Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #651  
Old 01-07-2015, 02:42 PM
Hentor the Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 14,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan View Post
That's how self defence works, though. If you can reasonably assume that the person is an imminent threat to you, you can defend yourself.

Someone disobeying a cop, and reaching for something, has been proven in court to meet that standard. That's really all there is to it.
That's a very Smapti standard - what the court says goes.

If that standard ends up with a bunch of dead people who were in the end not an actual threat, it most certainly is appropriate to question that practice, regardless of what the court said.
  #652  
Old 01-07-2015, 04:32 PM
Typo Negative's Avatar
Typo Negative is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 7th Level of Hell, Ca
Posts: 18,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
So you are asserting that the officer knew Mr. Ramirez's identity & the existence of outstanding warrants prior to shooting him? How did the officer know such things? Is he psychic? Is the officer a part of the Pre-Crime police force?

So the penalty for not obeying an officer's commands is now death? Srsly?
As someone else already pointed out:
Quote:
Before Ramirez was shot, Morrison recognized him as the suspect in a shooting the night before
Your cite says they were looking for him specifically. They probably talked about him at the roll call meeting at the start of the shift. Probably had photos and everything.

I, personally, am as appalled as anyone about our justice system as a whole and I believe our police officers are often way too quick to use force. I also believe they are much quicker to use deadly force when the suspect is non-white. All of these need to change.

But I think you are reading too much into this particular incident. If the facts laid out in this article are true, then it's a justified shooting. Ramirez was a recognized suspect in a shooting. He refused multiple orders to put up his hands. He made a move that could have looked to anyone like someone reaching for a weapon.

In that situation, I, a peace-loving pacifist, probably would have shot him too.
  #653  
Old 01-08-2015, 11:41 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 20,174
Starting with the first video in this chain, in which St. Paul police use mace, taser, kick to the chest etc. to arrest a black man ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcnC_6YseiU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aw06ANLJNAQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6S7LRrCru8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdsQlSF4Ox8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbI5HHz7fJU innocent black man killed after cop beating

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkRct0YTibE

... I clicked suggestions at the right, finishing with the sixth, which describes Chicago cops shooting and very severely injuring an innocent man. Though the innocent was obviously on the verge of death, the cops didn't even call an ambulance until they noticed the man had used his cell-phone, thus creating a possible witness.

The suggested clicks went on and on, but I had time and heart only for these.

Anyone popping up to defend the cops?
  #654  
Old 01-09-2015, 07:34 PM
MaxTheVool is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 11,922
Interesting video... A civil rights activist undergoes use-of-force training, confronts (staged) scenarios.
  #655  
Old 01-09-2015, 08:00 PM
slumtrimpet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canukistan
Posts: 656
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxTheVool View Post
Interesting video... A civil rights activist undergoes use-of-force training, confronts (staged) scenarios.
Interesting indeed. Two things set my detector off; Fox and Maricopa County Sheriff's office. And sure enough, propaganda. Found that at the top of the comments.
  #656  
Old 01-09-2015, 09:37 PM
Defensive Indifference is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 7,320
That video is crap. What's the point? That cops should be held to no higher standard than a random civilian with no training? One hopes that the cops get extensive training on how to handle these kinds of situations. Throwing a completely unprepared guy in there and using his failure to justify police violence is thoroughly dishonest. What's next? "Bob sued his doctor for amputating the wrong limb, but when Bob had the scalpel in his hand, he saw it different!" Crap video, crap police force, crap network.
  #657  
Old 01-10-2015, 11:22 AM
MaxTheVool is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 11,922
Quote:
Originally Posted by slumtrimpet View Post
Interesting indeed. Two things set my detector off; Fox and Maricopa County Sheriff's office. And sure enough, propaganda. Found that at the top of the comments.
I think it's a misuse of the term to say that the video itself is propaganda. If someone trumpets it as somehow proving some huge point or settling the issue or being the be-all answer to all questions about Ferguson and Garner and so forth, then it would be being USED as propaganda. But as it is, it's just what it seems to be. A guy who had been stridently anti-police (in the context of these encounters) got a very brief experience of what it's like to be a cop in a difficult encounter, and found it eye-opening. Doesn't mean he reversed his basic position on the issue. Doesn't mean he started marching for the other side.

