I'm fine worth using tasers as an alternative to guns, when appropriate, in fact I want it. Problem is when tasers are used in situations when it's not needed. It appears there is a perception that a taser is a device for compliance, it's not, it is a weapon with risks. Less risk than a gun so preferable to that if possible, but it shouldn't be used when it's not needed because it is a weapon and is dangerous.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
The problem as always is defining necessary in a split second decision at the heat of the moment rather than in the cold light of day with all the facts.
The shooting of that therapist brings me close to the point that I feel police officers who shoot someone should be presumed guilty until proven innocent. I accept that he needs legal representation, but maybe the police unions should start re-considering if this is really the kind of advocacy they want to stand for.
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
No you aren'tQuote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Yes I am. A random police officer is more likely to be killed in the line of duty whether in an encounter now or not, than a random black male youth is to be killed by a police officer whether in an encounter now or not.
I agree, and I think police should get the benefit of the doubt. But that only works if they are actually held accountable when they are wrong and that doesn't seem to happen. In fact the whole legitimacy of the police depends strongly on whether you can trust the police and the statements they give. If you can't, you can't trust any evidence they give which would be a massive problem. So i think that police should get the benefit of the doubt but at the same time should be kept to a very high standard.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
And my point about the taser is more about the numerous stories about tasers being used in situations when there was no threat whatsoever, and the use of any weapon was basically unwarranted.
Cops get paid for being cops and get to take the uniform off at night. Blacks don't. What a ridiculous comparison.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/22/us/nor...ing/index.html
Lewk, is this the cop condemnation of this behavior that you were talking about?
Officers are given 24-48 hours after shooting someone before they have to give a statement. In all that time the best cover up they could come up with was that the shooting was for the caregiver's protection? WTF :bulb:
So:
- Did not listen to the therapist that there was no weapon.
- Could not see the toy truck obviously did not resemble a gun.
- Told the therapist to lie down when it was the autistic guy with the "gun"
- Were positioned at such a distance as to have no ability to deescalate the situation even if they wanted to.
- Even though they apparently couldn't assertain that the autistic guy wasn't holding a gun, they attempted to kill him for making a move to "sit down next to the therapist".
- If this were a legit threatening situation, the officer missed all three shots at the guy. WITH A RIFLE. from ~50 yards...
- Handcuffed both of them despite there being no legitimate reason to do so.
- Did not apply first aid to the therapist.
- An officer falsely reported that the autistic man was loading his weapon, which resulted in the accused officer taking potentially lethal action while also apparently not being able to see the situation.
- Approached a reported suicide attempt with guns drawn.
- Shot the wrong guy.
- When asked why the officer shot the therapist, the officer replied, "I don't know".
- neither officer thought to radio in request for binoculars.
Any one else would have been fucking arrested for this, even with Florida's fucked up "stand your ground" defense.
You're complaining that they're not making good cover up stories? If they're reporting their version of the truth then that should be applauded.
I agree. I think that does happen, though obviously improvements can happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flixy
It's not ridiculous whatsoever. It isn't even close, cops are an order of magnitude more likely to be killed than blacks are. Address that and you'll address cops being trigger happy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Cops are more likely to get killed everywhere. Cops don't go around murdering this many unarmed people everywhere. :rolleyes:
did you even see the footage?Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Looks like these cops thinks they can decide on the death penalty for being black while alive.
Their version of the truth is that the caregiver was shot for his own protection/safety. Beyond the "I don't know" the officers have admitted zero responsibility for how this unfolded. That makes for a very fucked up view of what happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Are they? What is the ratio of cops killed in the USA compared to say the UK or other nations?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
No I didn't and it isn't even remotely relevant to the principles involved. If they're guilty then they should be found guilty even if it is innocent until proven guilty. That's how justice works :rolleyes:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
Indeed it does.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
https://www.yahoo.com/news/video-tex...230242581.html
Another "bad apple". :rolleyes:
Yes. Why should that be shocking? You expect everyone in an industry to be an angel? Just how naive are you?
https://www.odmp.org/search/year/2015Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...oung-black-men
130 officers lost their lives in the line of duty in 2015. 56 of those were from deliberate action (shooting, assault, being deliberately hit with a car etc), which excludes accidents and illness.
1134 young black men shot and killed by police in 2015
0.9 million serving police officers in the US (http://www.nleomf.org/facts/enforcement/)
6.5 million young black males as defined by the Guardian ("Despite making up only 2% of the total US population, African American males between the ages of 15 and 34")
0.017% of total young black male population were killed by police in 2015
0.006% of the currently serving police force were murdered in 2015
So, that's all very black of the envelop but I think the take home is that you have it backwards. Young black men are an order of magnitude more likely to be killed by police than police are likely to be killed by anyone, not vice versa.
It is also worth noting that being a cop doesn't even make the top 10 most dangerous jobs in the US. I would therefore regard the idea that US police are justified in shooting people, especially black people at the drop of the hat, because they do a very dangerous job to be dubious in the extreme.
It is very relevant. Shooting from a distance in a situation where no lives are threatened can not be excused. That you don't recognize hyperbole when you see it is another problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
The problem is not that a lawyer could come up with the crap the union jurists came up with. The problem is that they give the impression the Union is sticking up for people who attempt murder as long as the attempt is carried out in uniform.
He's also missed the part where cops almost never get found guilty. The juries are composed of the Lewks and Rands of the world.
If it can't be excused then there should be no reason not to get a conviction under innocent until proven guilty.
Let's see if this attempted murder gets punished. It shouldn't take 2 years to come to a conclusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Good lord. Honestly, I already automatically replace "RB" with "Fe" in my headQuote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
It may depend on the state statute, but everything I've read indicates that it would probably be prosecuted as attempted manslaughter. It sounds like, and I believe union representatives are trying to frame it as a negligent discharge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
I dunno, does that hold if his official story is that he was trying to shoot the autistic man in order to protect the therapist?
I couldn't say, either way it is a pretty god awful thing to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless