Wow, that’s a horrible idea. Exactly opposite of what “we the people” should demand from our government. The armed government enforcers are supposed to be able to shoot people at will with no accountability? What a surprise that the governor is a former prosecutor.
Citizens are not like police their powers differ. The power of citizen’s arrest is not even close to the police power.
You are not allowed to use deadly force (and guns in my state are always considered deadly force) to prevent a crime or enforce a law unless it is required to prevent violence. You generally can’t try to detain someone for dealing drugs and then pull gun when the alleged drug dealer resists your attempt to arrest them. A cop can. So you can’t hold a prostitute at gunpoint because you think she’s prostituting herself in front of your house no matter how irritable the alleged prostitute gets, a cop can.
Cops are allowed to detain you based on reasonable suspicion. A citizen also has to be pretty sure because they can be guilty of false imprisonment even if they have a reasonable basis to believe that a crime has occurred.
You can use deadly force to arrest someone who is using deadly force (AKA a shooter). You can generally use deadly force to arrest anyone that breaks into your home rules are always frequently different for stuff you do in your own home.
Storeowners have special arrest powers to prevent shoplifting.
It is generally unwise to play armed citizen cop a la Zimmerman. The citizen’s gun is generally there to be used in self defense not to clean up the neighborhood.
There is a pretty wide gap between “thug” and “nigger”
Nigger is a hateful word that has a centuries long history linked to slavery, segregation, black oppression and racism.
Terms like Welfare Queen are really just code words for black single mom on welfare who allegedly has children just to increase her welfare benefits. Despite the fact that most single moms on welfare are white, people think black.
Thug is a term that CAN have some dog whistle characteristics but is in common use in other contexts so that it is not automatically a racist term, even when used to describe black men if those black men are violent criminals. If the term thug is being used to define rude black teenagers who like to annoy people with loud music, then its probably at least a little bit racist because you would probably not describe a rude white teenager who likes to annoy people with loud music a thug, you would just call them an asshole. This is especially true if you are trying to justify violence against the “thug” because no one would think its OK to shoot someone just for being an asshole but when a black man is an asshole then they’re a thug and shooting them becomes more understandable, you know… because they are a menace to society (while drinking their juice in the hood).
So in this case, were the black men violent criminals? Were they criminals of any sort? Anything to indicate thuggery? Because i’ve got to be honest if Jordan Davis turns out to be a drug dealing gang member with a violent criminal background, etc. I think thug is a good word to describe him. If he’s a stupid 17 year old that turned u loud music to intentionally piss off some old white dude, then he’s just an asshole and using the term thug probably means you are inclined to see black people as thugs. Probably means you are more likely to convict them of stuff if you are on a jury. But it doesn’t mean you are the type of racist we saw marching in Charlottesville. Just the kind of racist you see every day.
White people tend to see rebellious black teenage boys as threatening and rebellious white teenage boys as a pain in the ass. You see, its just a phase for white boys and its an immutable character treat for black boys.
So, I CAN actually use deadly force to prevent a crime or enforce a law?
Are cops allowed to use deadly force to prevent all crime? Can a copy shoot a prostitute simply for prostituting?
Generally? Is there a law against it? Or is it just not a good idea? Something else?
They do? Is that written in a law somewhere? I’d like to read that.
Unwise or illegal? Or something else?
Cops in several districts have had body CAMs for over a year now and the rate of police shootings has not changed much. How do you explain that? Is it possible that you are irrationally hysterical?
Who told you that? I bet a white person told you that. I’ve known since childhood that police were much likelier to believe that a black person committed a crime than a white person. I’ve known about driving while black for a long long time. I’ve known for decades that police lie for each other an they lie on the stand.
I’ve also know that these things are rare nowadays (except for the police lying for each other part, that’s still waay too common).
It seems to me that this might be hitting you especially hard because is such a revelation to you that cops are humans and capable of bad shit. This shit has been going on for a long time but the fact of he matter is that when it comes to actually shooting people, cops do not shoot poor black people any more frequently than they shoot poor white people. They don’t shoot rich black people any more frequently than they shoot rich white people. At least not by enough o be statistically significant.
I thought we were talking about police shootings. Cops have been profiling black men since as far back as I can remember.
