Kentucky State Police training documents urges cadets to be “ruthless killer[s]” and quotes Adolf Hitler advocating violence.
This is, by the way, a student production put out by a Louisville high school. I am beyond impressed with their journalism.
Situations like this lend credence to calls to defund the police. Starting over might be the only way.
Defund the Schutzstaffel!
This one comes from Madison, Wisconsin and is kind of unusual:
This pilot has crashed 3 jetliners, but we should not fire him before his next crash happens.
Yeah, but did you see the way the ground was looking at him?
What did you expect him to do? He was in fear for his life.
Did anyone besides Bo bother reading the article? The cop had three shootings mentioned.
Shooting #1, the guy was armed with a sword. No charges.
Shooting #2, the guy was sitting in a parked car in a city park after hours. Had a gun sitting next to him. No charges, but I agree that one could be sketchy.
Shooting #3, the guy was himself armed with a handgun, was shooting back at the officer during a foot chase, and didn’t drop the pistol. Maybe because Genius shot himself in the arm while trying to hit the cop. No charges.
On the facts as given in the article—and I agree with Bo, it’s not a set of facts you see every day—what would the City of Madison have preferred happened in those three cases? Get cut up a bit with that sword before shooting? Let Car Guy grab the gun first?
I’m just bemused. It doesn’t look like—again, from the facts given in the article—that this officer did anything wrong. On the contrary, Officer Mensah appears to be the kind of diligent officer you would want on your police force. Certainly, my opinion could change with additional evidence not mentioned.
Funny, how he can’t be punished for any future thing he might do, yet you make it sound like he killed this guy for something he may have done in the future.
No, it’s really only heartbreaking in regards to the fact the young man was killed.
I can’t believe I have to explain this to people, but here goes. Yes, if you have an exposed weapon, and a cop tells you to get away from it, or don’t touch it, and you persist in disobeying their lawful commands, s/he can kill you over something you might do. The question is, “Is there an imminent threat of unlawful deadly force?” Depending on where the weapon is, the previous actions of the person threatening unlawful deadly force, and other things that make up the totality of the circumstances, there can be an imminent threat towards that officer without the weapon being pointed at the officer, or even in the actor’s hand.
S/He doesn’t have to wait for you to grab it and point it at the officer, in order for the officer to stop that imminent threat with deadly force… Though if the actor did point the weapon at the officer, that would make it easier for the officer to articulate an imminent threat of deadly force.
Somewhere between a guy eating his lunch in his car, weapon all the way across the cabin in the passenger door, and the guy seat belted in the drivers seat. (I.e., the weapon is visible, but not readily reachable), and the guy firing the weapon at the officer, is the line where an reasonably objective person would determine there was an imminent deadly threat. I don’t know where that line was in this shooting, which is why I said it could be sketchy.
Where have you gone, Officer Friendly?
A nation turns its lonely eyes to you
Ooo ooo ooo.
What’s that you say, Mrs. Robinson?
“Officer Friendly has left and gone away”
Hey hey hey
You’re making “He said he saw a gun in the car and thought Anderson was reaching for it so he opened fire” do a LOT of work to get to that statement. Given other statements by those who have viewed the video and the fact that police MOVED THE GUN before investigators arrived makes it seem just a little bit fishy.
In this case, the officer said he thought he saw the man reaching for the gun. This is more than slightly problematic. And, what else do we have to go on? Are there other reliable (i.e., non-police) witnesses? Because, it has come to the point where we simply cannot trust what the police say happened (I mean, it appears that lying and faking evidence has been pervasive for a very long time, but we used to be able to trust them because they were able to hide their lies better).
I started a thread in Elections, because this is the worst election-suppression violence I’ve seen in my lifetime, but cops in North Carolina attacked a voting march today, in a Republican county that Democrats have been trying to flip:
Unless some astonishing facts come out, there are a lot of cops that should face prison time over this.
They truly are little more than terrorists with badges.
So much for proportionality. Unless they were being violent, pepper spray is not an acceptable response to blocking traffic.
I’m confused. I though pepper spray/tear gas was a proportional response to an unruly mob refusing to obey legal orders to disperse and clear the area.
Please tell, what methods would you recommend to restore order? Forget, for the sake of argument, that you consider one side to be Democrats and the other Republicans (which, I might point out, is not a given).
Did the protesters get tears on their nice police uniforms after getting pepper sprayed? THAT’S ASSAULT!