/knows it can get away with.. well.. murder with little responsibility or personal accountability, abuse is almost a certainty.

As a law abiding citizen, I want the police to have the authority necessary to enforce the laws, but I also want accountability when they exceed their authority or break the very laws they are there to enforce.

[Jeff-Groves]

looks staged.

more race baiting propaganda intended to fire up "youths" resulting in more riots and a weaker police force.


http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n12/privateer_2006/wall-of-text-mr-bean.gif~original

[vienna]

My point is that since it is the police who have the authority to directly infringe on more of our civil rights than other officials, the police must be held to a higher standard of conduct not less of a standard.

There must be a direct link between power and responsibility; authority and accountability.

Once you have a police force that feels/knows it can get away with.. well.. murder with little responsibility or personal accountability, abuse is almost a certainty.

As a law abiding citizen, I want the police to have the authority necessary to enforce the laws, but I also want accountability when they exceed their authority or break the very laws they are there to enforce.

I think, on the whole they are held to a higher standard by the law. Where the break down and disconnect comes from is the 'unspoken code' in a lot of departments regarding the reporting of misconduct and the pressure on fellow officers to "help a bro' cop" out when it comes to 'backing up' a fellow cop's 'story' This may be soon disappearing due to the advances in technology. There are already very many departments that require dash cams in patrol cars and a lot of departments are moving toward requiring body cams for on-duty officers. This might relieve a fellow officer of the awkward dilemma of having to testify against a fellow officer...

For the officers and their unions/associations, who are always trying to raise 'privacy' issues, the best that can be said is the advice cops I've spoken to say about other potential law breakers: If you don't want to be caught, don't do the crime. I am very sure 99.99% of any reviews of footage garnered will show what could be expected routine days of routine duty. However, the advantages to the officers is greater than the supposed disadvantages. Prior to the adoption of body cams in the LAPD, some officers had taken to carrying voice recorders to document interactions with suspects. In one very recent case, a young woman made a claim of racial bias against an LAPD officer when she and her boyfriend were detained after citizen complaints. She went to the press and local civil right groups pouring out her tale of abuse. The whole thing fell apart when cellphone video taken by witnesses surfaced. The videos had no soundtrack, but the officer's own recording completely tore apart any case the young woman was trying to build...

In another recent incident in the nearby city of Glendale, CA. The son of a prominent actress, Taraji P. Henson, had been stopped by the Glendale police for a traffic infraction. He told his mother he had been stopped due to racial profiling. Her response was to publicly state her son would not be attending a local university because of the incident. However, Glendale has dash cams, with audio, in its patrol cars and a review of the video told a completely different story:

http://www.people.com/article/taraji-p-henson-apologizes-police-racial-profiling

It is understandable a mother would protect her child. Once Henson found out about the video and saw it, she had the class to apologize to the Glendale police department. The Glendale police may have let Taraji's son off easy, but I somehow suspect she didn't let her son off easy for the embarrassment...


<O>

[Gargamel]

Dashcam video:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-32237544

While it's painfully obvious the victim made some very stupid decisions here, I see no threat to the officer at all in either video, just a man trying to escape.

The dashcam video, to ,e, shows the officer doing a normal traffic stop. I see no aggression or malice here. But when things escalated, he made some very poor choices.

[Wolferz]

http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb295/Wolferz_2007/barney-fife.jpg

Broken tail lights really freak me out too buut, I'd have to kill the perp with one shot. :O:

Sheriff Taylor might be onto something with that issue only one round of ammo policy.

[Rockstar]

http://news.yahoo.com/dash-cam-video-shows-officer-pursuing-man-shooting-221654486.html

This pretty much hits the nail square on its head.


The mostly black neighborhood where the shooting took place is far from unique, said Melvin Tucker, a former FBI agent and police chief in four southern cities who often testifies in police misconduct cases.

Nationwide, training that pushes pre-emptive action, military experience that creates a warzone mindset, and legal system favoring police in misconduct cases all lead to scenarios where officers see the people they serve as enemies, he said.

"It's not just training. It's not just unreasonable fear. It's not just the warrior mentality. It's not just court decisions that almost encourage the use of it. It is not just race," Tucker said. "It is all of that."

[Hans Schultz]

This happened in the neighborhood I grew up in, and the neighborhood where my parents still live. Very close to Charleston AFB and the old Navy Yard.

[Fr8monkey]

He is going to get off scott free..

Police in South Carolina have fired their weapons at 209 suspects in the past five years, and a handful of officers have been accused of pulling the trigger illegally – but none has being convicted, according to an analysis by The State newspaper.
The analysis also found:
At least 101 African-American suspects were shot at, of whom 34 died. At least 67 white suspects were shot at; 41 died. Five were either Latino, Asian or Native American; four of them died.


Plus it was "self-defense".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/08/south-carolina-officers-shootings_n_7027694.html

[Bilge_Rat]

the plot thickens...

Dash Cam video released:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7gg-HUAYg4

shows a perfectly standard traffic stop, then the suspect bolts.

I don't see how they can prove murder, even manslaughter might be a stretch now, a good defence attorney may be able to raise enough reasonable doubt to get an outright acquittal.

for example:

what would a reasonable PO think? remember he has to decide shoot/don't shoot in less than 1 minute.

car stolen? serious crime?

what is in the car? drugs? guns? dead body?

Is the suspect armed?



Now Scott's family claims he was worried about outstanding child support, but you don't bolt from your car and try to escape for that, would you?

notice also there is woman in the car. Where is she?

[AndyJWest]

the plot thickens...

Dash Cam video released:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7gg-HUAYg4

shows a perfectly standard traffic stop, then the suspect bolts.

I don't see how they can prove murder, even manslaughter might be a stretch now, a good defence attorney may be able to raise enough reasonable doubt to get an outright acquittal.

for example:

what would a reasonable PO think? remember he has to decide shoot/don't shoot in less than 1 minute.

car stolen? serious crime?

what is in the car? drugs? guns? dead body?

Is the suspect armed?



Now Scott's family claims he was worried about outstanding child support, but you don't bolt from your car and try to escape for that, would you?

notice also there is woman in the car. Where is she?

Is it legal in the U.S. to shoot someone in the back because you think they might have committed a serious crime?

[Dowly]

I cant believe there are people actually defending this waste of living space. :nope:

[Bilge_Rat]

Is it legal in the U.S. to shoot someone in the back because you think they might have committed a serious crime?

Tennessee v. Garner sets the standard.

Law enforcement officers pursuing an unarmed suspect may use deadly force to prevent escape only if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_v._Garner

A police officer can " shoot someone in the back " as you say if he has reasonable cause to believe they are a serious threat.

btw Dowly, everyone is entitled to a fair trial, not just criminals.

[Rockstar]

the plot thickens...

Dash Cam video released:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7gg-HUAYg4

shows a perfectly standard traffic stop, then the suspect bolts.

I don't see how they can prove murder, even manslaughter might be a stretch now, a good defence attorney may be able to raise enough reasonable doubt to get an outright acquittal.

for example:

what would a reasonable PO think? remember he has to decide shoot/don't shoot in less than 1 minute.

car stolen? serious crime?

what is in the car? drugs? guns? dead body?

Is the suspect armed?



Now Scott's family claims he was worried about outstanding child support, but you don't bolt from your car and try to escape for that, would you?

notice also there is woman in the car. Where is she?

There always going to what ifs. But doesn't it still boil down to Ability, Opportunity, Jeopardy? I'm Hard pressed to believe a fleeing suspect fulfilled all of those requirements. I do see your point though and I also believe there could be enough doubt raised in his defense. This was not a 'routine' traffice stop and things did escalate pretty damn quick and decisions had to be made. Having the benifit of hindsight I think he made the wrong one.

[Nippelspanner]

A police officer can " shoot someone in the back " as you say if he has reasonable cause to believe they are a threat.
If getting killed for running away is 'reasonable' I*'m glad I don't live in the US.

This is just sick.

[Dowly]

btw Dowly, everyone is entitled to a fair trial, not just criminals.

I agree. But going the "fear of life" route in this case wont cut it. The perp was of no threat according to the video, just running away. Fairly sure tha does not warrant use of deadly force.

Jury will make their decision, but I will be very surprised if it is not guilty.

[AndyJWest]

Tennessee v. Garner sets the standard.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_v._Garner

A police officer can " shoot someone in the back " as you say if he has reasonable cause to believe they are a serious threat.

btw Dowly, everyone is entitled to a fair trial, not just criminals.

My question was in response to your earlier post:
what would a reasonable PO think? remember he has to decide shoot/don't shoot in less than 1 minute.

car stolen? serious crime?

what is in the car? drugs? guns? dead body?

Is the suspect armed?

Driving a stolen car doesn't in of itself make for a 'serious threat'. Neither does having drugs or a dead body in it (not that there appears to have been the slightest evidence for any of that). And come to that, neither does a gun, unless the suspect is in the car. A vague suspicion that the suspect 'might' be armed doesn't amount to 'reasonable cause' to shoot a person who is running away by any definition of the term that I can think of - and the Supreme Court seems to have reached the same conclusion in Tennessee v. Garner. And yes, everyone is entitled to a fair trial. They are also entitled to a system of justice that ensures that law enforcement officers are held accountable for their actions. Which may include being put on trial for murder if the evidence suggests that they have gunned someone down for no better reason than that the person involved was running away. Summary executions should play no part of law enforcement in any civilised society, and accordingly a jury should determine whether the law officer's actions were criminal or not.

[vienna]

It's happened again: San Bernardino County (California) Sheriff's deputies beat a suspect who was surrendering after a pursuit and it's all caught on camera, this time by a TV news helicopter crew:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmIEqu9ihfs

This looks like another case where the LEOs are going to have damn little wriggle room for an adequate explanation...


<O>

[Bilge_Rat]

Andy Savage, one of the top defence lawyer in Charleston has signed on to represent Slager.

http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20150408/PC16/150409379


this is going to be interesting.

[Wolferz]

If getting killed for running away is 'reasonable' I*'m glad I don't live in the US.

This is just sick.

I guess the officer couldn't be bothered with chasing the man down.
Bullets get there so much faster.:-?

[Gargamel]

Now, I see this boiling down to a couple questions.

One, will he be able to get an impartial jury? These videos and the story in general is all over the news, especially the local. I'm going to guess every potential juror will have a bit more bias than usual going into it.

And two, along with the first, will it be a fair jury? Imagine yourself as a juror, and knowing what has happened recently (heck, even back to the rodney king trial) with acquittals / non-prosecution of "similar" events recently, is there any way any juror will be able to put that out of their minds when coming to a decision? This is their town they will be thinking about. Will they lean towards a guilty verdict, just to avoid the ensuing potential chaos of a not guilty verdict?

And three, based on two, will the prosecution "dumb down" the charges against him to ensure a guilty verdict? If they think there's even a slight chance the current murder charge won't stick, will they go "easy" on him to make sure they get a guilty verdict, just so the aftermath doesn't occur again? As mentioned previously, there is case law that set's certain standards in these instances, and think an argument could be made in his defense. I don't agree, right now, with that argument, but it may be enough for reasonable doubt. And since nobody else was in his head, under that pressure, at that moment, I can see that argument holding sway with a jury.

Also, I find it despicable that our legal system would be 'tainted' by these types of thoughts. But it's only human nature to think like this. Rioting and other illegal acts are absolutely uncalled for in a response to a non-favorable verdict. Peaceful demonstration I fully support. Mass marches, sit-ins, etc. But rioting? No. There are better ways to enact the changes that are required. Riots and the like just further the divide.

[NeonSamurai]

Driving a stolen car doesn't in of itself make for a 'serious threat'. Neither does having drugs or a dead body in it (not that there appears to have been the slightest evidence for any of that). And come to that, neither does a gun, unless the suspect is in the car. A vague suspicion that the suspect 'might' be armed doesn't amount to 'reasonable cause' to shoot a person who is running away by any definition of the term that I can think of

The general rule of thumb taught to officers of the law for use of deadly force, is that there needs to be a clear and present danger. Specifically the individual has to be armed (as witnessed by the police officer) andacting in an immediately life threatening manner (pointing, raising, or firing a firearm towards another individual, holding a knife to a person, etc.). In shooting a fleeing suspect, the officer is only able to use deadly force if prior to fleeing, the officer or other officers witnessed the suspect acting in a life threatening manner as above, or that the officer has highly credible information that the suspect is an imminent threat (plotting to murder someone, etc.).

Officers are not permitted to act preemptively, and the threat has to be immediate (for example an officer facing down a suspect brandishing a knife from 20ft away would not be allowed to use deadly force until the suspect attempted to move closer to the officer or another individual, attempted to throw the knife at the officer or any other person, or drew a firearm).

However in the real world, things get a lot more muddy. As mentioned, it is exceedingly rare for officers to be punished legally for an unjustified use of deadly force. Even the internal review board of the police department can tend to be awfully lenient towards misuse of force cases. It is also a tricky thing to determine if the officer acted correctly or not, particularly if there is not video. So I wouldn't be at all surprised if deadly force guidelines are relaxed somewhat.


I also wouldn't be at all surprised if this guy gets off with little more than a slap on the wrist by IAB when it is all said and done. Even with clear, damning evidence they still get off almost every single time.

[vienna]

The local news radio station here in Los Angeles had an interview with a top legal expert on these kind of cases and he said the cop will not only be open to capital murder charges in state court, he is open to capital murder charges in Federal courts based on Federal Civil Rights laws. Doesn't look good, either way...


<O>

[Rockstar]

Oh I dont know if brandishing a knife at 20 feet is a good example. Since the suspect has the ability and opportunity to use it. And it has been proven a person can close that distance and stab a cop in the chest before he has a chance to unholster his or her sidearm. Therefore the officer may think his life is in jeopardy and shoot to prevent serious bodily injury or death. He wouldnt get an arguement from me either if did .

[CaptainHaplo]

Ya'll are putting way to much thought into this. The criminal case will probably not get into a courtroom. What is most likely to happen is that the cop will plead to manslaughter / depraved indifference, accept what is likely to be the max under the statute and the criminal side will end. The civil side - wrongful death against both the cop and against the city, will be a long term process.

Ultimately, the video still nails the cop to the wall - because his own action of moving the stun gun to "give a reason" for the shooting shows he knew it was not a good shoot.

[NeonSamurai]

Oh I dont know if brandishing a knife at 20 feet is a good example. Since the suspect has the ability and opportunity to use it. And it has been proven a person can close that distance and stab a cop in the chest before he has a chance to unholster his or her sidearm. Therefore the officer may think his life is in jeopardy and shoot to prevent serious bodily injury or death. He wouldnt get an arguement from me either if did .

It's for the same reason that a police officer cannot simply shoot an armed suspect holding a gun. The suspect has to move to the point of creating an immediate threat which is starting to raise their gun to a firing position. A person standing 20 feet away from you brandishing a knife is not an immediate threat as they have to start to close the distance, or move to throw the knife.

Also, the requirements to use lethal force, and having your weapon unholstered and aimed at the suspect are two separate things. Any time an officer suspects a person is armed, they will approach/attempt compliance with a drawn weapon aimed at the suspect, safety off and finger tip resting on the side of trigger guard. Officers are not expected to engage in gunslinger like duels. Plus like I said, if the suspect with the knife made any moves towards someone, that would constitute a valid reason to use lethal force. My example had the suspect brandishing a knife but staying still at that moment.

[Von Tonner]

It's happened again: San Bernardino County (California) Sheriff's deputies beat a suspect who was surrendering after a pursuit and it's all caught on camera, this time by a TV news helicopter crew:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmIEqu9ihfs

This looks like another case where the LEOs are going to have damn little wriggle room for an adequate explanation...


<O>

Ok, let me state from the outset here I cannot claim to have read on every case where a LEO has been accused of using undue force on a suspect.

But what I have observed on those cases I know of from OJ on wards to this latest one of a horse thief is that they ALL have one common denominator. And that is the person is blatantly disobeying a lawful request or command from a law officer.

This can begin with an altercation, verbal abuse or jump to straight forward flight. Who can argue that this will not piss a LEO off leading to action that he would not under normal circumstances even think of doing or contemplating. Yes, one can argue he should or has been trained to keep his cool but that is easier said than done given the situation.

Why I say this is when one looks at the recent one in the post above. Here you are led on a cat and mouse game lasting over 2 hours in the blazing sun in a god forsaken part of the country by some smart arse who initially gave your authority the finger in trying to flee. Sorry, but after wasting my time and fellow officers for over 2 hours I too would be a little pissed off and cuff him around the head and rearrange his family jewels a few times to release the anger in me.

But to play my own devils advocate - maybe I am not suitable material to be a police officer.:)

[Nippelspanner]

Guy applies for a job at the police...
Inspector says "These are the best qualifications I've ever seen, just one more test before you get the job. Take this gun, go out and shoot six black guys and a rabbit."
Guy replies "Why the rabbit?"
Inspector says "Fantastic attitude, you've got the job!"

[Rockstar]

It's for the same reason that a police officer cannot simply shoot an armed suspect holding a gun. The suspect has to move to the point of creating an immediate threat which is starting to raise their gun to a firing position. A person standing 20 feet away from you brandishing a knife is not an immediate threat as they have to start to close the distance, or move to throw the knife.

Also, the requirements to use lethal force, and having your weapon unholstered and aimed at the suspect are two separate things. Any time an officer suspects a person is armed, they will approach/attempt compliance with a drawn weapon aimed at the suspect, safety off and finger tip resting on the side of trigger guard. Officers are not expected to engage in gunslinger like duels. Plus like I said, if the suspect with the knife made any moves towards someone, that would constitute a valid reason to use lethal force. My example had the suspect brandishing a knife but staying still at that moment.


The SOP of waiting around until a suspect 'breaks the plane' is a thing of the past. Holding a gun or knife is not illegal, but holding on to it after being directed by law enforcement to put it down is most likely going to get you shot. But not always because so much depends on the situation at hand.

However firing into the back of a fleeing suspect or rolling up on a kid without warning and shooting him only to find out he was holding a bb gun. Or firing at a suspect, missing him and wounding innocent bystanders. Not good, not good at all.

[Von Tonner]

who said the police were not quick to learn from their mistakes. This has gotta be the slowest car chase ever:har:

http://news.sky.com/story/1462731/video-la-cops-led-on-snails-pace-car-chase

[Platapus]

Guy applies for a job at the police...
Inspector says "These are the best qualifications I've ever seen, just one more test before you get the job. Take this gun, go out and shoot six black guys and a rabbit."
Guy replies "Why the rabbit?"
Inspector says "Fantastic attitude, you've got the job!"

I am deeply ashamed that I found this funny. :D

[Onkel Neal]

If getting killed for running away is 'reasonable' I*'m glad I don't live in the US.

This is just sick.


Well, I think if the definition of threat is explained, you will cheer up. Say for example the criminal running away has a machine gun or a bomb, even a knife, and has demonstrated bad intentions, shooting him down is the best move. Would you disagree? Maybe the cop should run after him and ask politely to comply?

[Nippelspanner]

Well, I think if the definition of threat is explained, you will cheer up. Say for example the criminal running away has a machine gun or a bomb, even a knife, and has demonstrated bad intentions, shooting him down is the best move. Would you disagree? Maybe the cop should run after him and ask politely to comply?
Completely out of context.
I am talking about what just happened.
an unarmed person ran away - reason unknown.
Pumping 8 rounds in his back is reasonable to you?

I never said anything like not shooting a fleeing ARMED person, why would I?
So why bring this up?

[vienna]

Ok, let me state from the outset here I cannot claim to have read on every case where a LEO has been accused of using undue force on a suspect.

But what I have observed on those cases I know of from OJ on wards to this latest one of a horse thief is that they ALL have one common denominator. And that is the person is blatantly disobeying a lawful request or command from a law officer.

This can begin with an altercation, verbal abuse or jump to straight forward flight. Who can argue that this will not piss a LEO off leading to action that he would not under normal circumstances even think of doing or contemplating. Yes, one can argue he should or has been trained to keep his cool but that is easier said than done given the situation.

Why I say this is when one looks at the recent one in the post above. Here you are led on a cat and mouse game lasting over 2 hours in the blazing sun in a god forsaken part of the country by some smart arse who initially gave your authority the finger in trying to flee. Sorry, but after wasting my time and fellow officers for over 2 hours I too would be a little pissed off and cuff him around the head and rearrange his family jewels a few times to release the anger in me.

But to play my own devils advocate - maybe I am not suitable material to be a police officer.:)

Maybe you should look at the video again; I know I've seen it several times over, regular speed and slo-mo, since the story was topic #1 on all the local LA Tv stations (and it has appeared on the national feeds, as well). At the end of the chase, an deputy tazes the suspect. The suspect starts to turn towards the officer, and it appears the officer tells the suspect to comply (although, the nature of the chase as you described, not in so many nice words). The suspect then returns to a face down, prone, position, spreads his legs out, and places his hands behind his back in a submissive posture. A few seconds pass as another deputy arrives to aid the first deputy. As the second deputy arrives, the first one moved toward the head of the suspect and delivers a hard kick the head and/or neck of the suspect. Deputy #2 then delivers a hard kick from behind to the groin of the suspect. Other deputies arrive and a general free-for-all pummeling of the suspect ensues. If you look carefully at the video, the suspect's hands do not move from their position behind his back and remain so until obscured by the bodies of the other deputies who are striking him. It would appear the initial kick to the head/neck of the suspect probably stunned him or otherwise incapacitated him meaning the deputies were beating a person who was unable to defend himself. Hardly a banner day for those deputies or their department. In addition, the local news outlets have been reporting this morning an additional deputy has been suspended after he reportedly filed a false report on the incident, even after the video was aired...