I think that as long as there is no statistically significant different between the shooting of blacks and whites after correcting for other factors like socioeconomic status, prior criminal history, drug usage and mental instability, we should be looking to other factors than race.
I already know what is occurring, it seems like you are the one in the dark and falling victim to hysteria.
Not exactly, They have some very limited ability to detain a person for investigation, and that varies drastically by state. In no state would they have actual arrest powers.
Seemed to work out well for him.
Don’t forget fun incidents like killing people in the shower. Boiled to death by prison guards, but no wrongdoing was found.
Yes its called self defense (and defense of others).
No, but if the violence escalates, they don’t have to back off. If a private citizen tries to arrest a prostitute and the prostitute forcibly resists, you can’t escalate force to try and subdue the prostitute. You generally cannot disturb the peace to forcibly detain someone who is not disturbing the peace.
State laws differ but this is mostly common law. You can’t initiate violence to arrest someone who is not being violent. You can engage in self defense or defense of others. You can do extra stuff in your home and place of business.
Depends on the jurisdiction. I think its probably unwise in almost all cases and illegal in many places. The ability of a citizen to use deadly force in situations outside of self defense or defense of others is vanishingly small. Heck even the use of force is every limited. There are a few special situations like bounty hunters, tow truck drivers, some security guards but for average joes. Stick with self defense, you can get into a lot of trouble trying to junior mod your neighborhood.
A year isn’t very long, especially to see such a potentially major change. Further, this isn’t just about police shootings – what about overall complaints? Beatings and other violence? How many black people report mistreatment by police this year as opposed to past years? I don’t know the answers to these questions, but without them it’s not possible to evaluate the impact of body cameras, and what this might tell us about how police have changed their behavior.
But I’m not initiating violence. I’m simply trying to affect a citizen’s arrest of a person dealing drugs. Once I start doing that, the drug dealer pulled out a gun. HE initiated the violence. Once the gun is out, now I fear for my life. Now I can shoot him, right?
They can arrest until the cops get there in most cases. They can even use non-deadly force. The real difference AFAICT is that they don’t get sued for false imprisonment if they acted reasonably but they are wrong.
In what way did he benefit? ISTM that he is pariah and has been punched, shot at and treated with disdain because a lot of people think he got away with murder. Its sort of like saying that killing Nicole Brown Simpson worked out well for OJ.
I suppose he was able to sell the murder weapon for some money but I don’t think anyone would want to recreate his “success”
The particular sub-discussion is about shooting not just cops being assholes. I think there is in fact a reduction in complaints against police but frankly the body cams have done much more to exonerate police from accusations levied against them than damned them for misconduct.
BTW, why would it take years for differences to appear.
For example, if DC police were involved in 200 shootings in the year before body cams and there were no incidents of unjustified shootings and then there were 200 shootings by police in the year after body cams and there were still no unjustified shootings, perhaps the correct conclusion is that unjustified shootings are rare.
If this sort of pattern remains consistent with police departments across the country, then why wouldn’t that indicate that unjustified police shootings are rare as a general matter?
If you lay hands on the alleged drug dealer or threaten him in some way, how do we know he isn’t the one engaging in self defense against a George Zimmerman type, and he is just pulling his gun to warn you off?
If you are just talking to the drug dealer without making threats and he pulls a gun on you then you can defend yourself.
See how it get muddy and complicated when you try to play cop?
Is telling him “I’m affecting a citizens arrest, please accompany me to the police station” a threat?
Without knowing all these numbers (including when body cams were operating and when they weren’t), then this is just a series of guesses.
“effecting”
I guessed. Don’t shoot me over it!
Very limited, and like I said, varies by state.
He got to kill someone and get away with it. Some people are into that.
Unless they are sociopaths who want to kill randomly, or individuals who want to kill particular people, or any of the many many other reasons why one person may find themselves wanting to kill another.
He has demonstrated the path to doing so and getting to walk away from the legal liabilities of being the primary cuase of someone else’s death.
Someone was asking about where this more aggressive, combative “bulletproof warrior cop” idea was coming from. I can’t be bothered to go back and look for it again. You go look.
and THIS is why video evidence taken by “civilians” has become so important and why many police hate it so much.
Probably not but you have no police power and he has no obligation to obey you. how are you going to “enforce the law”?