Org Mobile Site
I don't know what to think of this... Apart from the Fergusson (sp?) case, a 12 year old were just shot.
Again, he had a soft airgun with the safety label removed.
None of the people shot thought it MIGHT, just MIGHT, be a bad idea to swing weapons around among people, or not at once surrender when police shows up.
Heck, the policemen want to get home to their families... You don't joke around with weapons around them, unless you want to be shot and killed.
Are these people effin morons, or what is happening?
Again, he had a soft airgun with the safety label removed.
None of the people shot thought it MIGHT, just MIGHT, be a bad idea to swing weapons around among people, or not at once surrender when police shows up.
Heck, the policemen want to get home to their families... You don't joke around with weapons around them, unless you want to be shot and killed.
Are these people effin morons, or what is happening?
Twelve year olds KNOW it is a toy and that they are just playing, so they don't worry about such things. Parents generally aren't aware that their kid is out playing with something that might look too real to a tense police officer. Sad.
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh:
Twelve year olds KNOW it is a toy and that they are just playing, so they don't worry about such things. Parents generally aren't aware that their kid is out playing with something that might look too real to a tense police officer. Sad.
It's definitely a tragedy... Twelve year olds KNOW it is a toy and that they are just playing, so they don't worry about such things. Parents generally aren't aware that their kid is out playing with something that might look too real to a tense police officer. Sad.
REGARDLESS though, when I was 12 I was into RPGs, and one day were on my way to a live with a crossbow...
Police came, and I at once turned around and put my hands around my head. I understood it was a tense situation, and acted accordingly. Don't blame this on the kid being "only" 12, good parenting includes respect for the police.
Specially when the kid had a gun with the safety label removed... I mean geez...
I have a theater knife at home, where the blade goes into the handle when you stab... Do you think I would approach a policeman with it, as I "knew I didn't have a weapon?".
This seems like a systematical error, but these 2 examples in a short timespan rather shows that the problem is with the black society, not the police.
BTW, could we change the title to "12 year old" instead of black person?
I connected it with a similar case, but it wasn't in the USA. My bad.
I connected it with a similar case, but it wasn't in the USA. My bad.
I messed up the thread start... Would be lovely if some mod could remove the thread altogether...
I have an important topic in mind, but this was a ill formulated...
I have an important topic in mind, but this was a ill formulated...
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
This seems like a systematical error, but these 2 examples in a short timespan rather shows that the problem is with the black society, not the police.
There is a perception in black society that the police are not entirely fair to black people. Some of them exaggerate this, but there does seem to be some truth in it. Obviously that undermines respect for the police, which results in more frequent tense situations which can cause more "incidents." So its not as simple as blame the cops or blame the blacks. There is an ongoing problem that both sides contribute to, and has no easy solution.This seems like a systematical error, but these 2 examples in a short timespan rather shows that the problem is with the black society, not the police.
As for the "effing moron" comment, keep in mind that a twelve year old does not have a fully developed adult brain. Apperently, plenty of college students do not have fully developed brains (http://www.livescience.com/7005-brai...ly-mature.html) so when 12 year old kids act like they're not all there mentally, well there's likely a reason.
I knew a college student of average intelligence who was stopped by the cops for playing around with a toy sword in public after dark. If he'd been black would he be dead now? I don't know, but if a reasonably bright college student can get into trouble with a fake weapon, I'm not surprised that kids make similar mistakes.
Personally, I think its common sense to ban realistic guns and guns that can easily be made realistic by removing labels etc. You can't just say that good parenting includes teaching respect for the police and leave it at that. Does a child deserve to die because he didn't have good parents? Do the police deserve to be thrown into tense situations that could have been avoided, and then maybe have to live with the knowledge that they had shot an innocent child, just because the child didn't receive good parenting?
Brain fart or not, I applaud you for raising the subject. Its an important one.
Originally Posted by Brandy Blue:
Wrote stuff
Wow, I've never seen you around here before... Welcome to the BR Wrote stuff
I'm short on time, and will answer you properly later...
Very well made arguments though
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Black = open fire instantly
Whatever you think of black 'cultures' - unless of course that includes genocidal sentiments - police reactions toward black citizens are clearly systematically excessive.
Edit: It's also funny when you consider this type of thing often happens in "Open Carry" states.
Originally Posted by Montmorency:
Black = open fire instantly
Whatever you think of black 'cultures' - unless of course that includes genocidal sentiments - police reactions toward black citizens are clearly systematically excessive.
Edit: It's also funny when you consider this type of thing often happens in "Open Carry" states.