And saying "people should comply with the police (implied: when the police have guns trained on them)" for their own safety is hardly a radical or controversial suggestion (barring crazy hypotheticals involving clearly corrupt cops ordering you to do illegal or dangerous things).
  #658  
Old 01-10-2015, 12:10 PM
slumtrimpet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canukistan
Posts: 656
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxTheVool View Post
I think it's a misuse of the term to say that the video itself is propaganda. If someone trumpets it as somehow proving some huge point or settling the issue or being the be-all answer to all questions about Ferguson and Garner and so forth, then it would be being USED as propaganda. But as it is, it's just what it seems to be. A guy who had been stridently anti-police (in the context of these encounters) got a very brief experience of what it's like to be a cop in a difficult encounter, and found it eye-opening. Doesn't mean he reversed his basic position on the issue. Doesn't mean he started marching for the other side.

And saying "people should comply with the police (implied: when the police have guns trained on them)" for their own safety is hardly a radical or controversial suggestion (barring crazy hypotheticals involving clearly corrupt cops ordering you to do illegal or dangerous things).
Did you read the linked article? It specifically points out that the video is propaganda because, among other things, it limits the interaction between the newly minted (and completely untrained) 'policeman' and the unarmed (but very threatening) 'civilian' to "shoot or be attacked". No alternative measures offered. No stun gun, no physical restraint training, no baton, no training in defusing a potentially dangerous situation, no nothing - just a gun in hand. Now, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if that is exactly how the Maricopa County Sheriff's department is taught to deal with civilians, but... really? That's what we want police to do?
Read the article, it's much better at explaining why the video is propaganda than I am.
  #659  
Old 01-10-2015, 12:32 PM
MaxTheVool is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 11,922
Quote:
Originally Posted by slumtrimpet View Post
Read the article, it's much better at explaining why the video is propaganda than I am.
I don't think we agree on what "propaganda" means. The video is certainly dishonest or incomplete if someone tries to use it as a comprehensive and complete argument of some sort. But I don't see anyone trying to do that. It's just what it is. (And I did read the article, and I don't disagree with its points as far as they go, but in general I think they're arguing against claims that the video, in isolation, is not making.)
  #660  
Old 01-10-2015, 02:57 PM
slumtrimpet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canukistan
Posts: 656
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxTheVool View Post
I don't think we agree on what "propaganda" means. The video is certainly dishonest or incomplete if someone tries to use it as a comprehensive and complete argument of some sort. But I don't see anyone trying to do that. It's just what it is. (And I did read the article, and I don't disagree with its points as far as they go, but in general I think they're arguing against claims that the video, in isolation, is not making.)
I'm happy to go with the dictionary definition of propaganda.
And as the article concludes:
Quote:
In either case it is a false dichotomy, meant to facilitate a false sympathy towards law enforcement by showing the job they do in a very misleading light given the major advantages an officer on the beat has vs. a citizen off the street participating in this exercise.
I think it fits the definition quite nicely. Nor is the video intended to be used 'in isolation'. It was made by and shown on FOX ferchristsakes.
  #661  
Old 01-10-2015, 06:16 PM
MaxTheVool is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 11,922
Quote:
Originally Posted by slumtrimpet View Post
I'm happy to go with the dictionary definition of propaganda.
To quote the Wikipedia article, "Defining propaganda has always been a problem". The article puts forth two definitions...

Garth Jowett and Victoria O'Donnell have provided a concise, workable definition of the term: "Propaganda is the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behavior to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist."

More comprehensive is the description by Richard Alan Nelson: "Propaganda is neutrally defined as a systematic form of purposeful persuasion that attempts to influence the emotions, attitudes, opinions, and actions of specified target audiences for ideological, political or commercial purposes through the controlled transmission of one-sided messages (which may or may not be factual) via mass and direct media channels. A propaganda organization employs propagandists who engage in propagandism—the applied creation and distribution of such forms of persuasion."

Note that both definitions include "systematic". I don't see how one video broadcast on one fox affiliate (VERY different from being broadcast on Fox News itself) can possibly qualify.