I do agree with you about the frustrations officer experience. Earlier in this thread, I wrote about conversations I had at a local coffee shop many years ago. One of the LAPD officers once remarked he thought I should try to apply for a position as an officer. I told him quite plainly felt myself very ill -suited for police work. I said that if I were confronted with a suspect who had done some crime to harm or kill a child, woman, or elderly person, my strong first inclination would be to put a well-placed round into his or her head. Restraint and subtlety have never been among my strong points and I know myself well enough to realize I could not refrain from expressing my "displeasure" about a suspect in such a case in a manner not in keeping with the law. I also told the LAPD officer I had a great deal of respect for those officers who jobs so well in the face of such provocations...


<O>

[August]

Pumping 8 rounds in his back is reasonable to you?

Nobody has said that what this cop did was reasonable. What's sick is your attempt to use this terrible situation as an excuse to state once again how much you dislike my country.

[Von Tonner]

Completely out of context.
I am talking about what just happened.
an unarmed person ran away - reason unknown.
Pumping 8 rounds in his back is reasonable to you?

I never said anything like not shooting a fleeing ARMED person, why would I?
So why bring this up?

Nippelspanner please refer back to the thread on the German pilot who it has now been shown beyond a shadow of a doubt he ploughed that plane into a mountain killing all on board. It has also been proven that Lufthansa have a serious case to answer to regarding withholding info on the medical condition of this pilot from the German Aviation Authorities.

When people on that thread - myself included - texted the guilt of not only the pilot but the carrier as well you posted an agreement with poster Tchocky where he posted and I quote "Everyone's a bloody expert all of a sudden"
It has also now been discovered that that sick individual googled a particular substance that would induce one to want to go to the toilet - which would explain a question I posed in that thread as to how would he know for certain the Captain would need to go to the toilet.

Coming back to the current thread. I do agree this does not look good for the officer. As I have said in this thread on evidence presented I, as a juror, would be hard pressed not to find him guilty. But let us give him the same consideration of guilt or not once ALL evidence has been presented and he has himself spoken.

"Everyone's a bloody expert all of a sudden" applies more to this officer than to a proven deranged pilot. As an aside, his wife is 8 months pregnant. He has just moved into his new home and has now lost his job and facing a murder charge. I have sympathy definitely for the victim who is now deceased - but I do have sympathy for this officer as well. My sympathy for him will dissapate immediately if it is found he was a racist in that he was a member of the KK or had a sheet with two holes in it in his bedroom closet. If not, he has my sympathy and is innocent until proven otherwise. Though as I say, given what has happened and what we have seen, it does not look good for him.

[Nippelspanner]

Nobody has said that what this cop did was reasonable. What's sick is your attempt to use this terrible situation as an excuse to state once again how much you dislike my country.
It's surely not the, sorry, 'your' country I dislike... just bunch of its people. :up:
Also, your little "appeal to emotion" is flat out ridiculous, sorry.
I merely asked Neal if this is reasonable in his point of view, cause his response sure made it sound like it was.

Nippelspanner please refer back to the thread on the German pilot who it has now been shown beyond a shadow of a doubt he ploughed that plane into a mountain killing all on board. It has also been proven that Lufthansa have a serious case to answer to regarding withholding info on the medical condition of this pilot from the German Aviation Authorities.

When people on that thread - myself included - texted the guilt of not only the pilot but the carrier as well you posted an agreement with poster Tchocky where he posted and I quote "Everyone's a bloody expert all of a sudden"
It has also now been discovered that that sick individual googled a particular substance that would induce one to want to go to the toilet - which would explain a question I posed in that thread as to how would he know for certain the Captain would need to go to the toilet.
So?
I refrained from judging that case too soon because we had no evidence at that point, everyone was just assuming things.

This is different.
We all have seen what happened.
A police officer shot an unarmed, fleeing, person that - as we could see - was no threat.


As an aside, his wife is 8 months pregnant. He has just moved into his new home and has now lost his job and facing a murder charge. I have sympathy definitely for the victim who is now deceased - but I do have sympathy for this officer as well.
Yeah, poor Mr. Triggerhappy...

:/\\!!

[Bilge_Rat]

actually this thread reminded me of "operation Flavius", (although obviously not to the same degree) the controversial SAS operation in Gibraltar in 1988 where 3 unarmed IRA suspects were shot and killed. The official explanation was that the SAS were worried they were about to detonate a bomb, but all three were found to be unarmed and without a detonator and bomb in the vicinity.

The siren apparently startled McCann and Farrell, just as Soldiers "A" and "B" were about to challenge them, outside the Shell petrol station on Winston Churchill Avenue. "Soldier A" stated at the inquest that Farrell looked back at him and appeared to realise who "A" was; "A" testified that he was drawing his pistol and intended to shout a challenge to her, but "events overtook the warning": that McCann's right arm "moved aggressively across the front of his body", leading "A" to believe that McCann was reaching for a remote detonator. "A" shot McCann once in the back; "A" went on to tell the inquest that he believed Farell then reached for her handbag, and that he believed Farrell may also have been reaching for a remote detonator. "A" also shot Farrell once in the back, before returning to McCann—he shot McCann a further three times (once in the body and twice in the head). "Soldier B" testified that he reached similar conclusions to "A", and shot Farrell twice, then McCann once or twice, then returned to Farrell, shooting her a further three times. Soldiers "C" and "D" testified at the inquest that they were moving to apprehend Savage, who was by now 300 feet (91 metres) south of the petrol station, as gunfire began behind them. "Soldier C" testified that Savage turned around while simultaneously reaching towards his jacket pocket at the same time as "C" shouted "Stop!"; "C" stated that he believed Savage was reaching for a remote detonator, at which point he opened fire. "Soldier C" shot Savage six times, while "Soldier D" fired nine times.[22] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Flavius#cite_note-23) All three IRA members died. One of the soldiers' bullets, believed to have passed through Farrell, grazed a passer-by.[/URL]

[URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Flavius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Flavius#cite_note-24)

This was determined to be a lawful killing even though the only justification for the shootings was the belief that they might be about to detonate a bomb.

[vienna]

actually this thread reminded me of "operation Flavius", (although obviously not to the same degree) the controversial SAS operation in Gibraltar in 1988 where 3 unarmed IRA suspects were shot and killed. The official explanation was that the SAS were worried they were about to detonate a bomb, but all three were found to be unarmed and without a detonator and bomb in the vicinity.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Flavius

This was determined to be a lawful killing even though the only justification for the shootings was the belief that they might be about to detonate a bomb.


That sort of 'prevention' can be tricky. The LAPD has a division named the Metropolitan Division or Metro Squad, for short. One of their sub-units is a sort of special investigation and prevention force. They are tasked with finding and stopping multiple or serial criminals, most of whose identities are unknown to the authorities. They do this by stalking the criminals and trying to predict where they will strike next. They the stake out the location(s) and wait until the criminals arrive and commit a crime. They then swoop down and deal with the criminals. A few problems arise from this method: often civilians who are victims of the crimes are injured or killed by the suspects before Metro can act, since, technically, Metro can't arrest the suspects until they commit the crime; if Metro act pre-emptively ("We were certain he was going to commit the crime before he did it"), the cases fall apart due to those nagging little innocent before proven guilty considerations; there is a tendency for criminals who are stalked by Metro to be subject to a high mortality rate since the Metro members, since they are dealing with serious, violent offenders, are rather quick to shoot. (There used to be a much higher criminal mortality rate back in the old "John Wayne Syndrome" days of the LAPD, but better training and oversight within the Department has seriously reduced the toll.)...


<O>

[NeonSamurai]

The SOP of waiting around until a suspect 'breaks the plane' is a thing of the past. Holding a gun or knife is not illegal, but holding on to it after being directed by law enforcement to put it down is most likely going to get you shot. But not always because so much depends on the situation at hand.

To my knowledge many law enforcement organizations still use the approximate SOP I described (I've never heard the term 'breaks the plane' in relation to the SOP I described). Shooting a suspect who held their gun in a lowered position the entire time, while passively refusing to comply with the police officers, may or may not result in criminal charges for the officer. But there is a good chance of it resulting in disciplinary action from Internal Review, and the officer will probably end up with a civilian wrongful death suit from the suspect's family. Now if this same suspect was acting an aggressive, agitated, or threatening manner, that is an entirely different situation, and would probably not result in criminal charges, and with Internal Review ruling the shooting justified (It still may result in a civil suit, though).

Its all about the officer measuring the situation and attempting to choose the appropriate response within the operational use of force guidelines based on the situation they or an 'objectively reasonable' officer perceives. The general concept is that the use of deadly force is authorized by police to A) defend themselves or a third person from the use or imminent use of deadly physical force. or B) To stop a fleeing suspect who the officer reasonably believes has committed or attempted to commit a felony involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical injury (after the officer having given verbal warning of their intent to use deadly force, if possible given the situation).

[NeonSamurai]

actually this thread reminded me of "operation Flavius", (although obviously not to the same degree) the controversial SAS operation in Gibraltar in 1988 where 3 unarmed IRA suspects were shot and killed. The official explanation was that the SAS were worried they were about to detonate a bomb, but all three were found to be unarmed and without a detonator and bomb in the vicinity.

This was determined to be a lawful killing even though the only justification for the shootings was the belief that they might be about to detonate a bomb.

Of course that case was also taken to the European Court of Human Rights which found "that the operation had been in violation of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights as the authorities' failure to arrest the suspects at the border, combined with the information given to the soldiers, rendered the use of lethal force almost inevitable." which basically found fault with the operation itself and the commanders of the operation.

Also it is worth considering the politically charged nature of that shooting given the situation, and how it would have factored into the inquest's ruling. Plus there were also huge problems with the investigation, such as lost evidence, police tampering (officers removed shell casings immediately after the shooting, before being documented), statements not being collected until a week later, problems with the autopsies, and other issues.

[AngusJS]

Move along, move along, nothing to see here, there's no problem with law enforcement in America. :doh:

Imagine what would have happened to the cop if there wasn't footage of him murdering someone and then trying to frame the man as he lay dying.

Nothing, that's what.

[Aktungbby]

Move along, move along, nothing to see here, there's no problem with law enforcement in America. :doh:

Imagine what would have happened to the cop if there wasn't footage of him murdering someone and then trying to frame the man as he lay dying.

Nothing, that's what.
They should at least give the officer in Ferguson, who resigned, his job back; compared with this guy he's a relative saint!:k_confused:http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/aria_c12951520150410120100.jpg (http://townhall.com/political-cartoons/2015/04/10/129509)

[Torplexed]

Move along, move along, nothing to see here, there's no problem with law enforcement in America. :doh:

Imagine what would have happened to the cop if there wasn't footage of him murdering someone and then trying to frame the man as he lay dying.

Nothing, that's what.

It would be fascinating to able to run the whole scenario from the beginning, but replace Scott with your average middle-aged white guy. Would some magic force have stayed the cop's trigger finger? My feeling is this whole chain of events was initiated because a cop felt he had to pull over a black driver for a trivial violation as an excuse because he suspected he didn't belong in that fancy car, or maybe in that neighborhood.

[AngusJS]

double post

[Fr8monkey]

http://i.imgur.com/p3RJZzX.png

[Bilge_Rat]

can't vouch for the accuracy of this, but according to this interpretation, the fight between Scott and Slager went on for some time: i.e. "fight continues for another apx 100 yds".


https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/walter-scott-map-2.jpg?w=640&h=423

and it appears Slager was hit by his own Taser: notice the wire which seems to be extending from a dart in Slager's chest area.

https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/walter-scott-tazer-leads.png?w=640&h=403

if true it would strengthen his case that this was self-defence.

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

[Fr8monkey]

Guess the police are going to have to start shooting witnesses to...

[Nippelspanner]

if true it would strengthen his case that this was self-defence.
If true, it turns this around 180° and absolutely justifies self defense.
There are ways to beg for getting shot.
Attacking a cop with any sort of weapon is one of them.

[Aktungbby]

Not so clearcut! The video does not show what caused the officer to deploy a dangerous weapon initially; escalating above level one: his presence; level two: voice command to a sublethal (but not always) taser, level three...before resorting to deadly force, level four If true, it turns this around 180° and absolutely justifies self defense.
There are ways to beg for getting shot.
Attacking a cop with any sort of weapon is one of them.
This worm is beginning to turn a little;:hmmm: with 100 yards of chase and a fight all off camera.

[August]

If this was a Michael Brown situation where the cop was being advanced upon that'd be one thing but how exactly was the cop in this case defending himself by shooting a fleeing suspect in the back?

[Bilge_Rat]

I just watched the video which was linked above. Note this is a compilation based on the audio recordings, so may be subject to manupilation, but it shows a gap of 1 minute 43 seconds from the time Scott runs from his car to Slager shooting, so there is a large gap unaccounted for.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glsGDw8f6ns&feature=player_embedded



If this was a Michael Brown situation where the cop was being advanced upon that'd be one thing but how exactly was the cop in this case defending himself by shooting a fleeing suspect in the back?

At this point, I am still just gathering the facts. However since Slager is now charged with murder, the State of South Carolina has to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Slager does not have to prove that he acted in self-defence, he just has to raise a reasonable doubt. Now whether what we are seeing so far is enough is debatable.

more info on self-defence in South Carolina:

http://www.dalesavage.com/self-defense-in-south-carolina/

[Rockstar]

The charge of murder seems like a knee jerk reaction to deflect attention from city officials. But in doing so, did those officials do the shooter a favor by charging him with murder? Like you said a good defense can raise a heck of a lot of doubt coupled with the higher standards for the burden of proof required for such an accusation. I would expect an acquittal.

[Aktungbby]

As in my initial post in this thread, and with 100 yards of 'running altercation' not on video but which was sufficient to bring a taser into play: is that the officer believes the suspect HAS the taser and is fleeing with it: the only thing that would justify the horrific back-shooting. Every police officer is aware of civil liability connected to his performance and the taser or even the baton must not become 'unretained' by an officer-as his carelessness is then grounds for his liability. From the video of the shoot, it's not clear that the officer knows where his taser is (actually flown 4 feet behind him) and he is preventing it's escape from a strangely acting suspect-whatever his motivation- that starts 100 yards+ back with the routine car stop and susequent foot-chase. ""Non-lethal" is still the operative term with all of these new weapons, but civilian experience with Taser stun guns shows that "non-lethal" means "usually not lethal." Since 2001, roughly 200 people have died after being stunned with Tasers. Taser International, Inc., attributes all of the deaths to other causes, including acute intoxication and "excited delirium." The U.S. Department of Justice has launched an investigation to review some of those deaths." "In less than eight years, Miami Police, Miami-Dade Police, and Miami Beach Police officers have used their Tasers more than 3,000 times,” Michael E. Miller writes. “At least 11 men have died after being tasered by cops during that same period, including five in the past 16 months.” As before, I won't use one. The taser mfg knows this is bad publicity and every cop knows of the lethality of these weapons especially with regard to his municipality's liability and his potential lost retirement package...The list of deceasesd taser victims: http://electronicvillage.blogspot.com/2009/05/taser-related-deaths-in-united-states.html (http://electronicvillage.blogspot.com/2009/05/taser-related-deaths-in-united-states.html) Since 2009 there have been 634 documented taser deaths in America; mostly directed at minorities! @ NeonSamurai:D: that adds up to pretty lethal for 'non-lethal' in my book. http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lHSs0_Tg0v4/TbbNb_AMnMI/AAAAAAAAQls/rsoDC2Y9IXI/s200/taser-StatuteLiberty.jpg :down:vs http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_DmtdGP6kzMQ/TAkSYWAZb3I/AAAAAAAAOao/kj1Ag0u3VmI/s200/Ban-the-Tasers.jpg:up:

[Bilge_Rat]

more stuff!

this was Scott's passenger in the car:

http://conservative-headlines.com/2015/04/surprise-walter-scotts-passenger-is-a-known-gangbanger/

Pierre Fulton, 30, who has a long record, including armed robbery, possession of crack cocaine, etc.,


it really makes you wonder why Scott ran, I find it hard to believe it was just over unpaid child support.

[Rockstar]

SCOTUS opinion in Tennessee v Garner states that deadly force by a peace officer "may not be used unless necessary to prevent escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.”

And that probable cause is subject to the reasonableness test in Graham v Connor (as the courts have determined shooting a fleeing suspect as a "seizure") “must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer at the scene, rather than with the vision of 20-20 hindsight”.

Would another police officer placed into that same situation, have taken the same action? Im sure they'll find someone.

[August]

If this guy walks some cities are going to burn this summer I think.

[Catfish]

If this guy walks some cities are going to burn this summer I think.

This will be a problem for years to come, the suspicion is high on all sides. Even if the officer acted perfectly correct, what you wrote will most probably happen, witch hunts work both sides.

[Rockstar]

Thing is even if Generic Joe the police officer said he wouldnt have done the same as Slager. It's still going to be a biatch to prove murder and if they can't and he is aquitted I don't think they can come after him again.

Anyone know if South Carolina has 'imperfect self-defense' on the books?

[CaptainHaplo]

Let us assume that the officer was involved in a struggle over the taser.
Let us use the "map" provided that shows how far the struggle continued.
Let us even give credence to the picture showing what MIGHT be one of the taser leads.

There are still some insurmountable issues to overcome....

1) The "dashcam" audio provides proof that the officer deployed his taser very near the outset of the "chase", immediately after the driver began to run.

2) According to the eyewitness, Gwen, a struggle occurred well away from the vehicle location. The map shows that struggle to have occurred ~100' from where the shooting itself took place.

3) If the suspect was entangled in the taser leads while trying to escape, as the picture suggests, then it would have been clear to the officer that the taser was not a weapon, but rather an impediment to the suspect since he would have been dragging the taser by the leads instead of holding it.

4) It is clear from the video that the suspect has nothing in his hands as he flees. Even if the officer did not know WHERE his taser it, it was clearly NOT in the hands of the fleeing suspect.

5) The action of moving the taser from near where the shooting occurred to the body was tampering with evidence in a manner as to defend the killing as a "good shoot". There can be no other reasoning to move the taser at all. Police officers are trained on how to handle scenes where a death has occurred - and they know better than to move crucial pieces of evidence.

Issue #5 is going to be the one that makes any "excuse" for the rest of the issues be deemed as twisting the story to lessen the officer's responsibility. It simply makes a self defense claim by the officer lack any credibility.

[Wolferz]

:agree:

Clearly the officer went into Dirty Harry mode.:nope:

[Bilge_Rat]

5) The action of moving the taser from near where the shooting occurred to the body was tampering with evidence in a manner as to defend the killing as a "good shoot". There can be no other reasoning to move the taser at all. Police officers are trained on how to handle scenes where a death has occurred - and they know better than to move crucial pieces of evidence.

Issue #5 is going to be the one that makes any "excuse" for the rest of the issues be deemed as twisting the story to lessen the officer's responsibility. It simply makes a self defense claim by the officer lack any credibility.

You have raised that a few times, but if you look at the video, I see him drop the Taser next to the victim's right foot, in plain view of the other officer and the citizen filming the scene and he picks it up and reholsters it after 30 seconds.

Yes, one explanation might be that he was trying to tamper with the evidence, but another just as reasonable explanation was that he was not thinking clearly because of the stress and adrenaline.

If the State wants to claim he was deliberately tampering with the evidence, they will have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. They won't be able to if there are other reasonable explanations for Slager's actions.

[Platapus]

We are well into the 21st century. Why is there not more research not being done for non-lethal weapons?

The police need to be able to neutralize a threat. One way is to slam a piece of metal into the body with enough force to kill the person... but that is not the only way to neutralize a threat.

A live suspect is always better than a dead suspect.. well from a civil rights justice point of view anyway. There is value of dead witnesses to the police. A dead suspect can't defend themselves in court.

As a tax payer, I would be glad to pay more taxes to fund research on effective but non-lethal weapons for the police. Yeah, I want phasers set on stun, but we are still along way away from that. But there has to be something besides slamming metal into the organs of citizens!

We have lots of smart people who can work on this issue. Lets get them some funding so the police have the tools they need to enforce the laws and the citizenry does not need to worry about being executed before trial.

