Controversial encounters between law-enforcement and civilians - the omnibus thread

When one thinks of a police state, one thinks of governments unconstitutionally controlling the population through police. The USA, however, has redefined the term, for in the USA the police shoot people simply because it was what they do – a much more pure example of a police state.

You know, if the USA stopped worshiping guns, dumped the second amendment, and joined the rest of the first world by instituting real gun control, then eventually the police would not have to be trained to shoot first and make excuses later, and instead could serve and protect the public rather than kill the public.

It’s rather ironic that the USA keeps Trumpeting “Freedom”, when in fact it is a murderous police state when compared against the first world.

Unfortunately, police work does seem to attract some deficient personalities.

I only browse these threads and happened to note this exchange just because it was at the top of the page.

The distinction between “charges not filed” and “charges filed but dropped” is, at a legitimate practical level, of only minor importance. To correct this slight error, e.g. with a short simple sentence as monstro demonstrates, would have been a useful contribution. To instead write “that isn’t what the article says AT ALL” without even identifying the error is the act of a pissant pedant with a stick stuck up your rectum so far you conflate defecation with speech.

Hope this helps.

No; you’re wrong. There’s a world of difference between “charges filed and 2 trials held” and “charges not filed”, which is what happened here.

The fact that the two of you can only fall to trying to critique the way I critiqued monstro is pathetic. Get over it: she fucked up and I called her on it so she could correct herself. Then she chose not to review her cite or her post. Her choices.

If she had only been clear and/or known what the hell she was talking about, we wouldn’t have to go thru this idiotic hijack at all.

I reckon that should a black person try to defend himself from a policeman that standard is going to be pretty fucking high.

Police union president says that the bullet that struck the North Miami therapist was intended to protect him.

How he can say this when 1) the therapist was hand-cuffed and detained right after the shooting, 2) the scary autistic guy he was presumably being protected against wasn’t treated in a similar fashion, and 3) the cop admitted he didn’t know why he shot at him??

And lemme get something else straight. The president seems to think it’s not fucked up at all that the officer was aiming for the autistic dude. If he had shot that autistic dude, does he really think people would be MORE sympathetic and understanding? Maybe he’s right, but that’s fucked up.

Situations like this scare me. If someone wants to take you out of this world, all they have to do is call the police when you’re in your front yard and claim that you’ve got a gun, looking menacing. Then the executioners in blue will be dispatched, your obituary out the next day.

At some point we as a nation need to step up and say we’re not OK with extra-judicial killings by police over matters that do not even remotely approach capital crimes.

I’m perfectly content to frame this as a Constitutional Crisis.

And it took the police union two days to come up with this explanation. 48 hours to come up with a lame piece of bullshit like that. If it weren’t so obvious that they made that shit up I’d say you can’t make this shit up.

I don’t for one second see how anyone can keep a straight face while passing out the bullshit that guy did. “Trying to safe his life.” Yeah, he was so obviously in danger from a toy truck.

Also, saying that the cop may not have been in position to know what was going on doesn’t help either. I guess that when cops can’t hear what someone is saying they frequently fire a shot to get attention. BANG “Speak up!”

nm

nm

EDIT: something funny going on

monstro’s link isn’t working for me, so I’m trying to post one that works. Trying again.

I agree with monstro that the explanation is absolutely ridiculous, and so is the officer’s statement. Why can’t a police officer just say “I screwed up”? I understand people make mistakes, but why don’t the cops that make mistakes have the honor and decency to admit them? Shame on them (cops who shoot people by mistake without admitting it and apologizing).

I guess that does explain why cops fire 5 or 6 times. They are such bad aims that they can’t even hit what they are aiming at.

Well, 20 years ago when I lived 2 miles from a range, I spent a lot of time shooting next to both cops and the occasional gang member.

I’m no marksman, sniper or top shot, but I was better than every goddamned one of them and it was really an eye opener. I trust myself more with a gun than I do 99% of the cops.

Probably, unfortunately. But someone needing to defend themselves from a policeman is a rare occurrence, as when they are detaining you or arresting you you’re required to go along with it. Whether or not it’s a legitimate arrest.

Cops… honor and decency… cops, honor and decency… one of these is not like the other, one of these things just doesn’t belong…

I recall a police shooting in front of the Empire State Building ten, or so, years ago. Two cops killed a dangerous murderer who had a gun and was threatening to do more killing. So far so good. But they wounded nine other people - innocent people - in the process. Panic firing, I suppose. I’d blame that on under-training.

This is the police equivalent to nuking them from orbit, just to be sure.

What I (and, I’m sure, others) do realize is that you’re an apologist for unprovoked police violence against minorities.