Honestly, I think you're responding to something that isn't there at all, which is the use of that video as a cudgel to try to win the argument for the pro-police side. I can certainly imagine that happening, and if it does, it would almost certainly be both dishonest and propaganda, but as it stands you're responding to something that just isn't there.
  #662  
Old 01-11-2015, 09:10 AM
slumtrimpet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canukistan
Posts: 656


I have no interest whatsoever in endlessly debating whether or not the video was propaganda or not, especially the validity of the word 'systematic' and whether it applies in this case or not.

Sorry. Life's too short.

In other words; I think it's propaganda, you don't. Whatever. Everyone can watch it and/or read the article if they so choose, and decide for themselves.
  #663  
Old 01-12-2015, 12:42 PM
BigAppleBucky's Avatar
BigAppleBucky is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Long Island
Posts: 2,370
I searched "Iowa" in this thread and it came back negative - so SIAP.

White University of Iowa student get busted. Cop thought, however, that he was Hispanic. Cops lies shown by their own dash cam.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaREYiWMM9c

No "near miss";
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSg-6tWUI54

Gets abused even though his hands are on his head and he repeated screamed so:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ebrxd4qROd0


Here's his Q&A from the comment section of the video. (I hope this extensive quote does not violate any rule here. It's not from a published source.)

1) Q: Did you edit the video in any way?
A: No. The video is presented exactly as it was given to me. Absolutely nothing is cut from the beginning of the video and it only ends when I am in handcuffs.

2) Q: It's not obvious that you didn't nearly get hit by the car in the video since the part isn't visible on the screen. Are you sure you didn't get hit by a car?
A: We've got the interior camera from the police car which faces to the rear. I was absolutely not almost hit by a car. Here's a link to that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSg-6...

3) Q: Why didn't you put your hands on your back as the police officer told you to?
A: The original police officer did not tell me to do that. In fact, I had yelled that my hands were on my head with absolutely no objection from Officer Hall over 25 times. It was only after four police officers were on top of me that a completely different officer shouted for me to put my hands on my back. By that time I was physically hurt, had four police on my back, and was terrified.

4) Q: Why did you put your hands on your head in the first place?
A: I thought it was the least threatening position you can get in. You can't hurt anyone while you're laying down with your hands on your head. It's simply not possible.

5) Q: Why do you end the movie there?
A: Because the footage they gave me goes on for another 40 minutes. I had to end it somewhere and ending it at the time I was put in handcuffs seemed like the logical choice.

6) Q: Why does the police officer have to yell at you to get on your stomach in the beginning?
A: That's the position the officer body threw me on the ground into.

7) Q: You're a liar! You were really just shouting that whole time while you were actually resisting. Your hands weren't really on your head the whole time, were they?
A: There is video from the other police officer's dashcam's as well that shows me laying on the ground. In addition, the police readily acknowledge that my hands were on my head. No one is disputing that claim. There's another video under my account where Officer Hall acknowledges that my hands were on my head. You can find that here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iIAY...

8) Q: Why didn't you just comply with the officer's questions? Why did you ask if you were free to go?
A: I was well within my rights to ask that question. If you ask any lawyer, that is the absolute best thing I could have said. Every single lawyer will tell you to ask the exact same thing if you ever have to talk to a police officer.

9) Q: You seem to know a lot about the law. Do you have a criminal record?
A: I've got a speeding ticket from over six years ago. That's it. I just live with a law student.
  #664  
Old 01-12-2015, 10:04 PM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 5,205
I searched, not sure if this case has been discussed here. I didn't know about it until I read it on NPR. James Boyd was a mentally ill homeless man who was illegally camping last March. He was shot and killed by police after being hit with a flashbang grenade and not subsequently dropping the pocket knives he was holding. The altercation was caught on one of the officer's helmet cams. They've just been charged with murder.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/...-2014-shooting
  #665  
Old 01-13-2015, 10:35 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
I searched, not sure if this case has been discussed here. I didn't know about it until I read it on NPR. James Boyd was a mentally ill homeless man who was illegally camping last March. He was shot and killed by police after being hit with a flashbang grenade and not subsequently dropping the pocket knives he was holding. The altercation was caught on one of the officer's helmet cams. They've just been charged with murder.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/...-2014-shooting
...I saw that video a while ago, and my mouth just dropped in disbelief. I see no compelling reason why the police had to open fire here. I'm glad it is going to trial, but now the police are going after the DA.
  #666  
Old 01-14-2015, 12:06 AM
BigAppleBucky's Avatar
BigAppleBucky is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Long Island
Posts: 2,370
Maybe the real problem is that the current group of US cops lacks toughness. In this video, a Russian cop disarms a guy trying to hit him with a shovel. I suspect way too many American cops would have simply shot the guy in orange.