[vienna]

There is a real problem with "non-lethal" weapons, but the problem is not with the weapon, but with the person upon which the weapon is used. A very substantial percentage of deaths occurring after he deployment of such weapons is due to a either pre-existing medical conditions or other contributing factors such as substance abuse or sensitivity to the weapon used. Certain coronary and vascular conditions resulting in death can be triggered by "non-lethal" weapons. Aneurisms, arrhythmias, aortic dissections, cerebral hemorrhages, and several other 'flaws' in a person's physical health, which would be unknown to a police officer performing his duties, have been attributed to the use of "non-lethal" weapons; it's really just the "luck of the draw". I had a discussion with a friend several years ago who is a critic of he police, in general, about this very subject and I used this example: actor John Ritter died in 2003 of an aortic dissection, basically a weakening of coronary connective tissues. He had appeared to be in good health for all of his adult life and showed no indications of a problem. He was even well-known for his abilities in physical comedy, doing various strenuous prat-falls and tumbles. The day he died, it was just the time had come when his body failed, nothing more. Should the studio, production company, or TV network be held responsible for his death just because it occurred during his employ? It's the same with a police officer: He has no way of knowing anything about the physical condition, often unknown even to the victim, of the person upon whom he has used "non-lethal" force. Again, it's really just the "luck of the draw"...


<O>

[Von Tonner]

:agree: The reason is sound that one would not know the physical/medical condition of the suspect. That would always be a variable. But, would it not be the lessor of two evils. A piece of metal flying into ones body is not a variable in the sense of damage it will occur. That is a given.

To use a gun in what many LEO are trying to do i.e. stop a suspect fleeing, should not be the weapon of choice as that is not what it is designed to do. But what choice does he have - a taser is not, as has been shown in this incident, to always be effective in what it was designed to do.

"Tasers were introduced as non-lethal weapons to be used by police to subdue fleeing, belligerent, or potentially dangerous people, who would have otherwise been subjected to more lethal weapons such as a firearm. A 2009 Police Executive Research Forum study said that officer injuries drop by 76% when a Taser is used. However, while Taser CEO Rick Smith has stated that police surveys show that the device has saved 75,000 lives, there has been some controversy where Tasers have been implicated in instances of serious injury or death." (Wikipedia)

NEONSAMURAI: Guns are for killing, not incapacitating.

So I think Platapus has a valid point. Its back to the drawing board.

[Dowly]

Another shooting, this time accidentally by a 73yo reserve deputy who thought he had taser on his hand... it was a gun.
http://abc7chicago.com/news/video-oklahoma-reserve-deputy-accidentally-shoots-and-kills-suspect/653636/

[Von Tonner]

It must surely becoming patently clear now to the powers that be that something needs to done.

If we for a moment take out the emotion of race for a start. As stats will show it is not ONLY blacks that are at the receiving end. And as I have previously posted in this thread, to play the "race card" then I want that substantiated by evidence that the LEO has a history, or at the very least, previous charges of racism.

So, leaving all the above aside what do we have?

1) We appear to have a growing attitude in disobeying law enforcement.
2) This will, I suspect be coupled to criminality but also to a growing attitude in Joe Public
3) This all comes together in the suspect, once ID'ed and challenged by the law, to attempt to flee.

So coming out of the above and the increasing occurrences one could argue that "respect for a law officer" is on the wane. And two, fear of such officer.

Other side of the coin.
From a LEO point of view what is he or she to do in trying to simply question or apprehend a suspect if that suspect ignores them and flees.

1) To try and run down the suspect is one option if all factors are stacked in your favour.
2) A call for back up while you try and maintain visual contact. If that is not an option what next.
3) You have a taser with extreme limitations and highly unpredictable outcomes.
4) You have a gun with no limitations on effectiveness or unpredictability on outcome.

If, and in any civil society it most certainly is, a LEO is entrusted to UPHOLD the law and not stand back while a suspect simply runs away, then he or she must enact one or more of the above options. Allowing the suspect to flee is not one of those options.

What then is the answer to this growing problem?

Thinking out the box for the moment and please don't laugh - but if we are able to bring down a huge bellowing and angry elephant without harming a hair on its head - why not a smart arse running away from a LEO:D

[Wolferz]

Thinking out the box for the moment and please don't laugh - but if we are able to bring down a huge bellowing and angry elephant without harming a hair on its head - why not a smart arse running away from a LEO:D
Equip officers with tranquilizer guns with truth serum filled darts?:up::D

[Aktungbby]

Thinking out the box for the moment and please don't laugh - but if we are able to bring down a huge bellowing and angry elephant without harming a hair on its head - why not a smart arse running away from a LEO:D

Equip officers with tranquilizer guns with truth serum filled darts?:up::D

You dreamers do NOT know the long dreadful history of the South ...and it is not proper to compare African-Americans to elephants in :subsim: forums... thank you very much!:-? http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/66/Elephantmary.jpgMary the elephant lynched in Tennessee 1910 http://blueridgecountry.com/archive/favorites/mary-the-elephant/ (http://blueridgecountry.com/archive/favorites/mary-the-elephant/) :nope:

[Onkel Neal]

well said, Von. The primary problem is criminally.

[Nippelspanner]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/66/Elephantmary.jpg

What in seven Hells...

[Fr8monkey]

What in seven Hells...
Mary was a five-ton Asian elephant who performed in the Sparks World Famous Shows circus[/URL]. After killing a trainer, she was hanged in 1916. Her death is sometimes interpreted as a cautionary tale (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circus) of circus animal abuse[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruelty_to_animals"] during the early 20th century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_%28elephant%29

[AngusJS]

It's not criminality that has led to these problems with LEOs. Crime has been on the decline in the US since the early-mid 90s.

What has been on the rise is access to mobile video recording technology in cell phones and dashcams, and access to the Internet, which can make local stories go global in hours.

If this incident happened 15 years ago, we wouldn't be talking about it. There would be no video. There would be no evidence of the cops moving the tazer. There may have been eyewitnesses, but it'd be their word against the cop. The worst case scenario for the cop would just be "he said, she said", with no way to tell who was right.

[Platapus]

The problem with the TASER is that it uses a non-lethal "dose" of a lethal force (electricity). As several of you have accurately pointed out, the non-lethal dose may not be non-lethal to some people.

We need to research a non-lethal weapon that does not just use a lower "dose" than a lethal weapon. What is that technology? I dunno, that's what has to be researched.

As for why there may be more people willing to ignore laws, I offer three potential reasons

1. We have too many laws where the public does not recognize the rational behind the law. If the average citizen does not understand why a specific law is in place, perhaps that law is unnecessary.

2. We do not enforce the laws equally. This is a bad thing for a free society. Many laws are never enforced (see item 1), and worse other laws are selectively enforced. Even dogs respond to consistent enforcement of the laws/rules. As I was taught in the military, if an order is not worth enforcing it is not worth giving.

3. The punishment for violating laws is delayed and inconsistently applied. Keying off of item 1, the public has to understand the type of punishment that is appropriate for the crime.

There is a delicate balance between rushing to prosecute and delaying prosecution unnecessarily.

A person buying an ounce of pot to share can get 5 years in prison but high ranking officials who blatantly compromise classified information get a reprimand

The plea bargaining system is being over used because prosecutors want a conviction... any conviction to help their records. There is a time and place for plea bargaining. If the majority of cases are plea bargained there is something wrong with the initial charges.

In the military we laugh about "different spanks for different ranks" but it is really nothing to laugh about. It is a terribly demotivating problem.

To paraphrase (steal) what was written about discipline: A law should be like a red hot stove

1. Everyone knows that if you touch a red hot stove with your bare hand you will get burned
2. Every time someone touches a red hot stove, they get burned
3. Every one who touches a red hot stove gets the same burn

If I were King?

1. I would reduce the number of laws and get rid of laws we, as a society, would not choose to enforce

2. All laws would be written so that the average citizen can understand the law, the problem the law is trying to address, and agree with the logic of the law's existence

3. Because there would be a reduction in the number of laws, We should be able to speed up the investigation and trial process. Making sure we take enough time to gather up all the evidence, but at the same time have a speedy trial like it says in the constitution

4. Plea bargaining would be by exception rather than the rule. If society would be protected by charging the accused with a lessor crime, then that should be the crime they are initially charged with. If a lessor crime would not benefit society, then the higher crime needs to stay.

5. Punishment should be equally applied. I understand that judges should have some leeway in how they sentence people, but it should be limited. If you do a crime you have to do some of the punishment!

I believe that if we implement these things it will go a long way in getting the citizens to have more respect for the law.

Right now the law is a lottery where chances are you won't get caught, won't get prosecuted for the original crime, may not get any punishment.

That has to change.

/old man rant

[vienna]

This old man would like to add:

The idea of a chemical non-lethal solution (tranquilizer darts) faces the same problem as Tasers; depending of the physical condition, age, other chemical consumption (alcohol, dugs),or medical problems, a dose capable of subduing a 'normal' suspect could kill another...

Plea bargains are not just to pad the conviction rate of prosecutors, they also are turned to as a means of avoiding costly trials; is some cases, it is purely a cost benefit decision. Added to this is the use of plea bargains to avoid potentially embarrassing trials such as when a politician is caught with his hand in the till or his pants down. This also applies to the wealthy, famous, or politically connected. Think back to how many pols, celebrities, or insiders have skated in situations where the rest of us would have been given the max. One case that springs to mind is Rush Limbaugh:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/rush-limbaugh-arrested-on-drug-charges/

Do you think, if he wasn't a celebrity, the cheerleader for the Bush administration, and able to affod the best of the sleaziest lawyers, that he would have just skated through the justice system unscathed? Somehow, I don't think so...

BTW, over the years, I have personal seen several incidents where the LAPD has Tasered a suspect. The one that stands out most memorably is when a pair of officers attempted to subdue a very tall and muscular rampaging guy high on PCP. Both officers fired their Tasers at the suspect and he merely ripped out the barbs and continued to run away. Two more squad cars appeared, raising the total to six officers on scene. One of the newly arrived officers fired his Taser with the same result as the previous two firings. The officers then drew batons and tried to surround an tackle the guy. He then turned and ran into a nearby auto dealership showroom. Another pair of officers arrived and blocked off the only other exit from the showroom. The suspect then just turned and ran headlong into the very large plate glass window, crashing through, and landing face down on the sidewalk. All the officers then swarmed and jumped on the suspect and managed to subdue him. The whole incident took just a few minutes and still ranks as one of the most eventful arrests I have ever seen...


<O>

[Wolferz]

This officer has a cruiser.:huh:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/video-shows-arizona-officer-ramming-into-robbery-suspect/ar-AAb14Hx?ocid=iehp

Adds a whole new meaning to running down a suspect

[Jimbuna]

Swift, decisive and effective.

[Nippelspanner]

Swift, decisive and effective.
And it made me chuckle...

[Aktungbby]

A firearm releases a gas propelled projectile and a squadcar is also a gas propelled projectile if you think about it. The officer was simply upgunning as circumstances required. Swiftness, distraction, and impact are clearly called for here...especially as he may suddenly change his mind and aim at the police vehicle. This guy is pissed off and suicide-by-COP maybe is on his mind.http://img.s-msn.com/tenant/amp/entityid/AAb1tJA.img?h=442&w=728&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f

[Bilge_Rat]

4. Plea bargaining would be by exception rather than the rule. If society would be protected by charging the accused with a lessor crime, then that should be the crime they are initially charged with. If a lessor crime would not benefit society, then the higher crime needs to stay.



no one likes plea barganing, but the dirty litle secret is that it is essential to keep the system running.

95%+ of all cases never go to trial and end with the defendant pleading guilty to something.

If you forced all cases to be decided by a judge or judge/jury, the system would ground to a halt. You would have to expand the number of courthouses/judges/staff by a factor of 5-10 at least just to handle the extra work.

Now plea barganing gets a bad rap, but it generally leads to overall fair results. When a lawyer gets a case, whether the prosecutor or defence, they do the same thing we do in this thread, namely the look at the facts, the law, analyse the strong and weak points, see what can be proven. They usually have a good idea of what a likely result will be even before they step into court.

Look at the Slager case, based on what we know, if it went to court, the result could be anything from a murder conviction to an outright acquittal. The most likely result is probably a manslaughter conviction with a sentence in the 2-5 to 10-20 range. So if there is a plea agreement where Slager pleads guilty to manslaughter with a 5-10 years sentence, it may look like he is getting off easy, but in fact there is a good chance that is what the ultimate result would be in any event.

[AngusJS]

This officer has a cruiser.:huh:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/video-shows-arizona-officer-ramming-into-robbery-suspect/ar-AAb14Hx?ocid=iehp

Adds a whole new meaning to running down a suspectWhat? The local prosecutors cleared their justice system colleague, a member of a police department that they work with every day, of any and all wrongdoing? I am shocked. Certainly no reciprocal back scratching going on here.

And what would have happened if the suspect was killed in the crash? I'm guessing nothing, as per usual.

[AngusJS]

no one likes plea barganing, but the dirty litle secret is that it is essential to keep the system running.

95%+ of all cases never go to trial and end with the defendant pleading guilty to something.

If you forced all cases to be decided by a judge or judge/jury, the system would ground to a halt. You would have to expand the number of courthouses/judges/staff by a factor of 5-10 at least just to handle the extra work.

Now plea barganing gets a bad rap, but it generally leads to overall fair results. When a lawyer gets a case, whether the prosecutor or defence, they do the same thing we do in this thread, namely the look at the facts, the law, analyse the strong and weak points, see what can be proven. They usually have a good idea of what a likely result will be even before they step into court.Except when prosecutors pile on charge after charge, many far more serious than the actual crime warrants, just to intimidate the defendant into accepting a plea deal. Justice be damned - I want a conviction! :nope:

[Platapus]

Except when prosecutors pile on charge after charge, many far more serious than the actual crime warrants, just to intimidate the defendant into accepting a plea deal. Justice be damned - I want a conviction! :nope:

That was my point. When used correctly the plea bargaining can be an effective tool. When used incorrectly it can force a person to plea guilty to a lessor charge because they can't afford a lawyer.

The Alford Plea is one example.

Since it is the prosecutor who gets to choose what and how many charges, it is in the best interest of the prosecutor to heap on as many serious charges in hopes that the defendant will cop a plea and the prosecutor does not even have to prove the case. No way that could be abused.

There has to be a better way. More oversight on the prosecutor's office would be a good thing. Don't get me started on prosecutor immunity. :nope:

[August]

Maybe prosecutors should be required to put all the eggs in one basket and only charge defendants with a single crime. There could be multiple counts as well as separate charges for indirectly related crimes but the associated lesser crimes would not be counted.

For example the gang of bank robbers that kill two bank guards get tried for bank robbery and two counts of murder but the conspiracy rap, weapons charges and the myriad of other lesser laws that were broken in the process are not considered except maybe as evidence of guilt in the main trials.

[Wolferz]

Welcome to dystopia.

Try not to run afoul of the law and you won't get bitten by the law dogs.

To the law dogs...

Don't kill 'em! We need slaves to stamp license plates.

[Platapus]

Maybe prosecutors should be required to put all the eggs in one basket and only charge defendants with a single crime. There could be multiple counts as well as separate charges for indirectly related crimes but the associated lesser crimes would not be counted.

For example the gang of bank robbers that kill two bank guards get tried for bank robbery and two counts of murder but the conspiracy rap, weapons charges and the myriad of other lesser laws that were broken in the process are not considered except maybe as evidence of guilt in the main trials.


Makes a lot of sense

[Wolferz]

and kill a double homicide suspect. Even though the guy was charging him and begging him to shoot.
Caught on personal body camera...
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/watch-ohio-officer-refuses-shoot-charging-murder-suspect-article-1.2190739

Hopefully the rest of the cops learn from his example.:up:

[Wolferz]

Walter Scott died for no other reason than the fear of losing another job by being jailed for non support of his children.

The man was tossed into a no win situation by the family courts.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/skip-child-support-go-to-jail-lose-job-repeat/ar-AAbkZsj?ocid=iehp

Well, now he can't support his kids due to death by trigger happy cop.:nope:


I wonder why it is that the courts always lay the entire burden of child support on the man. It does take two to tango after all.
Women want equal rights, equal pay, equal this and equal that in all things except child support.
It's ludicrous.

[AngusJS]

I wonder why it is that the courts always lay the entire burden of child support on the man. It does take two to tango after all.
Women want equal rights, equal pay, equal this and equal that in all things except child support.
It's ludicrous.They don't. The non-custodial parent pays child support to the custodial parent, which can be either male or female.

But a process which enforces a debt against you by jailing you, voiding your driver's license, etc., thus destroying your ability to pay, and keeps doing that, thus ensuring that you'll never be able to pay, is Kafkaesque in its perversity. Throw in lack of counsel at trial, and you've got a completely broken system.

It reminds me of the endless cycle that people can fall into from municipal violations, which John Oliver exposed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UjpmT5noto

[Wolferz]

They don't. The non-custodial parent pays child support to the custodial parent, which can be either male or female.

But a process which enforces a debt against you by jailing you, voiding your driver's license, etc., thus destroying your ability to pay, and keeps doing that, thus ensuring that you'll never be able to pay, is Kafkaesque in its perversity. Throw in lack of counsel at trial, and you've got a completely broken system.

It reminds me of the endless cycle that people can fall into from municipal violations, which John Oliver exposed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UjpmT5noto

Nine times out of ten, the custodial parent is the mother.

Wife 1.0 took off on me when my kids were wee babies and she signed up for state welfare using the kids to get more money. I got a bill from the state for it and the children were in my custody the whole time. When I informed them of that fact, they hauled her into court and didn't do a damn thing to her.:-?

[Platapus]

About 30 years ago, one of my troops was going through a nasty divorce. The court awarded the wife $1,600 per month in child support against my guy.

He told the judge that it does not cost $1,600 to support him, his wife, and their child every month. Furthermore how can the court decide that it costs $3,200 per month to raise a child as child support is supposed to be half.

The judge told him to be quiet or he would hold him in contempt.

So my troop who was bringing home about $2,000 per month had to pay $1,600. He had to default on his other bills and was administratively moved back in to the barracks for failure to pay his bills with the expected result to his career.

The wife? Openly shacking up with the guy she cheated with. No intention of marrying (and ending the child support) and taking expensive vacations.

When my troop asked the court to verify that his child support was being spent on the children, he was told no. There is no responsibility (in Nebraska) for the mother to account for any of the money given to her for child support.

A fair and just system indeed.

[AngusJS]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/man-died-of-spinal-injury-after-being-arrested-by-baltimore-police/2015/04/20/93014bba-e76f-11e4-9a6a-c1ab95a0600b_story.html?tid=pm_local_pop_b

None of the officers say they used force in arresting him. Yet video apparently shows him limp being put into a van. When he came out, he couldn't breathe.

Obviously this must have been a preexisting condition - his spine must have been ready to snap at any moment - and the cops bear no responsibility. Or at least that's what the DA will say when he declines to prosecute.

[Fr8monkey]

Another example of cover your own...

[Wolferz]

Is like hiring an alcoholic to guard a liquor store.:nope::-?

[August]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/man-died-of-spinal-injury-after-being-arrested-by-baltimore-police/2015/04/20/93014bba-e76f-11e4-9a6a-c1ab95a0600b_story.html?tid=pm_local_pop_b

None of the officers say they used force in arresting him. Yet video apparently shows him limp being put into a van. When he came out, he couldn't breathe.

Obviously this must have been a preexisting condition - his spine must have been ready to snap at any moment - and the cops bear no responsibility. Or at least that's what the DA will say when he declines to prosecute.

Didn't George Patton die of the same injury?

[Armistead]

The state will always find a way to put the cost on a responsible party over the irresponsible one. Like 100's of times I've fired employees over the years, not showing up for weeks, drugs, numerous issues, if I went to the hearing to deny them unemployment, 90% of the time they still got it regardless of what they did to be terminated...

My first divorce, wife cheating, still got damn near everything, probably because she had existing children living with her before me....

[August]

Would you take a police officers boot in the nads for $650 grand?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/04/22/california-county-to-pay-man-on-horse-beaten-by-deputies-on-video/

[Wolferz]

Would you take a police officers boot in the nads for $650 grand?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/04/22/california-county-to-pay-man-on-horse-beaten-by-deputies-on-video/

Pass,

Whether justified or not, police brutality is still brutality.

It is not for any officer of the law to become judge, jury and executioner.
Those who think they have that right are wrong and should be just as accountable for their actions as Joe citizen/criminal.

Breaking the law to enforce the law is counter productive.

[August]

Pass,

Whether justified or not, police brutality is still brutality.

It is not for any officer of the law to become judge, jury and executioner.
Those who think they have that right are wrong and should be just as accountable for their actions as Joe citizen/criminal.

Breaking the law to enforce the law is counter productive.

Totally agree. Still, over half a million bucks is a lot of money.

[Armistead]

Would you take a police officers boot in the nads for $650 grand?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/04/22/california-county-to-pay-man-on-horse-beaten-by-deputies-on-video/

I would

[Wolferz]

Totally agree. Still, over half a million bucks is a lot of money.
I'm rather fond of my nads, not to mention my allergy to excruciating pain.:yep:

Besides the fact that a few shots to the nads can and will kill you.

[CaptainHaplo]

Nine times out of ten, the custodial parent is the mother.

Being a custodial Dad, I can tell you that it is a hard battle to win when it comes to custody. Child support? Pfft, don't make me laugh. My son's mother was required to pay $50 bucks a month 8 years ago. The amount was set because she wasn't working. She has had a few jobs since then, but as soon as the enforcement people find out, she "loses" the job. I have seen less than $1000 total in 8 years. She is supposed to pay half of medical too - nothing on that score. Not to mention I foot the whole bill for insurance too. Oh - and for her visits - I have to provide half the transportation.