Open carry does not equal weapon in hand or reaching for. Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Black = open fire instantly
Whatever you think of black 'cultures' - unless of course that includes genocidal sentiments - police reactions toward black citizens are clearly systematically excessive.
Edit: It's also funny when you consider this type of thing often happens in "Open Carry" states.
Regardless, your posts come off as autistic enough times for me to not really care much about what you think.
You basically with your posts come off as a Sheldon from TBBT, without the superior mind and habit to offer people in distress a hot beverage.
Originally Posted by :
Open carry does not equal weapon in hand or reaching for.
Actually, it does.Open carry does not equal weapon in hand or reaching for.
Originally Posted by Montmorency:
Actually, it does.
Against policemen?Actually, it does.
Originally Posted by :
Against policemen?
A handful of seconds is enough to make such a judgement? Against policemen?
The issue is the perfunctory nature of warnings given, if at all given.
Originally Posted by Montmorency:
A handful of seconds is enough to make such a judgement?
The issue is the perfunctory nature of warnings given, if at all given.
LOL... A handful of seconds is enough to make such a judgement?
The issue is the perfunctory nature of warnings given, if at all given.
Yes, a handful of seconds is enough... Heck, half a second is enough if someone seemingly reach for a gun or lunge at you.
I guess you live in an academic lala land, and have no experience with real threat situations.
I have been aiming an assault rifle at a person, and I would have shot him instantly had he done anything stupid.
Why? Because that was my JOB, and I want to get home around 5 o'clock and be with the people I love. I think this is the point people like you just don't get.
Originally Posted by :
Yes, a handful of seconds is enough... Heck, half a second is enough if someone seemingly reach for a gun or lunge at you.
Then, uh, maybe don't pull up the car right next to the individual? Maybe use a loudspeaker? Yes, a handful of seconds is enough... Heck, half a second is enough if someone seemingly reach for a gun or lunge at you.
Your mindset is unbelievably rigid. You can't imagine any other way to respond to a possible threat as a cop than to immediately get on the scene and shoot first, ask questions later?
To say nothing of the fact that with white individuals police are much more 'understanding'.
I'm not sure I understand Montmorency's point about prefuctory warnings. Is a cop supposed to say to everyone he or she meets, "Don't draw a weapon, or a toy weapon, or look like you are drawing a weapon or toy weapon or I will have to shoot you?" I don't think that threatening everyone on sight is going to help relations between cops and the public much. Or is he or she supposed to spend 3 or 4 seconds saying that while someone finishes drawing the weapon and shoots the cop dead? Yes, a few seconds (or sometimes maybe a split second) is not enough time to makes such a judgement, but sometimes that is all the time the cop gets.
Looks like you posted an answer before I finished asking my question. Loudspeakers are probably not always a practical solution in real life policing, but might be sometimes.
Originally Posted by Montmorency:
Then, uh, maybe don't pull up the car right next to the individual? Maybe use a loudspeaker?
Your mindset is unbelievably rigid. You can't imagine any other way to respond to a possible threat as a cop than to immediately get on the scene and shoot first, ask questions later?
To say nothing of the fact that with white individuals police are much more 'understanding'.
Maybe they pulled up next to, as there were civilians in the line of shooting, and they wanted the car between innocents and the perpetrator? I don't know how it is over there, but here police cars are bullet proof (well, to an extent). Then, uh, maybe don't pull up the car right next to the individual? Maybe use a loudspeaker?
Your mindset is unbelievably rigid. You can't imagine any other way to respond to a possible threat as a cop than to immediately get on the scene and shoot first, ask questions later?
To say nothing of the fact that with white individuals police are much more 'understanding'.
How effin hard can it be to understand that if the police show up, you have most likely done something wrong, and REGARDLESS you should cooperate. In a meeting with the police, being polite is ALWAYS the right choice.
Heck, I was in the US and did a completely wrong move driving... In Sweden it would have been correct though.
Next thing I see is flashing lights...
I at once pulled over, and rolled my window down. The officer came, and I explained that I was from Sweden (he looked at my passport) and that I really had no idea that was unlawful there (something about a U-turn).
He told me it is, and not to repeat it, then he wished me a nice vacation. Heck, he even called me "sir".