Some of the comments say it was staged. I have no idea. Maybe it was.
  #667  
Old 01-14-2015, 06:33 AM
SciFiSam is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Beffnal Green innit
Posts: 8,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
Reasonable and perhaps prudent, absolutely. It's not reasonable for an officer to open fire based on an assumption, though.
It's only reasonable because of the gun laws in the US. There are arguments for those gun laws, and I think some of them are valid, and also I recognise that "they're taking away our guns" is basically a flashpoint for "the govt is going to take away ALL our rights," for some people.

But police in the UK wouldn't be justified in assuming someone has a gun because the odds are they won't. You can legally own some types of shotgun and rifle, so there have been killings involving those weapons, but they're not the sort of thing you can hide in your jacket and then pull out.

So the police assuming someone has a gun is a necessary outcome of allowing nearly anyone to own a gun, so much so that even if you weren't allowed to own a gun it'd be pretty easy to take one from someone who was.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigAppleBucky View Post
Cops caught lying

Cops tried to suppress the dash cam video, but it came out and saved the victim.

How many times are people falsely arrested and not saved by videos? Scary thought.

Last one. Merry Christmas.
I like how they kept saying "stop resisting arrest" as if saying that would make it all OK for the dashcam, like an older brother saying "stop hitting yourself."

The video thing also makes me think that "why would someone be holding out a mobile phone?", as brought up by someone else in this thread, has an obvious answer.
  #668  
Old 01-16-2015, 12:54 PM
BigAppleBucky's Avatar
BigAppleBucky is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Long Island
Posts: 2,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
I searched, not sure if this case has been discussed here. I didn't know about it until I read it on NPR. James Boyd was a mentally ill homeless man who was illegally camping last March. He was shot and killed by police after being hit with a flashbang grenade and not subsequently dropping the pocket knives he was holding. The altercation was caught on one of the officer's helmet cams. They've just been charged with murder.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/...-2014-shooting
Same group of cops. One of 'em shoots an undercover officer multiple times.
Albuquerque PD

Quote:
In the aftermath of the shooting, the car doors where Bailey and Vester were sitting were open, but police haven’t released details about any perceived threat or why the lieutenant opened fire. The complaint makes no mention of the suspects having a gun at the scene.

The Albuquerque Police Department has been under scrutiny from the Justice Department for the high number of police shootings of unarmed suspects, and using excessive force.
One wonders if they're getting their stories straight before giving out a narrative.
  #669  
Old 01-16-2015, 01:40 PM
PastTense is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,868
Quote:
Investigators say a former Colorado police officer shot and killed a man in the back after stopping him on the street and following him to his home.

James Ashby has been charged with second-degree murder in the October shooting death of 27-year-old Jack Jacquez in the rural community of Rocky Ford.
http://www.seattlepi.com/news/crime/...in-6020415.php

Court documents:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bzc...ew?usp=sharing
  #670  
Old 01-16-2015, 02:54 PM
monstro is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 20,938
Brooklyn police officers investigated for planting guns
  #671  
Old 01-17-2015, 03:44 PM
Chefguy's Avatar
Chefguy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Portlandia
Posts: 42,837
This could be part of the problem. Florida officers using mug shots of blacks for target practice.
  #672  
Old 01-17-2015, 05:16 PM
get lives is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...I saw that video a while ago, and my mouth just dropped in disbelief. I see no compelling reason why the police had to open fire here. I'm glad it is going to trial, but now the police are going after the DA.
A DA found some integrity? I'm suspicious. What's her angle?
  #673  
Old 01-17-2015, 05:59 PM
monstro is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 20,938
Cops admit to beating up the wrong black guy.
  #674  
Old 01-17-2015, 06:29 PM
Baal Houtham is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Leaky Heart of America
Posts: 2,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigAppleBucky View Post
I searched "Iowa" in this thread and it came back negative - so SIAP.

