# 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:** 22
**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 4, 2017, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/421 "2017-08-04T12:40:07Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Your two philosophies are directly conflicting. Suppose, in the dark at night, someone breaks down my door. By your “self defense is justified if I feel reasonable fear” principle, I can shoot them immediately upon feeling reasonable fear (which would be immediately). By your “you don’t get to shoot a cop for doing his job”, I can’t, because there’s a possibility that this person is a cop who made a mistake and is breaking down the wrong door. > > So which is it? What do I do in this circumstance according to your philosophies? You don’t get to shoot a cop who is doing his job, even if that job involves mistakenly breaking down your door. ---
**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 4, 2017, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/422 "2017-08-04T12:46:58Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > You don’t get to shoot a cop who is doing his job, even if that job involves mistakenly breaking down your door. Again, your two philosophies directly conflict. I asked you about a very simple scenario: In the dark at night, someone breaks down my door. I have reasonable fear for my life and a gun in my hand. It’s dark and all I can see is the shape of a person with a gun in their hand. Can I shoot them? ---
**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 4, 2017, 12:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/423 "2017-08-04T12:54:32Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Again, your two philosophies directly conflict. I asked you about a very simple scenario: > > In the dark at night, someone breaks down my door. I have reasonable fear for my life and a gun in my hand. It’s dark and all I can see is the shape of a person. Can I shoot them? Not if they’re a cop doing their job. ---
**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:** [August 4, 2017, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/424 "2017-08-04T12:57:55Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Cops, and a few other law enforcement personnel, are allowed to use fear and force to get people to do as they are told, as long as what they are being told is legal. You don’t get to defend against that. How many fractions of a second did the Rice kid have to do what _he_ was told? ---
**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 4, 2017, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/425 "2017-08-04T13:03:37Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Not if they’re a cop doing their job. Then you don’t believe that I can shoot an unidentified intruder if I’m in reasonable fear for my life? I thought you believed in self-defense! What a shock! **Steophan** is against the right of self-defense for citizens to defend their homes from unknown intruders in the dark! Pausing to identify the intruder could cost me my life, thanks to your anti-self-defense philosophy. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2017, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/426 "2017-08-04T13:08:44Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Rice is not accused of anything. I’ve simply stated what his actions were, not whether they were criminal or immoral. You’ve accused him of threatening or appearing to threaten a police officer multiple times. > [@](#): > > You do if you’re a zookeeper, and it’s your job to put yourself in dangerous situations. No, you don’t in fact do that unless you’re an incompetent moron. Let’s say a tiger escapes from its cage. Your actions in order of preference are: 1. Isolate the tiger from the general public (either by trapping the tiger somewhere or removing the public from the vicinity) until it can be coaxed or herded back into its enclosure. 2. Tranquilize the tiger from a distance. This is less preferable than 1) as even tranqs can cause potential damage to animals, but if 1) isn’t a reasonable option this may become necessary. 3. If 1) and 2) are not options and/or the tiger poses an immediate danger to someone, _then and only then_ is lethal force used. You will note that none of the options are “Run right up to the tiger, shout at it, and then shoot it to death two seconds later because your aggressive approach caused it to react”. Because that would be the action of an incompetent moron. > [@](#): > > Zoo animals are, in fact, killed when they endanger people - even if it’s through the negligence of others. Harambe is probably the most famous one. **As a last resort.** No one is saying there are no circumstances under which the police should shoot someone, although I can understand why you feel the need to keep claiming this as it allows you to pretend you have any credibility left on the subject. > [@](#): > > What law criminalises the supposed recklessness of the officers? I assume you know, since you specifically called it “criminal”. I wasn’t intending to build a full legal case on a passing rhetorical device but if you like[here’s the Wiki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recklessness_(law)): > [@](#): > > Black’s Law Dictionary defines recklessness in American law as “Conduct whereby the actor does not desire harmful consequence but…foresees the possibility and consciously takes the risk,” or alternatively as “a state of mind in which a person does not care about the consequences of his or her actions.” Black’s Law dictionary 1053 (Bryan A. Garner ed., 8th ed. abr. 2005). In American courts, like English courts, a wrongdoer is found guilty of recklessness based upon the subjective test rule, where the accused must have had the same reasonable knowledge or ability to know the circumstances surrounding the incident in order to be found guilty of recklessness. If it makes you feel better, I doubt anyone would bother to try a case on this basis when potential manslaughter was on the table but nonetheless the officer was reckless and a boy died as a direct result of it. > [@](#): > > It’s part of the job of the police to put themselves in dangerous situations, for fuck’s sake. But not to instigate or escalate them, for fuck’s sake. > [@](#): > > “Disgrace to the uniform” is grounds for firing, not prosecution. _Even if_ a cop drives up to you and points a gun at you, you are not allowed to threaten them. Which Rice didn’t do, remember? Do try to keep your story straight. ---
**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 4, 2017, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/427 "2017-08-04T13:10:22Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Then you don’t believe that I can shoot an unidentified intruder if I’m in reasonable fear for my life? I thought you believed in self-defense! What a shock! **Steophan** is against the right of self-defense for citizens to defend their homes from unknown intruders in the dark! > > Pausing to identify the intruder could cost me my life, thanks to your anti-self-defense philosophy. You can defend yourself from unknown intruders _if_ you have a reasonable belief that they present an imminent threat, but not from cops doing their job. They are completely different situations. ---
**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 4, 2017, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/428 "2017-08-04T13:11:53Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > You can defend yourself from unknown intruders _if_ you have a reasonable belief that they present an imminent threat, but not from cops doing their job. They are completely different situations. If someone is breaking down my door in the middle of the night, and they have a gun in their hand, then I have a reasonable belief that they present an imminent threat. So I can shoot them, right? ---
**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 4, 2017, 1:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/429 "2017-08-04T13:13:53Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > You’ve accused him of threatening or appearing to threaten a police officer multiple times. That’s not an accusation, it’s an observation. I’ve never claimed Rice committed a crime, as there’s no reason to even consider it. ---
**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 4, 2017, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/430 "2017-08-04T13:16:17Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > If someone is breaking down my door in the middle of the night, and they have a gun in their hand, then I have a reasonable belief that they present an imminent threat. So I can shoot them, right? If you have a reasonable belief that they present an imminent threat, yes. If they are a cop doing their job, no. Assuming that the cop is in uniform, if not it would probably be reasonable to misidentify them. ---
**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 4, 2017, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/431 "2017-08-04T13:19:14Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > If you have a reasonable belief that they present an imminent threat, yes. If they are a cop doing their job, no. Assuming that the cop is in uniform, if not it would probably be reasonable to misidentify them. It’s entirely possible to have a reasonable belief that they present an imminent threat in the time before I figure out that they’re a cop. In the dark I might be able to see nothing more than a body shape and a gun. If I wait to identify them, they might kill me and my family. So I can shoot them, right? Because I have a reasonable belief that they present an imminent threat, even if this is before I’ve identified who they are? ---
**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 4, 2017, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/432 "2017-08-04T13:23:20Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > It’s entirely possible to have a reasonable belief that they present an imminent threat in the time before I figure out that they’re a cop. In the dark I might be able to see nothing more than a body shape and a gun. If I wait to identify them, they might kill me and my family. So I can shoot them, right? Because I have a reasonable belief that they present an imminent threat, even if this is before I’ve identified who they are? You can shoot to kill someone who you reasonably believe to be an imminent threat to the life of you or your family. You may not shoot a cop who is doing their job. There’s not going to be a different answer no matter how many times you rephrase the same question. Don’t shoot cops who are doing their jobs, or even cops who claim to be doing their jobs but are actually unlawfully arresting or searching or whatever. Deal with it in court later. ---
**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 4, 2017, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/433 "2017-08-04T13:27:41Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > You can shoot to kill someone who you reasonably believe to be an imminent threat to the life of you or your family. You may not shoot a cop who is doing their job. This is a direct conflict, since both of these things might occur at the same time. If you actually care about the right to self-defense, then you would agree that I can shoot someone if I reasonably believe they are an imminent threat to the life of me and my family, under any circumstances, and even if they’re later revealed to be a police officer who busted down the wrong door. Or maybe you don’t really care about self-defense, and only about protecting cops no matter what mistakes they make. ---
**Author:** ![SingleMalt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/singlemalt/32/3961_2.png) [@SingleMalt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SingleMalt)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2017, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/434 "2017-08-04T13:35:04Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > It seems backwards to you that it’s up to the state to prove guilt, not the defendant to prove innocence? > … I don’t believe that this is correct for your self-defense scenario, but IANAL. Self-defense is a positive defense; you’re admitting to shooting someone, but you are claiming it’s justified. It’s up to you to demonstrate that justification to the jury. Lawyer Dopers, am I off-base here? ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2017, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/435 "2017-08-04T13:40:37Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > That’s not an accusation, it’s an observation. It’s not an observation; it’s speculation at best and an accusation at worst. Observations require something to be observed. The video does not show Rice threatening the officer. > [@](#): > > I’ve never claimed Rice committed a crime, as there’s no reason to even consider it. So “threatening a police officer with a gun” isn’t a crime? ---
**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 4, 2017, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/436 "2017-08-04T13:47:47Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Yes, of course it bothers me that self defence laws aren’t applied equally. The answer to that is to apply them equally, not to remove the right to defend onessekf. It doesn’t disturb you that, according to your legal philosophy if there we no witnesses, I could walk into a room, shoot you, claim self-defense (“He was going right for my throat!”) and the burden would be on the state to prove