[Police brutality] American injustice, yet again.

[Pattern Ghost]

On 6/18/2020 at 6:12 AM, Lord Liaden said:

Have you seen this video making the rounds? This cop should not be on the street with a gun at this time, if ever.

 

Wow...

 

Also: Smart cops don't go through drive-throughs in their squad cars or in uniform, considering how many ex-cons end up in those sorts of jobs. 😄

[Emperor Kang]

1 hour ago, Hermit said:

 

First , thanks for the entire post. It was pretty insightful  over all, but this part is the ONE area I was like "I did not know ANY of this part" . Given how some folks get ..kind of aggressive when on steroids (at least types) I can see why this complicates things.

 

So you may think no one is reading your wall of text, but, well, I learned something today.

 

You are not the only one! Very insightful, unbiased and looking at it from every perceivable angle - not this "black-white-this side is 100% right and you are all nogoodniks" that most of the media, "activist", pundits  and politicians are spreading.

Let's hate - in the name of whatever ...

 

I long for times when problems are addressed in a civilized, fact-based manner again, when arguments are exchanged and listened to from both sides. Hell, even the 80s with the Cold War getting hotter were better than today in this regard - and then the USA and the USSR had literally a gun at each others' temple and whispering "Hey, bub! Want some?"

 

I am so tired and fed up with screaming people on either side of the fence unwilling (and I fear - becoming unable) to even considering that the other side might have half a point here and there.

 

Democracy is the rule of the majority while looking out that the minority still holds rights that defend them  and make them NOT wonder if they are alive or in a cage tomorrow. Democracy is - for better or worse - working on compromise within a society.

[TrickstaPriest]

1 hour ago, Emperor Kang said:

Democracy is the rule of the majority while looking out that the minority still holds rights that defend them  and make them NOT wonder if they are alive or in a cage tomorrow. Democracy is - for better or worse - working on compromise within a society.

 

I don't know of anyone that wants you or anyone in a cage, in particular, thank goodness.  I agree more compromise and patience is important.

 

Unfortunately while we/you are dealing with a lot of inane internet arguments, there's a real effort from the government to flatly ignore everything people need.  The level of disinterest in even providing adequate support and direction with the coronavirus was the straw that broke the camel's back for me (and maybe a lot of others?).  People threw around words like sedition on this thread, I don't think they understand what's happened in 2020.

 

I think that this is the first protest that's really pushed the government to even consider anything the public wants since I can remember, for my entire life.  I've been urging things like getting us off oil and coal, which won't even be considered.  There's been literally zero effort in forty or fifty years on any major public topic, even the ones that are literally killing us.

 

That's the level of despair people like me have been living with our entire lives.

 

I'm sorry people online feel like others are being hateful, regardless of which group.  I encourage people to communicate.  But the explosion of fear and frustration and anger is kind of understandable when you see what's been happening since before we were even born.

[Emperor Kang]

19 minutes ago, TrickstaPriest said:

 

I don't know of anyone that wants you or anyone in a cage, in particular, thank goodness.  I agree more compromise and patience is important.

 

My sentence seems to be little bit misleading: I am refering to Democracy as a system that makes minorities not wonder - like in a dictatorial regime - that being in the minority may lead to their lives being shortened or turned to be horrible (in cages).

Something that you and I can be thankful for.

Right now, that is stil the case in both our countries (I assume you are from the US), though  the atmosphere also becomes more toxic here.

 

[TrickstaPriest]

4 minutes ago, Emperor Kang said:

My sentence seems to be little bit misleading: I am refering to Democrayc as a system that makes minorities not wonder - like in a dictatorial regime - that being in the minority may lead to their lives being shortened or turned to be horrible (in cages).

Something that you and I can be thankful for.

Right now, that is stil the case in both our countries (I assume you are from the US), though  the atmosphere also becomes more toxic here.

 

 

My apologies.  Coming from talking to so many people, I saw that phrasing as very different from what it was.

 

It's very toxic.  I hope people can communicate better, but it's been a vested interest for politicians to maintain a toxic atmosphere... I think I had my 'vote lock in' rant already on some thread here.

 

So with vested interest against us, it's going to be hard to change.

[Lord Liaden]

3 hours ago, TrickstaPriest said:

 

I don't know of anyone that wants you or anyone in a cage, in particular, thank goodness.

 

Um, have you looked at America's southern border over the last few years?

[Lord Liaden]

4 hours ago, Emperor Kang said:

I long for times when problems are addressed in a civilized, fact-based manner again, when arguments are exchanged and listened to from both sides.

 

 I'm sorry, but that was never the norm. Most of what we saw and heard that seemed like that was a veneer over decay, so the decay could be hidden and denied. The refusal to listen was always there, it's just gotten harder to ignore.