White University of Iowa student get busted. Cop thought, however, that he was Hispanic. Cops lies shown by their own dash cam.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaREYiWMM9c

No "near miss";
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSg-6tWUI54

Gets abused even though his hands are on his head and he repeated screamed so:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ebrxd4qROd0


Here's his Q&A from the comment section of the video. (I hope this extensive quote does not violate any rule here. It's not from a published source.)

1) Q: Did you edit the video in any way?
A: No. The video is presented exactly as it was given to me. Absolutely nothing is cut from the beginning of the video and it only ends when I am in handcuffs.

2) Q: It's not obvious that you didn't nearly get hit by the car in the video since the part isn't visible on the screen. Are you sure you didn't get hit by a car?
A: We've got the interior camera from the police car which faces to the rear. I was absolutely not almost hit by a car. Here's a link to that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSg-6...

[...]
.

FWIW I watched the student's presentation of the police cam and thought the officer came off much better than the student. Based on the video I would have guessed that the guy was intoxicated and maybe mentally deficient. The cop seemed polite until he grew exasperated, he didn't seem bullying. If the student was as oblivious as his taped responses make him seem, i can totally believe a Campus Cop was worried about his safety.

The student walked away from the cop and the cop car, ignoring the cop telling him to stop many times. Then the student was talking like he was taking stimulants, talking compulsively, asking if he was free to go before the cop could establish anything like a dialog.

I haven't read anything else about the incident, or what injuries were sustained, but the student seemed pretty well separated from normal reality.
  #675  
Old 01-19-2015, 08:08 AM
Freudian Slit is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: New York
Posts: 22,322
Anyone hear about this one? This time it's the (black) police chief who got shot and the (white) civilian who did the shooting.

Quote:
Sentinel Police Chief Louis Ross was shot Thursday morning after he entered a house looking for the person who allegedly phoned in a bomb threat to a Head Start center, CNN affiliate KFOR reported.

Ross was shot by the man living in the house, KFOR said. The chief had just donned a protective vest, which is credited with saving his life, the OSBI said in a press release. His condition was not available Saturday night.

"The man who shot and wounded the Sentinel police chief will not be arrested at this time," the release said. "OSBI investigators have extensively interviewed the man. Facts surrounding the case lead agents to believe the man was unaware it was officers who made entry."
  #677  
Old 01-21-2015, 04:48 PM
you with the face is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,559
I shouldn't be opening up this thread any more, it's so upsetting. Anyone feel the same?
  #678  
Old 01-21-2015, 05:04 PM
Fotheringay-Phipps is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
Why did the police escalate this traffic stop so much that it resulted in one man's death?
I think it had to do with the fact that 1) the guy had a gun in his car, 2) he did not follow instructions, and 3) he was personally known to the cops to be a career criminal. Not a good combination if you're hoping for restraint by the cops.

Last edited by Fotheringay-Phipps; 01-21-2015 at 05:04 PM.
  #679  
Old 01-22-2015, 11:44 AM
Stuffy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: the Big Valley
Posts: 4,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by you with the face View Post
I shouldn't be opening up this thread any more, it's so upsetting. Anyone feel the same?
All the time, and yet I can't seem to stop.
  #680  
Old 01-22-2015, 12:52 PM
Drunky Smurf is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Smurf Village.
Posts: 11,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
Why did the police escalate this traffic stop so much that it resulted in one man's death?
1. The police didn't escalate it.

2. When the police tell you not to move you don't move.

What do you think the cop thinks when they have a gun pointed at you and they tell you not to move and then you get out of the car, "Oh this nice man must be getting out to do some yoga and not to hurt me even though I know they have one gun that I already took away so there is no way in the world they might have another, no, he's getting out to stretch and do some yoga."?
  #681  
Old 01-22-2015, 01:09 PM
Tapioca Dextrin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Staring blankly at my GPS
Posts: 11,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drunky Smurf View Post

What do you think the cop thinks when they have a gun pointed at you and they tell you not to move and then you get out of the car,
What was the guy in the car supposed to do? Stay still or get out of the car?

Stay still? Get murdered

Get out of the car? Killed

Did you even watch the video? The cop was screaming that he was about to kill the dude in the car. He was completely hysterical. He wound himself so tight that the easiest thing he could do was shoot someone dead.
  #682  
Old 01-22-2015, 01:29 PM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 40,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tapioca Dextrin View Post
What was the guy in the car supposed to do? Stay still or get out of the car?