Its a totally unfair system - and what is sad is that it doesn't really short change me - but it sure does shortchange the child. My son had an early college trip to Europe he wanted to take. She wouldn't give up a few days in the summer so he could go. Never mind paying part of the over $5k cost....

[AngusJS]

The audio that's surfaced in the Walter Scott has a supervisor in his department telling him that he'll be interviewed "in a few days."

Excuse me? SOP for a cop who kills someone is that he doesn't have to explain himself for a few days?

If I were to shoot somebody, the cops would rightly try to get my story ASAP. But a cop gets a few days to either mold his story in the best possible light (assuming the worst), or to start to forget details of the incident (assuming the best). Either way, it's a bad idea. So why do it?

[AngusJS]

A woman filming US Marshals gets her cell phone grabbed from her and smashed on the ground by one of them.

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2015/04/21/caught-on-video-u-s-marshal-grabs-womans-cell-phone-smashes-it-on-ground/

WTF? You're that afraid of accountability that you destroy other's property just because you "can"?

[Wolferz]

A woman filming US Marshals gets her cell phone grabbed from her and smashed on the ground by one of them.

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2015/04/21/caught-on-video-u-s-marshal-grabs-womans-cell-phone-smashes-it-on-ground/

WTF? You're that afraid of accountability that you destroy other's property just because you "can"?

Two words can sum it up succinctly...

Police State:-?

[Schroeder]

I think a big part of the problem is the lack of training, organization and weeding out people who are unfit (both physical and character wise) for the job. Some US officers just get 14 weeks of training (Alaska State Troopers) before they are let loose on the public. Over here it's between 2.5 and 3 years (according to a documentary I watched 90% of German applicants for a job at law enforcement get rejected before they make it into the force). Another thing is that law enforcement is organized on states and federation level alone. So is the training. No patchwork of local counties and sheriffs offices which can do whatever they want to (Sheriff Joe Arpaio (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio)anyone?). We still have jerks among the police but I don't think it's nearly as bad as in the US (or we're better at suppressing the news...).
I think something big needs to change in order to get the trust back that was lost recently.

[Platapus]

A woman filming US Marshals gets her cell phone grabbed from her and smashed on the ground by one of them.

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2015/04/21/caught-on-video-u-s-marshal-grabs-womans-cell-phone-smashes-it-on-ground/

WTF? You're that afraid of accountability that you destroy other's property just because you "can"?


What I find more frightening than the violation of someone's civil rights is the fact that we have a person with a fully automatic weapon, back up weapons, body armor that can't control his emotions.

What could possibly go wrong?

[vienna]

^ Agreed, fully...


<O>

[Jeff-Groves]

I feel good knowing Ohio rates real low on training for Officers.
:o

[Wolferz]

To hunt and to kill

Should replace
To protect and to serve on their cruisers.:shucks:

[Nippelspanner]

To hunt and to kill

Should replace
To protect and to serve on their cruisers.:shucks:
And you think that new slogan would really reflect reality and the work of the police in general?

The media doesn't really report about the good things cops do every day.
They cherry pick the dramatic stuff to have a 'shocking story', that is all that matters (to them).

All this silly "cops = racist" debate is incredibly stupid.
A black guy gets killed = racism!!!!11.
Any other suspect gets killed = won't be mentioned.
:shifty:

Of course, when the news just now report about every dead black guy, it seems that cops are all trigger happy racists.

But is this really the truth?

[Betonov]

I'm with nippelspanner here.

The media focuses too much on the bad cops because misery sells and just reporting the facts today is not considered a journalists work.
Even satirical news like Jon Stewart, that gives equall ridicule to left and right, reports only on bad cops and ignores those that do serve and protect.

but....

The police seems to be quite inefficient at purging it's own ranks of filth.
A slovene saying says: one crow won't blind the other

[Catfish]

I think a big part of the problem is the lack of training, organization and weeding out people who are unfit (both physical and character wise) for the job. [...].

I think the main problem is that they let cads and characterly handicapped persons become police officers.

[HunterICX]

I'm with nippelspanner here.

The media focuses too much on the bad cops because misery sells and just reporting the facts today is not considered a journalists work.
Even satirical news like Jon Stewart, that gives equall ridicule to left and right, reports only on bad cops and ignores those that do serve and protect.

Yeh, also with that bad image being imprinted on the police it's not going to help the ones that are just doing their job and duty as the people they'll encounter will most likey be less coorperative acting like an total ass to see if they can provoke a police scandal.

but....

The police seems to be quite inefficient at purging it's own ranks of filth.
A slovene saying says: one crow won't blind the otherAnd stricter training is going to be needed to prevent rot to get the badge in the first place.

[Betonov]

And stricter training is going to be needed to prevent rot to get the badge in the first place.

Slovenia has a low problem with cops. Police brutality here is when a cop greets you with an anoying tone of voice.
And it's easier to pass the tests for the military than the police. So training has a lot to with it.

[Aktungbby]

That guy was a US Marshall not a sworn peace officer with street smarts. Those gents are Federal employees and, as I recollect not my favorites types. The young lass has got a pretty good assault and battery case IMHO. the officer may have workrelated reasons for not being photo'd but that doesn't excuse his attack on a public street w/o an arrest.

[AngusJS]

http://theadvocate.com/news/12134862-123/video-raises-questions-about-inmates

Cops kill a man while trying to restrain him in custody at the police station.

Then they lie about it - the cop with the taser says he only tased the victim for 5 seconds, then he reholstered the taser - yet the video shows that he held the taser to the victim the entire time, and fired the taser for at least 45 seconds.

Of course, the taser computer report corroborates the cop's story - except for the problem that it "recorded" the wrong time - it's 15 minutes off from the timestamp in the video. Oh well, must be a glitch. :roll:

Regarding the 10 minutes of video that show the victim lying motionless in the cell, dying, while the cops did nothing but peek through the window twice - well, your eyes deceive you, you see - because the police reported that they totally saw the victim breath and move his arms.

And of course, the internal investigation cleared the cops of all blame. And that's where it would have ended - until the video was released. Oops!

[Nippelspanner]

That is something that baffles me.
You see that a lot in videos. They shoot/taze someone... and then just completely ignore the person.

"Well, ok he is... lying there and I can see a puddle of blood forming slowly on the ground which probably isn't good (duh) but uhm yeah...I'm no medic so I just won't do anything and watch the clouds..."

WTF

You incapacitated a human being, criminal or not, now effing TRY to save his life! :nope:

Don't tell me US cops don't know basic life support!
Every driver has to know basic life support!
It isn't hard, really.

[Torplexed]

Well, to try and balance out all the ugly bad cop stories, here is a picture of a Seattle deputy sharing his lunch with a homeless guy.



http://cdn0.dailydot.com/cache/c7/b5/c7b58d9d02a0ae7e108423187bc78697.jpg

The deputy, who wishes to remain "anonymous," found the homeless man panhandling and struck up a conversation with him, he explained on the department's Facebook page. "Our deputy asked him if he was hungry the man said he was. So the deputy sat down with him and shared his lunch with the man. It's as simple as that.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/washington-state-sheriffs-deputy-share-lunch-homeless-man/

Yeah...I know. Whudda weirdo.

[Platapus]

I do not understand how it can be acceptable for a police department to investigate themselves for misconduct.

Does not the term conflict of interest ever come up? Or public perception?

They come up in my line of work and I am sure not alone in this.

[Wolferz]

Yeah...I know. Whudda weirdo.


One NYC's finest got snookered for a pair of boots by what appeared to be a homeless guy. He wasn't.:haha:

[Jimbuna]

Well, to try and balance out all the ugly bad cop stories, here is a picture of a Seattle deputy sharing his lunch with a homeless guy.



Yeah...I know. Whudda weirdo.

Nice one :cool:

[Schroeder]

Don't tell me US cops don't know basic life support!
Every driver in Germany has to know basic life support!
It isn't hard, really.
Fixed that for you.:88)

[August]

I think there is a sea change coming in what it means to be a police officer in this country. People videotaping police activities are not going to stop. If anything such scenes will become more and more prevalent until it forces the police to act more responsibly.

[Wolferz]

I think there is a sea change coming in what it means to be a police officer in this country. People videotaping police activities are not going to stop. If anything such scenes will become more and more prevalent until it forces the police to act more responsibly.


Slapping a body camera on each and every one of them will go a long way toward curbing their shenanigans.:up:

Officers breaking laws to enforce minor offenses should be immediately fired, prosecuted and never allowed to wear a badge again.

The way things have been going, I guess that's why they call a badge a shield.

[Von Tonner]

I have but one comment to make or let me put this thought in a question.

Why is it that black people by and large, no matter the country, turn to violence, looting, burning etc to either make a point, get attention, or to protest?

"The National Guard has been deployed to Baltimore following widespread rioting and looting in the city. The violence began after a 25-year-old African American died of injuries sustained while in police custody. Apparently the best way to protest police brutality, logically speaking, is to burn down the city and loot every single supermarket. Reuters

[Nippelspanner]

I have but one comment to make or let me put this thought in a question.

Why is it that black people by and large, no matter the country, turn to violence, looting, burning etc to either make a point, get attention, or to protest?

"The National Guard has been deployed to Baltimore following widespread rioting and looting in the city. The violence began after a 25-year-old African American died of injuries sustained while in police custody. Apparently the best way to protest police brutality, logically speaking, is to burn down the city and loot every single supermarket. Reuters
It has nothing to do with them being black.
Yet it has to do with human nature.

My guess is that a lot of black people start to take the news reports a tad too personal and people love taking things personal so they can vent about it, right?
It would be the same with white or purple people, yet the news don't report about a white guy getting shot since it just wouldn't provoke interest from the news agencies target audience...

I would do some research on crime statistics to compare the whole black/white thing. Do more black people get shot? If so in what areas and why?
But I honestly don't care.
It is depressing and stupid enough already what is going on at the moment.

Only a guess.

[Betonov]

It has nothing to do with them being black.
Yet it has to do with human nature.



I does have something to do with that they're black. But it's not that their nature is different from the whites, it's that the blacks are a lot poorer and crime is linked to economic status.

And someone bring me a riot/looting picture that has NOT been passed trough the media and we'll play a game of ''count the whites''

[Nippelspanner]

I does have something to do with that they're black. But it's not that their nature is different from the whites, it's that the blacks are a lot poorer and crime is linked to economic status.
Absolutely.
Though, there are poor white people as well.
And poor Hispanics, Asians, ...
A lot of them, actually.


And someone bring me a riot/looting picture that has NOT been passed trough the media and we'll play a game of ''count the whites''

:D

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/576469/images/r-MONTREAL-STUDENT-PROTEST-large570.jpg
Student riot in Montreal (well, "riot" :03:)

[Betonov]

QET (or is it QFT)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v675/toxigal/yahoo1.jpg


