Ridiculous Police News (Specific events)

[Weegion]

The cop didn't have information that this particular suspect had a gun. He did not see any weapon - he didn't even think he saw a weapon. He did not accurately perceive the threat level from this very drunk guy with headphones on and used deadly force unnecessarily.

But they are not even arguing at this point that he was killed because they knew he was dangerous. They are arguing he was killed for not following orders, a seemingly Orwellian standard to set.
But in the era of precognitive thought policing, this is the new norm.

"Good shoot".

[Karbuncle]

So its all the cops error and stupidity, the kid did NOTHING wrong?

I think their defense for that is "he was drunk". To which I would of course say "Not drunk enough to walk backwards while facing cops with guns drawn and telling them to fuck off"

But they are not even arguing at this point that he was killed because they knew he was dangerous. They are arguing he was killed for not following orders, a seemingly Orwellian standard to set.
But in the era of precognitive thought policing, this is the new norm.

"Good shoot".

so we should we just take all police orders as "I'll follow them if I want too, NBD?"

You have a policeman pointing a gun at you issuing an order to get your arms up and out of your pockets and you think that the man ... i.. give up, I think you guys should become police officers see how well your armchair methods of controlling people work.

[NynJa]

He was acting like he had a weapon consealed in his pants, and was mouthing off to cops with guns drawn on him.

[Salodin]

The cop didn't have information that this particular suspect had a gun. He did not see any weapon - he didn't even think he saw a weapon. He did not accurately perceive the threat level from this very drunk guy with headphones on and used deadly force unnecessarily.

Do I think he made an honest mistake? Yeah. But the difference between good and bad police work is making the correct decisions in high-stress situations. His mistake lead to a needless death, and there should be repercussions for making mistakes that kill people.

It's weird that I even have to make this argument.

You don't need to know which one specifically had a gun; all you need to know is that one of them had a gun. Considering his other two friends complied, and he didnt, AND he made a gesture that is commonly done when reaching for a concealed weapon you still don't understand why he fired his weapon?

I think we're done here.

[archibaldcrane]

So its all the cops error and stupidity, the kid did NOTHING wrong?

Failing to comply is a dumb thing to do, but the punishment shouldn't be death. He never presented a threat to the officer but he was shot anyway.

You want to blame the victim here really hard, I get it. But the victim didn't jeopardize the cop's safety, and should not have been shot to death. He was just being a drunk idiot.

[Karbuncle]

Failing to comply is a dumb thing to do, but the punishment shouldn't be death. He never presented a threat to the officer but he was shot anyway.

You want to blame the victim here really hard, I get it. But the victim didn't jeopardize the cop's safety, and should not have been shot to death. He was just being a drunk idiot.

I can't argue with that really... I'd like to say Its upsetting this man had to die for his mistake, I'm just not sure what if any punishment should be appropriate, cause the way I view it, the cop addressed the situation with the information he had and did a reasonably good job, going as far as trying to make sure he didn't die from the shots. So I can't blame the cop for acting the way he did because he was acting on the information he was given.

I see what you say by "no threat", but as Sal said, the cop had information that one of them had a firearm, and while it turns out they didn't, it could have just as easily turned out he did. if this man had a gun on him, this wouldn't even be news, and the only reason its brought up is because he was later found to be unarmed. But the officer couldn't have known this as the information he was given was based off a 911 call stating they were "flashing a gun". I mean if he had waited and the kid did have a gun, would he have had enough time from the moment the kid drew his gun to before he could shoot to disarm/shoot him? Maybe.

Again... I do understand your point of view, we're just looking at it differently

[Weegion]

so we should we just take all police orders as "I'll follow them if I want too, NBD?"

Obviously I never suggested that, in fact I think he certainly should have followed the orders, but that does not mean I think this is quality police work either.

[Salodin]

He never presented a threat to the officer but he was shot anyway.

Ohhhhh, okay I get it. You just missed the part where he lifted his shirt like he was grabbing a concealed weapon. No prob, I get it now.

[Ksandra]

Failing to comply is a dumb thing to do, but the punishment shouldn't be death.

I want to quote this ten million times.

[Karbuncle]

Obviously I never suggested that, in fact I think he certainly should have followed the orders, but that does not mean I think this is quality police work either.

What are your standards for quality police work then. Cause again, I'd really love to see you people become police offers, if only to give these other obviously untrained gun monkeys a beacon of light to follow.

I'm laying the angst a little hard here... but a cops job is not easy, and i have a feeling, trained or not, none of you would be so calm and cool in a situation like this. Not being behind a computer has a way of... changing how you view things, and I don't mean that in an "NERDS" way, but more of a, things happen differently in reality than they do on an armchair.

I mean seriously who is going to want to become a cop when everyone hates you for doing your job and any slip up in judgment regardless of the information you're giving, procedures you followed, or times you warned someone, will lead to you being fired or possibly jail time? I know this is a far step from whats being asked here, but i feel it should be brought up as an example of how extreme our society views policemen. When you read the comments on those news articles and the statement from the victims relatives and such, this is the kid of picture you suspect society wants. They expect all cops to be super humans, immune to fear, and reacting to everything with the speed, judgment and accuracy of an automaton. They're trained humans, but they're still humans, and a mistake or hesitation on their part could leave them dead. I'm not saying this particular paragraph to defend this cop, but more of a statement on the state of all police.

[Weegion]

But the officer couldn't have known this as the information he was given was based off a 911 call stating they were "flashing a gun".

Why is this such a big deal though? You are allowed to own firearms in the United States, and while "flashing" it is probably criminal depending on laws, does it necessarily make a situation/individual dangerous?

[archibaldcrane]

Ohhhhh, okay I get it. You just missed the part where he lifted his shirt like he was grabbing a concealed weapon. No prob, I get it now.

Lifting his shirt makes it even easier to see if there is an object in his waistband. For all we know this drunk idiot was showing that he wasn't packing.

The cop never saw a weapon, never thought he saw a weapon. But he shot anyway.

[Salodin]

It's simpler then that. Cops work on what they "know". I put that in quotation marks because what they know might be based on false assumptions. They "knew" one of them had a weapon, and when one of them made the gesture to go pull a firearm he was open fired upon. It's tragic, but not malicious or wrong. The cop did everything he was supposed to do.

[Salodin]

Lifting his shirt makes it even easier to see if there is an object in his waistband. For all we know this drunk idiot was showing that he wasn't packing.

The cop never saw a weapon, never thought he saw a weapon. But he shot anyway.

Put your hands up =/= cross your arms and lift up your shirt. You're only making a better case for why this soul was darwined.

[Karbuncle]

Why is this such a big deal though? You are allowed to own firearms in the United States, and while "flashing" it is probably criminal depending on laws, does it necessarily make a situation/individual dangerous?

Its about context of the situation. I'd have to dig up the article cause i cannot recall the exact wording or the phrasing of the 911... but there were other contributing factors to approaching the suspects with such. He followed them a short while before hand and witnessed other acts that could be taken as offensive/threatening, though I do believe the article mentioned later that those were misunderstandings. Regardless of the situation beforehand, as I believe Neph already mentioned, if a suspect is well, suspected of having a firearm, you meet that with equal force, which means yes, it doesn't mean they were dangerous, but when theres a 911 call about people flashing guns, a cop is to respond with a gun as well.

Obviously hes not suppose to shoot first ask questions later or respond with guns blazing... which is why he followed the 3, he also approached them and ordered them to the ground, noticeably without shooting and killing the other 2... Perhaps we should look at how we handle dispatch/911 calls involving people who have a gun but are not using it at the time of the call. I mean, if anything this falls back to a paranoid 911 caller getting police involved because she thought these people were thugs up to no good.

[Salodin]

Why is this such a big deal though? You are allowed to own firearms in the United States, and while "flashing" it is probably criminal depending on laws, does it necessarily make a situation/individual dangerous?

Holy shit, wave a gun around while cops have their weapon drawn on you and tell me how that works out for you.

Oh wait, you'd be too dead to do so, and the rest of the world would agree it was a good kill.

Sorry for the triple, certain edits are hard/impossible on the taps.

[Weegion]

Holy shit, wave a gun around while cops have their weapon drawn on you and tell me how that works out for you.

LOL but that is not what happened when he was shot. If it was it would certainly be a different story.

[Karbuncle]

http://fox2now.com/2014/10/07/police...-her-a-ticket/

Ohlordy, an example of a good policeman making the news.

[Meresgi]

http://fox2now.com/2014/10/07/police...-her-a-ticket/

Ohlordy, an example of a good policeman making the news.

Afterwards he shot her for reaching for her wallet!

Nice to see actual good news actually shown, especially on fox

[Nephlite]

Why is this such a big deal though? You are allowed to own firearms in the United States, and while "flashing" it is probably criminal depending on laws, does it necessarily make a situation/individual dangerous?

Depends on the state. Some, you can't carry at all unless you have a permit. Even if you did, you still cannot brandish or hold that firearm in a way that threatens another unless your life is in danger.

Lifting his shirt makes it even easier to see if there is an object in his waistband. For all we know this drunk idiot was showing that he wasn't packing.

The cop never saw a weapon, never thought he saw a weapon. But he shot anyway.

You don't know what he saw because you weren't there. I can easily make a fist with my index finger presented and make it look like I'm printing a firearm under my shirt. Small .22 derengers are so small, you don't even know it's there until you're dead. Sun was in the cops eyes, too and the kid was moving fast. I dunno, we might not be looking at the same video since you thought he was black initially. Also, he wasn't wearing headphones.

I'm for accountability in most situations and I agree that the police should be held accountable. You have to understand that the police are held to a higher standard that has higher expectations, in exchange for higher thresholds to meet criteria for negligence and criminal behavior.

In most instances, basic law still applies. You still have to establish intent and you still have to take in to consideration that persons perception at the time of the incident. It's not just about police involved shootings, it's about the concept of policing on the whole. Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer in this example killed this kid with intent, with malice, and with wanton disregard for life? At the same time, prove the officer did not reasonably fear for his life and his training and experience did not meet a very specific set of criteria for a Deadly Force perception.