that you weren’t trying to kill me when I shot you? > [@](#): > > One is innocent until proven guilty. That should be the end of it. This isn’t some sort of legal fiction or pedantic technicality, it’s a fundamental part of justice. Right. And Al Capone is innocent of everything except tax evasion. :rolleyes: > [@](#): > > The only way a jury can be wrong would be to convict despite having reasonable doubt that someone is guilty. They can’t wrongly acquit when they have doubts. Legally, you’re technically right. Realistically: [are you serious](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification_in_the_United_States#In_practice)? And/or fucking stupid? > [@](#): > > Your standard, once again, is to consider someone - especially a cop, due to your bigotry - who acts in a way you don’t like to be guilty of any an all tangentially related crimes regardless of whether their conduct actually satisfies all elements of that crime. You have an absolutely fundamental misunderstanding of how the law, and justice, actually work, and have shown no interest in fixing that misunderstanding. Bullshit. I’ve explained at length why I found that the juries in the Castile and Slager cases were wrong. I spent _plenty_ of time going over the evidence available. Your only response to this has basically been, “The juries know better so you’re wrong”. That’s not an argument, that’s exactly what you’re trying to prove! That, and to pretend that my position is something entirely different, and imply a bunch of bullshit that does not follow from my posts. Why? It’s dumb. And it’s _really_ transparent. > [@](#): > > Also, you think you know better from a tiny sliver of evidence than investigators and juries who have seen all the evidence, and you think you know the law better than lawyers and judges. You are, in short, so stupid you can’t even tell you are stupid. I think that with the benefit of hindsight, more time, and more evidence, I can do better than 12 random schmucks who may or may not know anything about the law and bring all their own biases to the table. I think the one holdout in the Michael Slager case was _almost certainly_ not looking at the law objectively. I think that it’s _possible_ that Yanez was still within the borders of the law, but that if that is true, the law is incredibly unjust. > [@](#): > > You don’t get to shoot cops who are doing their jobs, whether or not you agree with what their job is. You’re not even supposed to threaten them because, unlike burglars, the cops have a right to be there, and a right to use force if you don’t obey their lawful instructions. And, presumably, they have a right to flashbang that infant. My god, lick harder, I can almost not see my face reflected in that officer’s boot. Even if you’re right, _even if_ any pretense of self-defense goes out the window the moment the people breaking down your door are cops (even if they don’t announce it as such and even if there’s no way you could have known), that’s the legal issue. The _moral_ issue is something else entirely: this guy shot at people _breaking through his window_. That’s clear-cut defense of self and property. The fact that the unidentified intruders had a “right to be there” does nothing to eliminate the fact that there is no way Marvin Guy could have known that at the time. This is not a _murderer_. At best, he made a mistake - a mistake far more innocent than the mistake Officer Yanez made. > [@](#): > > It’s possible to shoot one by accident, if you somehow failed to notice the uniforms. It’s not possible for it to be self defence. Okay, so you agree that the _murder_ charge is bullshit, right? Because prosecutors tried to sentence Marvin Guy to _death_. He’s still awaiting trial three years later. ---
**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 4, 2017, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/437 "2017-08-04T14:05:26Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > So “threatening a police officer with a gun” isn’t a crime? I’d be astonished if it was, it seems far too specific. Those two things may well be elements of one or more crimes, but as no-one is accusing Rice of any crime it’s irrelevant. ---
**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 4, 2017, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/438 "2017-08-04T14:10:08Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > This is a direct conflict, since both of these things might occur at the same time. If you actually care about the right to self-defense, then you would agree that I can shoot someone if I reasonably believe they are an imminent threat to the life of me and my family, under any circumstances, and even if they’re later revealed to be a police officer who busted down the wrong door. > > Or maybe you don’t really care about self-defense, and only about protecting cops no matter what mistakes they make. You have a right to self defence. You have a responsibility not to shoot cops who are doing their jobs. They sometimes conflict. That doesn’t remove either the right or the responsibility. ---
**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 4, 2017, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/439 "2017-08-04T14:13:01Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > You have a right to self defence. You have a responsibility not to shoot cops who are doing their jobs. They sometimes conflict. That doesn’t remove either the right or the responsibility. Good for you for admitting that these can conflict. When they conflict, which takes priority? In the moment, if I pull the trigger due to the unknown intruder with a gun in the dark, I might kill a cop who broke down the wrong door. But in the moment, if I refrain from pulling the trigger, he might kill me and my family. So what’s the correct action? ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2017, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340/440 "2017-08-04T14:21:22Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Good for you for admitting that these can conflict. When they conflict, which takes priority? In the moment, if I pull the trigger due to the unknown intruder with a gun in the dark, I might kill a cop who broke down the wrong door. But in the moment, if I refrain from pulling the trigger, he might kill me and my family. So what’s the correct action? Simple - you shouldn’t shoot the people with guns breaking down your door in the middle of the night because they might be cops, but they should shoot you because you might have mistaken them for intruders and be planning to shoot them. Because it’s a dangerous situation. Or something. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340.md?page=21) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-cops-who-openly-applauded-police-abuse-today/792340.md?page=23)