Starlord Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 3 hours ago, BNakagawa said: A black man resists being taken into police custody and is fatally shot in the back while fleeing the police. I don't know what he did to attract the attention of the police, but given their track record of treatment of black men in their custody, I don't exactly blame him for running. He was intoxicated, asleep in his car at a Wendy's. They woke him and he failed a sobriety test. He resisted arrest and grabbed a taser and ran. The officer who still had his taser pursued and tried to taser him. While running he turned back to fire the taser at the closest officer. One of them shot him immediately afterwards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Bushido Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 2 hours ago, Starlord said: He was intoxicated, asleep in his car at a Wendy's. They woke him and he failed a sobriety test. He resisted arrest and grabbed a taser and ran. The officer who still had his taser pursued and tried to taser him. While running he turned back to fire the taser at the closest officer. One of them shot him immediately afterwards. Suggesting that it's okay to shoot someone because they might taser you..... that's not really something anyone who carries a taser wants to be putting forward, I wouldn't think, especially considering just how much work was put into public awareness that "hey look! We have no-lethal weapons! These are non-lethal! They will knock you down, but you'll be perfectly fine!" So.... Should we be considering shooting people in order to not get tasered..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cygnia Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 A Long-Lost Manuscript Contains a Searing Eyewitness Account of the Tulsa Race Massacre of 1921 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starlord Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 2 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said: Suggesting that it's okay to shoot someone because they might taser you..... that's not really something anyone who carries a taser wants to be putting forward, I wouldn't think, especially considering just how much work was put into public awareness that "hey look! We have no-lethal weapons! These are non-lethal! They will knock you down, but you'll be perfectly fine!" So.... Should we be considering shooting people in order to not get tasered..... Somebody needs to invent a phaser with a stun setting as fast as possible? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt the Bruins Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 It better ONLY have a stun setting, or it'll be dirty cops' wet dream. A weapon that disintegrates the evidence as it kills! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cygnia Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 Continued here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottishFox Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 9 hours ago, BNakagawa said: A black man resists being taken into police custody and is fatally shot in the back while fleeing the police. I don't know what he did to attract the attention of the police, but given their track record of treatment of black men in their custody, I don't exactly blame him for running. Yeah, in a country of 328 million they killed a whopping 3 unarmed black men last year that were not fleeing. Better run for your life! Running, btw, triples your chances of dying unarmed. Also, this guy had just won a 1v2 fight with the cops, stolen one of their tasers and bolted. Even then they didn't shoot. Then he turns towards them and aims the taser in their direction and THEN he gets shot. Once the guy aims a taser at you - the gunfire is justified. Especially since he just took the best less-than-lethal option. And the crowd that burned down the Wendy's?? What in the actual hell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pattern Ghost Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 Two quick observations on that incident before I head off to bed: 1. The cops screwed up the entire encounter on several levels, starting* with trying to use a Taser while one-hand wrestling with a larger guy and ending with policing their brass (i.e., destroying evidence) instead of rendering first aid after the shooting. They missed several beats in between. 2. A Taser isn't non-lethal if you tase someone with a gun then take their gun off them. OTOH, there were two officers, and you can only get one shot with that model of Taser, so the risk of the guy getting a gun off the first cop was pretty low. Nonetheless, the police are trained to react quickly when someone points a weapon at them, so if there hadn't been a much larger comedy of errors and poor judgement in play, that part may have been justifiable. *If I were to speculate, I'd suggest the problems started before the fight, because they clearly failed to de-escalate the guy. Edit:: Just re-watched video on my home monitor. I thought the officer was trying to drive stun the guy, but it looks like he was just awkwardly trying to bring the Taser into play when it got grabbed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Democracy Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 You say this as if we should expect more than three. I am appalled at the killing of one unarmed man... 1 hour ago, ScottishFox said: Yeah, in a country of 328 million they killed a whopping 3 unarmed black men last year that were not fleeing. Better run for your life! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 2 hours ago, ScottishFox said: Yeah, in a country of 328 million they killed a whopping 3 unarmed black men last year that were not fleeing. Better run for your life! Running, btw, triples your chances of dying unarmed. Have you thought through the implications of those figures? A police officer is supposed to use lethal force when he believes there's a likelihood of death or serious injury to himself or someone else. We're supposed to believe they feel more threatened when a suspect is running away? Stopping someone from running away is not justification for lethal force. Resisting arrest is not justification for lethal force. Not under law, and not under common sense. If a civilian did that they'd be facing murder charges. Police officers are supposed to be held to a higher standard of conduct than the average Joe, not a lower one. Twilight, Matt the Bruins and Ragitsu 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 Here's another thought I heard during an Internet commentary today: If the police officer who had a taser pointed at him was justified in believing it presented a serious threat to his life, then the suspect was justified in believing the same thing when the taser was being used against him. In which case his flight would be a reasonable action of self-defense. Sauce for the gander. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragitsu Posted June 14, 2020 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 3 hours ago, ScottishFox said: Yeah, in a country of 328 million they killed a whopping 3 unarmed black men last year that were not fleeing. Better run for your life! Running, btw, triples your chances of dying unarmed. Flippant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BNakagawa Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 three unarmed black men that they will admit to. Who knows how many had burner weapons planted on them after the fact? Ragitsu and Matt the Bruins 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twilight Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 15 minutes ago, BNakagawa said: three unarmed black men that they will admit to. Who knows how many had burner weapons planted on them after the fact? Quite a few I'd imagine. I'm certainly not gonna take the cops' word for it that those were the only instances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottishFox Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 4 hours ago, Lord Liaden said: Have you thought through the implications of those figures? A police officer is supposed to use lethal force when he believes there's a likelihood of death or serious injury to himself or someone else. We're supposed to believe they feel more threatened when a suspect is running away? Stopping someone from running away is not justification for lethal force. Resisting arrest is not justification for lethal force. Not under law, and not under common sense. If a civilian did that they'd be facing murder charges. Police officers are supposed to be held to a higher standard of conduct than the average Joe, not a lower one. This is not true in all cases. I'll give you an example that I've seen. A police officer is responding to a reported murder. They arrive and the suspect begins to flee the scene. A chase ensues and the suspect leaps over a fence and is about to lose the officers. The officer - believing that this person is an imminent deadly threat to the public (not himself) - fires a shot and kills the suspect. Turns out the guy had already ditched the murder weapon so he's "unarmed" at the time of the shooting. Not that I'm a fan of shooting fleeing suspects in the back in almost all cases - better to catch them later. But in some circumstances it can make perfect sense. And you're right about civilians, but a CCW holder is not a police officer and vice versa. This is not a higher or lower standard of conduct, but part of the job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottishFox Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 4 hours ago, Lord Liaden said: Here's another thought I heard during an Internet commentary today: If the police officer who had a taser pointed at him was justified in believing it presented a serious threat to his life, then the suspect was justified in believing the same thing when the taser was being used against him. In which case his flight would be a reasonable action of self-defense. Sauce for the gander. You can't honestly believe that in the process of resisting arrest than any tool use (baton, pepper spray, taser) amounts to a justification to fight back and flee for your safety. Officers generally have a different standard here because they are also carrying firearms. If they get disabled by the taser, it's possible the suspect will go for their firearm. You can also get shot while "unarmed" by trying to take the officers firearm. I've seen some video of that. And none of this is to say that there aren't bad cops and that we can't make improvements in the rules and culture (stop protecting bad cops, ditch no-knock warrants, limit the use of choke holds, etc.). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 2 minutes ago, ScottishFox said: This is not true in all cases. Any case where it is true is too many. With respect, you're defining an exceptional situation and implying that because such a situation could exist, it justifies a blanket approach by the police to the majority of situations where it does not. That's a straw-man argument that can and essentially has led to many needless deaths. Matt the Bruins, Cygnia and Ragitsu 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 5 minutes ago, ScottishFox said: You can't honestly believe that in the process of resisting arrest than any tool use (baton, pepper spray, taser) amounts to a justification to fight back and flee for your safety. No, I don't honestly believe it. I think the argument is hogwash, myself. But that's the very argument police involved in that selfsame shooting incident, and those who are defending them, are using as justification for firing on the suspect fleeing with a taser. If they're going to play that card they would have no right to protest if it was dealt back at them. Ragitsu and Twilight 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottishFox Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 Just now, Lord Liaden said: Any case where it is true is too many. With respect, you're defining an exceptional situation and implying that because such a situation could exist, it justifies a blanket approach by the police to the majority of situations where it does not. That's a straw-man argument that can and essentially has led to many needless deaths. No, it's an ACTUAL situation for which I've seen the video. It is not "could exist" It is "has happened". And I'm not saying it justifies a blanket anything. I believe I said as much in my response. "Not that I'm a fan of shooting fleeing suspects in the back in almost all cases - better to catch them later. " It's not a straw-man argument. It's a real situation that HAS happened. Just so we're clear. I do think police kill people unnecessarily at times. Sometimes at a level that is straight up murder (such as George Floyd, such as the several clips on the Hodge twins video). Police training can improve and police culture can improve. As I've mentioned previously there are police departments that are killing 10x as many people as other police departments. Clearly - we can do better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 If it's not a common situation the police encounter, it's irrelevant whether it's happened in the past. A rarity can't be used as a normative to justify actions which in the majority of cases aren't warranted. But that's what we see and hear happening around the police all the time, right now. Because it's known to sometimes occur, they want to act like it's always likely to occur, and treat everyone they have to deal with as a threat. That sort of thinking has led us to where we are today. Twilight, Matt the Bruins, pinecone and 1 other 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted June 15, 2020 Report Share Posted June 15, 2020 I recommend sticking to the end of this one. It's not long, and it's not what you think. Ternaugh 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragitsu Posted June 15, 2020 Author Report Share Posted June 15, 2020 Liaden, how did you end up discovering Beau? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted June 15, 2020 Report Share Posted June 15, 2020 Honestly can't remember for sure, but I think he was recommended to me through the arcane YouTube algorithm. Like many people I was put off by his look initially, to my shame; but I think the title of his video prompted me to click on it, and I was pleasantly surprised. I tune in to him frequently now. I don't always agree with his conclusions, but I respect his clarity of argument, his reliance on demonstrable fact, and his obvious commitment. He's brought no few things I wasn't aware of to my attention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinecone Posted June 15, 2020 Report Share Posted June 15, 2020 On 6/14/2020 at 12:49 AM, csyphrett said: I don't know if this is the right thread but the appeals court has denied the DOJ's dismissal of charges against Mike Flynn. Apparently they got a bureaucrat who never saw the inside of a court to sign the paperwork, and the judge involved is like no, so they tried to go over his head, and the appeals panel was like no. Bill Barr is the dirtiest cop around CES I dunno, the high score is eye popping...or is that a "low" score. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinecone Posted June 15, 2020 Report Share Posted June 15, 2020 16 hours ago, ScottishFox said: Yeah, in a country of 328 million they killed a whopping 3 unarmed black men last year that were not fleeing. Better run for your life! Running, btw, triples your chances of dying unarmed. Also, this guy had just won a 1v2 fight with the cops, stolen one of their tasers and bolted. Even then they didn't shoot. Then he turns towards them and aims the taser in their direction and THEN he gets shot. Once the guy aims a taser at you - the gunfire is justified. Especially since he just took the best less-than-lethal option. And the crowd that burned down the Wendy's?? What in the actual hell. Sorry to interupt, but you just said he turned towards them, why was he shot in the Back? That does not make sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.