# I pit the cops who openly applauded police abuse today **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 28, 2017, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340 "2017-07-28T19:00:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 18
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2017, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/341 "2017-08-02T22:05:28Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > We know he wasn’t reaching for a toy gun, as no toy gun was found anywhere near the scene. An air pistol modified to look like a real gun was, however. We don’t know if he was reaching for anything. Yet you stated it as a fact (or near fact or whatever – I still don’t understand the distinction, or how it’s okay to state non-facts as facts for any reason). > [@](#): > > And it remains the case that anyone with any sense would have felt threatened by someone reaching for such a gun. That statement is not conditional on any particular person doing so. Irrelevant to anything I’ve said. > [@](#): > > The one thing I said that was not true in this thread I’ve acknowledged. It had nothing to do with this case. You’ve said multiple things that we don’t know are true – that Rice threatened the cops, that they gave him instructions that he disobeyed, that he reached for the gun/toy/whatever, that the cops were in fear and that fear was reasonable, etc. > [@](#): > > I’ve not straw manned your arguments, indeed it would be hard to do so because you are trying very hard not to actually make any. What you _are_ doing is repeatedly misinterpreting my statements, ignoring my clarifications, and refusing to state a position of your own. Show, specifically, where I’ve done any of this. I’ve attacked your exact words and nothing more. > [@](#): > > The cops are innocent in any matter relating to Rice’s death. That’s an observable fact, as they have not been convicted of any crime. Another false statement. They were not indicted. That is not the same thing as “innocent”. God you’re careless, even after all these admonitions and unknown things that you’ve stated as true and been criticized for. Maybe you’re just incapable of being careful with the things you say. > [@](#): > > Whether they were, in fact, in reasonable fear of his actions is in the strictest sense unknowable, but not being a solipsist, I can easily look at the evidence and say that they were. So can you or anyone else, if you choose. No I can’t. Too many facts are unknown – what did they say? What did Rice do? What motivated them to drive so close? Etc. If you think you can “easily say” that they were, then your standard of evidence apparently goes no further than “the cops said so [even though some of their statements contradicted those of witnesses] and that’s it”. > [@](#): > > Anyway, here’s your chance. State your positions. Are the cops innocent? Did Rice threaten them? Ideally, show the evidence, and don’t weasel out of it by saying you don’t know. I don’t believe for a second you think the evidence is exactly 50-50. I don’t know if the cops are innocent. They have not been convicted of any crime. I seriously doubt that Rice threatened them – a child deciding to threaten cops rushing at him sounds as inconceivable as the cops deciding in advance that today’s the day they kill a black child. It’s possible that Rice reached for the toy (it’s not at all clear in the video), but if so, I don’t know if that was because he was told to, or because he thought (possibly incorrectly) that’s what the cops wanted him to do (i.e. grab it and drop it), or because he thought it was a game, or some other reason. I’m saying I don’t know because _I literally don’t know_. How could I answer any differently? If I have to lean one way or the other, I’d lean towards the position of municipal judge Ronald Adrine, who believed there was enough evidence to indict them. But IANAL, and this opinion is unrelated and irrelevant to everything I’ve said in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2017, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/342 "2017-08-02T22:22:07Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Well yeah, it’s not impossible that there could be a situation where two people could reasonably think the other is a threat. If I’m delusional, only you would have reason to feel threatened, so there’d not even be a question about your right to defend yourself. > > Was this meant to be some sort of gotcha, or just some pathetic macho posturing? > > Also, _not_ being delusional, I won’t be praying any time soon. Take it any damn way you want. And that asshole who killed Tamir Rice HAD been fired from another police department as being totally unfit. > **[Cleveland officer who killed Tamir Rice had been deemed unfit for duty](https://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-cleveland-tamir-rice-timothy-loehmann-20141203-story.html)** > > The rookie Cleveland police officer who fatally shot 12-year-old Tamir Rice last month had been deemed unfit for duty at a previous police department and was in the process of being fired when he resigned from his post, according to records released... Cleveland officer who killed Tamir Rice had been deemed unfit for duty > **[Cleveland cop who shot 12-year-old slammed for ‘immaturity’ in past job | CNN](https://www.cnn.com/2014/12/04/justice/cleveland-police-officer-timothy-loehmann/index.html)** > > Before he shot and killed 12-year-old Tamir Rice, Cleveland Police Officer Timothy Loehmann was described as “emotionally immature” at a previous job. Cleveland cop who shot 12-year-old slammed for ‘immaturity’ in past job > **[Cop Who Shot Tamir Rice Was Deemed Unfit For Policing 2 Yrs Ago](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/timothy-loehmann-unfit-for-police-service_n_6264992)** > > Cop Who Shot Tamir Rice Was Deemed Unfit For Policing 2 Yrs Ago Timothy Loehmann, Cop Who Shot Tamir Rice, Deemed Unfit For Policing 2 Years Ago Oh yeah, we have a “new outrage of the day” now because another incompetent asshole murdered a woman who had CALLED THEM, while she was talking to his partner. > **[Somali immigrant cop Mohamed Noor, who shot Justine Damond, was 'highly...](https://www.foxnews.com/us/somali-immigrant-cop-mohamed-noor-who-shot-justine-damond-was-highly-celebrated-by-minneapolis-mayor-in-2015)** > > The Somali-born Minnesota police officer alleged to have shot and killed an unarmed Australian woman on Saturday had been lauded by Minneapolis’ mayor and feted by the local community when he joined the force in 2015. Justine Damond called police to report a possible crime occurring near her house. Officers arrived, and Noor, at some point, and for an as yet unknown reason, allegedly fired his gun, striking Damond in the abdomen and ultimately killing her. When she was shot, Damond was standing, in her pajamas, talking to an officer on the driver’s side of the squad car. Noor, in the passenger’s seat, allegedly fired, shooting Damond through the driver’s side door, three sources with knowledge of the incident told The Star Tribune. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2017, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/343 "2017-08-02T22:43:35Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Finally you get it. Unless we know they were not, it was self defence. Presumption of innocence, and all that. Something disturbingly few people here believe in. In the US, self-defense requires an affirmative showing. It’s not a presumption. If you are going to try to rely on a legal definition of self-defense, you have to rely on the whole hog, not the just the chitterlings. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2017, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/344 "2017-08-02T22:54:04Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > We know he wasn’t reaching for a toy gun, as no toy gun was found anywhere near the scene. An air pistol modified to look like a real gun was, however. > … This is actually untrue. It was an airsoft gun, which are toy guns. It wasn’t an air pistol, which is another name for a BB gun or pellet gun. It’s true that it was modified by removing the orange tip, which is another clue that it’s a toy. Air pistols (BB guns) are not sold with those tips. Anyway, the ironic thing to me with this whole exchange is that you’re stepping up to protect cops from another country. UK cops are much more reasonable and kill far, far, far fewer people that US cops. It’s like you have recreational outrage in favor of American cops. I have no idea why you feel like you have to defend the bad apples from a police force from another country. As **SteveG1** points out, the cop who shot Rice was, in fact, a bad apple, as determined by other police forces. ---
**Author:** ![Hocus\_Pocus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/41988e/32.png) [@Hocus\_Pocus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hocus_Pocus)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2017, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/345 "2017-08-02T23:47:34Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > This is actually untrue. It was an airsoft gun, which are toy guns. It wasn’t an air pistol, which is another name for a BB gun or pellet gun. It’s true that it was modified by removing the orange tip, which is another clue that it’s a toy. Air pistols (BB guns) are not sold with those tips. Whether it’s a toy gun or actual firearm is irrelevant. And are you really so naive that you think criminals are painting orange tips on their guns? > [@](#): > > Anyway, the ironic thing to me with this whole exchange is that you’re stepping up to protect cops from another country. UK cops are much more reasonable and kill far, far, far fewer people that US cops. It’s like you have recreational outrage in favor of American cops. I have no idea why you feel like you have to defend the bad apples from a police force from another country. And I don’t understand people from another country w/ no knowledge of our laws & LE procedures criticize American LE (like BPD). ---
**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:** [August 3, 2017, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/346 "2017-08-03T00:32:27Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > In the US, self-defense requires an affirmative showing. It’s not a presumption. If you are going to try to rely on a legal definition of self-defense, you have to rely on the whole hog, not the just the chitterlings. Depends on the state, but it’s becoming increasingly common to actually presume people’s innocence. The best recent example would be George Zimmerman. Hopefully, all of them, and other countries, will move towards not forcing victims of assaults to prove their innocence. ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/347 "2017-08-03T00:36:33Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > A great deal of the criticism of the police _is_ trying to prevent the police doing their jobs. I’ve seen people here saying the police shouldn’t be able to ask people to identify themselves, shouldn’t be able to restrain people they’ve been arrested, that moving people back to a safe distance is infringing on their free speech, and many other idiotic complaints. None of those things are wrong for the police to do. Uh…depending on the circumstances. Certainly each of those things has been used to infringe on the rights of someone whom the police regard as “other.” A requirement to identify yourself has occasionally been abused to intimidate and to create “watch lists” for the purpose of violating civil rights. Not always, not usually…but it certainly has been. Restraining a suspect can be done in right ways and wrong ways (see “chokeholds”). Moving people back to a “safe distance” is sometimes used to isolate protest away from legal public areas, and has certainly at times been used to shut down the free speech of people the cops don’t agree with. I’ve personally seen this one used pretty frequently. It’s even _attempted_ when it doesn’t work – I’ve seen cops and security personnel tell protesters to move off land the protesters know darned well they’re allowed on because it’s in their permit, and I’ve seen the protesters refuse to leave, and then the police and security people **give up**. They do so because they weren’t interested in actual safety, nor are they going to prevail in a court fight, but it was _worth a shot_ to see if they could bluff the protesters into giving up constitutionally-protected rights. When the police and authorities are casually trying to curtail people’s rights in situations they’re not even strongly interested in, when it’s more of a reflex than a decision, why is it a surprise people come to see them as inimical, as enemies of freedom? ---
**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:** [August 3, 2017, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/348 "2017-08-03T00:37:18Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > This is actually untrue. It was an airsoft gun, which are toy guns. It wasn’t an air pistol, which is another name for a BB gun or pellet gun. It’s true that it was modified by removing the orange tip, which is another clue that it’s a toy. Air pistols (BB guns) are not sold with those tips. Airsoft guns (as the name pretty clearly states) are low-powered airguns. They are not toys, and they can injure people, which is why those that use them for sport wear protective equipment. Anyone giving one to a child as a toy would be horrifically irresponsible. For those following along, that’s not an accusation directed at anyone, I have no idea where Rice got his one. ---
**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:** [August 3, 2017, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/349 "2017-08-03T00:40:35Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Another false statement. They were not indicted. That is not the same thing as “innocent”. So you don’t accept the presumption of innocence. That shows that your opinion on anything to do with legal matters can safely be ignored. As for the rest of your post, you are once again asking questions I’ve repeatedly answered, because you don’t like the answers, and refusing to actually state your position, just vaguely hint at it so you can claim I’m intentionally misinterpreting you. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/350 "2017-08-03T00:45:40Z")
> [@Hocus\_Pocus](#): > > Whether it’s a toy gun or actual firearm is irrelevant. > > And are you really so naive that you think criminals are painting orange tips on their guns? > And I don’t understand people from another country w/ no knowledge of our laws & LE procedures criticize American LE (like BPD). It’s relevant because **Steophan** said it wasn’t a toy. I don’t understand your second question – is there a missing word? Is BPD supposed to be BPC? If so, I think he’s an American living in Germany, but I’m not planning on checking every poster for consistency. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/351 "2017-08-03T00:50:55Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Depends on the state, but it’s becoming increasingly common to actually presume people’s innocence. Presumption of innocence and presumption of self-defense are not the same thing. The only time there is a presumption of the fear aspect, as far as I know, is the Castle Doctrine. This was not the case for George Zimmerman. As far as I know, and I could be wrong, stand your ground laws as in Florida enable someone to receive immunity from prosecution (which is not exactly like an affirmative defense, since it occurs before the trial. I should have looked that up), but the onus is on them to provide evidence that they were acting in self-defense and had a reasonable fear. It is not a presumption that they are acting in self-defense, but a lack of a duty to retreat. If I have this wrong, I await correction. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/352 "2017-08-03T00:53:39Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Airsoft guns (as the name pretty clearly states) are low-powered airguns. They are not toys, and they can injure people, which is why those that use them for sport wear protective equipment. > > Anyone giving one to a child as a toy would be horrifically irresponsible. For those following along, that’s not an accusation directed at anyone, I have no idea where Rice got his one. Airsoft guns are toys for older kids. There exist toys that can injure people – a rubber band shooter can injure someone. Kids use protective equipment when they play baseball – would it be horrific to give a kid a baseball bat? That can injure someone as well. Lots of people give airsoft guns to children – who do you think uses them? Adults use BB guns, pellet guns, or actual guns. Adults don’t use airsoft guns. From what I recall, Rice got the one he had from a friend – it was a friend’s airsoft gun that he had. I still don’t understand your desire to defend the police in a foreign country. It’s just weird – you have zero insight into what it’s like to be hassled by American police, you don’t see them walking around with rifles, handguns, tasers, batons. And, you really have no idea what it’s like to be basically repressed by American police if you’re African American. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/353 "2017-08-03T01:01:48Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > If I have this wrong, I await correction. I will read the reply and, if corrected, acknowledge it. But otherwise I can’t see continuing in this thread beyond this clarification. Because it’s ooky. ---
**Author:** ![Hocus\_Pocus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/41988e/32.png) [@Hocus\_Pocus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hocus_Pocus)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/354 "2017-08-03T01:19:06Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > It’s relevant because **Steophan** said it wasn’t a toy. I don’t understand your second question – is there a missing word? Is BPD supposed to be BPC? If so, I think he’s an American living in Germany, but I’m not planning on checking every poster for consistency. LOL…BPD s/b BPC (Budget Player Cadet). And that second sentence should have read “Are you really so naive as to think that criminals aren’t painting the tips of their guns orange?” Never had my morning coffee today! ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/355 "2017-08-03T01:41:43Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > So you don’t accept the presumption of innocence. That shows that your opinion on anything to do with legal matters can safely be ignored. Why do you keep up with the straw men? You asked if they were innocent, not if they should be presumed innocent by the legal system if they are tried. I agree with the concept of presumption of innocence in terms of the legal system; this is different than asserting, factually, someone who has not been tried as innocent. There were plenty of lynchers and racist murderers who were not convicted of murder. Nonetheless, they were not innocent (in the broad sense of the word), even if they were found not guilty, or not tried to begin with. Not every question is about the legal system or “legal matters”. > [@](#): > > As for the rest of your post, you are once again asking questions I’ve repeatedly answered, because you don’t like the answers, and refusing to actually state your position, just vaguely hint at it so you can claim I’m intentionally misinterpreting you. So sorry for pointing out that many of the things you asserted factually you couldn’t possibly know. Hopefully you’ll do better, even if you don’t want to admit to the rest of us that you might have screwed up. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/356 "2017-08-03T02:08:57Z")
> [@Hocus\_Pocus](#): > > LOL…BPD s/b BPC (Budget Player Cadet). > > And that second sentence should have read “Are you really so naive as to think that criminals aren’t painting the tips of their guns orange?” > > Never had my morning coffee today! Got it. I’m sure some criminals are doing that. BPC is, I think, American. Anyway, I’m not sure why I contributed to this hijack. Back to the OP: Boo to those cops who applaud police abuse. Yay for the various government and police departments who said that Trump is basically an idiot for pushing police brutality. Bullshit to the Trump administration who claims it was all a joke. And with that, I bid you adieu. ---
**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:** [August 3, 2017, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/357 "2017-08-03T03:05:26Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Not every question is about the legal system or “legal matters”. This one is. > [@](#): > > So sorry for pointing out that many of the things you asserted factually you couldn’t possibly know. It wasn’t you that pointed out the factual error I made in this thread, and I’m not the one claiming to know better than those who properly investigated these cases. > [@](#): > > Hopefully you’ll do better, even if you don’t want to admit to the rest of us that you might have screwed up. I willingly admitted when it was shown that I screwed up. Embarrassing as it was to do so, I’m actually glad of it now, because it shows that your claim that I can’t admit that I’m wrong to be false. Like so many other of your claims. So, how about you practice what you preach, clearly state your positions without hiding behind claims that things for which we have evidence for are unknowable, and admit that you’re wrong about many things, not least the nature of innocence when it comes to crime. ---
**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:** [August 3, 2017, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/358 "2017-08-03T03:10:52Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > I will read the reply and, if corrected, acknowledge it. But otherwise I can’t see continuing in this thread beyond this clarification. > > Because it’s ooky. The standard, in Florida at least, is that they have to provide some evidence that it was self defence, such as their testimony under oath that it was. In practice, if the defendant doesn’t claim self defence, the state doesn’t have to disprove it, it’s not an automatic requirement. Most defendants don’t claim it, as that means admitting to killing someone, which is usually a bad idea in a murder trial. This was discussed at great length, both here and elsewhere, at the time of Zimmerman’s trial. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/359 "2017-08-03T06:30:16Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > You are ignoring that the fear must be reasonable. Was the fear that Jeronimo Yanez had when he shot and killed Philando Castile justified? Keep in mind: - If Castile had meant to shoot Yanez, he probably wouldn’t have told him about the gun - There was no evidence that Castile was reaching for the gun beyond the paranoid fantasies of Yanez - Yanez had explicitly commanded Castile to produce ID (which one might expect to be found in a pocket) - In the US, we have the fundamental right to bear arms. You are allowed to own and carry a gun. It would imply quite firmly that this right includes the right to own and carry a gun without immediately getting shot for doing so. Also, keep in mind that the Jury was denied access to evidence they asked for, such as the interview transcripts from after Yanez shot Castile. To put it bluntly, if the law allows for this to be treated as self-defense, then the law is disgustingly broken and needs to be changed. > [@Steophan](#): > > Civilians have the same self defence rights as the police. Hypothetical: what if Castile had seen Yanez reaching for his gun, and decided that the correct response was, in self-defense, to disarm the officer? Say, he saw Yanez reach for his firearm, and responded by throwing open the door, knocking Yanez down, and training his own firearm on him. Would that have been justified self-defense? Given what happened afterwards, he absolutely would have been morally justified, and given what we know about shootings at police stops and Yanez’s demeanor, Castile was probably in a similar amount of danger at that moment to Yanez was, even not knowing how things were going to end. I think given the facts on the ground, Castile’s case for assaulting Yanez in self-defense is actually stronger than Yanez’s case for shooting Castile in self-defense. Now how do you think that would have gone in court? Stupid question, really. There’s no such thing as justified self-defense against a cop. Castile either would have been killed on the spot by Yanez’s backup, or would have faced almost certain persecution. What we have here is one standard for self-defense for cops (“I thought he was reaching for his gun after I told him to produce ID, so I shot him on the spot”) and one for civilians (“[They broke into my home in the middle of the night unannounced, I thought I was being robbed, I shot and killed one of them, and am now facing the death penalty](http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/what-happens-when-civilian-kills-cop-self-defense)”). > [@RitterSport](#): > > BPC is, I think, American. Expat living in Munich, with lots of friends and family back in the states. My outrage at these policies is not strictly recreational. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 9:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/360 "2017-08-03T09:24:20Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > This one is. > > It wasn’t you that pointed out the factual error I made in this thread, and I’m not the one claiming to know better than those who properly investigated these cases. > > I willingly admitted when it was shown that I screwed up. Embarrassing as it was to do so, I’m actually glad of it now, because it shows that your claim that I can’t admit that I’m wrong to be false. Like so many other of your claims. > > So, how about you practice what you preach, clearly state your positions without hiding behind claims that things for which we have evidence for are unknowable, and admit that you’re wrong about many things, not least the nature of innocence when it comes to crime. You admitted it once, IIRC, but not when you said Rice reached for the gun, [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340.md?page=17) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340.md?page=19)