# Controversial encounters between law-enforcement and civilians - the omnibus thread **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 10, 2014, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942 "2014-10-10T07:35:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 658
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13142 "2018-04-13T00:47:38Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Sorry, wrong answer. Only “Yes, I was positive it was a gun” is a correct answer. Still waiting for what is wrong with a cop being sure a suspect has a gun before shooting said suspect. ---
**Author:** ![mikecurtis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mikecurtis/32/3284_2.png) [@mikecurtis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mikecurtis)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13143 "2018-04-13T03:04:51Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > Why are you arguing with a slime bag troll? No good can come of that. > . . . You may think he’s a troll. But he is stating a belief that many (most?) in the US still hold. Indeed it’s the belief that we all were taught growing up. That the police are the good guys, they may not be perfect but they deserve our respect and support. And they further believe that what we are trying to do with all this “monday morning quarterbacking” is to try and destroy the very institution charged with keeping us safe. And if we succeed, then no one will be safe. you may not think **Steophan** deserves to be taken seriously, but I think the argument does. I may not agree with them but I am trying to help them undertand my point of view. mc ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 9:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13144 "2018-04-13T09:42:54Z")
> [@mikecurtis](#): > > you may not think **Steophan** deserves to be taken seriously, but I think the argument does. I may not agree with them but I am trying to help them undertand my point of view. I understand your position. You think people who defend themselves when they genuinely, and reasonably, believe they are about to be killed should be locked up if it turns out they were mistaken. Really, the question of whether it’s cops or not is something of a red herring, _everyone_ should have the right to defend themselves, the only relevance of them being cops is that you are sending them into danger on your behalf, and so it’s more immoral to want to weaken that right for them. ---
**Author:** ![madmonk28](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madmonk28/32/20811_2.png) [@madmonk28](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madmonk28)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13145 "2018-04-13T13:39:25Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > Why are you arguing with a slime bag troll? No good can come of that. > > He describes the police as the people we send out to protect us. But whom are they protecting? If not **all of us** , then they are little more than a hit squad for certain among us. Correction: racist slime bag troll. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13146 "2018-04-13T13:42:02Z")
> [@mikecurtis](#): > > If requiring a cop to be certain the use of deadly force is necessary makes some situations more dangerous for the cop, then do not send the cop into those situations. easy solution. “911, what’s your emergency?” “My ex-husband is trying to break into my house! He says he’s going to kill me, and he has a CCW permit! Send help!” “I’m sorry, miss, until you have actually seen the gun, we can’t send the police. Get back to us when he fires a few shots. Have a nice day!” Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13147 "2018-04-13T13:58:25Z")
> [@mikecurtis](#): > > He means (as do I) that if the cop thought there was a gun and killed someone because of it, then there had better be a gun “in fact.” That it’s not good enough to just feel the need for deadly force there has to be an actual need for the use of deadly force. Just saying “I thought he had a gun” is not good enough. The officer’s opinion or feeling or intuition is not justification for the use of deadly force. There has to be an actual, real, credible threat. > > mc Is [this the Elie Mystal](https://ethicsalarms.com/2016/12/09/the-ethics-meltdown-of-elie-mystal-continues/)you are talking about? > [@](#): > > “Black people lucky enough to get on a jury could use that power to acquit any person charged with a crime against white men and white male institutions. It’s not about the race of the defendant, but if the alleged victim is a white guy, or his bank, or his position, or his authority: we could acquit. Assault? Acquit. Burglary? Acquit. Insider trading? Acquit.Murder? … what the hell do you think is happening to black people out here? What the hell do you think we’re complaining about when your cops shoot us or choke us? Acquit. Don’t throw “murder” at me like it’s some kind of moral fault line where the risk of letting one go is too great. And [here](https://www.calibrepress.com/2018/01/a-more-reasonable-expectation/)is a fuller example of what he is further proposing - > [@](#): > > I would suggest a whole more radical standard than [the Graham Standard]. … I would suggest that they have to be, the cops have to be right in fact, which is something we usually do not apply to the law. … So if you shoot me because you think I have a gun I had best have a gun, and if I don’t have a gun your ass is going to jail. Because you were wrong. I don’t care if you really thought so. I don’t care if I was telling you I had a gun! If you are not right in fact then you have to go to jail. I think that would be a standard that would allow us to prosecute these police officers. … And I would say, ‘Fuck you, police officer!’ I’m sick of you. Screw you … So it appears that he agrees with mental midgets such as many in this thread - even if he shouts “I have a gun” and reaches into his pocket, and the police shoot him, those police should go to jail. An interesting standard, if by “interesting” one means “utterly moronic”. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13148 "2018-04-13T14:00:17Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > I understand your position. You think people who defend themselves when they genuinely, and reasonably, believe they are about to be killed should be locked up if it turns out they were mistaken. A jury should decide if their fear is genuine and reasonable. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13149 "2018-04-13T14:13:18Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > “911, what’s your emergency?” > > “My ex-husband is trying to break into my house! He says he’s going to kill me, and he has a CCW permit! Send help!” > > “I’m sorry, miss, until you have actually seen the gun, we can’t send the police. Get back to us when he fires a few shots. Have a nice day!” > > Regards, > Shodan Perhaps you can explain how this is related in any way to a cop making sure a person actually has a gun before killing them? ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13150 "2018-04-13T14:20:13Z")
> [@mikecurtis](#): > > You may think he’s a troll. But he is stating a belief that many (most?) in the US still hold. Indeed it’s the belief that we all were taught growing up. That the police are the good guys, they may not be perfect but they deserve our respect and support. And they further believe that what we are trying to do with all this “monday morning quarterbacking” is to try and destroy the very institution charged with keeping us safe. And if we succeed, then no one will be safe. > > you may not think **Steophan** deserves to be taken seriously, but I think the argument does. I may not agree with them but I am trying to help them undertand my point of view. > > mc > [@Steophan](#): > > I understand your position. You think people who defend themselves when they genuinely, and reasonably, believe they are about to be killed should be locked up if it turns out they were mistaken. Really, the question of whether it’s cops or not is something of a red herring, _everyone_ should have the right to defend themselves, the only relevance of them being cops is that you are sending them into danger on your behalf, and so it’s more immoral to want to weaken that right for them. Yeah, sounds like he is making a good faith effort to understand your position. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13151 "2018-04-13T14:32:07Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > You think people who defend themselves when they genuinely, and reasonably, believe they are about to be killed should be locked up if it turns out they were mistaken. So you agree that if people break into my house at night and I defend myself by killing them and later it turns out I was mistaken because they were a police raid, I shouldn’t be locked up? After all, I was genuinely and reasonably scared of being killed by intruders, but I was mistaken. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13152 "2018-04-13T14:48:12Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > “911, what’s your emergency?” > > “My ex-husband is trying to break into my house! He says he’s going to kill me, and he has a CCW permit! Send help!” > > “I’m sorry, miss, until you have actually seen the gun, we can’t send the police. Get back to us when he fires a few shots. Have a nice day!” > > Regards, > Shodan This would be _almost_ as bad as her calling 911, and the cops show up and shoot _ **her.** _ Which…actually happened. We have talked about it [in this very thread](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Justine_Damond). ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13153 "2018-04-13T14:51:47Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > A jury should decide if their fear is genuine and reasonable. If there’s good reason to think they were not, then yes - same as for anyone else accused of a crime. An accusation alone should not lead to a trial, there must be significant evidence and a realistic chance of conviction. Any shooting by the police should be investigated, but action should only be taken if there’s genuine evidence of a crime. Putting the evidence to a Grand Jury before there’s a trial would seem to me a good way of ensuring that it’s considered fairly. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13154 "2018-04-13T14:54:34Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > So you agree that if people break into my house at night and I defend myself by killing them and later it turns out I was mistaken because they were a police raid, I shouldn’t be locked up? After all, I was genuinely and reasonably scared of being killed by intruders, but I was mistaken. No, it’s not reasonable to assume the police are a threat. But, you know what? If it turns out that I’m wrong about that, and the case is treated as I’ve suggested cases with cops will be treated, then either the Grand Jury will fail to indict, or the trial jury will acquit. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13155 "2018-04-13T14:58:06Z")
> [@Typo\_Negative](#): > > Which…actually happened. We have talked about it [in this very thread](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Justine_Damond). Interesting that the only people objecting to body cameras after that incident are the police unions. _They_, rather than the majority of individual cops or the command structure, are what causes the majority of these problems. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13156 "2018-04-13T15:03:40Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Interesting that the only people objecting to body cameras after that incident are the police unions. _They_, rather than the majority of individual cops or the command structure, are what causes the majority of these problems. You think the police unions are the ones telling cops to turn off their cameras and mics when it looks like they have to go extra-legal on someone’s ass? Ghod you have got to be pretty damn stupid to think that we are stupid enough to buy that crap. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13157 "2018-04-13T15:06:50Z")