http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/ cYHCggGBwlHBUXITEhJSkrLi4uFx8zODMsNygtLisBCgoKDg0O GhAQGiwkHB8sLCwsLCwsLCwsLCwsLCwsLCwsLCwsLCwsLCwsLC wsLCwsLCwsLCwsLCwsLDcsKyw4LP/AABEIAMIBAwMBIgACEQEDEQH/xAAcAAAABwEBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQIDBAUGBwj/xABDEAABAwIDBQUFBwMCAwkAAAABAgMRACEEEjEFBkFRYRMicY GRMkKhscEHFFJi0eHwIzNyQ4I0g/EVFmNzdJKissL/xAAZAQADAQEBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAgMABAX/xAAjEQACAgICAQUBAQAAAAAAAAAAAQIRAyESMUEEEyIyUXFS/9oADAMBAAIRAxEAPwDiIVFjTiUTpVlhcMFyCQIvpMiml4cJVCT I1n9qRT3RRw1ZHQxTvZRT6UcqGSiAYKaQoVIUmmimigEU0koqX 2VDsaNgIeWlstFSgkRJMCba9anYfBFaglKSpSiAlIFyTYAdan7 TaRhx2aCFOie1WCCkKB/tN8wniriegomGtr7sqYaS52zLs+0lpRUUf5SBbrVCRVk9ijBEa 666VEKKVX5Gmo38RgGKnYVfaLSlxUJ0/Sn9g7IU++hvK4UqUAooTmIHEjhW+3w3N2fh2TldyPACBnBM8li s34FRjNp7EWzFiR1EHpTDey3T7pHjyrd7qb74dxpOGxralKSI7 TLmBAsCqLjxrUbB2DhFqUpsdsgGUqJlI/LHSuVzlHTR0pJ7RzPZm6rrnsZir8osPOtXs37Lpjtl5eYF1eug ro6uzaHBMaAD6Cqt7aalGE90fHzpeT/R+KIGD3ZwGFiGkuOC4UvvEHnyFSn8WVe8RyHAeVRzfhRjDcdKV yGUQKJo0elOJw5pcc6XY2hKZJ+pp6KaCP4KOVVjMWE+VAIjzpI X/DSk9KwAFPnRERQUqBzpKVCsYksNzw/TxNTEKS3pc1HbJIgac6kNYYC5PrTIRiIWvUwKS4whM6fr40p/FRYVXLeUo2rMwtYTOk0KSGzyoVhjheOUlIhKRJvN5HhUVpClqu TzJ1rUu4NKh3gJ61E/7KSJyqIPA8j9aup6IODbKdTgSYCivrEX5XpSnYuUq9ONW2JwaY SDeNLQTz0pt3Z6LzMawD8hTRnoWUA9t7Mbw7LC1PJW48M/ZoEhts6FSuZNoqp7ZPX0q4xLOdAQYCe7EASMogeNqbYw4aClKM wCNPd5U/NUKoMgog6U6EaWmdI49BzNPN4pFyAEzxgHwBmrjZ6x3VNoHbEQ hYuUk2KgBbPFhymh7ldje3fRGejDJKAYxChCyD/ZSRdtJHvke0oaCw40rdvd/wC+ewoCF5TOiRGtOL3GxZSohpYMe8ed+Op/etB9l+DWw5im8QnJAbUcw0ubit7sZLTFcGuycx9mKXRGZdjAIA FzoVTw41nnfs8fwzoDyFPg+wG4IV/kSQE+ZrpmM2uT/aC0oF5m64/F0HIc6y+K3lW53QVRe5kX50rboySGtnbs45zuSjAMGCpDRClmO aqy2I3dCHHA2FYiVSlxV1ADmJiZ1rVMNqKUue0DIgKvA89J9Yp 1rFqb7rcpJkQUjXW51NTh7l/JlJcH0gt0tltONL7VoJUlcZ4KVkxe5rQYJrsjDS1AHUG48Ryql 2QFrczOEkpJSCLBVgSYPKr4eNTnplIO0E4iTJkk8edIDIFSEgT fSklNKPYgJHKlhI5UoetAJ60QCCnzoldbU92cUhaTytWMISUkW nyFqGQ8L0Ck+A6UoUAiVDypGW3KnAaVlrGGEg+NSsMxxVag0ga 2pT+KiwrAskFaU/tUDE4onS4ppSCq9SWNnKJ1geHCtZtEVpClG1TuyyC8TUhx5LQi L/Cqh9/NcmibsdU+etCooJ50dYJzqONEoAUTrscb8qiqWT7XkOFVoWxRW CaUETqL1KwGzHXf7bZV14DzrT7N3LUbvLj8qbn10FBySBxMYG7 x86ucBuhisU0S2wpQM3sEnzVrW8w+xmGACGwTOq+8fG9Xext5C pa21LSChObKBBSDp0HhVccXJWJJ0ednNkLSsgaglJ4wRY/KtXuTshf31kpnIgFaj4aecxSdvMt/enwj2M6unG5NdX+zXZ7f3PKoZS4qUn3iAISek3gcqm+Um4lpKM I8h8AnjM1A2lsJDqu8VJNgcsSYMjNzA5VdY/AltWUxHA86iqXAqPFp0C0ylTu1mIzvuLjQFKbczYUTu7TQMrcW r8sJ5dBVsvEnh3fn+1R9dNaNgpFCd2r2fXkMwiwKLWhQ1vzqaj ZIBBDjgSRlI7skce/EidLdan5eZolDmaG77NSK9rA5VJOdSgmYECL1OUOlCjFYInJS0 gAUpCRN6JxIBtRAN6UomiUDQNYIpKqJxc8dKSkURFYwYNGtu2k 03l8qWVmI4UaMJm1GDQp5DMiTYC/pQMMhM6U8jCk61htnb8ZnyVd1ElKU8hwJPFVafAbxshQGYmTF+ poeaDWtF+xhBypb+JCRAqNiMaTYVDcPOmE/ol9ebWoi0CpIpC0CgMRCepoVI+7mio0GzK4Lchxd1kIHLVX6Vq sDuowyAez7Q81XPppVz2RHCKNVK22bQ02mBAAA5D9KdaTJANgT c8hSoqn3k2x93QmAFLXmyg30ElUDWPTSslsPeh3ezFQsIw+VRJ gcQgDVa44DlxJFV+CwAaFpJ1KjqpR1Uo8Sf0rK7Lxj7uIU+tKo VGdUQIAhPmTeBW0D0gV2458tIjkhxKEbuNqeU6738ypCOA015m ug7O2q2FtIbCsvGwBJA5cBWagk0lfdM3/lqoorslJuXZ0bFFL7KikgkSR0IrFqB1Jk1f7n4oEFJsTcdYqnx 7WRxaORPpXPnXkfF+EcAmjI4UAfWgo865yok0nJzozeobO02VK KUuIKhYgEfw0aZrJyR/0p1TMe1ammVQZqcMJPeUPLnQMQ1CdBFSAxlEqPlUhSQgZjHQH6 c6r1PFRmK1GsDi5/SkE+VIcUKICsGhYFEU0PL0owaxgJcABGUEnjy8OdJCaWPCp2Ew BUQTpWQGxnD4STMVZdkAO9UslLaaNWAbMFa5ngmw561SMG+ibm l2eddo7NSl1YuIUQIHUmrTYux3FYltQSpTYIKjwHKTw0qw3vbT 9+d7IEN5gco8OfWt99lKA40+FpBRKUnlMTbwHzrKLb4nRJpQ5I bz0YVNaLam7UArZJI1yn6VmqEouPZKMlIBFFBgnhQNJNKEVmNC iCj1oUTFuhXImlyOIpOWlzSDEfaOLDLSnAlSykSEJEqUdABULZ Gy1pKn8QArEOCDF0tI1DKOg4niat8wF9OtRV43gj1P0FN4FIm8 SP6IGhJH1qqwirDwqfjzKQSZMmqxhVhV8IsySs3ohfW8mmiqrD ZjYK0z1+AJq7ZPwXO7QIWnWx5fOpG9DMPT+JIPnpVTsrbzjWM+ 7gZkESoqMZQdMsamp22toF1VwBlkCPHjUcs4u15NGEk78EBXSP OlBM21JpEcahbZfdaw7jzMZkezJ1UdAI1Nc8Vboq9IrN7seUn7 qhQzqH9QhXsf8AhlXuqPwFc9ew6mlaRGn7EVIc2mpnM3iUkKV3 wvULJvmnjrUzZbPahIS4nv35wNJj6V1xSj0c0pN9jux95nWdFE gXyquPKtlhd/2yoJWnvESlQPd6iNZFc12i2lK1puClRSDEZhwJTwkcKjsYZQVe wSRJ5SJ+VZwizKbR2ZvGh0Z82YHl/LU44OBtHCsjuPtZDgcSVpTBBSk27sR6nU/5VsC3ETedOvnXNKNM6FJNDIE6UYpaiT+lJUJFtaQew5FKSgnhT mGwpOtWLTQFGgNjeEwPE1NcdCRqKjP48CwqrxGIFyTAGpNvWiL sa2vjibTaoCscpy5JgWHCPCKRjMWgjMlQI51GwlwCTHSOtdqqO iRV7w7NK8S2E2Dibnll1JrYbKxZwzfZtAJbFzOqjzJ61X9qJnl UfHYzhPtGjGKTszk2q8HRNmbZDhF7/Mxe1ZfbrQD7kWGaw8QDVxu3gcqQoi5qq28P67nj9BUs/Rsf2KuYo6MpoiLVzFxwJHP0oqaBoVjF+BNRnsSlJ5nl+9RHsUp dh3U/E+JokIpbGDecUr2vTlSUmgE0oilMQ9rvJbaLizlSi6j00086Yb R/T+NV/wBoWPDWBdnVyG0jmSZPjABNVGxt+cMtKQ6otK96R3fI8q7MHRD I9mhZXwI86nYHEhCgYJibeNqgNYxhwS26hXgoUp3GJbEkp8SRa rtInZbMYRasah0xC2pHTIog0+6CVK8ac3SxqcUEqQrOGkqbKhp JOYhJ4wIqyYwBm442HE/pXBONzdHSpfFWQGsNMqWcqEglR5Aa+Fc+2tvSrEPp7IKbaaUoJ SLEpTHeX1M/GttvNiC4U4ZnipKSQJBUSBJ/KmrnE7kMs5nGEAKIAUFEkW1V4njVox4x12Ti4ymlJ6OT47FPOE JcaQ+3C1FLgAMgdxIIgpBIiBTeF3fYccCkNvYdYCVQ0pKhmIkg BWgB9a6Lhm2e+XFpBRqkJ9kcCrrVR9/w7pcXhVBXdCQRaJuVCfT1qcJ5ZNdHpP0/pXaV3/TnpwRzrc+8NOkKUO9mQpS0m4AIiq3GNOhQbynM7dIEKzkmABHX 5V0HBblIxjjjqlllLZlUCQtahBJ5CAKqmtinAYhXZjtXWVlDYK VKSvOMwQEpvnObXgK66/DycmPhNxfgtty9hKwjTinMqlq9roAPYB8TWnZxvaNNhKcoSCI6 kmfjULGbaLLd0oGKIlYT3m2DqQPxrFugp3CA5ETqQCZ4k3MnmS a5p2lspGm9D9SmGpuaj/OnO2OlRKE0vgWFMqdKrCohXSVrd7RttAylaVGelhPMC+tOlYHo cDzedTa3AhSYnNpJiBPO+lMbyqaZQpshTrqhYJSTlnSeXnVyvd xAQopEriZSmCVDiJ0+dUuDwTqoS0sqI91UkjxOvrSqEnoblFVR R7ubCcKu0dlKfdb6/iVy8KXtRzI4roa1i1LYCe2byT7wumeRPCsjtppRWpeUlBJIULi rQTumTlJdjWGfJBJ40hCi46lKEyqfK3PpSsFgXVgBKDfQkGI5z V0423s9HFby+Wp8BwApsmTitdhhC3vo0yNtloIQUBURmMxFU20 MSHHFrFsxmk7voLuHedXdZ/8AiBwHzNMFVuAFSblXyClG9BzSVqFFnkWHjRJVGv7UgwQSOdFT smhRMPZelHNqKeYpxEVMIlIpWWjpQNEFnJvtdx6lPts6IQgKjm pRMn0EVgK6d9r+CSEMuyS4VFHTKAT865ga7cT+KOTJ9mGlXlTq XJ9okjxJpoVa7q7JOKxbLA/1FgE8ki6j/wC0GnfQqO6fZxhXMPg2VQUgIBU2QL5iVlYPOCK1OMx4UUttmFu 2nghPvHxOlMbYzDDuJanPkyoCYngIHlWW2RjFtrUFggJhMqBBN p4jSVcK5oR3Z0Skmq8nUsLgUNpCUJAj1PUnnT4SeNVWxMY4sd8 W4eHCrJ5+B1roRzswO2tgfdytLSVFLrpcvcZlASCfwiNKxWF3Z V2zjzToaQleVbcEkL4K6JVwrtLB7pm/MHrWcx2yg266qyW3WiSsiyCggoSrwJJB4yRU3Bp2i0MpF3bwkI KMwzLMrjSJjyhIFU+8O22xiFDDEyQQt0H8IyAN+t1eVRttbdCk ltmUtn2le87wvyT0HnyrJOYqHetkgDmeFvD+aU6k62JLcmyY8M y0oHvKSPUwa3CY00isfsVvPiEcSmVmOggfE1sINc+R7LY+gslD LcRc/WnW2FKISlJJNaTZewgm69ePPwHIddaWEHIMpqJQq2c52ZKG+0W bAEgJT1UeJHKo+x8I4y+pWIdTmWkcbgk+zp0rZ7Q7uUJITAkWt 4VivtFWtf3fDpBKnXQVlEghKQYII5KPwrqWNdHP7jbNpglECdZ qqZxrrWJczISppRElsSpm1s/MGCelYzd3b7jT6mH3n+ySnKe1ygjMciVpWBpN4mdKe2VvE6h3F AJSS0tsAhUgoKYAXI9rj50eHhBjP9XZ011CHUFJhSSK5jvTslz BrK0LIQv2Y0J/CRpNa4b2NJ7OYSFRmmwQCJueZNgKsdvFlzDqDpT2SkkEkiEgj2 s3COdBpGjcd+DA7v7yuqbcztCGkSVE5R0SOZPIVlXsQpSytRJJ 53gagDpWe3l2ucIEN4Z5TyMyj2i0+3ltp0mJ6VRf98cR+T0pY4 0uh5ZbZ3H7P3cwdQsdyJJPC1RlG5jSa4mvejErSUF0oQrUIEZu hIvXY8C6FNoIsClJ+FJm8DYndj16PKaTI8aIVAsKzUVNEdKFYx YlvnINHHnTrYnQ+tOKbApEZjSb0oibUCkUkiiAod8N3/vjBbBGdJzIPJXI9K4djsEtpZQ4kpULEH+Xr0thcMVH60nb27OG xSMjzYPJQsocLKFWxT46ZLJDkeZK0O4u1VYfGNrREkhBn8KiM1 +FhUHebZ6cPinmUElLaykE6kDnFO7AbSU4hSlBJS1KOqs6QEjx muiX1Ix+x2XbG1S6+tkxlQpopUDZSXFJMEj2dDJ5eNaVpE6KPA gSLgkkQkzGa8DghM8a5NubiYBK1JkuNglRsQk5gk8kDU8zAqq2 ri1PY3EuNOupldiTlUbR7I0FiAOVTxqkUyPZ37B7S+7pJUUZbE mCNRA0NpOnQTViNo5iDlN4giCLm0cb6+F6804nauMnvurX4mTp l+Vb3cbftSiWMQCFBNiSolZFlDQwSIJPBKTVEybR1JzbrCGy4V ynUZQTN8oi0XNq53vNvM5iVQe62PZQDboVfiPw5A1H2vtmWm2w oxCSbATAnySOHiazbr2v86/z60HKzJUS3cRP85/z+aVTqfHtH8Ug/D5GnnnbQNTYef7VJxexwlAU4qO6ISPdFj3ybJnlr0pQmg3GaJL i+gR/+j4cK2nY5UlSlBKUiVKOiR/OFVW5uB7HDJUqxVLiuYB0+ApG1ml4xQShaRhxJ7pvaxJTxVNuQ qajykUukardPHoebcU2CEhUBStVAD2jyvNquNoqUUpS2vIqAc0 TA5VXbDdYbbS00IShMEcfPmTJp1cqUTfp0HCulJUQb2MP45xEB 4SCbLSCR5jhTG3MQXEBDSwM5AzJ9sc4n51PXeyr1Q7T2dBC2tR e0zWugxSloht7tobxTS1LKylacwWcwSkBRBP5s0QPE0SdhtMtH K6mVqU5EWUpSiZI1UbgBPSntpJKEpxKlJaKSCsE2UmLm/vVzbbe+Li3c2H7gSISoiT/ALAbAddTRb8gp9HU9l7LGGC3sU8kNqSZbcy3m5Wom+bhAtFcn3 r28rEOEAkMJJDTeiQkaW4m3XWq5zGOPFS33FuGLZlE+g0+FRUG VDxpLH3RWYzCqxGLbYT+VPhPeUfIfKqna2BLDy2laoJHiOB9K2 n2atF3FvvEWCTfqpQiPIGpX2jbtqWfvDQkgQsDWBoaXnUqDwuN nOmSZiYm1dv2HiW1MtpacC8qQDeTYReK4bWn3N2wnDvpmcihlX aYkzIHGK2SPJGxy4s64DagFU6gNKaS8w72iFW0iCNQRwpg1zNU dKdi70KNLyuvoKFAJYIdAHM0sJJ4RUfN51KTiDaTHTnSGYgpI1 E+FP4XDSQTYU6xAEmnVPp502hSWHABCRaor+IA8agPYz8NV2N2 qlIUVKTKUqVryBNGwUcN3vxAcxuJWnQur+Bj6VJ3e2Qt7D4laE FZR2YsJMFRKo8gKonV5iSeJJ9b10f7L28Y2graCA0tVyviU27s XrryPjE58auRUYHCuMtArQUhSu7mEZsupg3iTVe5hO8VJUoKJJ J5k123EYZLghYSsdR8qpcdubhXJgFs/lP0NSjkXkrKH4ctTiXkGYC/nTYxanHUWKSnNPDXw1rZMbkOLViOzdTkYMFS5EykKgRxvVExsx 5fsNFRgEgXIChIkai148KronTJWFfKlSSTbxtoONBxapAFSd3t ivOlXcUkAXUqQBe2utbzY27rbYznvKHvHnrlSOdJKSQVFsxCNm rSUKWgmSnIg2zlSgmJGg1+NdLw+wm/aUhJJ4ESB0A0A/k1X7zYKUtPkR2bqCAORUEmeMXrQkQNSDy1jyNI3odRoqMKOyOJ a91ILiB+RSdBPJQNZ7Zm8+HbbbbUVSAZNiUkqUYSD7SUzbmo30 qx3ufU2O1mxbWyYH47pJPiK44+2FvQSRCNZ62imxoWb8HSDvw4 27nSlKkT7BN40jOLn9Sa6HsXeNDyQqCJ4ghQ1CdU/mMCReDXnN9h1s905hw51ebr71OYdeUp1mxtqBJBFwYETwBNV/hOv09AvbUajVBEahWnpXPt5ftDKVZMGII1cWAZ6JR9TWe2pvAT h0tpIuEyUjLYXCR0F/GswpytbBVEzbG1n8UsKfcLhAgTYAeAtUE0BQisYezpHU/D96i4t/K24rSEwI5qsKeDKrmNLX1nkBVXt12G0p/ESo+CbfWsgs1/2TA9i8YtnTf/AG1vFqtFUm42zgzgmhHeWO0V4q0+EVbLIrlm7kzpgqSRkN4dx2 nsy2f6blzHuk/SuZPNrZWUqBSoWINd4+Vc7+1TLnZAAzEKJI1NwADVMU3dMTLBV aLf7LVyy/mKozJKY0zERHhatgEzWP8AsvKhh3QRYqTBvwBt8a1uaOHn+1Jk +w+P6irDjQpGYUKQoWIVTzDXHhWJxG9x/wBFvzUZ+Aqpx+3nXRCnD/iBlHnFb235E5I6FtPeFlkXIJ4JFyaymN3wWtUIbjkTf5WqgZwR IKlHKkXJPKrfd3EMCVqhKQISpZAkzwTrYUaSCON4fEPn+o6oD8 IsfQfWrRrYqEjKRYgg9Z1k1Af3uZQYQlShzEAHre5qk29vK64C 2JCVCCluScv5lRPpQXJm0ZbFbAIxC0NS40lUZk37vO3W3lXWd1 mC3hkJAKQAIB1jmRwkk1mtzW1NrX2bSlIcSEqUtJTk5gFXDyNb JpsIFrybk6nxPwppzb0LGKiTkvdKYxuJCUFSZUbWETcwSJ5C/lVfjdqIbsT3uCU3Uf26mqTaWMW4kJjvuewgT3RpmUeMfEnpQjG wt6JWI3kISWsO12qySSB7OZVgVK4mIkm1jUndHZi2WP6yklZJM o4zrKtVcABpUHZ+HcZSppGQpTdxRtJIkpnw15VPTtgiFONKTbu gX844fpTOT6QFEvc6oCc3GYPz8udWDMzdNgLAGw8Zqo2fiEK98 SfaKrR0APyq8biBwTwHPqf0pTMh70rBwTquISFDhGVQNSSCu4n QEnQAcyarcZtdt2Wg0t0hUOBXcSjKdCfeVYGNKGM2gcvfUlKBe B3Uj6nxNO+tior94dp4VxvEYfP2mIbQTGUiVQO82DYgT7XpXHc Vhe+cwKVcJkGtzstKMVtZx1K1ZEoABQmQogAFCidBx52rc7S2Y y6mHW0q68fUU/NLQvCzhiFvI0OcDgdaaLylupJTEA10Xae5QuWF5fyruPI61k9o bLeaXlcReJ7t7c+gp1JPoRxa7CEwJpMUlLspvaNSbD41YNbMUU 5lkISdCePhTCNpdkImpWFwS1EKgJTMyqw/epmGZSPZTJ/Er6CrfAbKdfNgT1OnrTqBzy9R/kqHmc9gonwEAeA1PnUPePdh1xtLjLSlFAhUSZGuYDhHKup7G3O SiFOd4/Cr13FNMC0W4UeKQsJz7Zl9jqBabA/An4JFNbSxSWrrIA+J8BTO3tpES4ykJE3tYcyBWexyTiBIlS/ia4pQ4vZ6ePIpq4je1N7CDDQsOJ1J8KoTsjE40pccXCROWeRN4 ir7AbqjV25/CNB4njWiZYCRYaWEaVuSX1GUb+wNmsBptLaQAlI0iPE9akrVSg nnSVOcAKXYyABQosvX0oUNhOZoQSQBM9Na02x93VGFOenLxqLt AHBqCEpBcgEqVeJ4AUbG28Q8lTanG20qEFZ7sDiBHGqSbf8ACS pA3i2i25DTXstyVHgo6COdUaWZICRJ0gVfYLdtgqAOISromBPq a1uCwLbUJbSEx0v660jklpDJN9mWwu5jqoLqkoTyFz5CtKzgWc I0pSQLC6laq5DN9KtHlpTKlEWFzNhHGawG3tr9sqEkhtOg5/mPWsk5Gbokvb1unRKUep+dU+P20+qxdVB4C3yqOp1OhBHUfpUJ 5YzWM/CqqKRNybLLBYvKFhKpWqBKrW1Jvx5CpmC2qpBUpaJWbBXKBAgC wAGg5k1m3lCDULAYxaJhSvp8adJNUI207Oi4XbrRhJ7qU3g+8q fePLj1rQbMdQtWYqBMifDkkc/lPOuXDa5MSlKup19RVls/eBprvrYUuCDAcIBHL96R4l4G9xnXsLs1JvlEjQe6gcyo8evpUb Hvhr2FhJOqzbybHAddTWJe39exBR2eVpMTkAlKeZJiVHqak7Nx TzxKwnun/VXr/wAtGnmaR/EeO9sk4jaK0whpJJOgOqp1Vl18zS2thqeg4lZcV+FJhKfTU1YY RhCZyzmVqVe0o8yfpU5KgkdedJY9C8BhW2EZUJCeFhSXHpqO86 Txqn2vt1LIgDM5y+p5UUnIDdbZN25tEst5kwpRICU8VEngONZx 1zskuYnFKyzAyC/+KD+JXTQcah4fbIBK1grcM96fZH4UD3R11rJ727UW+4AowhIGV A9lP6nrVowrRKc9WJ2vvU46sFKG20pMgBIN+aidTTbO8zuaXIc 8benKqYo86NhvMYJCepq6VHNJKXZ3XcLZuGxrYcQrMR7aDYoPU cq2ri2WBFpHAWrzXsTauJwDwdZUUnQ8UrTyPMV1bC7wt4lsPqU Egi4J0I1BpuRGUVBaNHjtvLXZFhVPinUpGZ1YHif5NZ3ae9oFm U/7j9BWUxGLdfWAMziyYAF/hwrEuVmm2xvQkgpbFtJP0FXe7gR2aVosFAGeJrBP4FDCoxC8yw f7TRClHopWia2+7D/aMhZQlsSQhtOiUptBV7xOtQzq0dno7Tdl8+1IkQBUVcjS5qQEg 3Vp0plRHuiPG9cx3i2xNjSVCgB60aqJhMdKFFmoqxiHvDsI4l0 rDkEgAAjlVBi903UaQroLfOuhuYQN3JmKjrk3N6Cm0Ckc42SQy +lTiNDxtlPPrXQwqRaOc9PpVTtvYYeIKSEkazxFZ/FKxDWZnPMi8HgevCma5PQPqFvNtwuK7Ns9xOpHvKH0FZ9Th86k uYWBMifhpzqEpFVSpE3bCcJphs6wLn1HhUgjUa0hLfKsaiKtEm mX0GZqxU1yp3DbNW6oJQJP815CsmZxsqEoNBDLjhDbaSonQAV0 XZe6IahRVK4/CFJHhPzq5wWzG2Zyp7x9pXEnxpXlRli/So3e2AWmkpdidSkaE6946q8NK0Y+A5U42RxoLiot2WWtDYV51H x2LS0nMo5fjPgKr9sbaQ1ZMLXy4DxNY7G49SzK1T/NByp4QbElOi+2hvLNkAj8x4eVZl1SpJBz8TBlXmPpUd7Ex0qoX iO+SJvyroiklRCbb2W6nSeh5G0eNV5RmdIN9Benm9oq98BY66+ tFs5IcxIgQlSkiNbSJpgx3JWIxWxzcpuBxGl6graASQpJzcFD6 itl9xWlUA5czpQkapyAFU/CoKsIJUFAKmVZ0XiTx5aUFIpLEmZMKOgJjl+1WW7xcUvskJUsq 0SBJJHLyqXidkBRhBCrTI8Y9aqQ4tlcoWpKhMFJgjgbimTObJi aNScG2yoHFq/5Dd3F9DHsA8zTKtqKI7NpKcOkmMqLrP8Ams3qiS+SLd2dTMlXi rWpbeUHuiT8B509aIxgiY9gsgNvGLnzPGt9uTbAs8yCfVRNYDE bTyoUlZkkET10roO6rZGDY/wB9ZNRzKoo68KV6Ldy97/9KIUEJ50CeWlcp0ilKy3pCl8TTiVyIpBjoaxhqOtHRR0o6Ji3x RvUejoUhl0CqbbjYKZIBN7xQoU0OwMyWJH88qr1i9FQq6JMbPG kHWhQrMZD4FbfdxsBoEAAnWBr40KFTl0PEvRQVQoVJBY2gXqFv AohlcGLcLUKFMuwM565pUR6hQrqRzvsrcaaipoUKKAO1O3Z/wCJb/zFChWGh9kaLZJu3/6h3/6mlYdOVT+Xu/29LcTyoUKQsytxwjELi3fGluFZjaXtnzoqFPEnl+orD6CrR8RE fhP0oUK6DlRT4k/Ku0bu/wDC4f8A8pHyoUKh6npF/T9smrpANChXEdI6nSmlUKFEzBQoUKID/9k=

My point is that both of them (blacks and whites and anyone else) should be thrown in jail for looting and rioting. And journalists that focus on rase and not the issue shoudl also be thrown in a granite quarry to learn some work ethics.

[Nippelspanner]

QET (or is it QFT)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v675/toxigal/yahoo1.jpg


http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/ cYHCggGBwlHBUXITEhJSkrLi4uFx8zODMsNygtLisBCgoKDg0O GhAQGiwkHB8sLCwsLCwsLCwsLCwsLCwsLCwsLCwsLCwsLCwsLC wsLCwsLCwsLCwsLCwsLDcsKyw4LP/AABEIAMIBAwMBIgACEQEDEQH/xAAcAAAABwEBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQIDBAUGBwj/xABDEAABAwIDBQUFBwMCAwkAAAABAgMRACEEEjEFBkFRYRMicY GRMkKhscEHFFJi0eHwIzNyQ4I0g/EVFmNzdJKissL/xAAZAQADAQEBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAgMABAX/xAAjEQACAgICAQUBAQAAAAAAAAAAAQIRAyESMUEEEyIyUXFS/9oADAMBAAIRAxEAPwDiIVFjTiUTpVlhcMFyCQIvpMiml4cJVCT I1n9qRT3RRw1ZHQxTvZRT6UcqGSiAYKaQoVIUmmimigEU0koqX 2VDsaNgIeWlstFSgkRJMCba9anYfBFaglKSpSiAlIFyTYAdan7 TaRhx2aCFOie1WCCkKB/tN8wniriegomGtr7sqYaS52zLs+0lpRUUf5SBbrVCRVk9ijBEa 666VEKKVX5Gmo38RgGKnYVfaLSlxUJ0/Sn9g7IU++hvK4UqUAooTmIHEjhW+3w3N2fh2TldyPACBnBM8li s34FRjNp7EWzFiR1EHpTDey3T7pHjyrd7qb74dxpOGxralKSI7 TLmBAsCqLjxrUbB2DhFqUpsdsgGUqJlI/LHSuVzlHTR0pJ7RzPZm6rrnsZir8osPOtXs37Lpjtl5eYF1eug ro6uzaHBMaAD6Cqt7aalGE90fHzpeT/R+KIGD3ZwGFiGkuOC4UvvEHnyFSn8WVe8RyHAeVRzfhRjDcdKV yGUQKJo0elOJw5pcc6XY2hKZJ+pp6KaCP4KOVVjMWE+VAIjzpI X/DSk9KwAFPnRERQUqBzpKVCsYksNzw/TxNTEKS3pc1HbJIgac6kNYYC5PrTIRiIWvUwKS4whM6fr40p/FRYVXLeUo2rMwtYTOk0KSGzyoVhjheOUlIhKRJvN5HhUVpClqu TzJ1rUu4NKh3gJ61E/7KSJyqIPA8j9aup6IODbKdTgSYCivrEX5XpSnYuUq9ONW2JwaY SDeNLQTz0pt3Z6LzMawD8hTRnoWUA9t7Mbw7LC1PJW48M/ZoEhts6FSuZNoqp7ZPX0q4xLOdAQYCe7EASMogeNqbYw4aClKM wCNPd5U/NUKoMgog6U6EaWmdI49BzNPN4pFyAEzxgHwBmrjZ6x3VNoHbEQ hYuUk2KgBbPFhymh7ldje3fRGejDJKAYxChCyD/ZSRdtJHvke0oaCw40rdvd/wC+ewoCF5TOiRGtOL3GxZSohpYMe8ed+Op/etB9l+DWw5im8QnJAbUcw0ubit7sZLTFcGuycx9mKXRGZdjAIA FzoVTw41nnfs8fwzoDyFPg+wG4IV/kSQE+ZrpmM2uT/aC0oF5m64/F0HIc6y+K3lW53QVRe5kX50rboySGtnbs45zuSjAMGCpDRClmO aqy2I3dCHHA2FYiVSlxV1ADmJiZ1rVMNqKUue0DIgKvA89J9Yp 1rFqb7rcpJkQUjXW51NTh7l/JlJcH0gt0tltONL7VoJUlcZ4KVkxe5rQYJrsjDS1AHUG48Ryql 2QFrczOEkpJSCLBVgSYPKr4eNTnplIO0E4iTJkk8edIDIFSEgT fSklNKPYgJHKlhI5UoetAJ60QCCnzoldbU92cUhaTytWMISUkW nyFqGQ8L0Ck+A6UoUAiVDypGW3KnAaVlrGGEg+NSsMxxVag0ga 2pT+KiwrAskFaU/tUDE4onS4ppSCq9SWNnKJ1geHCtZtEVpClG1TuyyC8TUhx5LQi L/Cqh9/NcmibsdU+etCooJ50dYJzqONEoAUTrscb8qiqWT7XkOFVoWxRW CaUETqL1KwGzHXf7bZV14DzrT7N3LUbvLj8qbn10FBySBxMYG7 x86ucBuhisU0S2wpQM3sEnzVrW8w+xmGACGwTOq+8fG9Xext5C pa21LSChObKBBSDp0HhVccXJWJJ0ednNkLSsgaglJ4wRY/KtXuTshf31kpnIgFaj4aecxSdvMt/enwj2M6unG5NdX+zXZ7f3PKoZS4qUn3iAISek3gcqm+Um4lpKM I8h8AnjM1A2lsJDqu8VJNgcsSYMjNzA5VdY/AltWUxHA86iqXAqPFp0C0ylTu1mIzvuLjQFKbczYUTu7TQMrcW r8sJ5dBVsvEnh3fn+1R9dNaNgpFCd2r2fXkMwiwKLWhQ1vzqaj ZIBBDjgSRlI7skce/EidLdan5eZolDmaG77NSK9rA5VJOdSgmYECL1OUOlCjFYInJS0 gAUpCRN6JxIBtRAN6UomiUDQNYIpKqJxc8dKSkURFYwYNGtu2k 03l8qWVmI4UaMJm1GDQp5DMiTYC/pQMMhM6U8jCk61htnb8ZnyVd1ElKU8hwJPFVafAbxshQGYmTF+ poeaDWtF+xhBypb+JCRAqNiMaTYVDcPOmE/ol9ebWoi0CpIpC0CgMRCepoVI+7mio0GzK4Lchxd1kIHLVX6Vq sDuowyAez7Q81XPppVz2RHCKNVK22bQ02mBAAA5D9KdaTJANgT c8hSoqn3k2x93QmAFLXmyg30ElUDWPTSslsPeh3ezFQsIw+VRJ gcQgDVa44DlxJFV+CwAaFpJ1KjqpR1Uo8Sf0rK7Lxj7uIU+tKo VGdUQIAhPmTeBW0D0gV2458tIjkhxKEbuNqeU6738ypCOA015m ug7O2q2FtIbCsvGwBJA5cBWagk0lfdM3/lqoorslJuXZ0bFFL7KikgkSR0IrFqB1Jk1f7n4oEFJsTcdYqnx 7WRxaORPpXPnXkfF+EcAmjI4UAfWgo865yok0nJzozeobO02VK KUuIKhYgEfw0aZrJyR/0p1TMe1ammVQZqcMJPeUPLnQMQ1CdBFSAxlEqPlUhSQgZjHQH6 c6r1PFRmK1GsDi5/SkE+VIcUKICsGhYFEU0PL0owaxgJcABGUEnjy8OdJCaWPCp2Ew BUQTpWQGxnD4STMVZdkAO9UslLaaNWAbMFa5ngmw561SMG+ibm l2eddo7NSl1YuIUQIHUmrTYux3FYltQSpTYIKjwHKTw0qw3vbT 9+d7IEN5gco8OfWt99lKA40+FpBRKUnlMTbwHzrKLb4nRJpQ5I bz0YVNaLam7UArZJI1yn6VmqEouPZKMlIBFFBgnhQNJNKEVmNC iCj1oUTFuhXImlyOIpOWlzSDEfaOLDLSnAlSykSEJEqUdABULZ Gy1pKn8QArEOCDF0tI1DKOg4niat8wF9OtRV43gj1P0FN4FIm8 SP6IGhJH1qqwirDwqfjzKQSZMmqxhVhV8IsySs3ohfW8mmiqrD ZjYK0z1+AJq7ZPwXO7QIWnWx5fOpG9DMPT+JIPnpVTsrbzjWM+ 7gZkESoqMZQdMsamp22toF1VwBlkCPHjUcs4u15NGEk78EBXSP OlBM21JpEcahbZfdaw7jzMZkezJ1UdAI1Nc8Vboq9IrN7seUn7 qhQzqH9QhXsf8AhlXuqPwFc9ew6mlaRGn7EVIc2mpnM3iUkKV3 wvULJvmnjrUzZbPahIS4nv35wNJj6V1xSj0c0pN9jux95nWdFE gXyquPKtlhd/2yoJWnvESlQPd6iNZFc12i2lK1puClRSDEZhwJTwkcKjsYZQVe wSRJ5SJ+VZwizKbR2ZvGh0Z82YHl/LU44OBtHCsjuPtZDgcSVpTBBSk27sR6nU/5VsC3ETedOvnXNKNM6FJNDIE6UYpaiT+lJUJFtaQew5FKSgnhT mGwpOtWLTQFGgNjeEwPE1NcdCRqKjP48CwqrxGIFyTAGpNvWiL sa2vjibTaoCscpy5JgWHCPCKRjMWgjMlQI51GwlwCTHSOtdqqO iRV7w7NK8S2E2Dibnll1JrYbKxZwzfZtAJbFzOqjzJ61X9qJnl UfHYzhPtGjGKTszk2q8HRNmbZDhF7/Mxe1ZfbrQD7kWGaw8QDVxu3gcqQoi5qq28P67nj9BUs/Rsf2KuYo6MpoiLVzFxwJHP0oqaBoVjF+BNRnsSlJ5nl+9RHsUp dh3U/E+JokIpbGDecUr2vTlSUmgE0oilMQ9rvJbaLizlSi6j00086Yb R/T+NV/wBoWPDWBdnVyG0jmSZPjABNVGxt+cMtKQ6otK96R3fI8q7MHRD I9mhZXwI86nYHEhCgYJibeNqgNYxhwS26hXgoUp3GJbEkp8SRa rtInZbMYRasah0xC2pHTIog0+6CVK8ac3SxqcUEqQrOGkqbKhp JOYhJ4wIqyYwBm442HE/pXBONzdHSpfFWQGsNMqWcqEglR5Aa+Fc+2tvSrEPp7IKbaaUoJ SLEpTHeX1M/GttvNiC4U4ZnipKSQJBUSBJ/KmrnE7kMs5nGEAKIAUFEkW1V4njVox4x12Ti4ymlJ6OT47FPOE JcaQ+3C1FLgAMgdxIIgpBIiBTeF3fYccCkNvYdYCVQ0pKhmIkg BWgB9a6Lhm2e+XFpBRqkJ9kcCrrVR9/w7pcXhVBXdCQRaJuVCfT1qcJ5ZNdHpP0/pXaV3/TnpwRzrc+8NOkKUO9mQpS0m4AIiq3GNOhQbynM7dIEKzkmABHX 5V0HBblIxjjjqlllLZlUCQtahBJ5CAKqmtinAYhXZjtXWVlDYK VKSvOMwQEpvnObXgK66/DycmPhNxfgtty9hKwjTinMqlq9roAPYB8TWnZxvaNNhKcoSCI6 kmfjULGbaLLd0oGKIlYT3m2DqQPxrFugp3CA5ETqQCZ4k3MnmS a5p2lspGm9D9SmGpuaj/OnO2OlRKE0vgWFMqdKrCohXSVrd7RttAylaVGelhPMC+tOlYHo cDzedTa3AhSYnNpJiBPO+lMbyqaZQpshTrqhYJSTlnSeXnVyvd xAQopEriZSmCVDiJ0+dUuDwTqoS0sqI91UkjxOvrSqEnoblFVR R7ubCcKu0dlKfdb6/iVy8KXtRzI4roa1i1LYCe2byT7wumeRPCsjtppRWpeUlBJIULi rQTumTlJdjWGfJBJ40hCi46lKEyqfK3PpSsFgXVgBKDfQkGI5z V0423s9HFby+Wp8BwApsmTitdhhC3vo0yNtloIQUBURmMxFU20 MSHHFrFsxmk7voLuHedXdZ/8AiBwHzNMFVuAFSblXyClG9BzSVqFFnkWHjRJVGv7UgwQSOdFT smhRMPZelHNqKeYpxEVMIlIpWWjpQNEFnJvtdx6lPts6IQgKjm pRMn0EVgK6d9r+CSEMuyS4VFHTKAT865ga7cT+KOTJ9mGlXlTq XJ9okjxJpoVa7q7JOKxbLA/1FgE8ki6j/wC0GnfQqO6fZxhXMPg2VQUgIBU2QL5iVlYPOCK1OMx4UUttmFu 2nghPvHxOlMbYzDDuJanPkyoCYngIHlWW2RjFtrUFggJhMqBBN p4jSVcK5oR3Z0Skmq8nUsLgUNpCUJAj1PUnnT4SeNVWxMY4sd8 W4eHCrJ5+B1roRzswO2tgfdytLSVFLrpcvcZlASCfwiNKxWF3Z V2zjzToaQleVbcEkL4K6JVwrtLB7pm/MHrWcx2yg266qyW3WiSsiyCggoSrwJJB4yRU3Bp2i0MpF3bwkI KMwzLMrjSJjyhIFU+8O22xiFDDEyQQt0H8IyAN+t1eVRttbdCk ltmUtn2le87wvyT0HnyrJOYqHetkgDmeFvD+aU6k62JLcmyY8M y0oHvKSPUwa3CY00isfsVvPiEcSmVmOggfE1sINc+R7LY+gslD LcRc/WnW2FKISlJJNaTZewgm69ePPwHIddaWEHIMpqJQq2c52ZKG+0W bAEgJT1UeJHKo+x8I4y+pWIdTmWkcbgk+zp0rZ7Q7uUJITAkWt 4VivtFWtf3fDpBKnXQVlEghKQYII5KPwrqWNdHP7jbNpglECdZ qqZxrrWJczISppRElsSpm1s/MGCelYzd3b7jT6mH3n+ySnKe1ygjMciVpWBpN4mdKe2VvE6h3F AJSS0tsAhUgoKYAXI9rj50eHhBjP9XZ011CHUFJhSSK5jvTslz BrK0LIQv2Y0J/CRpNa4b2NJ7OYSFRmmwQCJueZNgKsdvFlzDqDpT2SkkEkiEgj2 s3COdBpGjcd+DA7v7yuqbcztCGkSVE5R0SOZPIVlXsQpSytRJJ 53gagDpWe3l2ucIEN4Z5TyMyj2i0+3ltp0mJ6VRf98cR+T0pY4 0uh5ZbZ3H7P3cwdQsdyJJPC1RlG5jSa4mvejErSUF0oQrUIEZu hIvXY8C6FNoIsClJ+FJm8DYndj16PKaTI8aIVAsKzUVNEdKFYx YlvnINHHnTrYnQ+tOKbApEZjSb0oibUCkUkiiAod8N3/vjBbBGdJzIPJXI9K4djsEtpZQ4kpULEH+Xr0thcMVH60nb27OG xSMjzYPJQsocLKFWxT46ZLJDkeZK0O4u1VYfGNrREkhBn8KiM1 +FhUHebZ6cPinmUElLaykE6kDnFO7AbSU4hSlBJS1KOqs6QEjx muiX1Ix+x2XbG1S6+tkxlQpopUDZSXFJMEj2dDJ5eNaVpE6KPA gSLgkkQkzGa8DghM8a5NubiYBK1JkuNglRsQk5gk8kDU8zAqq2 ri1PY3EuNOupldiTlUbR7I0FiAOVTxqkUyPZ37B7S+7pJUUZbE mCNRA0NpOnQTViNo5iDlN4giCLm0cb6+F6804nauMnvurX4mTp l+Vb3cbftSiWMQCFBNiSolZFlDQwSIJPBKTVEybR1JzbrCGy4V ynUZQTN8oi0XNq53vNvM5iVQe62PZQDboVfiPw5A1H2vtmWm2w oxCSbATAnySOHiazbr2v86/z60HKzJUS3cRP85/z+aVTqfHtH8Ug/D5GnnnbQNTYef7VJxexwlAU4qO6ISPdFj3ybJnlr0pQmg3GaJL i+gR/+j4cK2nY5UlSlBKUiVKOiR/OFVW5uB7HDJUqxVLiuYB0+ApG1ml4xQShaRhxJ7pvaxJTxVNuQ qajykUukardPHoebcU2CEhUBStVAD2jyvNquNoqUUpS2vIqAc0 TA5VXbDdYbbS00IShMEcfPmTJp1cqUTfp0HCulJUQb2MP45xEB 4SCbLSCR5jhTG3MQXEBDSwM5AzJ9sc4n51PXeyr1Q7T2dBC2tR e0zWugxSloht7tobxTS1LKylacwWcwSkBRBP5s0QPE0SdhtMtH K6mVqU5EWUpSiZI1UbgBPSntpJKEpxKlJaKSCsE2UmLm/vVzbbe+Li3c2H7gSISoiT/ALAbAddTRb8gp9HU9l7LGGC3sU8kNqSZbcy3m5Wom+bhAtFcn3 r28rEOEAkMJJDTeiQkaW4m3XWq5zGOPFS33FuGLZlE+g0+FRUG VDxpLH3RWYzCqxGLbYT+VPhPeUfIfKqna2BLDy2laoJHiOB9K2 n2atF3FvvEWCTfqpQiPIGpX2jbtqWfvDQkgQsDWBoaXnUqDwuN nOmSZiYm1dv2HiW1MtpacC8qQDeTYReK4bWn3N2wnDvpmcihlX aYkzIHGK2SPJGxy4s64DagFU6gNKaS8w72iFW0iCNQRwpg1zNU dKdi70KNLyuvoKFAJYIdAHM0sJJ4RUfN51KTiDaTHTnSGYgpI1 E+FP4XDSQTYU6xAEmnVPp502hSWHABCRaor+IA8agPYz8NV2N2 qlIUVKTKUqVryBNGwUcN3vxAcxuJWnQur+Bj6VJ3e2Qt7D4laE FZR2YsJMFRKo8gKonV5iSeJJ9b10f7L28Y2graCA0tVyviU27s XrryPjE58auRUYHCuMtArQUhSu7mEZsupg3iTVe5hO8VJUoKJJ J5k123EYZLghYSsdR8qpcdubhXJgFs/lP0NSjkXkrKH4ctTiXkGYC/nTYxanHUWKSnNPDXw1rZMbkOLViOzdTkYMFS5EykKgRxvVExsx 5fsNFRgEgXIChIkai148KronTJWFfKlSSTbxtoONBxapAFSd3t ivOlXcUkAXUqQBe2utbzY27rbYznvKHvHnrlSOdJKSQVFsxCNm rSUKWgmSnIg2zlSgmJGg1+NdLw+wm/aUhJJ4ESB0A0A/k1X7zYKUtPkR2bqCAORUEmeMXrQkQNSDy1jyNI3odRoqMKOyOJ a91ILiB+RSdBPJQNZ7Zm8+HbbbbUVSAZNiUkqUYSD7SUzbmo30 qx3ufU2O1mxbWyYH47pJPiK44+2FvQSRCNZ62imxoWb8HSDvw4 27nSlKkT7BN40jOLn9Sa6HsXeNDyQqCJ4ghQ1CdU/mMCReDXnN9h1s905hw51ebr71OYdeUp1mxtqBJBFwYETwBNV/hOv09AvbUajVBEahWnpXPt5ftDKVZMGII1cWAZ6JR9TWe2pvAT h0tpIuEyUjLYXCR0F/GswpytbBVEzbG1n8UsKfcLhAgTYAeAtUE0BQisYezpHU/D96i4t/K24rSEwI5qsKeDKrmNLX1nkBVXt12G0p/ESo+CbfWsgs1/2TA9i8YtnTf/AG1vFqtFUm42zgzgmhHeWO0V4q0+EVbLIrlm7kzpgqSRkN4dx2 nsy2f6blzHuk/SuZPNrZWUqBSoWINd4+Vc7+1TLnZAAzEKJI1NwADVMU3dMTLBV aLf7LVyy/mKozJKY0zERHhatgEzWP8AsvKhh3QRYqTBvwBt8a1uaOHn+1Jk +w+P6irDjQpGYUKQoWIVTzDXHhWJxG9x/wBFvzUZ+Aqpx+3nXRCnD/iBlHnFb235E5I6FtPeFlkXIJ4JFyaymN3wWtUIbjkTf5WqgZwR IKlHKkXJPKrfd3EMCVqhKQISpZAkzwTrYUaSCON4fEPn+o6oD8 IsfQfWrRrYqEjKRYgg9Z1k1Af3uZQYQlShzEAHre5qk29vK64C 2JCVCCluScv5lRPpQXJm0ZbFbAIxC0NS40lUZk37vO3W3lXWd1 mC3hkJAKQAIB1jmRwkk1mtzW1NrX2bSlIcSEqUtJTk5gFXDyNb JpsIFrybk6nxPwppzb0LGKiTkvdKYxuJCUFSZUbWETcwSJ5C/lVfjdqIbsT3uCU3Uf26mqTaWMW4kJjvuewgT3RpmUeMfEnpQjG wt6JWI3kISWsO12qySSB7OZVgVK4mIkm1jUndHZi2WP6yklZJM o4zrKtVcABpUHZ+HcZSppGQpTdxRtJIkpnw15VPTtgiFONKTbu gX844fpTOT6QFEvc6oCc3GYPz8udWDMzdNgLAGw8Zqo2fiEK98 SfaKrR0APyq8biBwTwHPqf0pTMh70rBwTquISFDhGVQNSSCu4n QEnQAcyarcZtdt2Wg0t0hUOBXcSjKdCfeVYGNKGM2gcvfUlKBe B3Uj6nxNO+tior94dp4VxvEYfP2mIbQTGUiVQO82DYgT7XpXHc Vhe+cwKVcJkGtzstKMVtZx1K1ZEoABQmQogAFCidBx52rc7S2Y y6mHW0q68fUU/NLQvCzhiFvI0OcDgdaaLylupJTEA10Xae5QuWF5fyruPI61k9o bLeaXlcReJ7t7c+gp1JPoRxa7CEwJpMUlLspvaNSbD41YNbMUU 5lkISdCePhTCNpdkImpWFwS1EKgJTMyqw/epmGZSPZTJ/Er6CrfAbKdfNgT1OnrTqBzy9R/kqHmc9gonwEAeA1PnUPePdh1xtLjLSlFAhUSZGuYDhHKup7G3O SiFOd4/Cr13FNMC0W4UeKQsJz7Zl9jqBabA/An4JFNbSxSWrrIA+J8BTO3tpES4ykJE3tYcyBWexyTiBIlS/ia4pQ4vZ6ePIpq4je1N7CDDQsOJ1J8KoTsjE40pccXCROWeRN4 ir7AbqjV25/CNB4njWiZYCRYaWEaVuSX1GUb+wNmsBptLaQAlI0iPE9akrVSg nnSVOcAKXYyABQosvX0oUNhOZoQSQBM9Na02x93VGFOenLxqLt AHBqCEpBcgEqVeJ4AUbG28Q8lTanG20qEFZ7sDiBHGqSbf8ACS pA3i2i25DTXstyVHgo6COdUaWZICRJ0gVfYLdtgqAOISromBPq a1uCwLbUJbSEx0v660jklpDJN9mWwu5jqoLqkoTyFz5CtKzgWc I0pSQLC6laq5DN9KtHlpTKlEWFzNhHGawG3tr9sqEkhtOg5/mPWsk5Gbokvb1unRKUep+dU+P20+qxdVB4C3yqOp1OhBHUfpUJ 5YzWM/CqqKRNybLLBYvKFhKpWqBKrW1Jvx5CpmC2qpBUpaJWbBXKBAgC wAGg5k1m3lCDULAYxaJhSvp8adJNUI207Oi4XbrRhJ7qU3g+8q fePLj1rQbMdQtWYqBMifDkkc/lPOuXDa5MSlKup19RVls/eBprvrYUuCDAcIBHL96R4l4G9xnXsLs1JvlEjQe6gcyo8evpUb Hvhr2FhJOqzbybHAddTWJe39exBR2eVpMTkAlKeZJiVHqak7Nx TzxKwnun/VXr/wAtGnmaR/EeO9sk4jaK0whpJJOgOqp1Vl18zS2thqeg4lZcV+FJhKfTU1YY RhCZyzmVqVe0o8yfpU5KgkdedJY9C8BhW2EZUJCeFhSXHpqO86 Txqn2vt1LIgDM5y+p5UUnIDdbZN25tEst5kwpRICU8VEngONZx 1zskuYnFKyzAyC/+KD+JXTQcah4fbIBK1grcM96fZH4UD3R11rJ727UW+4AowhIGV A9lP6nrVowrRKc9WJ2vvU46sFKG20pMgBIN+aidTTbO8zuaXIc 8benKqYo86NhvMYJCepq6VHNJKXZ3XcLZuGxrYcQrMR7aDYoPU cq2ri2WBFpHAWrzXsTauJwDwdZUUnQ8UrTyPMV1bC7wt4lsPqU Egi4J0I1BpuRGUVBaNHjtvLXZFhVPinUpGZ1YHif5NZ3ae9oFm U/7j9BWUxGLdfWAMziyYAF/hwrEuVmm2xvQkgpbFtJP0FXe7gR2aVosFAGeJrBP4FDCoxC8yw f7TRClHopWia2+7D/aMhZQlsSQhtOiUptBV7xOtQzq0dno7Tdl8+1IkQBUVcjS5qQEg 3Vp0plRHuiPG9cx3i2xNjSVCgB60aqJhMdKFFmoqxiHvDsI4l0 rDkEgAAjlVBi903UaQroLfOuhuYQN3JmKjrk3N6Cm0Ckc42SQy +lTiNDxtlPPrXQwqRaOc9PpVTtvYYeIKSEkazxFZ/FKxDWZnPMi8HgevCma5PQPqFvNtwuK7Ns9xOpHvKH0FZ9Th86k uYWBMifhpzqEpFVSpE3bCcJphs6wLn1HhUgjUa0hLfKsaiKtEm mX0GZqxU1yp3DbNW6oJQJP815CsmZxsqEoNBDLjhDbaSonQAV0 XZe6IahRVK4/CFJHhPzq5wWzG2Zyp7x9pXEnxpXlRli/So3e2AWmkpdidSkaE6946q8NK0Y+A5U42RxoLiot2WWtDYV51H x2LS0nMo5fjPgKr9sbaQ1ZMLXy4DxNY7G49SzK1T/NByp4QbElOi+2hvLNkAj8x4eVZl1SpJBz8TBlXmPpUd7Ex0qoX iO+SJvyroiklRCbb2W6nSeh5G0eNV5RmdIN9Benm9oq98BY66+ tFs5IcxIgQlSkiNbSJpgx3JWIxWxzcpuBxGl6graASQpJzcFD6 itl9xWlUA5czpQkapyAFU/CoKsIJUFAKmVZ0XiTx5aUFIpLEmZMKOgJjl+1WW7xcUvskJUsq 0SBJJHLyqXidkBRhBCrTI8Y9aqQ4tlcoWpKhMFJgjgbimTObJi aNScG2yoHFq/5Dd3F9DHsA8zTKtqKI7NpKcOkmMqLrP8Ams3qiS+SLd2dTMlXi rWpbeUHuiT8B509aIxgiY9gsgNvGLnzPGt9uTbAs8yCfVRNYDE bTyoUlZkkET10roO6rZGDY/wB9ZNRzKoo68KV6Ldy97/9KIUEJ50CeWlcp0ilKy3pCl8TTiVyIpBjoaxhqOtHRR0o6Ji3x RvUejoUhl0CqbbjYKZIBN7xQoU0OwMyWJH88qr1i9FQq6JMbPG kHWhQrMZD4FbfdxsBoEAAnWBr40KFTl0PEvRQVQoVJBY2gXqFv AohlcGLcLUKFMuwM565pUR6hQrqRzvsrcaaipoUKKAO1O3Z/wCJb/zFChWGh9kaLZJu3/6h3/6mlYdOVT+Xu/29LcTyoUKQsytxwjELi3fGluFZjaXtnzoqFPEnl+orD6CrR8RE fhP0oUK6DlRT4k/Ku0bu/wDC4f8A8pHyoUKh6npF/T9smrpANChXEdI6nSmlUKFEzBQoUKID/9k=