[Ragitsu]

5 hours ago, Emperor Kang said:

 

You are not the only one! Very insightful, unbiased and looking at it from every perceivable angle - not this "black-white-this side is 100% right and you are all nogoodniks" that most of the media, "activist", pundits  and politicians are spreading.

Let's hate - in the name of whatever ...

 

I long for times when problems are addressed in a civilized, fact-based manner again, when arguments are exchanged and listened to from both sides. Hell, even the 80s with the Cold War getting hotter were better than today in this regard - and then the USA and the USSR had literally a gun at each others' temple and whispering "Hey, bub! Want some?"

 

I am so tired and fed up with screaming people on either side of the fence unwilling (and I fear - becoming unable) to even considering that the other side might have half a point here and there.

 

Democracy is the rule of the majority while looking out that the minority still holds rights that defend them  and make them NOT wonder if they are alive or in a cage tomorrow. Democracy is - for better or worse - working on compromise within a society.

 

The onus is on the powerful to listen to the powerless, not the other way around. At least, that should be the case. I have to push back against false equivalencies.

[Old Man]

23 hours ago, massey said:

Any stance of "even one person being wrongfully killed is unacceptable" doesn't work for me.  Mistakes happen.  Accidents happen.  Outright murders happen.  We want to minimize these of course, but as TrickstaPriest said above with the person who set a cop on fire in Mexico, "that one person is an asshole and an instigator".  Police departments in the United States are local.  They vary from massive organizations like the NYPD and LAPD, down to small towns with two part time cops.  You cannot have such a dispersed system and also guarantee against one person being "an asshole and an instigator".  You cannot say that the entire justice system failed just because Officer Hardass decided to put a bullet in somebody.  Single digit incidents across a country of 330 million people are not a sign of a manifestly unjust system.

 

Brilliant post, sir, but I wanted to address this one point.  The problem isn't that mistakes happen, or that one person is an asshole.  The problem is that in too many PDs, the asshole is protected by the system and even encouraged to continue his asshole ways.  His fellow officers will plant evidence on the victim, lie about what happened, cover up the asshole's crimes, and go after anyone who records or blows the whistle on the asshole.  The prosecutors will deliberately fumble the case against the asshole, if charges are even brought.  The police union will write protections for the asshole into the union contract.  And now everyone in the PD is a bad cop, save the occasional Serpicos who are tolerated at best and doomed to termination or death at worst.

 

In the last two weeks we've seen one PD stage a "blue flu" to protest the arrest of a cop who shot a taser-armed drunk in the back, and we've seen another PD division resign in protest after one of their number was disciplined for shoving an old man and inflicting a TBI.  This is not a one-person-is-an-asshole problem.

[Starlord]

Can we at least agree that one-asshole-per-person is not a problem?

[Ternaugh]

7 minutes ago, Starlord said:

Can we at least agree that one-asshole-per-person is not a problem?

 

Sure.

[ScottishFox]

2 hours ago, Old Man said:

In the last two weeks we've seen one PD stage a "blue flu" to protest the arrest of a cop who shot a taser-armed drunk in the back

 

According to this video analysis I just watched on Active Self Protection (start around 9 minutes if you've seen the initial footage and are already familiar with the scenario for the analysis) the cop is basically required to arrest the guy per department rules and could get fired for not arresting him.

 

Also, the commission of several forcible felonies by Rayshard in his attempt to escape justify the use of lethal force - especially at the point the taser is fired at the police.

 

He also links the relevant Georgia legal statute and a bunch of related news articles.  It's a pretty solid review.

 

Also, turns out the DA is being pretty duplicitous as a couple of weeks prior claiming tasers are deadly weapons (even showing relevant slides), but in this case said they're not deadly weapons and filed charges before the Georgia Bureau of Investigations had sent in their findings which is rare enough that another law enforcement officer of 30+ years said he'd never seen that happen before.  Feels like he might have intentionally rushed the gun and overcharged to simultaneously soothe the angry masses and guarantee that none of the charges stick.

 

 

 

 

Also, the DA had a slide in his presentation of the picture below from June 2, 2020.  I've skipped the link to the video as the commentary is pretty disgusting.  Georgia law regulates tasers as firearms.

 

 

 

 

[Lord Liaden]

Thank you for that link, 'Fox. It's important to the working of the law that each case of police shooting be examined on its own merits and within context. As I mentioned earlier, I thought the interaction between Floyd and Officer Rolfe started out very positively, and wondered why it turned out this way. This preliminary analysis does offer a rationalization for that, but as the video notes, the investigation isn't over and not all the evidence has been released to the public.

 

But I am getting tired of the constantly-moving definition of a taser as non-lethal or lethal. There needs to be a universal American legal standard for its use. Also, the inability of two officers to get one man lying on the ground under control doesn't speak well of their training in hand-to-hand subduing.

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

1 hour ago, Lord Liaden said:

But I am getting tired of the constantly-moving definition of a taser as non-lethal or lethal. There needs to be a universal American legal standard for its use.