**Czarcasm** , much of the problem is that every time we think “nobody could be that stupid” you prove us wrong. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13158 "2018-04-13T15:08:06Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > **Czarcasm** , much of the problem is that every time we think “nobody could be that stupid” you prove us wrong. > > Regards, > Shodan Say hi to that mouse in your pocket for me, will ya? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13159 "2018-04-13T15:15:59Z")
**Steophan** , meet **Shodan**. **Shodan**. meet **Steophan**. Now take a good long look at each other, realize that the doofus you are facing is your primary supporter…and understand how fucking stupid your position must be if _this_ person is backing you up. 'nuff said. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13160 "2018-04-13T15:27:12Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > No, it’s not reasonable to assume the police are a threat. > > But, you know what? If it turns out that I’m wrong about that, and the case is treated as I’ve suggested cases with cops will be treated, then either the Grand Jury will fail to indict, or the trial jury will acquit. Didn’t you say this: > [@](#): > > You think people who defend themselves when they genuinely, and reasonably, believe they are about to be killed should be locked up if it turns out they were mistaken. Really, the question of whether it’s cops or not is something of a red herring, everyone should have the right to defend themselves So I guess you don’t mean what you say. Surprising. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/13161 "2018-04-13T16:25:15Z")
> [@Typo\_Negative](#): > > The case of the shooting of Redel Jones. August 12, 2015 > > [Redel Kentel Jones, 30 - The Homicide Report - Los Angeles Times](http://homicide.latimes.com/post/redel-kentel-jones/) > [Amid protests, panel finds that LAPD did not violate deadly force rules in shooting of black woman in South L.A.](http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-lapd-shooting-redel-jones-20160712-snap-story.html) > [LAPD report: Woman fatally shot last week had moved toward officer with knife](http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-lapd-shooting-20150819-story.html) > [https://www.laprogressive.com/redel-jones-shooting/](https://www.laprogressive.com/redel-jones-shooting/) > > Redel Jones was 30 yr old black woman. 2 LAPD officers, responding to a robbery call, were following Jones. 2 more came later. Jones was indeed the robber of a pharmacy, and did have a knife. This is not in dispute. Another thing that is not in dispute is that once again officers did not activate their body-cams. 4 officers, none activated their cameras. > > Here is the dispute. The police officers says that they were following Jones and issuing orders to her when she turned and moved toward the officers with the knife. > > An eye-witness says that Jones did not turn around and was shot as she was moving away from the officers. > > I bring this one up because it should be pretty easy to clear up the dispute, right? Right??? If she was moving towards the officers, the bullets would enter her body from the front. If she was running away from them, the bullets would have entered her body from the back. > > If you were a reporter, what would you do to get to the bottom of this? Hell, if you were an _investigator,_ what would you do get to the truth? > > You would get the autopsy report, wouldn’t you? You would ask the coroner "did the bullets enter her front or her back’? Kind of a standard thing for an autopsy. If she was shot in the front, the officers are telling the truth. If she was shot in the back, the witness is telling the truth. > > I linked 4 sites, read several more. LA Times and Daily News, both respected papers. No mention of autopsy report. _No mention that anyone had asked for one_. No mention that any reporter had made a call to the coroner. > > Or maybe my google-fu is weak. I don’t know if your google-fu is weak, but > [@](#): > > The memo also included statements from three other people who were in the alley. Two men told investigators they saw officers chase Jones and saw her turn or move toward police while holding the knife. > > Another witness, however, said she saw something else. The woman, who was interviewed by The Times after the shooting, told investigators she didn’t see anything in Jones’ hands when she was shot, and never saw her turn toward police. > > Prosecutors pointed to the broadcast from Ramirez, along with the video footage from the robbery and the knife found at the scene. > > “While there is a conflict between the witnesses’ opinions as to what occurred just prior to the officer involved shooting, we find the overall evidence is sufficient to conclude Jones was armed with a knife, turned and advanced toward Ramirez,” the memo said. [Cite](http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-redel-jones-shooting-20170606-story.html). So two of the three witnesses saw both Jones holding a knife, and her moving towards the police, and one who didn’t see the knife (which was recovered at the scene) or her moving towards the police. I found some [references](http://wavenewspapers.com/lapds-silence-angers-activists/)to activists complaining that the LAPD didn’t release the results of an autopsy soon enough, but apparently one was performed ([cite](http://da.lacounty.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/JSID_OIS_05_2017_Jones.pdf) - pdf). It might be an interesting exercise to predict whether the wounds were front-to-back, or back-to-front, before reading the cite. No fair peeking read the cite for yourself. Regards, Shodan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942.md?page=657) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942.md?page=659)