My point is that both of them (blacks and whites and anyone else) should be thrown in jail for looting and rioting. And journalists that focus on rase and not the issue shoudl also be thrown in a granite quarry to learn some work ethics.
I could not agree more with you and that picture is spot on. :salute:

[Wolferz]

... and the police.:nope:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/baltimore-devolves-into-chaos-violence-looting/ar-BBiKXpR?ocid=iehp



Time to go color blind?

[Oberon]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-h_xgdM8FI

[HunterICX]

as for Baltimore, someone give this mom a award!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L19yJVRZWlc

:yeah:

[Rockstar]

as for Baltimore, someone give this mom a award!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L19yJVRZWlc

:yeah:

LOL I love it. Go mom!

[Jimbuna]

as for Baltimore, someone give this mom a award!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L19yJVRZWlc

:yeah:

That'll larn the bugga :)

[Armistead]

Civil rights protester put into same situations cops often are....

interesting results..


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfi3Ndh3n-g

[Nippelspanner]

Interesting indeed!
Quite the eye opener to some eye guess.
Had to chuckle when he said "I didn't understand how important compliance was."
I think that is one of the major problems when it comes to all these shootings, many don't understand this and... get shot.

When a cop tells me to stop, freeze, lay down... I friggin' do it and ask question later when a tense situation has passed.

[Armistead]

One thing we do know is the problem is getting worse and will continue to do so in these larger cities. Many of these cities were once large industrial and manufacturing cities, not anymore. However, when they were, the racial dynamics still came into play, the jobs left, many in the white community left as well to find other jobs.

The bigger issue was when we attempted the misguided attempt of the war on poverty in the 60's. We built more housing projects in these cities supported by numerous govt. welfare programs and this type of life became the norm. In the 50's the illegitimacy rate for blacks was about 20%, today it's over 70%, simply due to govt welfare laws that promoted the destruction of the family, remain single, have children, get more govt. benefits. The answer so far has been to throw more money, more welfare and social benefits at the problem.

We've made our inner cities war zones of poverty and crime with hardly a way out.

[Oberon]

Been looking around to see if I could find a reddit live link, and lo and behold here is one:
http://www.reddit.com/live/ut948b9s23la

[Jimbuna]

Civil rights protester put into same situations cops often are....

interesting results..


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfi3Ndh3n-g

Indeed....and the main reason I didn't apply for a permanent transfer into an armed response unit after having completed firearms training whilst in uniform.

Second chances are rare after the real event but thankfully our armed crime rate in the UK is nowhere near that of countries like the US.

That of course is a topic all of its own though.

[Platapus]

Concerning the two pictures there may be more to the story

http://www.snopes.com/katrina/photos/looters.asp

Evidently the reporter who took the "looting" picture actually saw the person looting and the reporter who took the "finding" picture did not see how they got the food.

[Onkel Neal]

One thing we do know is the problem is getting worse and will continue to do so in these larger cities. Many of these cities were once large industrial and manufacturing cities, not anymore. However, when they were, the racial dynamics still came into play, the jobs left, many in the white community left as well to find other jobs.

The bigger issue was when we attempted the misguided attempt of the war on poverty in the 60's. We built more housing projects in these cities supported by numerous govt. welfare programs and this type of life became the norm. In the 50's the illegitimacy rate for blacks was about 20%, today it's over 70%, simply due to govt welfare laws that promoted the destruction of the family, remain single, have children, get more govt. benefits. The answer so far has been to throw more money, more welfare and social benefits at the problem.

We've made our inner cities war zones of poverty and crime with hardly a way out.

Yeah. And I've read 100 articles about how insufficient school funding is dooming these kids to poverty. BS. If the parents would tend to their kids and make them act right in class and study, they would be fine. Too many kids from these communities have neglectful/absent parents. I guess that's society's fault too.:nope:

[AngusJS]

Yeah. And I've read 100 articles about how insufficient school funding is dooming these kids to poverty. BS. If the parents would tend to their kids and make them act right in class and study, they would be fine. Too many kids from these communities have neglectful/absent parents. I guess that's society's fault too.:nope:So millions of black people all just decided to be bad parents, totally uncaused by anything else?

[Fr8monkey]

I'm sure all the rich parents who just shove their kids off to the nanny have the same problem.

[Onkel Neal]

So millions of black people all just decided to be bad parents, totally uncaused by anything else?

Did I say "black people"? Don't hurt yourself throwing out the race card.:O:

So millions of people all just decided to be drug addicts, totally uncaused by anything else?

So millions of people all just decided to stop paying their bills, totally uncaused by anything else?

So millions of people all just decided to be unwed parents, totally uncaused by anything else?

So millions of people all just decided to avoid work if they cannot find exactly the job that suits, totally uncaused by anything else?

For many many generations, it was well understood that if a man and woman have a child, they are responsible for that child. If they have a child by accident, well, it was still up to them to deal with it. They made their choices, they should be accountable for the results. But not today, now millions of people can find plenty of reasons to blame their bad life choices and parenting on. I'm sure they would thank you.


I'm sure all the rich parents who just shove their kids off to the nanny have the same problem.
Of course they do. There are a lot of kids from high income families that get into trouble and underperform in school. Because their parents are not involved in their lives.

If the parents would tend to their kids and make them act right in class and study, they would be fine. Too many kids from these communities have neglectful/absent parents.

I don't see anything controversial about my statement. People should take care of their business, and parenting is a high priority.

[AngusJS]

Did I say "black people"? Don't hurt yourself throwing out the race card.:O:

So millions of people all just decided to be drug addicts, totally uncaused by anything else?

So millions of people all just decided to stop paying their bills, totally uncaused by anything else?

So millions of people all just decided to be unwed parents, totally uncaused by anything else?

So millions of people all just decided to avoid work if they cannot find exactly the job that suits, totally uncaused by anything else?

For many many generations, it was well understood that if a man and woman have a child, they are responsible for that child. If they have a child by accident, well, it was still up to them to deal with it. They made their choices, they should be accountable for the results. But not today, now millions of people can find plenty of reasons to blame their bad life choices and parenting on. I'm sure they would thank you.

I don't see anything controversial about my statement. People should take care of their business, and parenting is a high priority.When you said "these communites", I thought you meant predominately black neighborhoods.

My point was, obviously very large groups of people don't decide to to act in the exact same way just based on "free will." There must be a cause. And what other cause can there be than society? That's not to say that you or I are at fault. I'm just saying there must be some combination of policy, culture, economics and psychology that produces that outcome.

[Armistead]

Yeah. And I've read 100 articles about how insufficient school funding is dooming these kids to poverty. BS. If the parents would tend to their kids and make them act right in class and study, they would be fine. Too many kids from these communities have neglectful/absent parents. I guess that's society's fault too.:nope:

Watching a Democrat talk about concentrated poverty in Baltimore, how 10 blocks away is a thriving urban area. There's much talk about the mother that put the beat down on her son protesting, which was good, but she's also a single mother of 6 children in the ghetto. Again, when we created mass welfare system that reward you for having children, not working, being supported by the govt at the poverty level, you have this chaos. Our laws destroyed a once intact black family unit, even in poverty, mothers and fathers worked to get by and raise there kids. This mindset and lifestyle is getting passed down generation after generation, no change and getting worse.

The big complaint is education and lack of jobs.....then do something about it. A good majority of people through the history of America lived in poverty, they took pride in their local schools, family units, their property, neighborhoods, etc. Poverty isn't an excuse for immoral behavior and refusal to accept responsibility, if it was America would've gone up in flames years ago. Millions of illegals have come into America with nothing and work, build businesses, get educated....you would think legal Americans could as well, but you must be willing to change within yourself instead of playing the blame game that I'm responsible that you have to commit crimes, have babies out of marriage and choose to live a thug life in the ghetto....

I don't know why there must be a mindset to live this way when u can choose to live better. I look at the town I live in, it's a rural basically dying mill town that once thrived. The numerous mill neighborhoods of small houses were once decent, thriving neighborhoods, houses well kept and maintained. When all the mills died, whites basically moved to other places or found other jobs and these neighborhoods became Sec 8 neighborhoods, basically black. In one decade beautiful neighborhoods became slums, houses destroyed, yards trashed, trash all over the road. Drive through any time during the day and all you see is people sitting on front porches or standing on corners...go to the other neighborhoods, you'll see Mexicans working in damn near every yard, painting every house, etc...

If the govt is paying your rent, feeding you, giving you welfare to live every month....that's your choice, but it doesn't mean you have to raise kids with no discipline or instruction. If you went to school and behaved and learned, you could get college grants, whatever and get out. The one school in this neighborhood is out of control and worse grades in the county.

If you want change, change it, become part of the solution, not the problem.
Until we change the laws that stop rewarding single motherhood, things will continue to get worse.... It's not my damn fault you can't keep your legs closed or use govt paid for birth control...

[Onkel Neal]

When you said "these communites", I thought you meant predominately black neighborhoods.

My point was, obviously very large groups of people don't decide to to act in the exact same way just based on "free will." There must be a cause. And what other cause can there be than society? That's not to say that you or I are at fault. I'm just saying there must be some combination of policy, culture, economics and psychology that produces that outcome.

Well, what I meant was inner city communities, which in this case is mostly black, but in many cases is Hispanic.

I really do not understand what you mean, large groups of people don't decide to to act in the exact same way just based on "free will." I thought everyone had free will, and in this day and age, in this country, everyone has an abundance of opportunities, more than they ever dreamed of 100, even 50 years ago. I agree with Armistead. Even people from poor white backgrounds, such as myself (my grandfather was a sharecropper)--the sky's the limit. I wish you good luck in identifying the cause that is responsible for some people not taking advantage of the opportunities, for some people who avoid responsibility, decide to sell drugs, beat women, neglect their offspring, etc.

[August]

I wish you good luck in identifying the cause that is responsible for some people not taking advantage of the opportunities, for some people who avoid responsibility, decide to sell drugs, beat women, neglect their offspring, etc.

Part of the problem I think is community "leaders" telling them they are oppressed. They're told that The Man is keeping them down and that societies deck is stacked against them. Then they're told that free money can be had from the government. It's hardly any wonder why they have no motivation to improve their lives on their own.

[Fr8monkey]

Of course they do. There are a lot of kids from high income families that get into trouble and underperform in school. Because their parents are not involved in their lives.



I don't see anything controversial about my statement. People should take care of their business, and parenting is a high priority.
Yeah... That is why rich kids (and people) gett off scott free from crimes.


I want this disease (http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/12/12/the-affluenza-defense-judge-rules-rich-kids-rich-kid-ness-makes-him-not-liable-for-deadly-drunk-driving-accident/)

For most people, conviction for vehicular manslaughter due to drunk driving warrants a lengthy sentence, but not in the case of Ethan Couch, a wealthy young man from the state of Texas.
The Keller, Tex., 16-year-old has a rare condition that a judge believes is best remedied with anything but dealing with the consequences for causing a DWI wreck that killed four people, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram reported (http://www.star-telegram.com/2013/12/10/5408563/teen-sentenced-to-10-years-probation.html).
Couch suffers from “affluenza,” according to his lawyers, a term which means that his wealthy parents pretty much let him get away with everything. The defense saved him from a 20-year sentence; State District Judge Jean Boyd bought it at his sentencing on Tuesday and gave Couch probation instead.


Kill 4 from a DWI and get no time in prison. Let's see what happens when a poor intercity kid does that.

[Onkel Neal]

Ugh, yeah, I hated that. I'm not the only one, either. (http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/2013/12/outrage-over-ethan-couch-verdict-still-runs-hot-but-at-whom.html/)

Tell you what, if you'll join me, I'm willing to riot a little to get thugs like Ethan Couch thrown in the slammer. Tell me where and when. Preferably near a motorcycle shop or BBQ joint, for the looting, you know. :hmmm:

[AngusJS]

Well, what I meant was inner city communities, which in this case is mostly black, but in many cases is Hispanic.

I really do not understand what you mean, large groups of people don't decide to to act in the exact same way just based on "free will." I thought everyone had free will, and in this day and age, in this country, everyone has an abundance of opportunities, more than they ever dreamed of 100, even 50 years ago. I agree with Armistead. Even people from poor white backgrounds, such as myself (my grandfather was a sharecropper)--the sky's the limit. I wish you good luck in identifying the cause that is responsible for some people not taking advantage of the opportunities, for some people who avoid responsibility, decide to sell drugs, beat women, neglect their offspring, etc.Well, actually, no one has free will. But for the purposes of this conversation lets assume they do. You don't think it's odd that a particular group of people consistently makes the same choices? If this truly were the free utopia of which you speak, don't you think a million people would choose a million different options? Yet they all choose one option. Why is that? To think that they all just happen to choose that one option a million times over defies belief. There must be societal causes behind it. And thus I think you were wrong to dismiss society, and place 100% of the blame on them.

[August]

You don't think it's odd that a particular group of people consistently makes the same choices? If this truly were the free utopia of which you speak, don't you think a million people would choose a million different options? Yet they all choose one option. Why is that? To think that they all just happen to choose that one option a million times over defies belief. There must be societal causes behind it. And thus I think you were wrong to dismiss society, and place 100% of the blame on them.

Who says they all make the same choices? There have been plenty of people who have escaped the Ghetto with many different degrees of success. There's your million different options.

[Armistead]

Well, actually, no one has free will. But for the purposes of this conversation lets assume they do. You don't think it's odd that a particular group of people consistently makes the same choices? If this truly were the free utopia of which you speak, don't you think a million people would choose a million different options? Yet they all choose one option. Why is that? To think that they all just happen to choose that one option a million times over defies belief. There must be societal causes behind it. And thus I think you were wrong to dismiss society, and place 100% of the blame on them.


It's called cultural indoctrination and a percentage that chose to become enslaved to govt.

We obvious need to work on racial issue, but there is no excuse for behavior that says because I'm poor, I'm free to be a criminal or live off the govt rather than work and make the same amount...

Other day, grocery store, woman with least 6 kids, two full buggies of food, tons of junk food, bill was over $400 buck and she pulls out the food stamp card. My wife and I have two children, all we could afford and we use coupons....btw, that entire family mother and kids were obese.....eating much better than we do and for free.........

The mistake again was the war on poverty by the govt in the 60's that created big inner city ghettos concentrated within walking distance of the numerous govt buildings of free stuff....This turned out to be a trap of no escape for those that became part of it....more so when all the manufacturing jobs left the US...

We don't feed bears and other animals in parks for a reason, they stop fending for their own survival, becoming helpless and dependent on others....Humans aren't any different.... If you're healthy and can have many children, then be responsible for them....


Lot of jobs in Baltimore area if you're looking

http://www.indeed.com/l-Baltimore,-MD-jobs.html

[Jeff-Groves]

for the looting, you know.
Nothing like a good riot for free stuff seems acceptable behavior by those that want justice for a perceived wrong.
:o

[Onkel Neal]

I know. I'm just "misguided".

[vienna]

An upshot of all the controversies recently is the proliferation of an app provided by the ACLU to counteract the "accidental" erasures of videos by possibly offending officers:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=2310434

It speaks volumes when this sort of method becomes necessary. I'm still not sure if I'm fully comfortable with the use of this app...


<O>

[August]

I'd think such an app would be helpful with non police related confrontations too.

[Armistead]

I never get the point of rioting and looting your own neighborhood, race, friends businesses that support you...unless you're just out to get some free stuff withing walking range...

Serious, If I had a real just issue, I would go to the source. For instance, let's go back to the American Revolution...Say Neal and I are living back then, I'm a farmer, Neal is a blacksmith....the British impose an unfair tea tax, Neal and I get pissed about it, he steals my crops and burns my house down, I steal all of his tools....and burn him out...Mad at each other with nothing, we go to the British to get resolve and whatever free stuff they gave us to live and agree not to complain about the real issue....

[Jeff-Groves]

I think that is the issue that burns me most.
I'm all for protesting a wrong. But when it becomes a free shopping spree that has nothing to do with the protest?
Time to rethink things.
What makes stealing and burning from Shops right in any sense?

[Buddahaid]

It gets headlines.

[vienna]

Been through the whole looting thing back in 1992 during the Los Angeles riots (excuse me, the "insurrection", as the lefties here prefer it be called). There is a major street, Santa Monica Blvd., here in Hollywood and its about 3 blocks away from my home. On the second night, the looting had spread to our area. There was a Sears store about a mile down the blvd. and i3t was like an assembly line: on the south side of the street, people streamed by empty handed; on the north side the streamed by, arms full of loot. Those people were not protesting anything and certainly not perceived 'injustices'. It was pure, simple, opportunistic greed. At my apartment complex, we were preparing to defend the buildings against a drug dealing gang who were possibly going to sack and burn the complex because the land lord had been successful in evicting them when the gang had attempted to use the complex as a drug dealing hub. Fortunately, someone in the LAPD caught wind of the situation and dispatched cars to block the gang...

One thing was very obvious from the experience of the LA riots: the vast number of people looting and burning during the riots were motivated by greed and vengeance rather than any social and/or political motivations. No amount of relabeling such as "insurrection" or "uprising" can paint over the simple truth...

