Is war between cops and citizens brewing? [Archive]

Nippelspanner

07-08-16, 09:32 AM

You seem to be painting an entire race with the same brush.
No, I do not, but most of the black people in the US are in the very same situation: Living in lowest conditions, in poverty, surrounded by (black) violence.
But statistics don't really support the "black victim role", do they?
Also, many black people act as if "the white people" are on the hunt for them - might want to tell them what you just told me.

Video evidence is pretty hard to discredit. One video shows a police officer shooting an unarmed man in the back 7-8 times for a traffic pull over. :nope:
And that's totally sick, let's hope the guy gets what he deserves? What's the issue?

Of course, there are many who live in the U.S who have a better understanding and perspective than someone who lives an ocean away.
Possibly. Just living there doesn't necessarily make one an expert on the matter. I could be on Mars and still read articles that point out some inconsistencies here and that generalizing the cops as "evil racist killers" is a no-brainer,
especially when more white people die to police actions than black people and that the very most black people die at the hand of black people.
And what about this: http://static.prisonpolicy.org/images/raceinc.jpg

The problem isn't racism.
Yes there are some racist cops, of course there are.
But if you think that every racist cop is automatically a cold blooded lunatic killer - like many black communities claim, you're a tad naive, don't you think?
And mind you I'm talking the general issue here - not a particular case.

Looks like Paul Watson made a video about the whole thing.
For those interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJHvppVEBTY

Commander Wallace

07-08-16, 10:10 AM

*le sigh*

Ah yes, the secret genocide against the poor, harmless and peaceful black population of America continues. Damn all these racist cops (so all of them) who shoot more white people than black people... wait what? Oh! :o

But don't get facts in the way while you're rioting again, trashing your city, causing more violence, because the evil white man is after you.

As far as a " Secret Genocide " against blacks, the facts support that racial profiling and selective enforcement exists. I think if you were black in the U.S, you would have a right to be concerned about your safety and well being. I can certainly understand why black people would feel they are under siege. Again, the President of the U.S has acknowledged there is a problem.

As far as poor black people, you are misinformed. I knew of many black people I went to college with or were professors and administrators. Many of them today are highly regarded professionals in their own right. Some of the officers in question were also black that committed these crimes which indicates this is a much larger issue than white on black.

Racism may well be behind all of these issues or at the least, play a role.

No, I do not, but most of the black people in the US are in the very same situation: Living in lowest conditions, in poverty, surrounded by (black) violence.
But statistics don't really support the "black victim role", do they?
Also, many black people act as if "the white people" are on the hunt for them - might want to tell them what you just told me.
And that's totally sick, let's hope the guy gets what he deserves? What's the issue?

Possibly. Just living there doesn't necessarily make one an expert on the matter. I could be on Mars and still read articles that point out some inconsistencies here and that generalizing the cops as "evil racist killers" is a no-brainer,
especially when more white people die to police actions than black people and that the very most black people die at the hand of black people.
And what about this: http://static.prisonpolicy.org/images/raceinc.jpg

The problem isn't racism.
Yes there are some racist cops, of course there are.
But if you think that every racist cop is automatically a cold blooded lunatic killer - like many black communities claim, you're a tad naive, don't you think?
And mind you I'm talking the general issue here - not a particular case.

Looks like Paul Watson made a video about the whole thing.
For those interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJHvppVEBTY

Nippelspanner

07-08-16, 10:22 AM

As far as a " Secret Genocide " against blacks, the facts support that racial profiling and selective enforcement exists.
And for a good reason!
Again -> Crime statistics.

I think if you were black in the U.S, you would have a right to be concerned about your safety and well being.
Why? Because of millions and millions of black people, one or two get shot who were indeed completely innocent? Really?

Again, the President of the U.S has acknowledged there is a problem.

Yes, because that means anything. :hmmm:

As far as poor black people, you are misinformed. I knew of many black people I went to college with or were professors and administrators.Yes, of course - and meanwhile in reality, most black people still live in conditions that are vastly the opposite of what you just described.

Some of the officers in question were also black that committed these crimes which indicates this is a much larger issue than white on black.

Racism may well be behind all of these issues or at the least, play a role.
Explain to me how black on black violence is a racial matter.
And that was my hole point.
The problem is not racism!

But hey, feels before facts everyone...

Gargamel

07-08-16, 11:11 AM

Yes, there's bad cops out there. Just like there's bad people in general. But the vast vast majority of cops are in this business to help people, to protect them, to make a difference.

But they are also going to be going home every night, or at least try too. So if they feel they are in a situation where it has suddenly become "them or me", they are going to react accordingly. They have a split second to make that call, and it's a major life changing event, and sometimes they get it wrong.

But people need to help the cops out. Even if they cop is VERY much in the wrong with their actions, YOU COMPLY. DO NOT resist a police officer at the time. That way, they are never forced into making that decision.

But that's not always the case, sometimes a cop just makes the wrong choice at the wrong time, and it ends badly. It's a two way street, EVERYBODY involved needs to realize this needs de-escalated.

Now, here's the thing that's really bothering me. I cannot find the article again, but in the bottom section of a BBC article on the baton rouge shooting, it was explaining who took the video.

Apparently it was from a professional documentary crew that specializes in police brutality videos.

Wait, what? This shooting was a setup? How else do you explain how a doc crew was sitting there just as an incident was happening?

The man was a previous felon, who was trying to support his family by selling bootleg CD's. But yet he was carrying a gun, which is a major no no. Then some random tip comes in about him, and then he struggles against the cops, and during the struggle, somebody (reportedly not the cops) yells he's got a gun. Then you can hear the genuine surprise in the video shooter's voice when that happens.

I'm pretty damn sure that it will be eventually revealed that this documentary crew paid this guy a good sum of money to sit there and to take a beating. If he's done time before, he probably would have been more willing to do a little more if it meant his kids would have been taken care of for a while. This crew would have made more than enough off this video to cover that cost.

THAT'S what bothers me. These incidents are bad enough when they happen "naturally", but now people are going out to set up the cops. Doing this is a far less ludicrous idea than ambushing and killing 5 cops.

AVGWarhawk

07-08-16, 11:29 AM

Mittelwaechter

07-08-16, 01:47 PM

Is war between cops and citizens brewing?

Would the slaves at the plantation revolt against the foremen with the whips or against the plantation owner?

Who would be served first?

August

07-08-16, 02:13 PM

I'm trying to fathom why the girlfriend was more interested in FB'ing the video instead of assisting her boyfriend.

Maybe because the cop had just pumped 4 rounds into her boyfriend. If she had reached over to help him the cop would have interpreted it as she was going for her BF's gun and shot her too.

mapuc

07-08-16, 03:03 PM

This story makes me sad, sad that 5 Innocent policemen had to pay with they life.

Markus

AVGWarhawk

07-08-16, 03:12 PM

Maybe because the cop had just pumped 4 rounds into her boyfriend. If she had reached over to help him the cop would have interpreted it as she was going for her BF's gun and shot her too.

Yes, so lets video, talk about it while it happens then upload to FB instead. Is it just me or does that kind of ruin the idea of getting shot attempting to help the dying man? I think it was one shot. But that is immaterial. I truly think the cop had simply killed this man with zero justification.

Platapus

07-08-16, 03:18 PM

Until we start holding police accountable for their actions and not allow the police to arbitrarily kill citizens because "they felt threatened" and as long as there is a group of citizens who feel their lives are not considered important enough to protect, I fear this will only get worse.

If the police want the citizens to have a presumption that the majority of police are the good guys, then the police need to have the presumption that the majority of the citizens are good guys too. Both statements are true

The majority of the police are good guys
The majority of the citizens are good guys.

What is different is that one group is killing members of the other group and there does not seem to be any accountability. Who came up with the brilliant idea of allowing a police department to investigate itself for misconduct? The concept of conflict of interest did not cross their minds?

Crikey! We don't even allow school kids to grade their own assignments!!

This is how you get your citizens to fear the police.

Police states are formed on the foundation of "any means are necessary to protect the citizens".

Oberon

07-08-16, 03:35 PM

http://i.imgur.com/lQfrHqv.jpg?1

eddie

07-08-16, 04:11 PM

Sad state of affairs when people really begin to feel this way.:nope:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v138/Thony/13590503_10210058384876926_8339974215165958899_n_z psaudgqc2h.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Thony/media/13590503_10210058384876926_8339974215165958899_n_z psaudgqc2h.jpg.html)

vienna

07-08-16, 04:24 PM

In the midst of all the police bashing going on, I would like to quietly point out what happened during the shooting in Dallas: Dallas police officers showed admirable and laudable professionalism under fire while trying to protect not only their own, but also, those civilians caught up in the situation. The officers could have panicked or made knee-jerk reactions and fired into the crowd blindly assuming the shooter or shooters may have been among the protestors. There were some in the march who were openly armed and could have easily been mistaken as part of the shooting. The very fact the officers maintained enough of a cool to not make bad judgements speaks volumes about the officer's professionalism and the quality of their training. If this incident had occurred in some other jurisdictions, the results may have been even more tragic. This morning, here in Los Angeles, there was the graduation of a new class of LAPD officers, scheduled long before the shootings in Dallas. No matter what you think of the action of some very few officers, it takes a very special dedication for the vast majority of persons who take up a badge. And there is a cost to be considered: when a TV news reporter approached the newly sworn officers for comment about how they felt about Dallas, each of them begged off saying "I just want to spend time with my family"; I sincerely hope they have as much time with their families in the future as they can get...

<O>

Nippelspanner

07-08-16, 04:24 PM

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v138/Thony/13590503_10210058384876926_8339974215165958899_n_z psaudgqc2h.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Thony/media/13590503_10210058384876926_8339974215165958899_n_z psaudgqc2h.jpg.html)
Oh. Please. :/\\!!

Jeff-Groves

07-08-16, 04:33 PM

http://www.totpi.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/0202122-46.jpg

http://media2.abc15.com/photo/2016/03/29/16x9/Mesa_officer__who_opened_fire_on_unarmed_0_3509012 1_ver1.0_640_480.jpg

Nice that Police run around with stuff like that.

Oh! Wait! He shot a White Guy to death so I guess that don't count.

HW3

07-08-16, 05:24 PM

I truly think the cop had simply killed this man with zero justification.

As was reported in the media, the officer had asked for his license, as the victim was reaching behind himself the victim reportedly said he was a licensed concealed weapons carrier, and was armed. Now your the cop, what would you do?

As I see it, the victim made a terrible mistake by reaching behind himself before telling the officer about the gun. If he had just kept his hands on the wheel and told the officer about the gun and permit, and then followed the officers orders to the letter, this probably would not have happened. A mistake was made, and a young man died for it.:(

Jeff-Groves

07-08-16, 05:31 PM

Cop had his gun on target. No way the Guy could have drawn and aimed before Cop reacted.
Cop reacted to quickly in this case and panicked.

"He moved!!"

Platapus

07-08-16, 05:31 PM

I wonder what the exact timing of the actions was.

Did he tell the officer that he was carrying a weapon at the same time he was reaching for his wallet? That's not a good thing to do, although it may be a natural thing to do.

Jeff-Groves

07-08-16, 05:33 PM

Standard response....
"I felt threatened"

Get another line of work then.

Platapus

07-08-16, 05:46 PM

I am not allowed to shoot someone simply because I felt threatened. We routinely send people to jail who do that.

There has to be a demonstrated threat. And there better be some collaborating evidence to support that.

Why are the police not held to even the same standard as other citizens?

Do police lives matter more than citizen's lives?

Jeff-Groves

07-08-16, 05:49 PM

I believe that is the bottom line Platapus.
An I have to say I feel bad that I believe that.

eddie

07-08-16, 05:56 PM

Oh. Please. :/\\!!

Don't like it? Tough! Isn't a damned thing you can do about it is there!!! You want to jump my posts, who the hell cares besides you!?! When you have the time, you know where to stick it, I'm sure it will fit in your candy arse!

STEED

07-08-16, 05:59 PM

Dreadful.

Jeff-Groves

07-08-16, 06:00 PM

He's never been over here I take it eddie.
Germany must be a wonderland of equality!

Oberon

07-08-16, 06:06 PM

He's never been over here I take it eddie.
Germany must be a wonderland of equality!

Indeed, everything is equally terrible. :O:

Jeff-Groves

07-08-16, 06:08 PM

Standing by for wall of text.....
:shifty:

August

07-08-16, 06:25 PM

As was reported in the media, the officer had asked for his license, as the victim was reaching behind himself the victim reportedly said he was a licensed concealed weapons carrier, and was armed. Now your the cop, what would you do?

As I see it, the victim made a terrible mistake by reaching behind himself before telling the officer about the gun. If he had just kept his hands on the wheel and told the officer about the gun and permit, and then followed the officers orders to the letter, this probably would not have happened. A mistake was made, and a young man died for it.:(

Bull, the man was complying with the cops order to produce his license. The cop simply overreacted.

This reminds me of the NYC cop who killed that guy in the stairwell. He was wired way too tight for the job. The failure is on the part of the officer and the department who put him out there unready for the task.

Torplexed

07-08-16, 07:49 PM

In the midst of all the police bashing going on, I would like to quietly point out what happened during the shooting in Dallas: Dallas police officers showed admirable and laudable professionalism under fire while trying to protect not only their own, but also, those civilians caught up in the situation. The officers could have panicked or made knee-jerk reactions and fired into the crowd blindly assuming the shooter or shooters may have been among the protestors. There were some in the march who were openly armed and could have easily been mistaken as part of the shooting. The very fact the officers maintained enough of a cool to not make bad judgements speaks volumes about the officer's professionalism and the quality of their training. If this incident had occurred in some other jurisdictions, the results may have been even more tragic.

Yeah, it's a shame that this shooter decided on the Dallas Police Department to wreak his revenge. The DPD has a reputation as a model police force. They're transparent, active in the community, and excessive force complaints are rare. They're a police department that actually bothered to absorb the lessons from what transpired two years ago in Ferguson, Missouri.

But, I suppose if you anoint yourself as a crusader at war with the police, then in your deranged state there cease to be "innocent police" anymore than there are "innocent soldiers" in wartime.

That's what makes this week such a calamity. Doubling down on the tragedy just breeds more tragedy.

Nippelspanner

07-08-16, 10:15 PM

Don't like it? Tough! Isn't a damned thing you can do about it is there!!! You want to jump my posts, who the hell cares besides you!?! When you have the time, you know where to stick it, I'm sure it will fit in your candy arse!
That's cute. :/\\k:
Neither impressive, nor does it change the fact that "appealing to emotions" with a silly picture is of any help to anyone. It just makes it worse by over-blowing the whole issue.

Poor blacks who die less than whites to cops - cry me a river.

Wake up dummy. :har:

Commander Wallace

07-08-16, 10:36 PM

It's obvious everyone has feelings on the events of the last few days. It's been a tragedy in which people needlessly lost their lives. Nothing good will ever come from hate. I think once the anger and shock subsides and people are thinking clearly, there will remain fundamental questions and ones I will ask our forum members.

Does anyone see a way of resolving these issues between law enforcement and the people they are there to protect so both parties can be safe ?

What steps would you take if you could to make things right or at least get things moving in the right direction ?

Torplexed

07-08-16, 11:01 PM

What steps would you take if you could to make things right or at least get things moving in the right direction ?

Some consolidation of police departments might not be a bad idea. Virtually every political subdivision and government agency in the US can have its own police force, and many do. Most incorporated cities, towns and villages have some kind of law enforcement function, as do counties (parishes in Louisiana) and all states except Hawaii. The only state without sheriffs is Alaska, because there are no counties there.

Then, in addition, some hospitals, parks, convention centers, most public colleges and some private colleges have their own police departments, as do some other quasi-government bodies like water districts, local school districts, transit operations, railroads and Indian tribes.

Altogether, that makes for about 18,000 separate law enforcement agencies in the United States, each with its own chief/sheriff/superintendent or other CEO, its own policy manual, its own distinctive uniform and badge, its own unique way of doing things. That many Barney Fife fiefdoms big and small across the breadth of the nation make for a rather uneven and dizzying patchwork of policing.

But yeah, people hate giving up local control and I can understand that.

Kongo Otto

07-09-16, 01:32 AM

He's never been over here I take it eddie.
Germany must be a wonderland of equality!

Indeed, everything is equally terrible. :O:

Well, we have our fair share of trouble over here too, but at least i can leave my house without having the fear to get shot by a trigger happy high school drop out, like that tattooed moron pictured in this thread.

HunterICX

07-09-16, 04:06 AM

That's cute. :/\\k:
Neither impressive, nor does it change the fact that "appealing to emotions" with a silly picture is of any help to anyone. It just makes it worse by over-blowing the whole issue.

Poor blacks who die less than whites to cops - cry me a river.

Wake up dummy. :har:

*coughs* and yet unarmed at 5x the rate compared to whites

http://i.imgur.com/Akngf9M.png

Key Findings:

Police killed at least 102 unarmed black people in 2015, nearly twice each week. (See which police departments were responsible for these death (http://mappingpoliceviolence.org/compare-police-departments)s)
Nearly 1 in 3 black people killed by police in 2015 were identified as unarmed, though the actual number is likely higher due to underreporting
37% of unarmed people killed by police were black in 2015 despite black people being only 13% of the U.S. population
Unarmed black people were killed at 5x the rate of unarmed whites in 2015
Only 10 of the 102 cases in 2015 where an unarmed black person was killed by police resulted in officer(s) being charged with a crime, and only 2 of these deaths (Matthew Ajibade and Eric Harris) resulted in convictions of officers involved. Only 1 of 2 officers convicted for their involvement in Matthew Ajibade's death received jail time. He was sentenced to 1 year in jail and allowed to serve this time exclusively on weekends (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/nov/09/matthew-ajibade-georgia-student-taser-officer-prison-weekends). Deputy Bates, who killed Eric Harris, will be sentenced May 31.

danasan

07-09-16, 06:11 AM

Well, we have our fair share of shyte over here too, but at least i can leave my house without having the fear to get shot by a trigger happy high school drop out, like that tattooed moron pictured in this thread.

I agree with you here.

It is known, that there are 20 millions of illegal weapons here in Germany, which were legally bought before 1972.
Is is assumed, that there are up to 10 millions of weapons kept after WWII here in Germany, which are illegal now, of course.
It is assumed, that there are a lot of illegal weapons here in Germany since the war in the Balkan region, the fall of the wall / iron curtain as well.

That means, that maybe one out of three persons could be armed with an illegal weapon when interacting with the police, let alone the registered weapons.

Even while this could be a thread for the policeman involved here, they normally keep cool. That is my experience.

I am often controlled by the police when driving my car, especially in the night. I have never been looking into the barrel of the second policeman's pistol here, who supports the controlling one.

In the US, I had to experience that - looking into the cal .38 - at the very first moment.

Kind of frightening to me...

Dowly

07-09-16, 08:49 AM

Shall we wait for a bit, before taking sides?

Alton Sterling's case is not very clear. What we know is that the officers were responding to a call of a man pointing gun at another. He was resisting the officers (two tazers were fired). Once on the ground, his right hand kept moving, his gun was in his right pocket.

Philando Castile's case is not any more clearer. We know the aftermath, but not what happened before. The officer, very shaken, says two times 'I told him to not reach for it'.

Let's wait and see what the investigation finds. These two are now high profile cases, so they won't be forgotten.

As for BLM, they once again head to the streets before they know what happened. Just like in Ferguson. Now 5 police officers are dead. That's going to help. :nope:

Cool heads and all that.

Platapus

07-09-16, 09:57 AM

Does anyone see a way of resolving these issues between law enforcement and the people they are there to protect so both parties can be safe ?

What steps would you take if you could to make things right or at least get things moving in the right direction ?

This is a legitimate question and it deserves a serious answer. Here are my ideas for helping solve this problem. Some of my ideas are all related to the demilitarization the police force. The police are not like the military. They have different missions. The military kills people and destroys things. That's primarily what we do. The police should be enforcing the laws and protecting citizens.

1. Police should not wear military or military like uniforms. There are many reasons why the military wears uniforms. One of those reasons is that a uniform help provide a psychological distance between "us" and "them". Good for the military when we are trying to kill "them" bad for the police who are supposed to protect us.

2. Police should not have military type ranks. I cringe when I see a chief of police sporting four stars like he was some sort of a general. You are not a general, you are a manager of a law enforcement unit. Police officers should have police type ranks -- Officer (with classes), Detectives, Supervisors, etc. As the military relies on, ranks effect how people think and act.

3. Police should not have military weapons. I am absolutely against the policy of transferring old military equipment to the police. Police need to have the tools necessary to do their job, but they need to be civilian police tools.

4. Police should not obscure their identity. We have all seen photographs of police special response forces with their faces concealed. This has a tremendous emotional impact on who they are dealing with. It also has an effect on the officer wearing the mask.. It helps further psychologically distance the officer from what they are doing.

5. Accountability. The police is the government entity with the most opportunity to infringe on our civil rights. Most of my civil rights can, under the appropriate circumstance, be legally infringed by the police, at least on a temporary basis. This means that the police also have the opportunity to illegally infringe on my civil rights. This places a tremendous responsibility on the police. The police need extensive training on responsibility. Because they have the opportunity and the means to infringe on citizen's civil rights, the police must be held to a higher standard. This requires the police to be given clear guidance on what is and is not authorized. For every hour they spend on the firing range, the police need to spend 10 hours learning about civil rights. When an officer violates policy, they need to be held personally accountable.

I fear that to some police, the use of lethal force is not the last resort, but the first. That has to change.

6. Investigation. The police can not be allowed to investigate themselves. That's as dumb as allowing congress to make the rules for congress and investigate itself. And what country would be dumb enough for that. Why put officers in the position of having to investigate people who they may have to depend on to save their life next week? That's called conflict of interest.

If a local officer needs to be investigated, the investigation should be conducted at the county/state level. If a state police officer needs to be investigated the investigation should be conducted by another state or federal government.

Lastly, as a citizen, I would gladly pay additional taxes in order to fund non-lethal weapons for the police. The police need to be able to neutralize a threat. One way to neutralize a threat is to propel a few hundred grains of metal in to the person's body killing them.... but is that the only way?

This is the 21st century. We have smart people who can develop technology. What is that technology? I dunno. Clearly the TASER was a good start but hardly the ultimate tool.

A live suspect is always better than a dead one. Some in law enforcement may not agree with this as dead suspects can't testify.

We hear of cases of "suicide by cop". Often someone who wants this feels that they need to first kill someone else so the cop can finish the suicide. If the police had non-lethal weapons that can neutralize a threat, the option of suicide by cop, loses its attractiveness.

In any case, in the 21st century, there has to be another way to neutralize a threat other than punching a .40" hole in someone. Non-lethal also means that when mistakes are made, the person can recover.

A person who is killed by the police remains dead despite of any apologies or admissions of mistakes. Life is not a video game, there are no saves to reload.

So those are my ideas. Will these ideas make the police's job harder. Yes.

Civil rights always interfere with law enforcement. Look at the discussions about Miranda rights. Freedom always makes the government's job harder.

Law enforcement and government control can be a lot easier and more efficient if we just suppress civil rights and freedom. But that's not the America I want to live in.

But mostly, I just want the police to be held accountable for their actions. I don't think that is too much for a citizen to expect.

Betonov

07-09-16, 10:10 AM

4. Police should not obscure their identity. We have all seen photographs of police special response forces with their faces concealed. This has a tremendous emotional impact on who they are dealing with. It also has an effect on the officer wearing the mask.. It helps further psychologically distance the officer from what they are doing.

That one is legit.
Helps prevent retaliation from other members of the organised crime group or terror cell.

Jimbuna

07-09-16, 10:11 AM

No more name calling and or insults please.

Platapus

07-09-16, 11:46 AM

That one is legit.
Helps prevent retaliation from other members of the organised crime group or terror cell.

But when they testify in court, their identities would be known.

I hope no one is advocating that the police be allowed to testify anonymously.

Dowly

07-09-16, 11:59 AM

I dont think SWAT (etc.) units' people should be identified.

It just makes them and their families a good target.

Betonov

07-09-16, 12:08 PM

But when they testify in court, their identities would be known.

I hope no one is advocating that the police be allowed to testify anonymously.

If the judge has a private interwiew with the officer in question with a (rough layman term) council that would prove to the court of his legitimacy but not the public of his identitiy.
That would be null if the officer in question would be the one standing trial of course.

Torplexed

07-09-16, 12:27 PM

This is a legitimate question and it deserves a serious answer. Here are my ideas for helping solve this problem. Some of my ideas are all related to the demilitarization the police force. The police are not like the military. They have different missions. The military kills people and destroys things. That's primarily what we do. The police should be enforcing the laws and protecting citizens.

1. Police should not wear military or military like uniforms. There are many reasons why the military wears uniforms. One of those reasons is that a uniform help provide a psychological distance between "us" and "them". Good for the military when we are trying to kill "them" bad for the police who are supposed to protect us.

2. Police should not have military type ranks. I cringe when I see a chief of police sporting four stars like he was some sort of a general. You are not a general, you are a manager of a law enforcement unit. Police officers should have police type ranks -- Officer (with classes), Detectives, Supervisors, etc. As the military relies on, ranks effect how people think and act.

3. Police should not have military weapons. I am absolutely against the policy of transferring old military equipment to the police. Police need to have the tools necessary to do their job, but they need to be civilian police tools.

4. Police should not obscure their identity. We have all seen photographs of police special response forces with their faces concealed. This has a tremendous emotional impact on who they are dealing with. It also has an effect on the officer wearing the mask.. It helps further psychologically distance the officer from what they are doing.

5. Accountability. The police is the government entity with the most opportunity to infringe on our civil rights. Most of my civil rights can, under the appropriate circumstance, be legally infringed by the police, at least on a temporary basis. This means that the police also have the opportunity to illegally infringe on my civil rights. This places a tremendous responsibility on the police. The police need extensive training on responsibility. Because they have the opportunity and the means to infringe on citizen's civil rights, the police must be held to a higher standard. This requires the police to be given clear guidance on what is and is not authorized. For every hour they spend on the firing range, the police need to spend 10 hours learning about civil rights. When an officer violates policy, they need to be held personally accountable.

I fear that to some police, the use of lethal force is not the last resort, but the first. That has to change.

6. Investigation. The police can not be allowed to investigate themselves. That's as dumb as allowing congress to make the rules for congress and investigate itself. And what country would be dumb enough for that. Why put officers in the position of having to investigate people who they may have to depend on to save their life next week? That's called conflict of interest.

If a local officer needs to be investigated, the investigation should be conducted at the county/state level. If a state police officer needs to be investigated the investigation should be conducted by another state or federal government.

Lastly, as a citizen, I would gladly pay additional taxes in order to fund non-lethal weapons for the police. The police need to be able to neutralize a threat. One way to neutralize a threat is to propel a few hundred grains of metal in to the person's body killing them.... but is that the only way?

This is the 21st century. We have smart people who can develop technology. What is that technology? I dunno. Clearly the TASER was a good start but hardly the ultimate tool.

A live suspect is always better than a dead one. Some in law enforcement may not agree with this as dead suspects can't testify.

We hear of cases of "suicide by cop". Often someone who wants this feels that they need to first kill someone else so the cop can finish the suicide. If the police had non-lethal weapons that can neutralize a threat, the option of suicide by cop, loses its attractiveness.

In any case, in the 21st century, there has to be another way to neutralize a threat other than punching a .40" hole in someone. Non-lethal also means that when mistakes are made, the person can recover.

A person who is killed by the police remains dead despite of any apologies or admissions of mistakes. Life is not a video game, there are no saves to reload.

So those are my ideas. Will these ideas make the police's job harder. Yes.

Civil rights always interfere with law enforcement. Look at the discussions about Miranda rights. Freedom always makes the government's job harder.

Law enforcement and government control can be a lot easier and more efficient if we just suppress civil rights and freedom. But that's not the America I want to live in.

But mostly, I just want the police to be held accountable for their actions. I don't think that is too much for a citizen to expect.

Excellent list of ideas. :up:

Probably too much good sense there for our brand of public officials to absorb. :D

vienna

07-09-16, 12:29 PM

Yeah, it's a shame that this shooter decided on the Dallas Police Department to wreak his revenge. The DPD has a reputation as a model police force. They're transparent, active in the community, and excessive force complaints are rare. They're a police department that actually bothered to absorb the lessons from what transpired two years ago in Ferguson, Missouri.

But, I suppose if you anoint yourself as a crusader at war with the police, then in your deranged state there cease to be "innocent police" anymore than there are "innocent soldiers" in wartime.

That's what makes this week such a calamity. Doubling down on the tragedy just breeds more tragedy.

A local CBS network affiliate here ran a piece about an African-American photographer who was at the center of the shooting scene. As he was taking photos of the demonstration, the shots rang out; a bullet whizzed past his head. A Dallas PD officer ran up to him and pushed him out of the way to cover. The photographer looked back to where he had been standing only to see another officer standing on the spot. Another shot hit that officer, killing him. The photographer said if it had not been for the first officer shoving him, he might have been dead. He said he would like to find and meet the officer to thank him...

<O>

Kongo Otto

07-09-16, 01:00 PM

More and more i think it's not a gun problem with your coppers over there, it's a "who is becoming a cop" problem.

Cop heroically arrests school girl:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnjeKiDvN0M

Cop Puts Man In Hospital For Talking Loudly On His Cell Phone:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stnoucybXkI

Special needs 6 year old shot five times:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjJpu8ZnoqM

Assault and battery:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXwb5MeP6Wo

Punching handcuffed pregnant woman:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXyqlQl_vHs

State’s Attorney Had Video Evidence In Lynwood Police Brutality Investigation :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XP6_UYUUqXM

Sergio Alvarez, EX-Cop from West Scramento gets 205 to life for rape and sexual assualt.
http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/article41086659.html

Another one sentenced to 260 years for rape and battery:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/11/daniel-holtzclaw-former-oklahoma-city-police-officer-guilty-rape

And another one:
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/02/17/us/la-police-officers-sexual-assault-charges/
(http://edition.cnn.com/2016/02/17/us/la-police-officers-sexual-assault-charges/)
And while the AP's review is the most comprehensive available, the finding that about 1,000 officers in six years lost their badges over sexual misconduct is a certain undercount:
https://www.rt.com/usa/320437-police-officers-sexual-misconduct/

Well:
http://gawker.com/oakland-police-chief-resigned-over-sexual-misconduct-al-1781818742

And another pillar of the community:
http://photographyisnotacrime.com/2016/06/30/imperial-police-wont-prosecute-federal-agent-sexually-assaulted-detective-chief-instead-violated-victims-rights/

Jeff-Groves

07-09-16, 03:46 PM

More and more i think it's not a gun problem with your coppers over there, it's a "who is becoming a cop" problem.

There it is in a hand basket!

And then you have to ask a simple question.
Why the heck are they allowed to empty a full magazine into their targets?
A double tap should be enuff. If not? Double tap again.
It's call gun control. If Cops can't do it they should have no Guns.

Rockstar

07-09-16, 07:55 PM

I work in a national auto parts store located in a predominatly black neighborhood. no racisists, no black panthers, no white privilege, no tension, just business as usual.

But you look at the news and one would think race wars begin tomorrow.

Commander Wallace

07-10-16, 09:57 AM

People have posted excellent ideas with regards to what the issues are but none better than torplexed and Platapus. This is a comprehensive list as good as it gets. Your ideas were concisely laid out with common sense that would be near impossible to argue. Torplexed had said this Dallas police force was active in their respective community's which makes their loss that much worse and hard to absorb.

Torplexed had also pointed out that with various forces nationwide, law enforcement can vary from one community to another. I will assume for the moment that is because of their respective infrastructure and needs.
That being said, it may also be helpful if a nationwide standard were implemented to insure law enforcement is applied in a uniform and consistent manner. Severe Penalties should also be used to punish " selective enforcement " of law against people they are there to protect.

The use of video camera's has in some cases exposed police officers committing crimes that are worse than what they allegedly stopped a citizen for doing. They have also been credited for curtailing various abuses.

It may be helpful if these various police forces were no longer armed with military grade hardware. If the need arises, SWAT units can take the appropriate remedial action if higher power is needed. The various police forces should cease being paramilitary forces and go back to community based units tasked with protection of it's citizens. That being said, I think we can agree most uniformed officers are doing the best they can and conduct themselves honorably. If we can assume most people are good people, then that same standard should also be applied to law enforcement.

Lastly, law enforcement personnel who engage in criminal activities should not under any circumstances be given favorable treatments in the courts but be held accountable. This includes being put in the general population in prison. I think this would be a powerful deterent.

For these initiatives to work, they would have to be implemented on a national level with a corresponding national standard.

On the other side of the coin, the time may have come where the proliferation of military grade weapons among the general public is addressed on a bi partisan national level. I am all for the 2nd amendment and agree people should have the right to employ force to protect themselves and their families. I think that can be done without the use of the assault rifles that are sold to the general public. Most people who employ weapons as part of a home defense strategy have carefully thought out exit and primary and secondary gathering points for family members . Weapons will never be a substitute for the greatest weapon people have-their brains. This would go a long way toward helping law enforcement officers remain safe even though the vast majority of people with assault style weapons are law abiding citizens and probably pillars of their communities. I think we can all agree it's a small minority on both sides that are the problem. The problem is both sides are being painted with the same brush.

I also think torplexed and Platapus should run for office . :up:

Mittelwaechter

07-10-16, 10:58 AM

Some cops - the force of the legal crimminals ruling the nation - act selfish, racist and inhumane.
The potential victims solidarize and protest against the privileged force - the puffer between the rulers and the ruled.
They carry their protest on the streets.

More cops act badly, but the majority of them is protected by the rulers, by their laws and their privileged interpreters of these laws.
The cops shall be cared for, as the force to protect the privatized possessions of the rulers. Generous pardon for misbehaviour is granted.
The potential victims get more upset. Additionally they get support of sympathizers, a growing part of the society.

Attemps to desolidarize the society increase, but the controlled media has lost much of its former power, while the new media is controlled by a small group of individuals running extremely successful corporations.
They are on their way to capitalist monopole over perception, reality and motivation. The old system has to vanish, the old actors have to resign. A global media shall be established, globally interconnected, globally controlled.

The actual establishment has to fight back, find a solution to get the people off the streets. They solidarize, they work together, they want a change.
A little spark could ingite an explosion and the well established sytem of the rulers might be crushed.

Solution?
Make the potential victims part of some true culprit and get their totally justified indignation under control.
One of their kin has killed several cops now. Good cops! Really good cops, trying to ease the causative tensions by engaging in better behaviour, by trying to institutialze better cop behaviour.

And the sympathy for any support, any change is minimized immediately.

Make sure (as usual) the bad guy can't tell facts anymore and feel free to control the perception of the people again, contolling their behaviour and motivation.

“There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.” (Warren Buffett)

The cops are Warren's military - and they suffered some casualties - by serving as pawn sacrifice.

