# Time To Change Law, Re: Police Shootings? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 25, 2015, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822 "2015-05-25T21:02:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2015, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/101 "2015-05-26T23:56:20Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > The problem is that there are criminal suspects and there are criminal suspects. > > Suppose I stop a guy in a car for having a tail light out. I don’t much care about the tail light, but I want him to give me consent to search his car, because this route and this time of night is common for drug traffickers. The guy is pretty upset with the stop. It’s his fourth time getting stopped this week. And he’s yelling and being unreasonable. I get forceful with him to try to take control of the situation, and I ask him to exit the car and to keep his hands up. As he does, he stands up he puts his hand into his pants. I shoot him. It turns out, he didn’t have a weapon, he was just pulling his loose pants up as he stood up. > > In that situation, I refused to “place the safety of this criminal suspect before my own.” But was that proper or desirable? It may well qualify as self-defense legally, but I think its fair to ask cops–as our agents with special powers and duties–to take more risks than that. We ask firefighters to run into burning buildings to save people, even when those people are negligent. We can ask cops to exercise a little more restraint before pulling the trigger when someone does something negligent at a traffic stop or other police encounter. For the most part, police already do that when it comes to most white people they encounter. If they exercised the same restraint with black men, we would be in much better shape. +1 If you’re not willing to take _any_ risks as a cop, you shouldn’t be a cop. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/102 "2015-05-27T00:02:34Z")
And by the way, policing isn’t a particularly dangerous job. It’s not even in the [top ten](http://www.businessinsider.com/most-dangerous-jobs-in-america-2014-12#1-logging-workers-10) #1 is fisherman, #2 is lumberjacks. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/103 "2015-05-27T00:36:53Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > And by the way, policing isn’t a particularly dangerous job. The risks are high but the odds of the risks creating actual danger are lower than people think. Statistically I’m far more apt to croak of a heart attack than I am getting shot. And in fact, only slightly fewer police officers die in on the job automobile crashes than get shot. The real odds of getting hurt come from things that seem less severe than someone trying to shoot or stab an officer. In 33 years nobody has ever shot at me. But there have been a lot of people who tried to physically assault me. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/104 "2015-05-27T01:04:43Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > And by the way, policing isn’t a particularly dangerous job. It’s not even in the [top ten](http://www.businessinsider.com/most-dangerous-jobs-in-america-2014-12#1-logging-workers-10) > #1 is fisherman, #2 is lumberjacks. Training, training, and more training. Plus a radio, and a pistol. When you see people running from a dangerous situation, you’ll see LEO’s running TOWARDS that dangerous situation. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/105 "2015-05-27T02:13:08Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > A thug would become a criminal after they beat you to death. The definition of felony assault requires substantially less than beating someone to death. You seem to have a peculiar definition of crime, where all criminals are murderers. That’s not realistic. You also seem to think that police only deal with “criminals,” that is, felons, that is, murderers? Of course none of those narrow definitions is the case. Police deal with suicide threats, and misdemeanors, and infractions, and lots of things which are not felonious, not necessarily violent, and not a threat to their lives. The\* vast \*majority of the time. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/106 "2015-05-27T02:26:03Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > The real reason why most cops dont get convicted of murder is motive. > Most common motives for murder are money, love or vengeance. These things rarely figure in what a uniformed cop shoots someone. [snip] > > In all these recent killing by cops, I have seen almost none where people can show any reasonable motive for the cop- other than a mistake in judgement. Sometimes anger comes into it, sure, and maybe a tinge of racism. But does anyone think the cop in Parker’s sitrep above woke up _planning_ to kill a random motorist today? So, a killing that’s not motivated by a motive like money, love, nor vengeance isn’t a felonious homicide? Since when? I wasn’t aware that lack of motive made killing legally A-OK. :rolleyes: Yeah, some of these guys should be prosecuted for reckless endangerment, manslaughter, or negligent homicide rather than murder. But then again, some of them were acting way outside the lines when they shot a civilian, and a rare few might even be indictable for “felony murder,” which is when you really didn’t mean to kill anyone, but they died as a result of another crime you were committing. I feel like you were engaging in a couple of extremely silly sophistries in this post. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/107 "2015-05-27T03:04:46Z")