One vivid memory I have is the National Guard's heavy machine gun emplacement in the parking lot of the local Rite Aid...


<O>

[Jeff-Groves]

I agree with the 'Looters will be shot on sight' thing.

[Armistead]

I have a good black friend, he basically says blacks know better to go into white neighborhoods and business areas, says the govt would go to shooting along with white business folks if blacks came rioting and looting through the rich country club area....

[vienna]

I have a good black friend, he basically says blacks know better to go into white neighborhoods and business areas, says the govt would go to shooting along with white business folks if blacks came rioting and looting through the rich country club area....


During the LA riot, a lot of the business owners armed themselves since the LAPD was very, very slow to react when the riot started. Here in Hollywood, I saw men on the roof of one of the Scientology-owned buildings (there are several here) toting assault rifles. A pawnshop owner up the street from my home had spray painted this own the metal security door the warning "Owner Inside With Shotgun - Come In If You Dare". No one tried...


<O>

[Jeff-Groves]

So I guess that means they are good with looting each other?
:o
Sad state of affairs.

[Nippelspanner]

I agree with the 'Looters will be shot on sight' thing.
While I think these looters are scum and punishment for that should be severe, KILLING them is simply in direct contradiction to the values of any advanced civilization.

[Onkel Neal]

I have a good black friend, he basically says blacks know better to go into white neighborhoods and business areas, says the govt would go to shooting along with white business folks if blacks came rioting and looting through the rich country club area....

I'm pretty sure that goes for white looters as well. :arrgh!:

While I think these looters are scum and punishment for that should be severe, KILLING them is simply in direct contradiction to the values of any advanced civilization.

Don't expect everyone to agree with that.

[Nippelspanner]

Don't expect everyone to agree with that.
I sure don't.
Opinions...

[Jeff-Groves]

While I think these looters are scum and punishment for that should be severe, KILLING them is simply in direct contradiction to the values of any advanced civilization.
I never said KILL them. I said shoot them.
A leg wound and a cop at the ER to gather them up for jail works for me.

My home was invaded and my Step-son and his friend sent to hospitals.
I was in Hawaii at the time. Had I been home?
There would have been bodies sent to the morgue. Not the hospital.

So yes. I have no problem with protecting ones health or property from criminals.

[Aktungbby]

[QUOTE=Jeff-Groves;2311199]I never said KILL them. I said shoot them.
A leg wound and a cop at the ER to gather them up for jail works for me.

My home was invaded and my Step-son and his friend sent to hospitals.
I was in Hawaii at the time. Had I been home?
There would have been bodies sent to the morgue. Not the hospital.

So yes. I have no problem with protecting ones health or property from criminals.We know who's in charge when you're on the road!:up::D!http://images.checkthisyo.com/000/149/591/11-106-year-old-Armenian-Woman-guards-home-1990.jpg

[Jeff-Groves]

Nancy and I both were on Maui at the time.
But ya. She'll kill invaders just fine if I'm not home.
:03:

[Jimbuna]

Nancy and I both were on Maui at the time.
But ya. She'll kill invaders just fine if I'm not home.
:03:

Be kind enough to inform Nancy I've discarded my idea of making a surprise visit :)

[Aktungbby]

Just to bring it back on thread a little,:O: Some interesting points pertaining to the deceased gentleman, Mr Gray, in Baltimore who "made eye-contact and then fled." Essentially, anyone can walk away from a peace officer "and if you may walk...you have the right to increase speed ie: run too"...in theory.:hmmm: http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Evading-Arrest-on-Foot.htm (http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Evading-Arrest-on-Foot.htm) http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Evading-Arrest-on-Foot.htm (http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Evading-Arrest-on-Foot.htm) Fleeing from police is not, by itself, illegal in America, and the U.S. Supreme Court (http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/us/supreme-court.htm) has made clear that in safe neighborhoods, people not suspected of criminal activity can ignore a police officer who approaches them, even to the point of walking away.
But courts have set a different standard for places where street crime is common, ruling that police can chase, stop and frisk people if their location contributes to a suspicion of criminal activity.
This double standard is having a major impact as more black men die in encounters with police around the country. Many have been shot or tackled while trying to flee. The court rulings justifying police chases in high-crime areas where many African-Americans live are contributing to a dangerous divide between police and citizens, said Ezekiel Edwards, director of the Criminal Law Reform Project at the American Civil Liberties Union.
"Folks who are going to be the most intimidated or scared of the police are the same people in places where the Supreme Court has said, 'if you run from police, that's suspicion,'" he said.
Edwards is among the legal experts who say unprovoked flight, on its own, shouldn't justify a chase: "If you can walk away, you can run away. It shouldn't matter the speed at which you move away."
There are limits to this leeway: The Supreme Court and lower courts have repeatedly required police to have some justification for stopping or questioning someone in a public place. But several legal experts say that because he was standing in a drug-infested area, Gray's decision to bolt on April 12 may have justified the decision by four bicycle-riding officers to pursue and detain him. :timeout:and break his neck and leg on an over-long route to the station?.:nope:(he looks tolerably ok, still upright,in this shot?!!):timeout:http://images.dailykos.com/images/141079/large/Screen_Shot_2015-05-01_at_9.20.28_AM.png?1430486481http://images.dailykos.com/images/141087/large/2834824800000578-3063643-According_to_the_latest_police_press_conference_th ese_are_the_st-m-13_1430487056386.jpg?1430490744

[Von Tonner]

The silence is deafening.

A police officer gunned downed in Queens. Not the first by a long chalk.

"Officials said the incident was the fifth shooting of a New York police officer in as many months, and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio called it “a reminder of the dangers all of our officers face every single day”.

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f26/jat9/brian%20moore_zpsmelbes6w.jpg (http://s44.photobucket.com/user/jat9/media/brian%20moore_zpsmelbes6w.jpg.html)

Here is a guy who has a distinguished record as a police officer, born into a family that has served the community as police officers over generations - and is now fighting for his life life after been shot in the head by a bloody low life.

And one wonders why police officers tend to shoot first and ask questions later.

But hey, you know what, no towns, cities, suburbs, stores etc will be looted or burnt as his family come to terms with this incident.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/new-york-police-officer-brian-moore-shot-in-the-head-after-stopping-to-question-man-in-queens-10221896.html

[Rockstar]

The silence is quite deafening. So lets not forget the trigger happy boys in blue during the search for Christopher Dorner, shooting two ladies delivering news papers and those others just going about their daily routine who got a bullet.

Then there's the NYP shooting when cops shot and wounded everyone BUT the suspect.

I dont know how to put this, cops do have my support but they need to clean up their 'asterisk, asterisk, asterisk, asterisk-ing' act real quick. To me the line between some cops and crimminals are at best somewhat blurred. Departments need to do a little house cleaning.

[Von Tonner]

To me the line between some cops and crimminals are at best somewhat blurred. Departments need to do a little house cleaning.

I agree with you. No argument there from me. I am not at all saying ALL the men in blue butter would not melt in their mouth. What I am saying is that by FAR the majority of the men/woman in blue have families who pray that they come home after a shift safe and sound. And if one of them, with his or her family in the back of their mind should happen on a suspect who does NOT obey a lawful command from them to either stop, lie down, raise your hands, etc but continues to either flee, pose a threat, or whatever - sorry, but my benefit of the doubt wieghs so heavily in their favour should they do what they are tasked to do.

[Nippelspanner]

Had I been home?
There would have been bodies sent to the morgue. Not the hospital.
Yeah, very tough.
However, I fail to see how sending someone to the morgue is a justifiable action for someone stealing a TV or car, but the Proportionality law might just be a European thing, not sure.

[Jeff-Groves]

The home invasion was not an attempt to steal stuff.
It was to cause bodily harm which it did.
Come in my house with that intention?
Yes. I will assume the worst and fight with deadly intensity.
I wouldn't have time to try to just 'wound' someone and hope they are no longer a threat.
Better to be judged by 12 then carried by 6.

The invaders were caught quickly thanks to neighbors and did time in the joint.
Contacts I had made sure it was some rough time served.

[AngusJS]

I agree with you. No argument there from me. I am not at all saying ALL the men in blue butter would not melt in their mouth. What I am saying is that by FAR the majority of the men/woman in blue have families who pray that they come home after a shift safe and sound. And if one of them, with his or her family in the back of their mind should happen on a suspect who does NOT obey a lawful command from them to either stop, lie down, raise your hands, etc but continues to either flee, pose a threat, or whatever - sorry, but my benefit of the doubt wieghs so heavily in their favour should they do what they are tasked to do.So if the video didn't exist of the cop in South Carolina murdering Scott as he ran away unarmed, and then moving the taser close to Scott's body, your benefit of the doubt would weigh heavily in the cop's favor? Isn't that a bit problematic?

I'm sorry, there have been far too many instances of cops lying to CYA. They need to be subjected to the same scrutiny as everyone else.

Require chest cameras for all cops, now, period. Develop a system where the cops can't "accidentally" destroy the footage. That will weed out the bad cops, and the other ones in your vast majority that see other cops doing bad things...and choose to do absolutely nothing about it. They are just as culpable.

[Nippelspanner]

So yes. I have no problem with protecting ones health or property from criminals.
That's what I was referring to.

[Jeff-Groves]

So. If someone breaks into my home I should ask them if they are there to steal stuff or cause bodily harm?
What if they say to steal stuff and I say "No your not gonna do that" should we then negotiate the terms of how they leave?
(Dead or Alive and empty handed are the only choices I'll offer)

If someone is stealing stuff outside? No. I wouldn't shoot to kill. I might fire a shoot in the air to try to scare them off.
Only if they approached the house after that warning shot would it get bad really fast.

[Schroeder]

That's what I was referring to.
You have to take into account that a lot of people in the US are armed and if someone breaks into your home they'll likely carry guns. So I think it often boils down to shoot first and ask questions later because you simply don't have the time to assess the situation thoroughly without ending up with a bullet in your body.:-?

[Jeff-Groves]

The ones that invaded my home were not armed unless they dumped the weapons before they were caught 10 minutes later.
But in a violent home invasion? You don't have the time to figure that out.
It's shoot at center of body mass in a panic situation and hope they don't shoot back.
Until this happened here? No one locked their doors in this small village.
Now everyone does.
When We went to court for the trial I was asked to talk.
I told the court should any of the convicted come near my home after release from prison I would consider it an attempt at revenge and shoot to kill with no warning.
The Judge told them "If I were you? I'd never set foot in Nevada again!"
:haha:

It's easy to 'say' what you'd do given a situation.
It's much different when something bad does happen. Training takes over if your ex-military or such.

My best home defense weapon is an Air Gun.
.22 cal FULL AUTO with a 100 round belt.
Given it spits them out at 800+ FPS? It will kill you at close range.

[Aktungbby]

Yeah, very tough.
However, I fail to see how sending someone to the morgue is a justifiable action for someone stealing a TV or car, but the Proportionality law might just be a European thing, not sure.

So. If someone breaks into my home I should ask them if they are there to steal stuff or cause bodily harm?
What if they say to steal stuff and I say "No your not gonna do that" should we then negotiate the terms of how they leave?
(Dead or Alive and empty handed are the only choices I'll offer)

If someone is stealing stuff outside? No. I wouldn't shoot to kill. I might fire a shoot in the air to try to scare them off.
Only if they approached the house after that warning shot would it get bad really fast.

You have to take into account that a lot of people in the US are armed and if someone breaks into your home they'll likely carry guns. So I think it often boils down to shoot first and ask questions later because you simply don't have the time to assess the situation thoroughly without ending up with a bullet in your body.:-?
It's referred to as homeowner's Nacht und Nebel :doh: The Knight of the Richards is a little hasty though; I always direct what is to be stolen from unsupported outdated electronics to a the TV, so I can get better stuff from my homeowner's insurance and take the loss on taxes. Pity the poor perspiring burglar! :03: Living through two earthquakes changes your perspective on what really counts and -at 64- household stuff ain't really one of em'!:sunny: That does not include my wine collection!:stare:

[Jeff-Groves]

It's referred to as homeowner's Nacht und Nebel :doh: The Knight of the Richards is a little hasty though; I always direct what is to be stolen from unsupported outdated electronics to a the TV, so I can get better stuff from my homeowner's insurance and take the loss on taxes. Pity the poor perspiring burglar! :03: Living through two earthquakes changes your perspective on what really counts and -at 64- household stuff ain't really one of em'!:sunny: That does not include my wine collection!:stare:
:har:
Given I know what you do for a living?
You make a phone call and the clean up crew comes in and nothing ever happened.
:D

[Aktungbby]

:har:
Given I know what you do for a living?
You make a phone call and the clean up crew comes in and nothing ever happened.
:D
http://dusktilldawn.uscannenberg.org/crimescene/cleanscenemontage.jpgA bigger perspective from what I used to do: Real Estate appraiser-15 years: Any violent death or even AIDS if a hot tub is on the property; such as a shotgunning of an abusive husband or the suicide (by hanging-undisclosed to Chinese buyers) in the basement must be disclosed in CA; which will seriously lower the value and marketability of the actual homes in contested value cases I handled... by about 30%. In short, I'd retreat to a bathroom, lock the door and save myself the trouble, civil lawsuit and paperwork..that's what insurance is for. Let your already paid premium work for u! Since a home is usually the basis of an average investment portfolio and retirement planning, great caution is advised. If a safe retreat is an option- take it! The authorities also cannot then confiscate your pricey weapon of choice which often can entail a bureaucratic paperwork dance to get back.:up:

[Jeff-Groves]

A bigger perspective from what I used to do: Real Estate appraiser-15 years: Any violent death or even AIDS if a hot tub is on the property; such as a shotgunning of an abusive husband or the suicide (by hanging-undisclosed to Chinese buyers) in the basement must be disclosed in CA; which will seriously lower the value and marketability of the actual homes in contested value cases I handled... by about 30%. In short, I'd retreat to a bathroom, lock the door and save myself the trouble, civil lawsuit and paperwork..that's what insurance is for. Let your already paid premium work for u! Since a home is usually the basis of an average investment portfolio and retirement planning, great caution is advised. If a safe retreat is an option- take it! The authorities also cannot then confiscate your pricey weapon of choice which often can entail a bureaucratic paperwork dance to get back.:up:

All the more reason to buy that old Bank I want.
:D
I could hold up in the Vault and let the perps take stuff without a full on gun fight.
:yeah:

[Onkel Neal]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/05/01/freddie_gray_baltimore_indictments_what_do_cops_th ink_of_the_charges.html

Joseph Giacalone, a retired NYPD Detective Sergeant, was less restrained in his assessment. “Unfortunately I have to agree with the decision,” Giacalone told me. “Because I have no answer to why they threw him into the police van in the first place. What was the charge? Why did they arrest him? He didn’t commit any crime,” he said, adding “A lot of the guys I’ve spoken to feel the same thing I do.”

[em2nought]

All the more reason to buy that old Bank I want.
:D
I could hold up in the Vault and let the perps take stuff without a full on gun fight.
:yeah:

Thank bank is still available? Looked like such a good deal. :hmmm:

[Von Tonner]

This doing the rounds on emails.

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f26/jat9/humour_zpsrvpglqst.jpg (http://s44.photobucket.com/user/jat9/media/humour_zpsrvpglqst.jpg.html)

Funny, or not so funny thing is, when I was studying in NY back in the 1970's I was amazed at how many NYPD police officers not only played chess but were always up to a game. And they were pretty darn good as well. Had my arse kicked many a time in a coffee bar on their break.:D

[Wolferz]

This doing the rounds on emails.

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f26/jat9/humour_zpsrvpglqst.jpg (http://s44.photobucket.com/user/jat9/media/humour_zpsrvpglqst.jpg.html)

Funny, or not so funny thing is, when I was studying in NY back in the 1970's I was amazed at how many NYPD police officers not only played chess but were always up to a game. And they were pretty darn good as well. Had my arse kicked many a time in a coffee bar on their break.:D

No arrest made for the stolen milk crates and bread trays:06:
Typical:-?

[mapuc]

Two thing

1. This is, what I know, an all American problem.

2. Read a comment some page back and it made me think

What type of society have we become when a person with another skin colour, another religious belief or political standpoint have to fear for his or her life, if they enter an another neighborhood.

Markus

[Stealhead]

Two thing

1. This is, what I know, an all American problem.

2. Read a comment some page back and it made me think

What type of society have we become when a person with another skin colour, another religious belief or political standpoint have to fear for his or her life, if they enter an another neighborhood.

Markus
I very seriously doubt that police shootings are a uniquely American problem. Just based on what I know about law enforcement in Central and South America.

I do feel that with some LEO there is an us vs. them mentally and that leads to problems. However it is a multifaceted issue to put it lightly.

[Platapus]

While I am not proud of what my country does in this context and I do recognize it as a problem we must solve, The US is hardly alone when it comes to a history of violent discrimination against someone with a difference.

As long as there has been humans, there has been a belief that one group is "better" than another group and that being better justifies violence against the un-liked group.

[August]

What type of society have we become when a person with another skin colour, another religious belief or political standpoint have to fear for his or her life, if they enter an another neighborhood.

But Markus this has always been the case with every civilization throughout human history. If anything i'd bet such things happen now far less than they ever used to. Of course in earlier times we didn't have every instance splashed 24/7 in the news

As i mentioned earlier it's video that is changing the game. No longer is this a case of taking someones word, we can see what happens for ourselves and I think it is going to have a larger effect upon society than many people realize.

[mapuc]

While I am not proud of what my country does in this context and I do recognize it as a problem we must solve, The US is hardly alone when it comes to a history of violent discrimination against someone with a difference.

As long as there has been humans, there has been a belief that one group is "better" than another group and that being better justifies violence against the un-liked group.

I'm not and will never point finger at a country. It was in the Danish and the Swedish news I get the information that USA had some problem regarding coloured people and justice. That's how I understood it.

And yes we have also this we and them. I personally don't like it. A person different from me aren't necessary a bad person.

Markus

[em2nought]

No arrest made for the stolen milk crates and bread trays:06:
Typical:-?

You joke, but my finding is you can hand them the criminal with the evidence and unless there is money to seize or drugs involved good luck getting them to do anything. Probably cuts down on sympathy for them.

[Von Tonner]

The silence is deafening.

A police officer gunned downed in Queens. Not the first by a long chalk.

"Officials said the incident was the fifth shooting of a New York police officer in as many months, and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio called it “a reminder of the dangers all of our officers face every single day”.

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f26/jat9/brian%20moore_zpsmelbes6w.jpg (http://s44.photobucket.com/user/jat9/media/brian%20moore_zpsmelbes6w.jpg.html)

Here is a guy who has a distinguished record as a police officer, born into a family that has served the community as police officers over generations - and is now fighting for his life life after been shot in the head by a bloody low life.

And one wonders why police officers tend to shoot first and ask questions later.

But hey, you know what, no towns, cities, suburbs, stores etc will be looted or burnt as his family come to terms with this incident.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/new-york-police-officer-brian-moore-shot-in-the-head-after-stopping-to-question-man-in-queens-10221896.html

RIP You did your family and country proud

[AngusJS]

And again, and again, and again.

Back in 2013, an unarmed black man is stopped and arrested by 2 white cops. As he is following orders, on all fours while going into full submission mode, one of the cops kicks him in the face for no reason, breaking his jaw and rendering him unconscious.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/05/08/police-release-dashcam-video-of-delaware-officer-kicking-suspect-in-the-face/

A grand jury refused to indict the cop. :/\\!!

But now that the video is no longer "confidential," justice may yet be served.

Another isolated incident, but this time they didn't manage to sweep it under the rug. Of course it was not the police department that declassified the video, but a federal judge who ordered it be deemed non-confidential.

[AngusJS]

Turns out there is precedent for the murder of Grey in Baltimore. In Baltimore and other cities, cops have been known to handcuff suspects but not buckle them in when transporting them, then deliberately drive recklessly, sending the suspect flying against the metal interior.

This has resulted in several spinal injuries.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-baltimore-rough-rides-20150501-story.html#page=1

In Philadelphia, a man named James McKenna, who tangled with an off-duty officer in a bar, was awarded $490,000 after he suffered a broken neck in a 2011 van ride.Before he got into the wagon, McKenna said, he heard the cop tell the driver to “f— him up.” The trip took 20 minutes to go 1.12 miles — “at 2 in the morning,” said McKenna's lawyer, Tom Gibbons.
But what am I saying. These are obviously all isolated incidents which just happen to be spread across the country. And there just happens to be enough of these isolated incidents caused by the few bad apples that the practice is given a name: "rough rides", "nickel rides" or "joyrides." But I'm sure the good cops put an end to them wherever they sprang up and certainly didn't look the other way and do nothing. So obviously these methods can't have been in use for decades.


Oh wait.


http://articles.philly.com/2001-06-03/news/25322977_1_wagon-police-officer-police-van

[Torplexed]

Another isolated incident, but this time they didn't manage to sweep it under the rug. Of course it was not the police department that declassified the video, but a federal judge who ordered it be deemed non-confidential.

Better to be a doctor than a policeman nowadays. You can still bury your mistakes.

A thousand cops a day rescuing kittens from trees or escorting baby ducks across the street aren't going to make up for all this self-inflicted bad PR.