Oberon

07-10-16, 04:42 PM

The Bahamas issues travel advisory regarding the US:
http://uk.businessinsider.com/the-bahamas-travel-advisory-us-citing-police-2016-7?r=US&IR=T

Rockstar

07-11-16, 07:18 AM

2nd day since Dallas working in a predominately black neighborhood. Personal observations and experience. Still no racism, tension, division, hatred, black panthers or gunfire. Just business as usual and in fact a quite friendly atmosphere. Nice black lady was telling jokes, and I met a black fellow vet who thanked me for giving him a discount and said 'us vets need to stick together'.

Oberon

07-11-16, 07:21 AM

2nd day since Dallas working in a predominately black neighborhood. Still no racism, tension, division, hatred, black panthers or gunfire. Just business as usual and in fact a quite friendly atmosphere.

Have you checked down the back of the couch? :hmmm:

Rockstar

07-11-16, 07:24 AM

came home, checked behind couch and found a ton of dog fur.

Oberon

07-11-16, 07:27 AM

came home, checked behind couch and found a ton of dog fur.

Any quarters?

Rockstar

07-11-16, 08:23 AM

Unless I can find a use for all the fur my dogs generate and shed then no, nothing of value was found.

Rockstar

07-11-16, 08:28 AM

btw, Im not implying there is not a problem or all is well in the world. Just that in my neck of the woods nothing is going on that even comes close to what the headlines read.

Catfish

07-11-16, 08:29 AM

Unless I can find a use for all the fur my dogs generate and shed then no, nothing of value was found.

Can you smoke it? :hmmm: :O:

Seriously, the media likes the hype and bad news is good news for them.

em2nought

07-11-16, 09:34 AM

We need another House Un-American Activities Committee, but this time as a fourth branch of gov't with the power to bring any and ALL douchebags to trial for treason. :salute:

(https://www.gwu.edu/%7Eerpapers/teachinger/glossary/huac.cfm)

August

07-11-16, 09:38 AM

em2nought

07-11-16, 10:10 AM

The last thing we need is more government.

We'll trade in the IRS, it's got low miles but it was always a lemon :03:

Maybe we can charge it with treason, after all collecting taxes has to be the most un-American activity I can think of. lol

AVGWarhawk

07-11-16, 11:13 AM

As was reported in the media, the officer had asked for his license, as the victim was reaching behind himself the victim reportedly said he was a licensed concealed weapons carrier, and was armed. Now your the cop, what would you do?

As I see it, the victim made a terrible mistake by reaching behind himself before telling the officer about the gun. If he had just kept his hands on the wheel and told the officer about the gun and permit, and then followed the officers orders to the letter, this probably would not have happened. A mistake was made, and a young man died for it.:(

I don't know about you but I keep my wallet in my back pocket. Like many men. If I'm asked for it I have to reach behind me. He did advise he was a permit holder and was armed. This is how I heard it went down. A mistake as made...by the officer IMO.

Rockstar

07-11-16, 11:14 AM

Can you smoke it? :hmmm: :O:

Seriously, the media likes the hype and bad news is good news for them.

Lets not forget the politicians. Take for instance that old hag Hilliary Rodham Clinton chiming in shortly after the incident saying the white race needs to change. What a useless divisive old douche bag, IMO statements like that prove politicians are the ones dividing the country and have absolutley no intention to fix anything, they're in charge we gave them the power to fix things and all they do is stir the pot and blame citizens and play us like chumps. And of course lets not forget the fanboys from both sides of the spectrum who blindly continue the cheer, Long live the party, Go team! Which only serves to perpetuate the lunacy.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/07/08/hillary-clinton-blame-whites-cops-shooting-deaths-young-black-men/

The last thing any leader should be doing is driving the wedge in deeper by accusing whole groups of people of wrong doing because of their ancestors, skin color or religious background.

Armistead

07-11-16, 11:29 AM

I am concerned that often police use deadly force when they don't have to, but it's at that legal edge and this is a big concern for mentally that are mentally ill. Certainly many cops are *******s dealing with the public, but of course more in the public are *******s to the police.

However, I am not for the false narratives and accusations I often see by the public, activist groups, politicians over many of the shooting used to promote a cause. Aaron Sterling was no doubt a legal shooting. It's possible better training, different tactics may have given a different outcome, but that's playing hindsight and we know we need more.

A lot can be learned in the Sterling shooting. First, he was once again carrying an illegal gun, being he was a felon with numerous charges, assaults, domestic abuse, robberies of occupied dwelling, drugs, weapon charges, child sexual offender....and guess what....resisting arrest. So this started what went wrong. Then he pointed that gun at someone, another mistake on his part. This prompted the police there with probable cause. This was not Sterling's first rodeo, he knew why the cops were there and didn't want to get arrested for what he had just done or again get caught with an illegal weapon.
He didn't comply with the cops orders, was tasered, which failed, but still wouldn't comply.
He committed numerous more crimes this night which led to the shooting.

The next stage develops, after continued refusal to obey cops, a cop charges in. I wasn't there, but seems stupid....but it was legal for him to do so. If anything, the cop himself put himself in a position to get shot and escalate a shoot out where his partner couldn't help protect him. Certainly it's possible better tactics could've been used.

Next, Sterling is on the ground, two cops over him. I'm tired of this BS they had him restrained and down. Often cops are killed in this position, where they are hands on, even in more control, but subject is resisting, even minor, but often waiting for that moment to get a weapon or take the officers. Sterling was still resisting. The cops saw his gun and told him not to ****ing move, but he continued to resist.....why? All the video really shows is after the gun was spotted and they told him to move, the cop lost control of his hand and Sterling's arm went down to where his gun was and was shot. No doubt, just like M. Brown, this will be found a legal shooting.

I was very suspect of the P. Castile shooting, by the video it looked like a trigger happy cop. His calm girlfriend that went calmly live on video as he died, now her and her family collecting large amounts of money on gofundme sites only explained her view. One, we know they were stopped for suspect of armed robbery. She said he had a license to carry, he did not, so again his gun was illegal. She said he reached for his ID, but in the video after he was shot, why was his gun laying on his lap..... Something is not adding up here either, so we need more info. Another possible scenario, maybe he did that armed robbery and figured that's what he was being stopped for and he intended to kill the cop and try to escape.....doubtful, but possible.

edit, lol, didn't know it caught the word we use for butthole....

AVGWarhawk

07-11-16, 12:03 PM

Oddly, Al Sharpton has not said much. With exception that the 2nd Admendment is for white people only. No word of marching and protest that will headed up by Mr. Sharpton. With the exception of protest in NY that appear to be a weekly thing. Is it that Mr. Sharpton is distancing himself from Black Live Matter as a result of the 5 policemen shot at the protests in TX?

danasan

07-11-16, 01:57 PM

Rockstar

07-11-16, 03:08 PM

Back in the day when I had a real job and I was an armed officer of the Customs. Thanks to such broad scope of 14USC89 we wielded an incredible amount of power over anyone within the boundaries of this country. However, we were continually reminded of and took it to heart what that "bastard son of a scotch peddler" wrote in a letter to his captains and crews of the Revenue Cutter Service in 1790.

... While I recommend in the strongest terms to the respective officers, activity, vigilance and firmness, I feel no less solicitude, that their deportment may be marked with prudence, moderation and good temper. Upon these last qualities, not less that the former, must depend

They will always keep in mind that their countrymen are freemen, and, as such, are impatient of everything that bears the least mark of a domineering spirit. They will, therefore, refrain, with the most guarded circumspection, from whatever has the semblance of haughtiness, rudeness, or insult. If obstacles occur, they will remember that they are under the particular protection of the laws and that they can meet with nothing disagreeable in the execution of their duty which these will not severely reprehend. This reflection, and a regard to the good of the service, will prevent, at all times a spirit of irritation or resentment. They will endeavor to overcome difficulties, if any are experienced, by a cool and temperate perseverance in their duty--by address and moderation, rather than by vehemence or violence. The former style of conduct will recommend them to the particular approbation of the President of the United States, while the reverse of it--even a single instance of outrage or intemperate or improper treatment of any person with whom they have anything to do, in the course of their duty, will meet with his pointed displeasure, and will be attended with correspondent consequences.

The foregoing observations are not dictated by any doubt of the prudence of any of those to whom they are addressed. These have been selected with so careful an attention to character, as to afford the strongest assurance, that their conduct will be that of good officers and good citizens. But, in an affair so delicate and important, it has been judged most advisable to listen to the suggestions of caution rather than of confidence, and to put all concerned on their guard against those sallies to which even good and prudent men are occasionally subject. It is not doubted that the instructions will be received as it ought to be, and will have its due effect. And that all may be apprized [sic] of what is expected you will communicate this part of your orders, particularly, to all your officers, and you will inculcate upon your men a correspondent disposition...

I am sir, your obedient servant,
ALEXANDER HAMILTON,
Secretary of the Treasury

I wonder what law enforecement officers are taught today?

Anyway, even we had a few bad apples and issues no matter how many times we quoted Alexander Hamilton. But even so, guns werent ablazing then and they still aren't now. Thanks, I think, in part to strong leadership good training and the other idea drilled into our heads that 99.9 percent of the people we encountered were decent law abiding citizens.

Rockstar

07-11-16, 03:47 PM

The Bahamas issues travel advisory regarding the US:
http://uk.businessinsider.com/the-bahamas-travel-advisory-us-citing-police-2016-7?r=US&IR=T

meh, I'd be surprised if any Bahamians had the money to come to the U.S. Though I did see their Maritime Defense Forces over here a lot loading their boats up with home appliances from Home Depot to take back to the islands. Only civilian Bahamians I ever saw coming to the U.S. were poachers or those tafficking humans or narcotics.

Mr Quatro

07-11-16, 04:19 PM

What we need now is a good hurricane to replace the turmoil and get on with our everyday life.

August

07-11-16, 05:08 PM

We'll trade in the IRS, it's got low miles but it was always a lemon :03:

Conservative leaning non profits everywhere would rejoice! :)

Kazuaki Shimazaki II

07-12-16, 05:03 AM

A lot can be learned in the Sterling shooting. First, he was once again carrying an illegal gun, being he was a felon with numerous charges, assaults, domestic abuse, robberies of occupied dwelling, drugs, weapon charges, child sexual offender....and guess what....resisting arrest.

It is common tactics after a policeman shoots yet another person for their apologists to dig up as much crap about the deceased as possible.

Here's perhaps a better line. If that had not been a cop but say a private citizen trying to citizen arrest that guy. Based on your understanding of the events, how likely would such a citizen be able to get himself off a prison sentence using the usual defenses?

And if he won't be able to, how much extra slack should we give a cop? And why should we give them said slack, when if anything they should be more prepared to take a non-lethal solution than a regular citizen but ultimately did not?

AVGWarhawk

07-13-16, 08:59 AM

It is common tactics after a policeman shoots yet another person for their apologists to dig up as much crap about the deceased as possible.

It is even more so a common tactic to be a armchair domestic issue managers claiming the incident should have been handled a different way. Not until any of the armchair observers put themselves in the same position can it really be known how it should be handled. I wish all could be handled differently than what occurred. It's a tough call.

We can say this, officer are often provided information on stopped citizens. Run their name, license number, etc. Sometimes the same individual has had run-ins with the officer responding. Prior incidents and convictions are known. In short, heighten awareness. If said suspect has been known to carry weapons, resist arrest and a laundry list of other illegal activity it is probably not going to be a easy stop and question.

It is very tough to say what one would do when having not experienced the same situation.

Platapus

07-13-16, 03:25 PM

AVGWarhawk

07-13-16, 03:42 PM

Unless we can demonstrate that the police knew any of this before they shot him, information about his past is irrelevant. The police did not know about his past so they could not have made any decision based on his past.

If I randomly shoot someone on the street and afterward I find out that they are a fleeing felon child molester, terrorist, mass murder, cannibal and even a country music fan, am I a hero or a villain?

I am a villain. Despite taking out a person who deserves it, I did not know this when I randomly killed him.