Guh! Can I report my own messed-up code? Somehow I missed that. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/108 "2015-05-27T03:05:55Z")
Just report your own post like you would someone else’s. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/109 "2015-05-27T06:28:46Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > So, a killing that’s not motivated by a motive like money, love, nor vengeance isn’t a felonious homicide? Since when? I wasn’t aware that lack of motive made killing legally A-OK. :rolleyes: > > Yeah, some of these guys should be prosecuted for reckless endangerment, manslaughter, or negligent homicide rather than murder. But then again, some of them were acting way outside the lines when they shot a civilian, and a rare few might even be indictable for “felony murder,” which is when you really didn’t mean to kill anyone, but they died as a result of another crime you were committing. > > I feel like you were engaging in a couple of extremely silly sophistries in this post. Sigh. No. If you go to a jury, you want to tell them “motive means & opportunity”- you need to tell the jury \*why \*the nice Police Officer killed the man. Just saying “he did” doesnt buy you a guilty verdict. So, when you take one of these fuck-ups to a jury as a DA- what do **YOU** tell them is the motive? That’s where many of the police shooting cases fall apart. We _know_ the cop shot the guy, but the question is WHY? So unless you can impute\* worse things to the cop than “he panicked and shot out of fear” then your case is dead. Happens time after time. - and then _prove,_ which is harder. And- unless the cop is serving in the military, he’s a “civilian” also. ---
**Author:** ![hotflungwok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/edb3f5/32.png) [@hotflungwok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hotflungwok)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/110 "2015-05-27T15:13:26Z")
If I understand correctly, Michael Brelo was acquitted because it could not be shown that his shots were specifically the ones that killed the suspects. Do we know that the two unarmed men were killed by bullets, and not like a heart attack or something? If we do, we know that one or more of the cops did in fact shoot and kill the suspects. This looks like if you just get enough cops involved in the shooting that none of them can be convicted of anything. If a group of people collectively beat a person to death, do none of them get convicted of murder because no one can tell which specific blow actually ended the victim’s life? Why doesn’t some variant of the [Felony Murder Rule](http://criminal.lawyers.com/criminal-law-basics/murder-during-the-commission-of-a-felony.html) apply here? A getaway driver can be prosecuted and convicted of a murder committed by his accomplice, a crime he did not commit. So why can’t a group of cops be convicted of the killing of a suspect if you can’t figure out which specific bullet did the killing, but you know that one of the bullets fired did? ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/111 "2015-05-27T15:17:02Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > The definition of felony assault requires substantially less than beating someone to death. > > You seem to have a peculiar definition of crime, where all criminals are murderers. That’s not realistic. > > You also seem to think that police only deal with “criminals,” that is, felons, that is, murderers? Of course none of those narrow definitions is the case. (post shortened) The definition of felony assault requires substantially less what? Evidence? I never said all criminals are murderers, nor did I imply it. Were you responding to my post, or creating a strawman? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/112 "2015-05-27T15:55:05Z")
> [@hotflungwok](#): > > Why doesn’t some variant of the [Felony Murder Rule](http://criminal.lawyers.com/criminal-law-basics/murder-during-the-commission-of-a-felony.html) apply here? A getaway driver can be prosecuted and convicted of a murder committed by his accomplice, a crime he did not commit. So why can’t a group of cops be convicted of the killing of a suspect if you can’t figure out which specific bullet did the killing, but you know that one of the bullets fired did? For one, the charge was never murder - it was manslaughter. For two, it’s not as simple as “We don’t know who fired the killing shot, so they all go free” - the judge found in his ruling that Brelo, and the other officers, had justifiable cause to use deadly force based on their understanding of the situation at the time. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/113 "2015-05-27T16:03:09Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Yes, and in most cases, Appeals dont work thus _they_ are thus “a huge waste of time and resources”. ISTM that appeals are more likely to be succesful than GJs to not indict by several orders of magnitude. > [@hotflungwok](#): > > Why doesn’t some variant of the [Felony Murder Rule](http://criminal.lawyers.com/criminal-law-basics/murder-during-the-commission-of-a-felony.html) apply here? A getaway driver can be prosecuted and convicted of a murder committed by his accomplice, a crime he did not commit. So why can’t a group of cops be convicted of the killing of a suspect if you can’t figure out which specific bullet did the killing, but you know that one of the bullets fired did? IANAL, but FWIW my guess is that you need for the entire group to be engaged in a crime for that rule to come into play. It’s not like any time you’re part of a group in which one guy commits a crime that all are guilty. So if a bunch of guys are shooting someone with legal justification and one guy is shooting without legal justification, the other shooters can’t be charged on that basis. (By contrast, if the whole group is robbing a bank then all could possibly be responsible for the actions of the one shooter.) ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/114 "2015-05-27T17:28:47Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > No it isn’t. The police don’t file the charges, the DA does. And the DA does in fact review every police involved shooting. How is what I posted incorrect when that is a fact? Because they don’t all go before a grand jury. The DA doesn’t send them all to a grand jury. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/115 "2015-05-27T17:32:49Z")
> [@hotflungwok](#): > > Why doesn’t some variant of the [Felony Murder Rule](http://criminal.lawyers.com/criminal-law-basics/murder-during-the-commission-of-a-felony.html) apply here? A getaway driver can be prosecuted and convicted of a murder committed by his accomplice, a crime he did not commit. So why can’t a group of cops be convicted of the killing of a suspect if you can’t figure out which specific bullet did the killing, but you know that one of the bullets fired did? A felony murder conviction requires you to show the accused was participating in a felony at the time the murder occurred. You’d have a hard time showing evidence that the police intended to commit a crime when they began chasing the car. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/116 "2015-05-27T18:11:49Z")
> [@hotflungwok](#): > > Why doesn’t some variant of the [Felony Murder Rule](http://criminal.lawyers.com/criminal-law-basics/murder-during-the-commission-of-a-felony.html) apply here? A getaway driver can be prosecuted and convicted of a murder committed by his accomplice, a crime he did not commit. So why can’t a group of cops be convicted of the killing of a suspect if you can’t figure out which specific bullet did the killing, but you know that one of the bullets fired did? Because there was no underlying felony. Again, you also need motive. What was the motive? ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/117 "2015-05-27T18:49:21Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Because there was no underlying felony. > > Again, you also need motive. What was the motive? If you’re going to repeat yourself, be right. You have maybe been misled by police procedurals. “Motive” is not an element of murder. You can kill somebody for literally no reason and still be guilty of murder. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/118 "2015-05-27T18:53:19Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > You can kill somebody for literally no reason and still be guilty of murder. Bullhonkey. Murder is specifically the unlawful killing of a human being _with malice aforethought_. Murder, much like a mortal sin, requires intent. If one unlawfully kills another in a non-malicious manner, the crime is manslaughter, not murder. ---
**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:** [May 27, 2015, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/119 "2015-05-27T18:56:21Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Bullhonkey. Murder is specifically the unlawful killing of a human being _with malice aforethought_. Murder, much like a mortal sin, requires intent. If one unlawfully kills another in a non-malicious manner, the crime is manslaughter, not murder. You might want to provide a cite… or [I’ll do it for you](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malice_aforethought#United_States), because your understanding of the law continues to be lacking: > [@](#): > > To varying extents in the United States, the requisite intention can also be found where the perpetrator acts with gross recklessness showing lack of care for human life, commonly referred to as “depraved heart murder”,[4] or during the commission of or while in flight from any felony or attempted felony (termed felony murder.) In England, such mens rea would only find a verdict of reckless or constructive manslaughter. > > Note that through the principle of transferred intent, an accused who intended to kill one person but inadvertently killed another instead is still guilty of murder. The intent to kill the first person suffices. > > In most common law jurisdictions, the American Law Institute’s Model Penal Code, and in the various U.S. state statutes which have codified homicide definitions, the term has been abandoned, or substantially revised. The four states of mind that are now recognized as constituting “malice aforethought” in murder prosecutions are as follows:[7] > > i.Intent to kill, > ii.Intent to inflict grievous bodily harm short of death, > iii.Reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life (sometimes described as an “abandoned and malignant heart”), or > iv.Intent to commit a dangerous felony (the “felony murder” doctrine). ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2015, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822/120 "2015-05-27T18:58:53Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > If you’re going to repeat yourself, be right. > > You have maybe been misled by police procedurals. “Motive” is not an element of murder. You can kill somebody for literally no reason and still be guilty of murder. It is when the possibility that the defendant had a perfectly legal reason to shoot is there, such as nearly all police shootings. " intent to kill" is part of most murder laws. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-law-re-police-shootings/720822.md?page=7)