Stay still? Get murdered

Get out of the car? Killed
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raising Arizona
Robbers: Everybody FREEZE! Drop to the floor!

None of the customers move.

Old Customer: Make up yer mind, young feller. If I freeze, I cain't rightly drop to the floor. Whereas, if I drop, I'll be in motion!
Regards,
Shodan
  #683  
Old 01-22-2015, 01:43 PM
Fotheringay-Phipps is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tapioca Dextrin View Post
What was the guy in the car supposed to do? Stay still or get out of the car?

Stay still? Get murdered

Get out of the car? Killed

Did you even watch the video? The cop was screaming that he was about to kill the dude in the car. He was completely hysterical. He wound himself so tight that the easiest thing he could do was shoot someone dead.
I saw the video. The cop kept repeating not to move, to keep still and if he reached for something he would be shot. It was pretty obvious that the thing to do was to stay put with hands empty and visible. But the guy took it upon himself to get out of the car, and got shot.

I suppose you must be referring to the early part of the stop where the cop tells the other cop that "we're going to have to get him out of the car", having spotted the gun. But he did not at any point instruct the guy to get out and was pretty emphatic about telling him not to move.

As above, this guy was known to the cops, had a gun in his car at the time, and got out of the car in violation of cop's orders at very close proximity. I'm not an expert in police procedures, but in light of all of the above, it does not look like a problematic shooting from my lay vantage point.
  #684  
Old 01-22-2015, 01:50 PM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 5,205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fotheringay-Phipps View Post
As above, this guy was known to the cops, had a gun in his car at the time, and got out of the car in violation of cop's orders at very close proximity. I'm not an expert in police procedures, but in light of all of the above, it does not look like a problematic shooting from my lay vantage point.
Nitpick -- was it his gun? His car? He was a passenger, after all. And the gun was removed prior to the shooting, so it's not like they were worried he'd reach for that weapon. The rest of what you say is true, but I missed the part where the cop had reason to fear for his life. I also watched the video, and he mostly just sits there being non-compliant, and then gets out of the car slowly with his hands up, against the officer's wishes. Someone not known to have a weapon getting out of a vehicle slowly with his hands up does not equate to a deadly threat. Unless we're allowing cops to shoot unarmed non-threatening people now simply for not following directions.
  #685  
Old 01-22-2015, 02:00 PM
Fotheringay-Phipps is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
Nitpick -- was it his gun? His car? He was a passenger, after all. And the gun was removed prior to the shooting, so it's not like they were worried he'd reach for that weapon.
These types of nitpicks are more appropriate for a criminal law case than for a street situation. It's very reasonable to assume that where there's one gun there might be two guns.

Quote:
Someone not known to have a weapon getting out of a vehicle slowly with his hands up does not equate to a deadly threat. Unless we're allowing cops to shoot unarmed non-threatening people now simply for not following directions.
I disagree with this. I think a known criminal coming out of a car which contained at least one gun and contra explicit orders presents a very real threat. It's not at all comparable to "not following directions" when those directions are to walk on this side of the street and not that side.
  #686  
Old 01-22-2015, 02:07 PM
Typo Negative's Avatar
Typo Negative is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 7th Level of Hell, Ca
Posts: 18,100
Saw this on The Nightly Show.

http://www.bet.com/news/national/201...-practice.html

Quote:
The North Miami Beach Police Department has been using the faces of African-American men as target practice at a local gun range
Seriously? What the fucking hell?? Nobody in the PD thought this was a bad idea? If not from a humanity perspective, at least from a PR Nightmare perspective? No one thought "If this gets out, we're gonna look really bad, so maybe we shouldn't do it"? This was a shared range!!

Quote:
North Miami Beach police chief J. Scott Dennis says his officers should have used better judgment, but that they will not face any disciplinary action.
At the very least, the officers should do some community service, maybe some sensitivity training.....maybe CAT scans?
  #687  
Old 01-22-2015, 02:12 PM
Fotheringay-Phipps is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11,978
BTW, WRT my references to Reid being a known criminal, here's the AP:
Quote:
Reid, 36, spent about 13 years in prison for shooting at three state troopers when he was a teenager. And Days knew who he was; Days was among the arresting officers last year when Reid was charged with several crimes, including drug possession and obstruction.
That's why he calls him "Jermane" in the video - he knew him. And he probably knew he had been arrested for shooting at some cops too. It would be understandable if he judged the threat from this guy, in this situation, to be quite high.

Last edited by Fotheringay-Phipps; 01-22-2015 at 02:14 PM.
  #688  
Old 01-22-2015, 04:31 PM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 5,205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fotheringay-Phipps View Post
It would be understandable if he judged the threat from this guy, in this situation, to be quite high.
Ah, yes, a high threat for sure, worthy of much caution. But an imminent deadly threat? Isn't that the bar for self defense?

eta: My apologies for using the phrase "non-threatening" if that's what caused confusion. In the previous sentence I'd specified a deadly threat, but I thought "non-deadly-threatening" was too clunky. My point is, I'm not sure that the officer had any reasonable reason to believe that his life was in imminent danger at the moment he pulled the trigger.

Last edited by steronz; 01-22-2015 at 04:34 PM.
  #689  
Old 01-22-2015, 04:43 PM
Fotheringay-Phipps is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
Ah, yes, a high threat for sure, worthy of much caution. But an imminent deadly threat? Isn't that the bar for self defense?
I don't see the difference in this case. To the extent that there was a threat at all it was an imminent deadly one. It's not like the guy was possibly going to come back later with brass knuckles. The question was whether he was getting out of the car against orders because he had more than one gun on hand and intended to shoot the cop on the spot. I think that was a very reasonable assumption, given the facts described above. YMMV.
  #690  
Old 01-22-2015, 04:57 PM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 5,205
Yeah, I'm flabbergasted that you watched the video and you still think that's a reasonable assumption.
  #691  
Old 01-22-2015, 05:00 PM
Fotheringay-Phipps is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11,978
Well like I say, it's a lay perspective, and it's possible someone with actual training and experience would look at is as less dangerous (or more so).

I know in general cops get very nervous about people coming out of cars, even in routine traffic stops without any guns or criminal backgrounds etc. and all the more so in cases like this. (In NJ and other states, tinted driver and passenger windows are banned because cops need to be able to see clearly into cars that they're approaching.)

In any event, that's how I see it, FWIW.
  #692  
Old 01-23-2015, 07:35 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 20,174
I'm going to have to stop clicking on the YouTubes. One click leads to another and anger just increases. At least some incidents don't involve guns or tasering...

In this incident a woman was assaulted by a LEO, and handcuffed in a courtroom when she then complained. The judge ignored the woman and the handcuffing, preferring to play with the victim's toddler, who of course must be taken into custody.
  #693  
Old 01-23-2015, 10:29 AM
CannyDan's Avatar
CannyDan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: East coast of Florida
Posts: 2,764
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fotheringay-Phipps View Post
Well like I say, it's a lay perspective, and it's possible someone with actual training and experience would look at is as less dangerous (or more so).

I know in general cops get very nervous about people coming out of cars, even in routine traffic stops without any guns or criminal backgrounds etc. and all the more so in cases like this. (In NJ and other states, tinted driver and passenger windows are banned because cops need to be able to see clearly into cars that they're approaching.)

In any event, that's how I see it, FWIW.
Emphasis mine.

So apparently getting out of a car against instructions, with your empty hands held out in front of you, is a shooting offense now. Even when a cop has just pulled the door open.

This seems to be the new default. Do anything that makes a cop nervous -- and the list of things that make cops nervous increases daily -- and you stand a good chance of being shot. Truth to tell, I'm not really comfortable with that state of affairs.

Oh, I know it's a tough and dangerous job, and all every cop wants is to be able to go home after shift to a loving family, yadda yadda. But hey buckaroo, you sought it out and signed up for it. You've trained in it, and are supposed to be a professional. Professional in what? Well, in "protect and serve", if the motto I see paraphrased in virtually every police station is to be believed. And that means you have accepted some risk. Not unlimited risk, I don't expect you to dive in and take a bullet for me. But I do expect you to exercise some judgment, indeed even some restraint, in the performance of your duties.

In this particular case, it seems that alternate means of handling the threat could have resulted in zero fatalities. The cops were hot, and placed themselves so close to the subjects as to lose all perspective -- and all opportunity for flexibility. Once close approach revealed a gun, why couldn't the cops back off and cover the miscreants from a distance, like the cover of their patrol car doors? Go through the usual felony stop scenario: "Hold your hands out the window; get out of the car and face away from me; back up towards my voice..." Instead, the cop was so close that when the offender disobeyed orders and got out, he loomed over the cop, and even though his hands were empty, the cop was obviously afraid. Afraid enough to kill.

I'm not arguing the call if it is restricted to that tiny instant in time. Suspect looms, self defense is at least arguably reasonable. But it didn't need to get to that point. A well trained police force and a greater emphasis on that "protect and serve" thingy should have prevented this outcome.
  #694  
Old 01-23-2015, 12:33 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 27,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fotheringay-Phipps View Post
BTW, WRT my references to Reid being a known criminal, here's the AP:That's why he calls him "Jermane" in the video - he knew him.
Do you have a cite that backs up your assertion; that it was no other reason that he called him "Jermane"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fotheringay-Phipps View Post
And he probably knew he had been arrested for shooting at some cops too.
"Probably"? Do you have a cite for your assumption, or is it just your assumption, made totally without evidence here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fotheringay-Phipps View Post
It would be understandable if he judged the threat from this guy, in this situation, to be quite high.
Another assumption from you.

Your whole post is nothing but you making assumptions in an attempt to justify an outcome that you already agreed with.
  #695  
Old 01-23-2015, 12:51 PM
Fotheringay-Phipps is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
Your whole post is nothing but you making assumptions in an attempt to justify an outcome that you already agreed with.
Do you have a cite for this or is it your assumption, made totally without evidence here?

Let's go to the quarry and throw stuff down there!
  #696  
Old 01-23-2015, 01:55 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 27,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fotheringay-Phipps View Post
Do you have a cite for this or is it your assumption, made totally without evidence here?

Let's go to the quarry and throw stuff down there!
My cite is your post, as is evident from anyone reading the two posts, or from just reading my post which rebuts yours.

So no cites? You admit that you are just making stuff up, then? Glad to see you come clean.

You're entitled to your opinion, but aren't entitled to make up things and then present them as facts. If you have cites, please provide them.
  #697  
Old 01-23-2015, 02:09 PM
Fotheringay-Phipps is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11,978
You know what's even more fun? Let's go to the bottom of the quarry and throw stuff up from there. (You go first.)

Last edited by Fotheringay-Phipps; 01-23-2015 at 02:09 PM.
  #698  
Old 01-23-2015, 02:53 PM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 40,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
Do you have a cite that backs up your assertion; that it was no other reason that he called him "Jermane"?
You want a cite that the arresting officer called him by his name other than because he knew who he was? Why?

We know from the link that Days did know who Reid was, because he had arrested him before. That's what it says. What I would like to know is, what the fuck difference would it make if he knew it because Reid had it tattooed on his forehead, or a random guess?

I know from past posts that you are not shy about posting in such a way as to make yourself look like a complete idiot. I am curious, however, as to what you think you can establish with this quibble about how the officer knew what his name was. Other than signalling that you are, in fact, not quite as intelligent as some forms of plant life.

OK, I recognize that it is a fairly unimaginative form of trolling, but it might be amusing to hear whatever it is that pint of dysentery-infested sewage atop your brain stem has come up with as an excuse.

Regards,
Shodan
  #699  
Old 01-23-2015, 04:05 PM
get lives is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post

OK, I recognize that it is a fairly unimaginative form of trolling, but it might be amusing to hear whatever it is that pint of dysentery-infested sewage atop your brain stem has come up with as an excuse.

Regards,
Shodan
Is this how how you talk to people at your church on Sunday? If not, would you be embarrassed if they found out you treat people this way? If so, are you a hypocrite? Or are you simply a non-believer who attends for other reasons?

It sure shocked me when you admitted you attend church. I mean, surely you realize that's going to come as a surprise to people here. LOL

Last edited by get lives; 01-23-2015 at 04:06 PM. Reason: Typo
  #700  
Old 01-23-2015, 04:15 PM
Fotheringay-Phipps is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11,978
Hey, you got to let it out sometime, you know ...
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:53 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017