It all boils down to what was known and when was it known and that influences intent.

Lets talk present then in this case. The call came in concerning a man with a gun pointing at others in a parking lot. Enough said. Cops know what they are walking into. Alertness and tension is already there. Suspect apparently has no regard for human life. After all, he busy brandishing his weapon. If anyone believes the cops see it any other way I would say that is a mistake. Suspect struggles and resists arrest. Appears to go for his weapon even while down and having been tazered. What does anyone suggest should happen next?

Platapus

07-13-16, 03:56 PM

Penguin

07-13-16, 06:40 PM

If I randomly shoot someone on the street and afterward I find out that they are a fleeing felon child molester, terrorist, mass murder, cannibal and even a country music fan, am I a hero or a villain?

A monster. I'm glad to live in a place where I have the given right to bear Hank Williams records and follow the pursuit of honky-tonkness.

AVGWarhawk

07-13-16, 07:32 PM

Did the police see him brandishing his weapon? I have not read that.

As for the second, if you have a person on the ground and multiple cops are on top of him and you see the person reaching for something, would not the prudent thing to do be to grab and restrain instead of disengaging and pulling your own weapon?

In a grappling situation, I would think that pulling a weapon would be the last thing you want to do.

I dunno. What I fear is that shooting people is no longer a last resort but the first reaction.

The call to 911 stated a man at a convenience store pointing a gun at people in the parking lot. No need to see it. It was called in as such. Police plan accordingly.

The encounter occurred when the officers were dispatched to Sterling’s location outside the store after Baton Rouge Police Department received a disturbance call after midnight. A caller told a dispatcher that a black man in a red shirt who was selling CDs had threatened him with a gun.

Second, the man was on the ground and still resisting after two uses of the tazer. What's prudent when(2) not multiple cops have a suspect on the ground still going strong after two tazers that appears to be going for something in his pocket ? What is in his pocket is possibly a gun because the caller advised the suspect was armed.

The officer used the first resort. Tazer. Twice from what I have read.

Rockstar

07-14-16, 06:29 AM

August

07-14-16, 07:03 AM

There is a need to make an on-scene observation to determine if a person is armed and dangerous. Shooting someone and killing them because of what someone else said to 911 is not an excuse.

No but there was more to it than just a phone call. He was scuffling with two police officers while armed with a pistol.

Rockstar

07-14-16, 07:58 AM

If he was resisting arrest and the officer saw a firearm. Then me thinks Johnny Law wont have any problems explaining why he did what he did.

Oberon

07-14-16, 09:04 AM

http://www.cracked.com/personal-experiences-2353-i-was-cop-in-country-with-no-guns-6-startling-truths.html

AVGWarhawk

07-14-16, 09:05 AM

There is a need to make an on-scene observation to determine if a person is armed and dangerous. The officer needs to articulate what the threat was and his reasons for shooting someone so that a reasonable person would understand and agree with. If he cant he's screwed. Being a reasonable person myself I cannot fathom why an officer would shoot someone based on what he heard through the grape vine (911).

So what if the tazer didnt work? Faulty equipment isnt a reason to shoot some either. Thats why they're taught to use soft/ hard empty hand control, baton, pepper spray, pressure points. An 'accidental' kick to the groin would have stopped him dead in his tracks too. :D

On scene observation entails searching. Simply looking and asking is not enough. It is apparent then this individual resisting the search is then hiding something? Such as a weapon?

Tazer #1 did not work. Tazer #2 did not work. The possibility of two non-functioning tazers is very high. But, he was down eventually. The one officer had trouble getting a hold of the suspects right hand. Baton=brutality. Let's face it on the baton. It will always be construed as brutality/excessive force when used. Pepper spray? The tazer did no good. Pepper spray is less effective IMO. Kick in the groin? Will be noted as brutality.

Kazuaki Shimazaki II

07-14-16, 09:08 AM

The call to 911 stated a man at a convenience store pointing a gun at people in the parking lot. No need to see it. It was called in as such. Police plan accordingly.

Let's not make it sound so good. What in essence happened was this (according to the police account). A homeless man contacted Stirling and was immune to verbal and/or body language indications to cease and desist. It is not clear exactly what happened here but if homeless man so much as touched Stirling in this entire process, he technically committed Assault (you don't need to punch or kick to qualify).

Anyway, faced with this minor but persistent impediment to his freedom to walk the street without interference, Stirling took the decision to deploy his gun. This decision resolved the impediment with zero violence or actual injuries, something that won't be true if he chose to physically remove his impediment. Even if he met the objective and subjective elements of a crime here, he can actually justify it as self-defense using proportionate means (the threat was minor, but so was his zero-violence response).

Though what was reported is in fact a non-crime, the police department decided not to leave well enough alone and sent 2 people to attack with electroshock weapons, reckless of the risk that their arrest may be unjustified and further that the "less-than-lethal" weapon will actually be a disproportionate response at best considering the low social dangerousness of the alleged offense.

Even if he resisted the cops here, the fact that the basis of their arrest in the first place is a non-crime makes this an entrapment on the part of the police. He didn't have a "disposition" to resist police, at least not that day. The police decided to come arrest him for a non-crime, provoking this response.

Eventually, with assistance from their electroshock weapons, the people from the Police Department successfully wrestle Stirling to the ground. Even if Stirling was reaching for his gun with intent to employ, at this point he has a reasonable fear for his life (considering they had already hit him with electroshock weaponry twice). The cops take the decision to just shoot Stirling dead (heat-of-passion murder, perhaps?).

The officer used the first resort. Tazer. Twice from what I have read.

Only in America can electro-shock weapons be considered the "first resort".

AVGWarhawk

07-14-16, 09:34 AM

Let's not make it sound so good. What in essence happened was this (according to the police account). A homeless man contacted Stirling and was immune to verbal and/or body language indications to cease and desist. It is not clear exactly what happened here but if homeless man so much as touched Stirling in this entire process, he technically committed Assault (you don't need to punch or kick to qualify).

Anyway, faced with this minor but persistent impediment to his freedom to walk the street without interference, Stirling took the decision to deploy his gun. This decision resolved the impediment with zero violence or actual injuries, something that won't be true if he chose to physically remove his impediment. Even if he met the objective and subjective elements of a crime here, he can actually justify it as self-defense using proportionate means (the threat was minor, but so was his zero-violence response).

Though what was reported is in fact a non-crime, the police department decided not to leave well enough alone and sent 2 people to attack with electroshock weapons, reckless of the risk that their arrest may be unjustified and further that the "less-than-lethal" weapon will actually be a disproportionate response at best considering the low social dangerousness of the alleged offense.

Even if he resisted the cops here, the fact that the basis of their arrest in the first place is a non-crime makes this an entrapment on the part of the police. He didn't have a "disposition" to resist police, at least not that day. The police decided to come arrest him for a non-crime, provoking this response.

Eventually, with assistance from their electroshock weapons, the people from the Police Department successfully wrestle Stirling to the ground. Even if Stirling was reaching for his gun with intent to employ, at this point he has a reasonable fear for his life (considering they had already hit him with electroshock weaponry twice). The cops take the decision to just shoot Stirling dead (heat-of-passion murder, perhaps?).

Only in America can electro-shock weapons be considered the "first resort".

Deploying a gun as self defense? Calls for a person brandishing a weapon at another is a non-crime? Low social dangerousness of the alleged offense? Welding a weapon is a low social dangerousness?

Using a tazer is not the first resort. It is the first non-lethal resort when warranted.

You paint the incident as guns a-blazing response and ask questions later.

Sailor Steve

07-14-16, 10:51 AM

'Black Lives Matter' protest leader finds out what it's like to be a cop.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfi3Ndh3n-g

Kazuaki Shimazaki II

07-14-16, 11:24 AM

Deploying a gun as self defense? Calls for a person brandishing a weapon at another is a non-crime? Low social dangerousness of the alleged offense? Welding a weapon is a low social dangerousness?

You will notice that when our former convict held a weapon, nobody died. When cops were allowed to hold weapons, someone did die. Put down your cop apologism for a moment and try to get over that very real difference. Try and consider if they hadn't gone in tasers blazing, maybe no one had to get hurt that day.

I've actually explained it (and you have ignored it), but to get to criminality, you need to satisfy all the elements of the crime, and so, OK, he brandished with intent - as it is, we are talking a misdemeanor here. Then justifications must be absent or inadequate.

Self-defense is one of the justifications, and the unifying condition of all justifications is proportionality. Since Sterling actually used zero violence (OK, you can quibble over wide and narrow definitions of "violence" but at least you can say that and that's more than what the police managed), proportionality is guaranteed. Since his action is justifiable, the only thing one can do, from a criminal law perspective, is to call it a "non-crime".

AVGWarhawk

07-14-16, 11:58 AM

You will notice that when our former convict held a weapon, nobody died. When cops were allowed to hold weapons, someone did die. Put down your cop apologism for a moment and try to get over that very real difference. Try and consider if they hadn't gone in tasers blazing, maybe no one had to get hurt that day.

I've actually explained it (and you have ignored it), but to get to criminality, you need to satisfy all the elements of the crime, and so, OK, he brandished with intent - as it is, we are talking a misdemeanor here. Then justifications must be absent or inadequate.

Self-defense is one of the justifications, and the unifying condition of all justifications is proportionality. Since Sterling actually used zero violence (OK, you can quibble over wide and narrow definitions of "violence" but at least you can say that and that's more than what the police managed), proportionality is guaranteed. Since his action is justifiable, the only thing one can do, from a criminal law perspective, is to call it a "non-crime".

Brandishing or drawing a firearm, or other deadly weapon, can be a serious offense under Penal Code Section 417 if the following elements of the crime are proved:

You took out, exhibited or drew a firearm or other deadly weapon
In the presence of another person
And you did so in a rude, threatening or angry manner, or,
You did so unlawfully while engaged in a fight or argument, and
You were not in the act of self-defense or defending another person

http://www.lacriminaldefensepartners.com/penal-code-417-brandishing-a-firearm-or-weapon/

Brandishing a weapon a misdemeanor in some states. LA? I'm not sure. But, are the police going to stand idle by and allow the misdemeanor to possibly become murder? It is apparent the suspect covered each and determined as such from the resulting 911 call. Also, nowhere has any accounts demonstrated the cops came in with tazers a-blazing. No one appears to really care how it escalated to what it did become.

Further, I'm not defending(apologism) the cops or suspect. I'm discussing this particular incident and what anyone would do in the exact similar situation.

Kazuaki Shimazaki II

07-14-16, 01:06 PM

But, are the police going to stand idle by and allow the misdemeanor to possibly become murder?

I found the actual code:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=417

(2) Every person who, except in self-defense, in the presence of any other person, draws or exhibits any firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, in a rude, angry, or threatening manner, or who in any manner, unlawfully uses a firearm in any fight or quarrel is punishable as follows:

A firearm was indeed "exhibited", but it is not even resolved whether Sterling even "rude, angry or threatening" - he could have drawn it without being particularly rude, angry or threatening, which would actually mean all the elements of the crime aren't even there. (In fact, it seems Louisiana doesn't have a brandishing (http://www.bayoushooter.com/forums/showthread.php?50924-Brandishing) rule per se - scanning through their law, I can't find it either).

In any case, you can see that it really isn't a big deal. No one was hurt and no one was in imminent danger, I can't see the need to immediately reel him in to the point of firing tasers as the first move, much less ending up shooting him.

Further, I'm not defending(apologism) the cops or suspect. I'm discussing this particular incident and what anyone would do in the exact similar situation.

Well, then as far as I am concerned, let's not use the kid gloves on these cops. Let's treat them as people who've killed someone, and let them try and construct an argument based on self-defense or necessity.

AVGWarhawk

07-14-16, 02:13 PM

Well, then as far as I am concerned, let's not use the kid gloves on these cops. Let's treat them as people who've killed someone, and let them try and construct an argument based on self-defense or necessity.