Originally Posted by :
I'm not sure I understand Montmorency's point about prefuctory warnings. Is a cop supposed to say to everyone he or she meets, "Don't draw a weapon, or a toy weapon, or look like you are drawing a weapon or toy weapon or I will have to shoot you?" I don't think that threatening everyone on sight is going to help relations between cops and the public much. Or is he or she supposed to spend 3 or 4 seconds saying that while someone finishes drawing the weapon and shoots the cop dead? Yes, a few seconds (or sometimes maybe a split second) is not enough time to makes such a judgement, but sometimes that is all the time the cop gets.
That's rather silly.I'm not sure I understand Montmorency's point about prefuctory warnings. Is a cop supposed to say to everyone he or she meets, "Don't draw a weapon, or a toy weapon, or look like you are drawing a weapon or toy weapon or I will have to shoot you?" I don't think that threatening everyone on sight is going to help relations between cops and the public much. Or is he or she supposed to spend 3 or 4 seconds saying that while someone finishes drawing the weapon and shoots the cop dead? Yes, a few seconds (or sometimes maybe a split second) is not enough time to makes such a judgement, but sometimes that is all the time the cop gets.
Police get a call - someone walking around with a firearm.
How to respond:
1. Cordon off and evacuate the immediate area, announce through amplified speech to the individual in question what the situation is, allow appropriate time to respond.
2. Pull up in a car right next to the individual in question, begin shooting before you even finish uttering the warning.
The fact of the matter is that no one advocates for the second, not even the "BUT THE COPS FEEL THREATENED" types. Why? Because we understand as a society that we can not begin with lethal force when the situation is ambiguous.
Originally Posted by :
How effin hard can it be to understand that if the police show up, you have most likely don't something wrong, and REGARDLESS you should cooperate. In a meeting with the police, being polite is ALWAYS the right choice.
Heck, I was in the US and did a completely wrong move driving... In Sweden it would have been correct though.
Next thing I see is flashing lights...
I at once pulled over, and rolled my window down. The officer came, and I explained that I was from Sweden (he looked at my passport) and that I really had no idea that was unlawful there (something about a U-turn).
He told me it is, and not to repeat it, then he wished me a nice vacation. Heck, he even called me "sir".
There's a huge difference between that situation and what we can see happening in the video I linked.How effin hard can it be to understand that if the police show up, you have most likely don't something wrong, and REGARDLESS you should cooperate. In a meeting with the police, being polite is ALWAYS the right choice.
Heck, I was in the US and did a completely wrong move driving... In Sweden it would have been correct though.
Next thing I see is flashing lights...
I at once pulled over, and rolled my window down. The officer came, and I explained that I was from Sweden (he looked at my passport) and that I really had no idea that was unlawful there (something about a U-turn).
He told me it is, and not to repeat it, then he wished me a nice vacation. Heck, he even called me "sir".
Analogously, what if that policeman had yelled out of the car "Stop right now", then immediately rear-ended you in an attempt to push you off the road, while blasting his sidearm from the window like Dirty Harry?
Unreasonable, no?
Originally Posted by Montmorency:
That's rather silly.
Police get a call - someone walking around with a firearm.
How to respond:
1. Cordon off and evacuate the immediate area, announce through amplified speech to the individual in question what the situation is, allow appropriate time to respond.
2. Pull up in a car right next to the individual in question, begin shooting before you even finish uttering the warning.
The fact of the matter is that no one advocates for the second, not even the "BUT THE COPS FEEL THREATENED" types. Why? Because we understand as a society that we can not begin with lethal force when the situation is ambiguous.
You are assuming a specific situation which may or may not apply. Sometimes a cop doesn't know that there is a firearm in question until the bullets are already flying. Like I said, sometimes a loudspeaker may be the appropriate solution. Not always. Believe me, if there was one safe easy way that always worked, the cops would be using it. They don't want to get shot either.That's rather silly.
Police get a call - someone walking around with a firearm.
How to respond:
1. Cordon off and evacuate the immediate area, announce through amplified speech to the individual in question what the situation is, allow appropriate time to respond.
2. Pull up in a car right next to the individual in question, begin shooting before you even finish uttering the warning.
The fact of the matter is that no one advocates for the second, not even the "BUT THE COPS FEEL THREATENED" types. Why? Because we understand as a society that we can not begin with lethal force when the situation is ambiguous.
Monty, if you look at the video the perp had time to understand the situation.
In the video it also shows how the perp aimed what looked like a gun at people... Also he had his HOODIE UP making it hard to tell age.
As a policeman, driving up next to someone with a "maybe" weapon to get civilians safe is a very brave move.
The perp didn't cooperate, and was shot dead.
I blame it on bad parents and general US black culture.
Your example with rear ending and Dirty harry is just morose, I won't go to the level to address it more than if a cop acted that way, he wouldn't be able to stay for long in the police. Do you SERIOUSLY believe policemen can go on a rampage or two, or three... Without some superior officer raising and eyebrow and start questioning....
Wow, you really have no idea how the police work.
In the video it also shows how the perp aimed what looked like a gun at people... Also he had his HOODIE UP making it hard to tell age.
As a policeman, driving up next to someone with a "maybe" weapon to get civilians safe is a very brave move.
The perp didn't cooperate, and was shot dead.
I blame it on bad parents and general US black culture.
Your example with rear ending and Dirty harry is just morose, I won't go to the level to address it more than if a cop acted that way, he wouldn't be able to stay for long in the police. Do you SERIOUSLY believe policemen can go on a rampage or two, or three... Without some superior officer raising and eyebrow and start questioning....
Wow, you really have no idea how the police work.
Originally Posted by :
Monty, if you look at the video the perp had time to understand the situation.
In the video it also shows how the perp aimed what looked like a gun at people... Also he had his HOODIE UP making it hard to tell age.
As a policeman, driving up next to someone with a "maybe" weapon to get civilians safe is a very brave move.
The perp didn't cooperate, and was shot dead.
Delusional.Monty, if you look at the video the perp had time to understand the situation.
In the video it also shows how the perp aimed what looked like a gun at people... Also he had his HOODIE UP making it hard to tell age.
As a policeman, driving up next to someone with a "maybe" weapon to get civilians safe is a very brave move.
The perp didn't cooperate, and was shot dead.
Originally Posted by :
Do you SERIOUSLY believe policemen can go on a rampage or two, or three... Without some superior officer raising and eyebrow and start questioning....
Actually, yes. It happens all-too-frequently.Do you SERIOUSLY believe policemen can go on a rampage or two, or three... Without some superior officer raising and eyebrow and start questioning....
Originally Posted by :
Wow, you really have no idea how the police work.
You have an uncharacteristically-high opinion of American institutions here. Hmmm...Wow, you really have no idea how the police work.
Originally Posted by Montmorency:
Delusional.
Actually, yes. It happens all-too-frequently.
You have an uncharacteristically-high opinion of American institutions here. Hmmm...
1. Then you haven't watched the vid. Delusional.
Actually, yes. It happens all-too-frequently.
You have an uncharacteristically-high opinion of American institutions here. Hmmm...
2. Uh no. Questionable shootings generally is a topic in mass media. Not to mention they have a hearing, and have to go to a psychologist.
3. It's not like policemen really get rich... I think they go to work to make the world a better place. There are of course exceptions, like in all professions.
Looking at that video, this is how I see it.
A) Police pull up close, probably to protect anyone else from fire.
B) The non-driving officer jumps out crouched with his car door between him and the perp.
C) The non-driving officer back off to get behind the car, for better protection.
D) Perp is still doing nothing to surrender.
E) Perp is uncooperative and makes a bad choice.
F) Non-driving policeman fires.
G) Driving policeman goes around the car, he is possibly firing at the perp. We don't see the perp (we know only one of the 2 shots were aimed center mass (alternatively first shot missed center mass which they should aim at in such situations), perp might still have been resisting arrest after first shot).
Perp could easily have avoided being shot. Drop the weapon and show your hands, how effin hard can it be?
The policemen acted tactically as they are trained. As long as you don't F with them, you will be safe (in 99,9999% of the cases). It's not like the police generally go around and execute people.
The perp effed up. And that's how it goes.
Oh, also looking at the video, in the beginning before police show up... I totally get why people called the perp in as a total maniac...
I say it again Monty; it's so obvious that your posts hold autistic tendencies, they also reveal that you never EVER have been in a tactical situation.
A) Police pull up close, probably to protect anyone else from fire.
B) The non-driving officer jumps out crouched with his car door between him and the perp.
C) The non-driving officer back off to get behind the car, for better protection.
D) Perp is still doing nothing to surrender.
E) Perp is uncooperative and makes a bad choice.
F) Non-driving policeman fires.
G) Driving policeman goes around the car, he is possibly firing at the perp. We don't see the perp (we know only one of the 2 shots were aimed center mass (alternatively first shot missed center mass which they should aim at in such situations), perp might still have been resisting arrest after first shot).
Perp could easily have avoided being shot. Drop the weapon and show your hands, how effin hard can it be?
The policemen acted tactically as they are trained. As long as you don't F with them, you will be safe (in 99,9999% of the cases). It's not like the police generally go around and execute people.
The perp effed up. And that's how it goes.
Oh, also looking at the video, in the beginning before police show up... I totally get why people called the perp in as a total maniac...
I say it again Monty; it's so obvious that your posts hold autistic tendencies, they also reveal that you never EVER have been in a tactical situation.
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
Looking at that video, this is how I see it.
A) Police pull up close, probably to protect anyone else from fire.
B) The non-driving officer jumps out crouched with his car door between him and the perp.
C) The non-driving officer back off to get behind the car, for better protection.
D) Perp is still doing nothing to surrender.
E) Perp is uncooperative and makes a bad choice.
F) Non-driving policeman fires.
G) Driving policeman goes around the car, he is possibly firing at the perp. We don't see the perp (we know only one of the 2 shots were aimed center mass (alternatively first shot missed center mass which they should aim at in such situations), perp might still have been resisting arrest after first shot).
Well no, for someone who calls others stupid you have a pretty bad reading comprehension and sight:Looking at that video, this is how I see it.
A) Police pull up close, probably to protect anyone else from fire.
B) The non-driving officer jumps out crouched with his car door between him and the perp.
C) The non-driving officer back off to get behind the car, for better protection.
D) Perp is still doing nothing to surrender.
E) Perp is uncooperative and makes a bad choice.
F) Non-driving policeman fires.
G) Driving policeman goes around the car, he is possibly firing at the perp. We don't see the perp (we know only one of the 2 shots were aimed center mass (alternatively first shot missed center mass which they should aim at in such situations), perp might still have been resisting arrest after first shot).
Originally Posted by your own link:
Loehmann shot him immediately after leaving his police car, at a distance of about 10 feet, the video shows. Then he ducked behind the car as Garmback, a training officer with eight years on the force, jumped out of his seat.
The young guy gets shot between your points B and C according to that. Which is the only way it CAN work because by jumping out right next to him the policeman is exposed to the guy and his gun before he gets behind the car. So he fires right away while he leaves the car.Loehmann shot him immediately after leaving his police car, at a distance of about 10 feet, the video shows. Then he ducked behind the car as Garmback, a training officer with eight years on the force, jumped out of his seat.
Should be quite obvious as the guy drops onto the ground the moment the first policeman leaves the car, no idea where you see D and E happening.
In the UK, police and the population don't have guns. When guns are seen in the hands of children - even black children - the first thought isn't to shoot them.
In America, where police, security guards and of course the populace can have guns then I understand why there is this risk and hence making "fake" guns clearly fake is required.
If they want their guns, one of the prices is that police will kill people with phones, waterpistols, sandwiches etc.
In America, where police, security guards and of course the populace can have guns then I understand why there is this risk and hence making "fake" guns clearly fake is required.
If they want their guns, one of the prices is that police will kill people with phones, waterpistols, sandwiches etc.
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
1. Then you haven't watched the vid.
I haven't watched the video that I posted in the first place and that you reposted, huh?1. Then you haven't watched the vid.
The video that is in real-time and shows very clearly a situation that gives the kid less warning than a GANG DRIVE-BY SHOOTING - and you blame him for not reacting fast enough?
Enough is enough. Good luck.
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
Your example with rear ending and Dirty harry is just morose, I won't go to the level to address it more than if a cop acted that way, he wouldn't be able to stay for long in the police. Do you SERIOUSLY believe policemen can go on a rampage or two, or three... Without some superior officer raising and eyebrow and start questioning....
Wow, you really have no idea how the police work.
Welcome to the US, where black guys commit suecide by shooting themselves in the chest, in a police car, with a hidden gun after being searched, while being handcuffed with their hands on the back. I mean clearly there's nothing suspicious here at all is it? At least not according to the cops or the coroner. Still under investingation, but the odds of anything suspicious coming up is about 0. Your example with rear ending and Dirty harry is just morose, I won't go to the level to address it more than if a cop acted that way, he wouldn't be able to stay for long in the police. Do you SERIOUSLY believe policemen can go on a rampage or two, or three... Without some superior officer raising and eyebrow and start questioning....
Wow, you really have no idea how the police work.
The grand jury thing in Ferguson?
1 of 81 of the policemen was indicted in Dallas 2008 to 2012.
Civilians? Out of the 162.000 federal cases 2010, 11 cases declined to indict.
This is the situation were the prosecutor says: "This is the evidence I got, is it enough to prosecute?", nothing more, nothing less.
No bias at all, no sir.
There's alot of decent cops in the US, but the culture at some police districts are just nasty.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO