Well said. America is the richest, most powerful nation that has ever existed. How pathetic that its citizens tolerate a choice between servile cringing and justifiable homicide. Despicable.
What IS scary is how much this kind of abuse may have happened before the advent of dash cams.
They are not the same. And I don’t just mean the words and order are not exactly the same.
I completely agree. I don’t want to hear a discussion on what he could have don’t differently, because I don’t want people in his position to behave differently. I want only the cop to change his behavior.
Same words, different order. Said the same thing.
Explain how those two sentences have different meaning. Perhaps in one, you meant ‘he’ the cop, or did you mean ‘he’ the victim.
re: The victim’s behavior, or error in judgment, as some here have called it. It is equally true and equally useful to observe that the guy would have been less likely to be shot if he had gone to a different gas station, or left work five minutes earlier, or been sick that day.
All of those behaviors would have reduced the likelihood of him being shot by this cop. None of them are relevant to the problem, nor is the fact that he complied without announcing each move.
Because the problem here was not this guy. The problem was the cop who shot him.
Bolding mine.
Another well said from me.
I would have done the same thing. “Huh, cop car pulled up, wonder what is going on”. “Get my license? Sure.” “GET OUT OF THE CAR” I’d do it. “I’m getting shot at now, this is not good. I’ll raise my hands and back away”. Get shot at two more times anyway.
I do have some empathy for the Police Officer. Something is surely broken in him.
As much as I completely disagree with your assessment of what happened… I think I have a new sig line, if I may.
I may use it at weddings. 
I think billfish678 is trying to draw the same distinction that a couple of other posters have drawn: ‘the victim’s actions contributed to the situation’ vs. ‘the victim is partly responsible.’ The sentences he wrote don’t do that. They’re the same ideas expressed in slightly different words.
Thanks for trying to decode that.
I think though, there is a clearer division between those that would defend the cop, and those that think he was completely out of line. The subtlety of ‘difference’ in billfish678’s post, is way, way to fine.
The only difference is that one is in the active voice and one is in the passive. They are semantically identical statements.
But is anyone actually defending the cop? I don’t think anyone in this thread has said that he does not deserve to be fired and prosecuted… the only difference is that some people are suggesting he might have PTSD, and some people are saying that there were some reasons why the situation might have looked more dangerous than it seems to most of us BUT that that did not justify his response.
If anyone is interested in moving beyond race, I found this to provide meaningful background about the way modern police are trained to approach traffic stops:
The two sentences imply two different things. Or you can infer what the writer had in mind when they wrote either sentence. Or something along those lines.
The first sentence implies the victim was at fault.
The second sentence implies there was reason the cop shot the victim, besides being an asshole cop.
Some folks seem to think there is some sort of conservation of blame. Lessening the blame on the cop does not increase the blame of the victim.
Another thing. Both those sentences, despite the differences, are either both true or both false. Or if you want to double down on your probabilities you could say they are both equally likely to be true or false.
Some folks here also seem to be doing the following. They disagree that the victims movement was too fast. One can certainly argue that. But if one does take that position that does not automatically make the logic of there is a difference between “blaming the victim” and excusing the cop invalid.
I’ll go even further now. I don’t think the cop should go to jail (under the assumption that no further facts come out that this cop was racist or power hunger or murderous or just generally a criminal level asshole).
It would be easier to forgive the human errors of LEOs and military if we didn’t have a warrior worshipping society that created so many fanbois that defended almost every cop almost every time.
Its not like this is the only time a cops shot and innocent black man. If it were, we could call it an aberration but I suspect that cops shoot proportionally more innocent black men than innocent white men.
This guy wasn’t a dirty cop and I don’t see any reason to think this guy is a racist but if we aren’t going to acknowledge that cops are humans subject to the same human flaws as everyone else, its really hard to take claims of isolated error seriously when there are so many isolated errors.
OK. I generally agree with you with a caveat. Or two.
