First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
Post Reply Yet another person shot and killed while having their hands up
4834 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Online
Posted 9/20/16

sundin13 wrote:


octorockandroll wrote:
It means the punishment has to be proportionate to the crime comitted. So instead of shooting at the unarmed person for walking away from them, the reasonable cop would tackle or taser him. A police officer is only allowed to shoot when their life or that of a civilianis directly being threatened.


Small correction: A police officer is only allowed to shoot when they reasonably believe that their life or that of a civilian is being threatened.

Its more about reasonable belief than actual danger. In this situation, you have someone not complying, and then reaching down against orders. That isn't really cut and dry one way or the other. I wouldn't be surprised if protocol stated that a different line of action should have been taken pre-emptively, but like I said earlier, I don't believe this would be considered criminal.


The belief thing may just be a difference between our countries' law enforcement then, as I am prety sure that even if a canadian officer makes a bad call based on only perceived danger, then they will be punished. Not as severely as just up and shooting someone without warning, but punishment nobetheless.
runec 
28302 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 9/20/16

EichiXIII wrote:
Sure, but in this day and age where people have been setting up ambushes for cops I'd be super suspicious of even a stalled car in the road. That's part of what I meant when I mentioned things being tense on both sides earlier. Bad cops get a lot of media attention. Communities feels threatened and suspicious of all cops. Cops encounter more and more people who resist even simple commands. People retaliate against cops by seeking them out to kill them. Cops now fear every encounter even more than before not knowing what they are going to deal with. Uneasy cops get rougher with people and handle things poorly. It's a cycle I don't see ending any time soon.


Statistically speaking there's not really such a thing as "this day and age". The officer was vastly more likely to die in a car accident on the way to the scene then to actually be ambushed and killed. But tension is a problem, yes. But a tense officer creates a tense situation. The officer should be the one maintaining a calm, steady demeanor in order to de-escalate situations. If the visibly armed person with a reputation ( regardless of validity ) for shooting unarmed people is acting tense then everyone else is definitely going to be tense too.

I mean she should not have ended up with her gun drawn on an unarmed motorist with a stalled vehicle to begin with. But since she conveniently had her dash cam off on her patrol car we don't even have evidence of how she ended up that way.



13141 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 9/20/16

octorockandroll wrote:


sundin13 wrote:


octorockandroll wrote:
It means the punishment has to be proportionate to the crime comitted. So instead of shooting at the unarmed person for walking away from them, the reasonable cop would tackle or taser him. A police officer is only allowed to shoot when their life or that of a civilianis directly being threatened.


Small correction: A police officer is only allowed to shoot when they reasonably believe that their life or that of a civilian is being threatened.

Its more about reasonable belief than actual danger. In this situation, you have someone not complying, and then reaching down against orders. That isn't really cut and dry one way or the other. I wouldn't be surprised if protocol stated that a different line of action should have been taken pre-emptively, but like I said earlier, I don't believe this would be considered criminal.


The belief thing may just be a difference between our countries' law enforcement then, as I am prety sure that even if a canadian officer makes a bad call based on only perceived danger, then they will be punished. Not as severely as just up and shooting someone without warning, but punishment nobetheless.


Well, think of it like this. If someone points something at an officer which is shaped like a gun and looks like a gun, the officer fires and it turns out to be a toy guy spraypainted black, the officer wouldn't be in trouble. There was no actual danger, but the officer was entirely reasonable in believing that danger was present.
7025 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Earth
Offline
Posted 9/20/16
If the cop just shot him while standing there with his hands in the air, I'd be all for the death penalty for the cop. When you get your ass shot for not listening to some dude pointing a gun at you, well you basically deserve what you get. If a criminal points a gun in your face and asks for your wallet, are you just going to walk away, reach into your pants, or argue with the guy? No, you're going to give the bastard your wallet. At least any sane person would.