They will do their best to argue self-defense/eminent danger.

I really do not know what I would do in this situation or any other similar situation.

There is no doubt good cops and bad cops. As well as good and citizens. Other than the shootings that have occurred involving blacks(and I'm not making light of that) the underlying theme is black are being targeted unfairly(guilty before proven innocent/profiling). It is a recurring theme spoken by many who have experienced it.

How to resolve this problem remains elusive and will be for sometime.

August

07-14-16, 02:16 PM

I can't see the need to immediately reel him in to the point of firing tasers as the first move

This implies that they just walked up to him and started firing their tasers. That's not how the incident started...

Platapus

07-14-16, 02:42 PM

The call to 911 stated a man at a convenience store pointing a gun at people in the parking lot. No need to see it. It was called in as such. Police plan accordingly.

911 calls are really not prima facei evidence. I would expect the police to do a little bit of investigating to confirm and not assume.

If the police get a call about a brandishing and they show up and there is no one brandishing, then there are at least three explanations

1. The person who make the 911 call was either mistaken or lied. 911 callers do make mistakes and 911 callers do lie.
2. The person who brandished is not there but another person is
3. The person who is there was brandishing but is no longer

In all these explanations there is no immediate threat. Clearly the police need to take reasonable precautions like talking to this person while behind some cover. I think it is even appropriate for the police to have their weapons drawn as long as the police have proper trigger control.

I have read of other cases where the police roll in and straight away start yelling and taking people down. No one, not even the police should be allowed to take pre-emptive violent actions based on the possibility that there might sometimes be a threat.

I don't even know why the police would even attempt to grapple with a person they suspect has a weapon. That puts the officer at a vulnerability.

The officers should be in a defensive position with their weapons drawn. If a suspect can start to reach for a weapon, pull that weapon, aim that weapon and pull the trigger faster than the police can fire an already aimed gun, the police need to go back to the range.

If the person is just standing there not threatening anyone, why not talk to the person (while still maintaining a defensive position). If the person cooperates and lays down with their arms spread, put the cuffs on them. There is no need to jump on a suspect and many reasons why you would not want to. The officer must remain in a position where they can control the suspect. Grappling with a suspect is not staying in control. Grappling gives up control and puts the suspect and the officer on equal terms.

If the suspect is not cooperating but still not violent, what's the hurry? Call for back up

Only if the suspect is resisting without provocation from the police, or makes an attempt to leave or makes an attempt to use a weapon, then the police can take an appropriate minimum force methods up to an including, if necessary, using their weapon.

Are the police even being taught non lethal ways of controlling a suspect any more? They are not being taught PR-24 take-down and immobilization techniques? Are they not taught how to de-escalate situations? That's all part of being a law enforcement officer, in my opinion. Not just how fast you can shoot down a citizen because you felt threatened.

vienna

07-14-16, 04:00 PM

I've noticed some of the posters here seem to be referring to the tasers as possibly malfunctioning. This may actually not be the case: some individuals under the influence of substances such as meth or PCP sometimes are not affected at all by a taser strike that would take down a sober man; for that matter, there are some drunks I have seen who have shrugged off tasers while in their cups. I once witnessed LAPD officers trying to take down a rampaging man high on PCP; not only did he shrug off three taser strikes, he also was unfazed by repeated baton blows; one officer actually broke his baton on the back of the guy. The guy even ran through a massive floor to ceiling car dealership showroom window and didn't even slow down. It finally took the combined efforts of several police officers to swarm and smother him to the ground. So, those tasers used in the case cited in previous posts probably were functional; they just didn't function on the deceased suspect...

<O>

JU_88

07-15-16, 04:42 AM

The voice of reason (IMO).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpQDOtI4KzE

Platapus

07-15-16, 07:50 PM

I think TASERs were a good start, but probably not the ultimate solution. The problem with them is that there is little way to predict the effects on the person with regard to size, age, health condition, intoxication, and a multiple of other reasons.

The effects of a TASER can range from little effect to death. Not exactly a good solution to the problem of neutralizing a threat.

What we need is to encourage further research into non-lethal ways of neutralizing threats. I for one, would be very willing to pay extra taxes if the money was earmarked for this purpose.

What I don't want to see is taking the limitations/failures of the TASER and proclaiming that non-lethal weapons don't work.

That would be faulty logic.

NeonSamurai

07-16-16, 11:13 AM

The problem with LTL's (Less Than Lethal) is that they still have the potential to be lethal, and that police tend to be very inclined to use them in situations where their use isn't actually necessary at the moment they are used. There isn't such a thing as a non-lethal weapon, any use of force has risks.

Also the US is in kind of a difficult situation when it comes to equipping their police force. Due to the massive proliferation of firearms in the country, it is highly variable as to what kind of threat an officer may face. They may face an unarmed person, or they may face a person armed with military grade weapons and hardware.

There are a lot of reasons why most US police now have access to military grade weapons and body armor, such as the North Hollywood Shootout (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout). I think the proliferation of firearms has also created this feeling in the police of being besieged by the civilian populace, as the police never knows what the heck they may be dealing with when responding to a call.

Throw in latent & systemic racism into the mix, where police tend to view black males as a serious potential threat, even with a total lack of evidence, and police encounters become very dangerous events.

I'm not sure about the Alton Sterling case, but I wonder how they initiated contact. Its not uncommon particularly when dealing with a black male, for the officers to initiate contact aggressively. Often by yelling commands to the person with gun or sometimes taser drawn.

Think how you would react if you were in this situation: your on the street, all of a sudden 1 or more cops approach you, draw their weapons and scream compliance commands at you? How would you react, or would you even be able to react at all? What if they then tased you (which hurts an awful lot, and they disorient), how would you then react then, and do you think you were resisting arrest?

Then take all of that and consider what if you were a black man in this situation, where the same chain of events will probably result in your death.

Rockstar

07-16-16, 07:34 PM

'Black Lives Matter' protest leader finds out what it's like to be a cop.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfi3Ndh3n-g

I think the police department or whoever made the video may have set the BLM activist up for failure. Because unless I missed something all the trainers gave him to use was a firearm.

Nippelspanner

07-16-16, 08:50 PM

I think TASERs were a good start, but probably not the ultimate solution. The problem with them is that there is little way to predict the effects on the person with regard to size, age, health condition, intoxication, and a multiple of other reasons.
I'd, go so far and say they are next to useless, since they are very unreliable. They aren't the wonder-tool so many SJW's claim. And personally, I can understand every single cop reaching for his 9mm instead of a "maybe you will get home tonight, maybe not" toy. Reaching for your gun is the best safety you can get and I think it is sick of spoiled SJW idiots to even DEMAND cops use them in potentially life threatening situations.
The matter is simple: DON'T resist and DON'T threaten - no need to worry*.

What we need is to encourage further research into non-lethal ways of neutralizing threats.
No, excuse me, but what you guys over there need is to find a way to fix your rotten society that thinks it is in the middle of some racial war, where everyone, cop or civilian, black or white or yellow or purple, has to be afraid that the next person he encounters might be a lunatic.

You can give someone with a broken arm drugs to ease the pain - that won't fix the broken arm though.
I hope you guys will, because it won't be too long until we encounter similar problems here and who knows, maybe we can benefit from you "alpha testing society deterioration".

*in normal conditions

Jeff-Groves

07-16-16, 08:56 PM

What the heck is SJW?

Nippelspanner

07-16-16, 09:00 PM

What the heck is SJW?
A "social justice warrior" is basically a retarded regressive leftist who constantly 'fights' for 'justice' in all kinds of matters.
Feminism, gay rights, manspreading, ...
Reason, common sense, logic and facts are not the strong side of a SJW.
On top SJWs do this mostly to be PC. Because that is important these days.

Jeff-Groves

07-16-16, 09:03 PM

social justice warrior
OK. That is one I've never heard before.
:har:

Betonov

07-17-16, 01:21 AM

social justice warrior
OK. That is one I've never heard before.
:har:

And us moderate liberals hate them even more than the conservatives.
They're completely retarded and make us all look bad.

Nippelspanner

07-17-16, 01:23 AM

And us moderate liberals hate them even more than the conservatives.
They're completely retarded and make us all look bad.
They are our Palin, basically ...with a topping of cancer and herpes.

Platapus

07-17-16, 06:42 AM

What the heck is SJW?

Single Jewish Woman. It is used in single's ads. :D

Platapus

07-17-16, 06:50 AM

Reaching for your gun is the best safety you can get ......

Well safest for the officer. Sure. Shoot first and forget the questions because there is no/limited accountability is always the best and most safest action.... for the officer. Preemptive strike and all.

For the innocent civilian? An officer reaching for his or her gun is not the best safety.

But there is more to the equation than just the officer. Contrary to the belief of some, the world does not revolve around what is safe/easiest/best for the officer. There are also the citizens in the equation... supposedly the group that is being protected.

I would like for our smart people to develop new technology that will be safe for both the officer and the citizen.

A live defendant is better than a dead suspect.

Nippelspanner

07-17-16, 06:55 AM

Well safest for the officer. Sure. Shoot first and forget the questions because there is no/limited accountability is always the best and most safest action.... for the officer. Preemptive strike and all.As if a large number of cops are mindless machines who just don't care or what!

For the innocent civilian?
Who said anything about innocent?
How can the cop know - before hand - if the person he approaches means trouble?
Who said the cop has to reach for his gun as long as a person is compliant?

Ah!

As I said - be cooperative, don't pull any stunts -> everybody gets home safe. No rocket science.

(If anyone wants to mention the one guy who got shot in his car for no reason, congratulations, you are the problem in this debate.)

Onkel Neal

07-17-16, 07:03 AM

As I said - be cooperative, don't pull any stunts -> everybody gets home safe. No rocket science.

Exactly. It's pretty simple.

Oberon

07-17-16, 07:16 AM

Single Jewish Woman. It is used in single's ads. :D

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

NeonSamurai

07-17-16, 08:28 AM

I'd, go so far and say they are next to useless, since they are very unreliable. They aren't the wonder-tool so many SJW's claim. And personally, I can understand every single cop reaching for his 9mm instead of a "maybe you will get home tonight, maybe not" toy. Reaching for your gun is the best safety you can get and I think it is sick of spoiled SJW idiots to even DEMAND cops use them in potentially life threatening situations.

Your kind of grossly oversimplifying things. Tasers are generally successful in most cases, particularly when drugs are not involved. But to use a taser properly you need to be well trained on the device, as despite the manufacturers advertising, they are not simply point and shoot. Tasers can be defeated by thick or dense materials the person is wearing, they are a very short range device, and the needles can go off course (you need both to penetrate the skin for the device to work). This is one of the reasons why a typical police taser has at least 2 shots. It also means you need to be very mindful of where you aim, or if the taser is even likely to work in the situation.

Police also have other LTL devices that can be used, such as netguns (they are good for disabling people on a meth rampage), pepperballs (these are not used a whole lot due to the list of deaths associated with them), or K9 dogs.

The matter is simple: DON'T resist and DON'T threaten - no need to worry*.As I pointed out in my last post that can be hard to do, and keep in mind there are 2 or more people involved in this equation, and both of them can have completely different interpretations of the situation. I can also think of several recent cases, where the person was shot while complying, particularly black men.

As if a large number of cops are mindless machines who just don't care or what!

While I would certainly agree, the police have always had a problem with certain types finding their way into the police system, including blatant racists, people that desire the power and want to use it, sociopaths, and gun nuts who want to get to use guns for real.

Veterans with PTSD also have a tendency of joining police forces after their deployment and service have ended (Seriously, you would not believe the number of veterans I've worked with who had also been police or corrections officers after they came back), which can create a very dangerous situation if they have a flashback while responding, for the officer themselves, and/or the person(s) they are dealing with. In the case of combat veterans, they may not even have recovered from their deployment and may still feel like they are still in combat.

I'm not calling any of these people mindless machines (people are not mindless machines), but for the most part the police really could do with some tightening up of their recruitment.

Who said anything about innocent?
How can the cop know - before hand - if the person he approaches means trouble?
Who said the cop has to reach for his gun as long as a person is compliant?

Ah!

As I said - be cooperative, don't pull any stunts -> everybody gets home safe. No rocket science.This is a bit of an oversimplification, as what happens if the officer is not following proper procedure, or what if the person is just having a bad day? Officers are also not perfect and may incorrectly assess the situation. The two most crucial things to ensure public safety is proper and extensive training, and a strong amount of police involvement in the community. The other important things is anti-racism training (something even black officers need), and a great deal of shoot no shoot drills to try to override the latent tendency to view black men as automatically threatening.

Also fyi in the USA most police officers, after a traffic stop, will tend to approach cars containing black people with guns already drawn. They may think this black person is the one an APB was put out on, or they may just assume criminality. This also happens when on foot too.

If anyone wants to mention the one guy who got shot in his car for no reason, congratulations, you are the problem in this debate.Why shouldn't we mention him? From all the information presently available, the officer was not following proper procedure, and that the use of lethal force was not warranted at that moment. By the sounds of things the guy was in full compliance, including informing the officer that he did have a concealed carry permit, and that he was presently armed. The officer failed to handle the situation at that point

Nippelspanner

07-17-16, 10:28 AM

Why shouldn't we mention him?
*sigh*
Because he is a completely isolated case, far, far, faaaaaaaaar away from what we could call the norm - or not?
So in a general debate, how do isolated incidents matter, like at all?
They don't - unless a person starts reaching for anything to support a position.

I stick with what I said before, don't pull any stunts, don't play 'sovereign citizen' and everybody gets home 99.9% of the case.
If a cop simply murders someone, the problem is just that, murder.
Not related to the topic at all.

Also, I disagree on 'oversimplifying' things, it is rather you who doesn't think these scenarios through. A friggin net gun!?

Yeah, sure Mr. Knife-wielding-crazy-person who suddenly resists during a traffic stop, lemme get my net gun, taser, rubber ball shotgun and pepper spray, trying to enforce compliance with that while risking that it won't work and I might die, I'm sure you'll just wait a moment with your intentions of ACTUALLY KILLING ME.

Personally, I will never expect any cop to put his life on the line just because some freak loses it. I have been a paramedic, I have seen nutcases in action, so no thank you.

Do you know what?
If I ever be in 'Murica again and just jump out of my car in a traffic stop, approach an officer and not listening to what he says - he may feel free to put one between my eyes.

Some people are just begging for it, considering how they behave.
Might be a form of natural selection, who knows. Fine with me anyways.
I can only agree on one thing: Apparently, too many spoiled apples in blue, and training standards (if they exist) might be in dire need of being changed. However, that won't change the problem of all the non-blue loonies in the streets.

danasan

07-17-16, 10:47 AM

Breaking News:

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/17/us/baton-route-police-shooting/index.html

Baton Rouge Police Shooting, Three Officers might be Killed

Torplexed

07-17-16, 11:23 AM

Breaking News:

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/17/us/baton-route-police-shooting/index.html

Baton Rouge Police Shooting, Three Officers might be Killed

Swell. I guess going into Mobile Infantry mode wasn't the answer to Baton Rogue's problems.

http://hyperallergic.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Screen-Shot-2016-07-15-at-1.30.11-PM-768x616.png

Captain Jeff

07-17-16, 11:56 AM

America in 1776. "I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death."

America in 2016. "If the cops are harassing you, it must be your fault." "You should just do everything a cop tells you to do the instant he tells you to do it." "If the cops shoot someone then that person must have deserved it."

It's interesting to see how a police state can make people run in fear. Maybe people assume they can be safe from the police if they join in on the police attack.

It's also interesting to see some people from other countries talk like the reason we have so many out of control cops and so many prisons is because the people of this country are a bad society that needs to be clamped down and controlled. It's all our fault. You'd think some of these countries would look at their own history and realize a police state is never justified.

I have faith in the youth of this country. I believe they'll right the ship, even if they have to create a new country to do it. They will restore freedom and end the police state. And when they're done, they will live in a long period of isolationism. Did someone invade your country and now they're robbing you and throwing you in jails? Good luck with that. After all, where were you when it was happening to me?

Mittelwaechter

07-17-16, 12:09 PM

Your youth is distracted, conservative and ignorant. They won't fix anything.

The rest of the world is at the other end of your gun, asking you to put it down.

But you insist to bring those liberties and privileges you want to grant us.
You are many and you are armed to the teeth - with nukes, economy and control over our money.

Your spies and secret police know everything about us - and our politicians.
Your amount of weapons match the rest of the world - and you make pay us for them.

We fail to unite against you, because you work constantly and efficiently on divide et impera. But you wonder, why “the world” doesn't like the US...

If you are terribly strong you must be terribly nice. (Pippilotta Longstocking)

Oberon

07-17-16, 12:24 PM

If you are terribly strong you must be terribly nice. (Pippilotta Longstocking)

:doh: That's got to be the first time someone has quoted Pippi Longstocking on Subsim. :hmmm:

Mittelwaechter

07-17-16, 12:30 PM

She's my childhood hero.

Jeff-Groves

07-17-16, 12:42 PM

:o But she smoked dope!!
http://static02.mediaite.com/themarysue/uploads/2014/12/pippi.jpg

:har:

Kazuaki Shimazaki II

07-17-16, 01:07 PM

How can the cop know - before hand - if the person he approaches means trouble?

He doesn't. I'll contend, however, that it is a risk that he'll have to take. You know, just like the rest of us - we don't know if those we face will be dangerous either. A random (dubbed "reasonable" by a perhaps overly sympathetic court) fear does not allow us to pre-emptively attack anyone with tasers, much less guns.

As a civil servant, his job is to serve the civilians that are paying (via taxes) his wages. The onus is on a police-supporter to defend why a civil servant should be given such special privileges to such a special extent.

Nippelspanner

07-17-16, 01:08 PM

...fear does not allow us to pre-emptively attack anyone with tasers, much less guns.
And. Who. Said. That. It. Would? :shifty:

Kazuaki Shimazaki II

07-17-16, 01:28 PM

This time, based on the video they hadn't even tried lesser restraint measures on Sterling and went straight for the taser. You would notice you hear them tasing him before even trying to touch him, almost like he is a wild beast.

I don't believe in tolerating things based on "bad apple" theory. I'm on the side that had a real (not theoretical) threat of negative consequences (to themselves) been in the backs of the brains of the two involved police officers, even if their moral qualities aren't the best they'll have found it in themselves to try something else, thus avoiding this tragedy.

Mittelwaechter

07-17-16, 01:35 PM

:o But she smoked dope!!

del: img

:har:

A true anarchist, a free mind, questioning rules and given concepts.

Jeff-Groves

07-17-16, 01:39 PM

A true anarchist, a free mind, questioning rules and given concepts.

:up:
:salute:

Platapus

07-17-16, 01:52 PM

If you are terribly strong you must be terribly nice. (Pippilotta Longstocking)

That ranks up there with "It is nice to be important, but it is important to be nice" :up:

NeonSamurai

07-19-16, 01:12 PM

*sigh*
Because he is a completely isolated case, far, far, faaaaaaaaar away from what we could call the norm - or not?
So in a general debate, how do isolated incidents matter, like at all?
They don't - unless a person starts reaching for anything to support a position.

There are piles of cases just like this one, where the use of force was highly questionable at best, and potentially criminal at worst.

I stick with what I said before, don't pull any stunts, don't play 'sovereign citizen' and everybody gets home 99.9% of the case.
If a cop simply murders someone, the problem is just that, murder.
Not related to the topic at all.First of all your statistic is not even a statistic at all, its just your assumption on the safety chance during an event with police, and not based on reality. Incidents happen all the time even if the person is being compliant, and some of them result in fatalities. I'm also speaking about officers following proper procedure, which is completely on topic. Lastly civilians have rights too, even though they do have to obey the lawful orders from an officer of the peace.

Also, I disagree on 'oversimplifying' things, it is rather you who doesn't think these scenarios through. A friggin net gun!?Net-guns are a reasonable use of force and can be very effective in impairing a suspect's abilities to run or fight. Of course it depends on the situation and the amount of backup available at that time.

Yeah, sure Mr. Knife-wielding-crazy-person who suddenly resists during a traffic stop, lemme get my net gun, taser, rubber ball shotgun and pepper spray, trying to enforce compliance with that while risking that it won't work and I might die, I'm sure you'll just wait a moment with your intentions of ACTUALLY KILLING ME.Aside from your stereotype of people with mental illness, your totally missing my point, I'm not against the use of lethal force, but that lethal force should be the last resort, when everything else has failed, and yours or the life of someone else is in immediate jeopardy. That is proper police procedure. You can't just shoot the knife wielding person because he has a knife, that is not how the police are supposed to operate. In that situation, the officer could only open fire, if the individual made motions to attack another person in the car, or if they got out of the car and and proceeded to charge or advance on the officer until the point where the officers life was in danger. Otherwise the officer should retreat to a safe distance so as not to provoke the individual, keep other civilians out of the area, and call for backup, tactical response unit (SWAT), or a specialist unit that works with people with mental health issues. The officer should not engage the individual or use force on his own, and if the individual flees, he needs to try to maintain contact with the individual, and should not engage unless the situation warrants it.

Next time maybe try to make your point without the hyperbole.

Personally, I will never expect any cop to put his life on the line just because some freak loses it. I have been a paramedic, I have seen nutcases in action, so no thank you.Putting their life on the line is part of the job description, as it is for the military, and firemen. The job is very risky, and civilians should do their best to make their jobs easier. But people are emotional and can be irrational to, or they may simply be off their meds. By your standards it sounds like the police should have near carte blanche when it comes to the use of force against the mentally ill (FYI as a clinical social worker, I've worked with all sides: police, people of color, people with mental illnesses, and the 'freaks' you described). They have rights too, and don't deserve to be shot because they are acting aggressively. In almost all of those cases, they usually just want people to back the hell off and stop threatening them.

Do you know what?
If I ever be in 'Murica again and just jump out of my car in a traffic stop, approach an officer and not listening to what he says - he may feel free to put one between my eyes.You could even get shot in Canada doing stuff like that, or in your own country for that matter. Though unless you were carrying a weapon (or acting like you were), the officer doesn't have cause to use lethal force, but it depends on the exact circumstances.

Some people are just begging for it, considering how they behave.
Might be a form of natural selection, who knows. Fine with me anyways.
I can only agree on one thing: Apparently, too many spoiled apples in blue, and training standards (if they exist) might be in dire need of being changed. However, that won't change the problem of all the non-blue loonies in the streets.Begging for it does not justify it either. Suicide by police has lately become a rising trend, where suicidal people try to push police into using lethal force on them, frequently by pretending to have a weapon, or actually having one. It's bad too because of how the shooting will affect the officer too.

http://hyperallergic.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Screen-Shot-2016-07-15-at-1.30.11-PM-768x616.png

Wow they look like black stormtroopers... where even their boots are armored. I don't think even the combat grunts get armor like that

Oberon

07-19-16, 01:25 PM

I think if they were Stormtroopers then we wouldn't be having this discussion....

http://postmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/funny-cartoon-Stormtrooper-fail-aiming.jpg

Nippelspanner

07-19-16, 01:27 PM

I think if they were Stormtroopers then we wouldn't be having this discussion....

http://postmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/funny-cartoon-Stormtrooper-fail-aiming.jpg
*le sigh*
https://www.reddit.com/r/FanTheories/comments/1vjd2l/star_wars_stormtroopers_were_actually_very/

Oberon

07-19-16, 01:29 PM

*le sigh*
https://www.reddit.com/r/FanTheories/comments/1vjd2l/star_wars_stormtroopers_were_actually_very/

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/400x/62389766.jpg

Nippelspanner

07-19-16, 01:30 PM

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/400x/62389766.jpg
Then I won't get your point - I'm German.

Oberon

07-19-16, 01:33 PM

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/400x/52822730.jpg

Catfish

07-19-16, 01:59 PM

^ wait till we meet at Kiel, i'll show you some german humour :D

grumble now where's that clubbing icon

Onkel Neal

07-21-16, 07:07 AM

This is getting rediculous (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/florida-police-shooting-unarmed-caregiver-of-autistic-man-victim-account/) :o

Jimbuna

07-21-16, 07:59 AM

The article is blocked Neal, unless the reader signs in.

Onkel Neal

07-21-16, 08:04 AM

switched to another source

Jimbuna

07-21-16, 08:37 AM

"They cuff my hands and they flip me over. And I'm saying, 'sir, why did you shoot me?' and his words to me, he said, 'I don't know,'" Kinsey said.

Most worrying indeed :o

AVGWarhawk

07-21-16, 10:23 AM

This is getting rediculous (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/florida-police-shooting-unarmed-caregiver-of-autistic-man-victim-account/) :o

We do not need gun control. We need police control. I agree...it is getting out of hand and appears to have been for a very long time.

Rockstar

07-21-16, 10:42 AM

I was thinking anyone remember this?

On Feb. 7, 2013, Margie Carranza and her mother Emma Hernandez, then 71, were delivering newspapers before dawn in Torrance, where officers were posted on protective duty armed with shotguns and handguns. As the women slowly drove down the street, officers shot at their blue pickup truck mistaking it for Dorner’s gray or dark blue Nissan Titan.

"When the gun shots started, I started yelling I'm the person that delivers the LA Times!' I was thinking, 'What is the reason they're shooting at me?'" Carranza recalled during a 2013 interview with NBC4.

Carranza was grazed by bullets and her mother was shot twice in the back and neck. They were ordered out of the truck and later taken to Harbor-UCLA Medical Center.

***warning B.S. alert****

"Although the officers were mistaken, their perceptions were based on actual observations: a vehicle matching the suspect vehicle's description, with a partial matching license plate, being driven slowly on the wrong side of the street, followed by an object being thrown from the driver's side," the district attorney's letter said.

"The barrage of gunfire was tremendous, and troubling," the letter goes on to say, painting a picture of confusion among officers believing some of the gunfire was coming from Dorner inside the truck.

*****end B.S. alert****

Source: http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Prosecutors-Decline-to-File-Charges-Against-Officers-in-Shooting-During-Christopher-Dorner-Manhunt-366729041.html#ixzz4F3fMyTpC
Follow us: @NBCLA on Twitter | NBCLA on Facebook

Aktungbby

07-21-16, 10:49 AM

This one still rankles close to home after six years; the city paid $700,000 'without admitting guilt.' http://napavalleyregister.com/richard-poccia-shooting-coverage/collection_779e3aa8-ff53-11df-8cf4-001cc4c002e0.html (http://napavalleyregister.com/richard-poccia-shooting-coverage/collection_779e3aa8-ff53-11df-8cf4-001cc4c002e0.html) Having dealt with nuts in social security offices for nine years and taken away their pocket knives-to be returned when exiting- ...rule one: U CAN'T shoot them...:huh: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Police-shooting-of-nurse-was-justified-D-A-says-2458404.php (http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Police-shooting-of-nurse-was-justified-D-A-says-2458404.php) Especially from behind with an AR-15 when the officer in front has determined the threat to be at TASER level and can see the butt of the four inch knife still in the waistband....

Jeff-Groves

07-21-16, 01:57 PM

Police shot at in Columbus, Ohio now!
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/rnc-continues-police-shot-ohio-breaking-news/

What the heck people? Not enuff Deer around or what?

Aktungbby

07-21-16, 03:12 PM

Police shot at in Columbus, Ohio now!
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/rnc-continues-police-shot-ohio-breaking-news/

What the heck people? Not enuff Deer around or what?WOT U MEAN NOW BRO! https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/65/Kent_State_massacre.jpg<1970 of course now it's more sportin'...soda speke :nope: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/05/27/photo-shows-chicago-police-officers-posing-with-black-man-wearing-antlers/?utm_term=.86b5de06af43 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/05/27/photo-shows-chicago-police-officers-posing-with-black-man-wearing-antlers/?utm_term=.86b5de06af43) https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp-content/uploads/sites/23/2015/05/EXCOP1432757585_image_982w.jpg&w=1484https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvg4n8Txgdc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvg4n8Txgdc) Personally I've not seen an improvement in 'Tude for a half century.

Onkel Neal

07-21-16, 04:19 PM

We do not need gun control. We need police control. I agree...it is getting out of hand and appears to have been for a very long time.

Yeah, thinking the same thing here. Doesn't matter that the cops says he was aiming for the patient, nothing about this scene looks thretening at all. This is not "reaching for my gun" or anything dangerous. I am officially second guessing the hell out of this cop. This is nuts!
http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.2720792.1469134660!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_1200/article-kinsey-0721.jpg

AVGWarhawk

07-22-16, 08:12 AM

I don't second guess the cop in this instance. This is simply deplorable police vetting, training and follow up training IMO.

This surfaced today....

http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news/local/violent-arrest-of-teacher-caught-on-video-officers/nr3W6/

As King was being driven to jail, a separate police video recorded a conversation between King and officer Patrick Spradlin in which he said whites may be concerned about interacting with blacks because they can appear “intimidating.”

Really? A female school teacher? Stopped for speeding?

NeonSamurai

07-22-16, 08:42 AM

We do not need gun control. We need police control. I agree...it is getting out of hand and appears to have been for a very long time.

I think the problem, in part, goes hand in hand with the proliferation of guns, and the problem of letting states set up their own gun control legislation. Letting each state set up its own gun control laws, has had a huge part in the proliferation of guns in the US, particularly in the hands of ex-convicts, and criminals.

So why is this such a problem? It has a lot to do with the level of gun registration, background checks, etc. required in each state, which can range from rather stringent with restrictions to the types of guns one can own, too practically none at all. Then there are the gun fairs, where you can buy large amounts of all different sorts of firearms, without any kind of check or registration at all (this is one of the major sources of underground firearms from arms dealers, to criminals).

So for example, say I want to supply guns to NYC (a state and city with very strong gun laws), well the best way to go about it is to head to Vermont, which has pretty lax laws, buy a pile of guns either directly or from third parties, then go back to NYC and get around a 1000%-3000% return on them. For California, go to Nevada, and etc.

This problem also doesn't just affect the United States, US laws on this are also seriously affecting Canada and Mexico, as these guns are getting smuggled into both countries (particularly Mexico by the cartels, which is having a huge toll on the civilian and police death rate. Even in Canada, gun violence has been skyrocketing lately, and many of the guns used in these crimes have originated from the USA.

All of these things are making it very easy for criminals to acquire guns, that along with the large numbers of states that allow concealed carry, to ownership of fully automatic weapons, means that the police have absolutely no idea what the heck they are going to be facing day to day, it may be a walther ppk, or it may be the likes of a Saiga 12 full auto, or m4, or even a .50 cal sniper rifle.

Then consider this, with all these people carrying legal concealed firearms, what the <censored> are police supposed to do in a mass shooting, where half the people are armed, and may be shooting at each other out of confusion. Its pretty much impossible to identify who the bad guys are. Actually if I was a suicidal terrorist/anarchist, I would probably pick a state with very high concealed or open carry, just because of the ensuing carnage you could create by people not being able to identify the active shooter, and everyone shooting guns. I mean what kind of retarded lawmakers come up with this stuff?

So in a way I kind of really feel sorry for the police (latent racism aside). Seriously you guys need some kind of national gun control. I'm not talking about ending gun ownership, but guns need to registered, and re-registered at the time of sale (with stiff penalties if caught selling a gun without reregistering, or faking a claim of the gun being stolen). I mean access to the bloody NRA Eddie the Eagle is better protected, then access to firearms.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usgOsNhkKVE
(Yes I know its Samantha Bee... watch it anyways as she demonstrates just how easy it is to get guns with no checks what so ever)

NeonSamurai

07-22-16, 09:05 AM

Yeah, thinking the same thing here. Doesn't matter that the cops says he was aiming for the patient, nothing about this scene looks thretening at all. This is not "reaching for my gun" or anything dangerous. I am officially second guessing the hell out of this cop. This is nuts!

I agree but, why on earth would the officer be shooting at the man sitting on the ground with a toy truck in his hands. Sounds like utter BS to me. I think its more the effect of being a black male automatically makes you appear lethally dangerous, even if unarmed, which even black officers, and the general populace appear to suffer from, according to a few different studies. Personally I think it stems from history, and cultural depictions of black men in the media. It also appears to be largely unconscious, and might be conditioned.

I don't second guess the cop in this instance. This is simply deplorable police vetting, training and follow up training IMO.

I would totally second guess this officer, since even the police department couldn't justify the officers actions. Unfortunately training and followup training don't really do much, when in the situation, particularly if the officer is in a state of fear or panic, with the associated adrenaline surge. As the military has found out, you can never be sure how a person will react in the situation, and their is no real way of testing it either.

AVGWarhawk

07-22-16, 09:50 AM

I would totally second guess this officer, since even the police department couldn't justify the officers actions. Unfortunately training and followup training don't really do much, when in the situation, particularly if the officer is in a state of fear or panic, with the associated adrenaline surge. As the military has found out, you can never be sure how a person will react in the situation, and their is no real way of testing it either.

My point in not second guessing is there is no guessing at all. And my reason: this is simply deplorable police vetting, training and follow up training IMO. This cop was in the wrong hands down. What kind of situational awareness has been instructed with this officer? I'm afraid to really find out.

August

07-22-16, 09:27 PM

Then consider this, with all these people carrying legal concealed firearms, what the <censored> are police supposed to do in a mass shooting, where half the people are armed, and may be shooting at each other out of confusion.

I've heard of this scenario described many times but I've never heard of it actually happening. Seems with so many armed people there'd be many of such instances already if the theory holds water.

Jeff-Groves

07-22-16, 10:01 PM

"Actually if I was a suicidal terrorist/anarchist, I would probably pick a state with very high concealed or open carry, just because of the ensuing carnage you could create by people not being able to identify the active shooter, and everyone shooting guns. I mean what kind of retarded lawmakers come up with this stuff?"

:o
Wow! Is all I can say.

Show me just one mass shooting where the perp looked for something like that!
I doubt you can. They look for places that deny any weapons. Even legal carry weapons.

Mittelwaechter

07-22-16, 11:26 PM

If I'd like to start a saloon fight, I'd go into a saloon, not into a kindergarten. :yep:

And aren't there some cops shooting civilians, because the cops think they have a gun and could fire back?

You don't even have to have a gun and get into the situation you doubt to exist.

Mr Quatro

11-23-16, 07:27 PM

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/gun-sales-to-blacks-and-minorities-quadruple-after-trump-win/ar-AAkFPMZ?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp

Gun store owners told NBC News that since November 8 they're seeing up to four times as many black and minority customers —and black gun groups are reporting double the normal number of attendees at their meetings since the election.
Racial tension was already at a high during the election, with a spate of videoed shootings and deaths of black men by police officers, followed by ardent protests and the fatal targeting of white police officers.

And Donald J. Trump's surprise victory in November has done nothing to abate the racial violence — it even seems to have encouraged more open displays of hatred. More than 700 instances have already been reported to the Southern Poverty Law Center just since November 8, and LGBT hotlines are seeing an "all-time peak" in calls from people reporting harassment. (http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/lgbtq-crisis-hotlines-see-surge-calls-following-trump-victory-n682201)

Not a good sign, uh?