The police officer was in a complete position of power here. They generally should be. IF he felt he was in danger by pulling a person over for not wearing his seatbelt (Jones said he was and took it off at the gas station), the LEO should have handled it completely differently.
It bugs me. Jones could have completely been me. I normally react pretty darn fast. I’m the guy that catches a spoon pushed off the table before it hits the floor. Jones actions and movement where simple compliance.
With that said, I completely understand the police officer is just a person. People can react badly. BUT, his training and day to day experience should be enough to prevent him from shooting an unarmed man that was compiling with his orders.
As I said, I do feel sorry for the officer too. And I hate the idea of making an example of consequence by sending people to jail. That’s not the way it’s supposed to work IMHO. I will say that the officer should never work again as a LEO, or ever carry a gun again.
That article is definitely worth a read. It does a good job of discussing the culture within police forces that contributes to the growing police willingness to use force when it isn’t really necessary, and to approach every single encounter with the expectation that it will turn deadly.
I still think that officers like Groubert need to go to prison, because while we as a society need to work on creating better police forces, we also need to hold cops accountable when they do shit like this.
Also, i don’t think that this conversation needs to move “beyond race,” as you suggested in your post. I think that the article’s argument about the culture of policing needs to be added to the racial issue. That is, police might generally be more prone to shoot more quickly because of their training, but they also seem to do this disproportionately in cases where the civilian is black.
There is this argument that cops need to always be in control of the situation so that they may “return home at the end of the shift.” And the method we are increasingly seeing is to increase the fear level to keep the suspect in a subservient mode. Oh those brave domestic terrorists in blue! Dutifully protecting and serving fear to the community!
If the gentleman in question had read The Straight Dope he would know; more than one man in ten does not keep his wallet in his gun pocket. The Cop told the dude to do a thing and he just cold did it, you know, like a white person, so of course he shot him. Terrified people do unexpected things.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics notes that there were approximately 17.7 million police stops in 2011, let’s call it 18M. Officer magazine states that there were 12 firearm deaths among Law Enforcement Officers that same year and 15 deaths due to ambush, some of which may have involved a firearm. Let’s call that 25 since math is hard. Scribble, scribble, double, double, shift the decimal, two to the left–six to the right. The odds that this cop was going to be shot to death is one in 720,000. Or close to that, as I said math…
This cop had a more reasonable expectation to be hit by lighting, in February, in a basement, while drawing a royal flush. Speaking as the equipment manager for the math team, Deputy Fife doesn’t need a gun, he needs a calculator.
As for SeñorBeef, you claim to be able to comport yourself calmly and coolly so as to better communicate your actions and intentions, under stress. If you cannot do this on a message board, why should I believe you could do so while terrified? If I cannot believe you are capable of what you claim, why should I believe anything else you have written here?
Of course it’s hard to get data on how often the police kill people. But it’s hard to believe people of all races face equal risk when dealing with the authorities when the Cliven Bundy crew aims guns at federal marshals or tons of Tea Party protestors carry guns to political events and nobody get hurt, and guys like Levar Jones or John Crawford or Michael Brown get treated like lethal threats when they aren’t.
This is the complaint some of us have made over and over again in threads about people who have been shot by police even though they weren’t unarmed or not mentally competent or simply not dangerous.
Yabut…see, the thing is, the advice of locking your doors, or being aware of your surroundings is predicated on the fact that there are shitty people in this world who will rape or rob you. And you can’t change the fact that there are shitty people. The best you can do is protect yourself as well as possible from the shitty people doing shitty things to you.
But in this situation, we’re not talking about shitty people in general. We’re talking about cops (ie trained professionals in law enforcement). The thing is, it’s entirely possible to get rid of all shitty cops. So when you say something to the effect of “it’s just common sense not to give a shitty cop a reason to shoot you,” my response is “yeah…but why is the cop shitty? And why do all my interactions with police officers have to be under the assumption that this particular police officer is shitty and will shoot me if I step out of line?”