Rule #1 of modern day life:
If someone points a gun (or other dangerous weapon) at you and tells you to do something, do it. It doesn't matter if it's a cop, a crook, or the damn Pope.
IBELIS 
22150 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Illinois
Offline
Posted 9/20/16
I don't know if the victim was right or wrong the question I have in these instances is why do the police never shoot to bring the person down, why not shoot him in the leg? It is the rare instance that you see the victim being white and that is not because white's always comply with the police it's because they are not gunned down for not complying. I think a weapon should be visible before deciding to shoot someone because you believe they are armed. What is that belief base on?

In this case the voiceover suggested that a taser would be the appropriate action and one of the officers did just that , while another used a firearm, the suspects back was to them and he stuck his hand in his pocket. Is that really enough to shoot someone?

620 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 9/20/16 , edited 9/20/16

runec wrote:


EichiXIII wrote:
Sure, but in this day and age where people have been setting up ambushes for cops I'd be super suspicious of even a stalled car in the road. That's part of what I meant when I mentioned things being tense on both sides earlier. Bad cops get a lot of media attention. Communities feels threatened and suspicious of all cops. Cops encounter more and more people who resist even simple commands. People retaliate against cops by seeking them out to kill them. Cops now fear every encounter even more than before not knowing what they are going to deal with. Uneasy cops get rougher with people and handle things poorly. It's a cycle I don't see ending any time soon.


Statistically speaking there's not really such a thing as "this day and age". The officer was vastly more likely to die in a car accident on the way to the scene then to actually be ambushed and killed. But tension is a problem, yes. But a tense officer creates a tense situation. The officer should be the one maintaining a calm, steady demeanor in order to de-escalate situations. If the visibly armed person with a reputation ( regardless of validity ) for shooting unarmed people is acting tense then everyone else is definitely going to be tense too.

I mean she should not have ended up with her gun drawn on an unarmed motorist with a stalled vehicle to begin with. But since she conveniently had her dash cam off on her patrol car we don't even have evidence of how she ended up that way.





Yes. Which is why I called it a cycle. Also yes, the cop should be the one maintaining calm. The problem is that things are just changing. People seem to get out of hand more and more. A lot of people just aren't up to the task as much anymore as they were. The constant tension day after day breaks people down. Obviously some cops excel at their job and most are decent-good but many are just more average people who can't handle it and only was able to become a cop because of relaxed standards or needing certain types of officers to make their station look good in the eyes of the public.

It's a problem that both sides have to address at this point. Cops alone aren't enough anymore. You could have 100% of cops being completely honest and doing the right thing and still have a lot of mistrust on the other side escalating things to dangerous levels and vice versa. It might calm things down overall after being that way for years but since neither side will cooperate and be honest 100% of the time both sides need to come to an understanding. Since that also probably isn't going to happen that is why I said I don't see the cycle ending any time soon.

I feel like I am starting to ramble. I'm tired so forgive me if I am.

Oh, and yes, as I said the cops definitely have questions they need to answer. The cam being off I consider secondary to the taser but it is still one that demands an answer.



IBELIS wrote:

I don't know if the victim was right or wrong the question I have in these instances is why do the police never shoot to bring the person down, why not shoot him in the leg? It is the rare instance that you see the victim being white and that is not because white's always comply with the police it's because they are not gunned down for not complying. I think a weapon should be visible before deciding to shoot someone because you believe they are armed. What is that belief base on?

In this case the voiceover suggested that a taser would be the appropriate action and one of the officers did just that , while another used a firearm, the suspects back was to them and he stuck his hand in his pocket. Is that really enough to shoot someone?



They are trained to shoot to kill because wounding someone who has the intent to kill you can wind up with you, the officer, being killed. Shooting someone does not always end their violent actions just like tasers and pepper sprays aren't always effective at bringing people down. The safest option is to just shoot to kill. You also don't want an officer trying to figure out whether they should shoot to kill or just shoot to injure because in the time it takes them to make that call they could also be killed. It's just too dangerous to do it that way.

Typically, I believe anyway, something is visible at least when the call is made to kill them. Sometimes though it is, again, just too dangerous to give a person the time to pull out whatever they are pulling out and determine if it is a weapon or not. It's all split-second decisions that determine who goes home.

I don't believe his back was actually to them but that is where the whole thing gets debatable. He is already clearly not obeying orders and is behaving suspiciously. To add reaching into a pocket/waist/vehicle on top of that and some sort of decision has to be made. Taser would have been most appropriate in this case, preferably before he even got to the car, but a gun is an option they can use if they feel it is warranted as well.
4834 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Online
Posted 9/20/16 , edited 9/20/16

sundin13 wrote:

Well, think of it like this. If someone points something at an officer which is shaped like a gun and looks like a gun, the officer fires and it turns out to be a toy guy spraypainted black, the officer wouldn't be in trouble. There was no actual danger, but the officer was entirely reasonable in believing that danger was present.


I'm pretty sure that is not the case for a few reasons

1.) Every water gun I can remember seeing since I was a boy looks something like this.



Even if it were painted black, I would probably not mistake it for a real firearm, and I assume someone who's job involves dealing with firearms just about every day would be even less likely to do so.

2.) If a person were to go up to a cop like that and not be a very young child that person would be actively looking for trouble. They wouldnt be confronted by police and then respond shittily, they would be taking action specifically towards starting shit, so the reason the officer would be off the hook would be because they were deliberately provoked, not because they mistook a toy that only barely looks like a gun for a gun. Even without a weapon a guy attacking an officer is still a danger.

3.) the punishment for the officer (if he even received one that is) would be pretty minimal in that last scenario. A straight up attack is much different than a guy walking away. If it were a kid just playing around like that, the officer would definitely get a bigger punishment but if memory serves it would only be a temporary suspension. Like I said, not a super terrible punishment, but one nonetheless. Hell, its possible the parents would be worse off. If they knew about the modified water gun and didnt do anything about it they would be in some deep shit, seeing as modifying fake firearms to look more like real ones is illegal here.
7025 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Earth
Offline
Posted 9/20/16

IBELIS wrote:

I don't know if the victim was right or wrong the question I have in these instances is why do the police never shoot to bring the person down, why not shoot him in the leg? It is the rare instance that you see the victim being white and that is not because white's always comply with the police it's because they are not gunned down for not complying. I think a weapon should be visible before deciding to shoot someone because you believe they are armed. What is that belief base on?

In this case the voiceover suggested that a taser would be the appropriate action and one of the officers did just that , while another used a firearm, the suspects back was to them and he stuck his hand in his pocket. Is that really enough to shoot someone?



Legs don't do the shooting so they can still shoot back you. Center mass is the largest and easiest place to target in order to stop what you are aiming at. Police can only fire when they feel that their life is being threatened, and in that case the objective is to kill before they can kill you.

As for the racial stats you can find tons online. I read that the only thing to uptick in the past couple years is cops killed. Police shootings have remained the same. I suppose it all depends on how the stats are presented though. I don't really care about that crap. I don't think the KKK have manage to infiltrate all the police departments in the country, and are waging a war on black people like some seem to believe.
Humms 
10576 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / CAN, ON
Online
Posted 9/20/16
See when people raise their hands up that is being defiant. They are trying to rise above the police.

I'm pretty sure they will change it to " get on your knees " for many reason I'm sure. Obey the law kids !
620 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 9/20/16

octorockandroll wrote:

I'm pretty sure that is not the case for a few reasons

1.) Every water gun I can remember seeing since I was a boy looks something like this.



Even if it were painted black, I would probably not mistake it for a real firearm, and I assume someone who's job involves dealing with firearms just about every day would be even less likely to do so.

2.) If a person were to go up to a cop like that and not be a very young child that person would be actively looking for trouble. They wouldnt be confronted by police and then respond shittily, they would be taking action specifically towards starting shit, so the reason the officer would be off the hook would be because they were deliberately provoked, not because they mistook a toy that only barely looks like a gun for a gun. Even without a weapon a guy attacking an officer is still a danger.

3.) the punishment for the officer (if he even received one that is) would be pretty minimal in that last scenario. A straight up attack is much different than a guy walking away. If it were a kid just playing around like that, the officer would definitely get a bigger punishment but if memory serves it would only be a temporary suspension. Like I said, not a super terrible punishment, but one nonetheless. Hell, its possible the parents would be worse off. If they knew about the modified water gun and didnt do anything about it they would be in some deep shit, seeing as modifying fake firearms to look more like real ones is illegal here.


Just to point out the water gun thing.... All guns in the picture below are actually water guns.

http://i576.photobucket.com/albums/ss204/seandillonarfcom/capandwater.jpg

I don't believe they make them look like real guns anymore but that really only changed in the 90's I think. Still obtainable but mostly you see people with real looking BB and Airsoft guns.
27739 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 9/20/16 , edited 9/20/16
45 million living in poverty, hate on minorities, racist police,..etc
half of the country rooting for a demagoge,....
So, as a German i have a question:
is the U.S.A. turning into a third world country or are you guys just as stupid as the people in Germany in 1933.
one thing is for sure, remember the days that everybody hated russia and europeans played the lottery to get a magic green card to your country?
Well, you became shit like russia in the last 20 years, and you are the only ones not realizing.
USA.....USA....USA
4834 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Online
Posted 9/20/16

arano wrote:

45 million living in poverty, hate on minorities, racist police,..etc
half of the country rooting for a demagoge,....
So, as a German i have a question:
is the U.S.A. turning into a third world country or are you guys just as stupid as the people in Germany in 1933.
one thing is for sure, remember the days that everybody hated russia and europeans played the lottery to get a magic green card to your country?
Well, you became shit like russia in the last 20 years, and you are the only ones not realizing.
USA.....USA....USA


While I disagree pretty strongly with just about everything presented here I feel I should say that maybe this post might be on to something. After all I am not an american, but Xxanthar is and according to him the rule of the game in america is apparently "Comply or die". I can see that fitting into nazi germany pretty well.
620 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 9/20/16
As an American I will just say that America is still pretty great. It is, however, going downhill because we are focusing more and more on how things look rather than functionality. There is much we have to fix and we need to throw away the weird "we always know better" mentality that the government has and take cues from other countries, regardless of their political system, with functioning systems in areas we lack and implement similar ones ourselves without all the added in political BS that goes on. We do sometimes have really great ideas and plans...we just also then shit all over them by throwing stupid crap into them to push various political agendas to the point they no longer work at all. Then we complain and blame each other instead of working together to fix and remove the BS that ruined it in the first place and just scrap the whole idea.
27739 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 9/20/16
well, Hitler only made 30% the first time election, Trump is doing better.
Trump>Hitler
7025 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Earth
Offline
Posted 9/20/16

octorockandroll wrote:


arano wrote:

45 million living in poverty, hate on minorities, racist police,..etc
half of the country rooting for a demagoge,....
So, as a German i have a question:
is the U.S.A. turning into a third world country or are you guys just as stupid as the people in Germany in 1933.
one thing is for sure, remember the days that everybody hated russia and europeans played the lottery to get a magic green card to your country?
Well, you became shit like russia in the last 20 years, and you are the only ones not realizing.
USA.....USA....USA


While I disagree pretty strongly with just about everything presented here I feel I should say that maybe this post might be on to something. After all I am not an american, but Xxanthar is and according to him the rule of the game in america is apparently "Comply or die". I can see that fitting into nazi germany pretty well.


Yes, that was exactly what I was saying.... derrrrrrrp. Continue living under the protection of the USA and contributing nothing but some maple syrup.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.