If a taser can subdue somebody well enough to let the taser-er handcuff the taser-ee, a taser can also subdue somebody well enough to let the taser-er drop a brick through the taser-ee's face.  The ability to incapacitate inherently provides the ability to incapacitate and then kill. 

If, and this if is theoretical and I don't believe for a second applies in this case, the prospective taser-ee believes the prospective taser-er intends to follow up a tasering with further violence then the taser should absolutely be thought of as a lethal weapon. 

If, and I wish this were unqualified, the police officer can be trusted to not use unnecessary force on the taser-ee after tasering them then the taser is clearly a non-lethal weapon. 

[Lord Liaden]

Sensible in broader context, GBI, but of course not a legal definition. I also noticed that the Georgia law that ScottishFox transcribed classifies a taser which can be fired at range as a "firearm" and therefore governed by firearms regulations, but not as a "lethal weapon." The type of taser requiring hand-to-hand contact is not a firearm, and requires no permit to carry. Those precepts make whether or not a taser counts fundamentally as lethal, at best very open to interpretation.

[ScottishFox]

9 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

But I am getting tired of the constantly-moving definition of a taser as non-lethal or lethal. There needs to be a universal American legal standard for its use. Also, the inability of two officers to get one man lying on the ground under control doesn't speak well of their training in hand-to-hand subduing.

 

Man, as someone who has done years of that training I cannot agree more.  If your job is police officer you have to maintain a higher level of fitness and empty hand skills than the general public.  These two men got their asses kicked badly by an unarmed drunkard.  He wasn't on PCP or something.  He was drunk and didn't want to go to jail.  A moderate level of skill in a grappling art (bjj, wrestling, etc.) would have been more than sufficient to control the subject and prevent this lethal outcome.

 

It's also why I completely disagree with a ban on chokes.  The problem isn't chokes.  I've choked out lots of people.  In years of classes I've never even heard of someone getting killed much less seen a fatality.

Properly applied a choke does no lasting damage and completely subdues the choke-ee.  Handcuffing becomes a snap and you don't have to taser, bludgeon with a baton, pepper spray or otherwise try to get pain compliance from someone who is in fight or flight mode.  Most of those tools work about 50% of the time.  You have to be a complete incompetent to injure someone with a choke hold.  At which point it's not the maneuver it's someone who's too untrained or too volatile to do the job.  If you can't trust them to do a choke hold then you can't trust them to have a firearm.

 

I still can't believe the officer's step-mother was sacked for creating a "hostile work place" by way of being related to Officer Rolfe.  Public backlash has been pretty spicy.

 

 

 

 

[Lord Liaden]

An "at-will state." Never heard that concept before. Leaves a bad taste in my mouth. 🤢

 

I have to say, we seem to be coming to a consensus as to a strategy for police reform. Short term, more accountability. Medium term, more and better training. Long term, change police culture. Along the way, redirect resources to professionals trained in areas police aren't optimized for, including health care and social services, and let police focus on policing.

[Ragitsu]

 

 

I love the following comment in that^ video's comment section.

 

"Before: Chokeholds allowed only if the officer's life is threatened

After: Chokeholds banned except if the officer's life is threatened"

[Old Man]

19 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

It's important to the working of the law that each case of police shooting be examined on its own merits and within context.

 

Up to a point.  In my experience, an effective way to distract from the issue at hand is to overanalyze a particular incident in more and more excruciating detail hoping to lose people in the weeds.  In this case, a black man was shot in the back for the crime of being asleep in a stationary vehicle, by a cop who then kicked him while he was dying.  It's not the cop's fault, because of department policy.  It's not the department's fault, he's just one bad cop.  It must be the black man's fault, after all he did something stupid even though it posed no real threat to anyone.  Yeah.  Yeah, that's it.  Let's blame the dead guy and see what he has to say to defend himself.

 

As an aside, it's clear that Office Rolfe's stepmother was canned not for her relatives but because she revealed herself to be strongly racist, which is unacceptable in any position but especially not for a human resources director. 

[Ranxerox]

1 hour ago, Old Man said:

As an aside, it's clear that Office Rolfe's stepmother was canned not for her relatives but because she revealed herself to be strongly racist, which is unacceptable in any position but especially not for a human resources director. 

 

The link provided by Scottish Fox showed the claim that she was fired due to her own actions and that she created a hostile work environment, but it gave no specifics. Do you have citation for your claim that she is strongly racist?

[Badger]

12 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

Sensible in broader context, GBI, but of course not a legal definition. I also noticed that the Georgia law that ScottishFox transcribed classifies a taser which can be fired at range as a "firearm" and therefore governed by firearms regulations, but not as a "lethal weapon." The type of taser requiring hand-to-hand contact is not a firearm, and requires no permit to carry. Those precepts make whether or not a taser counts fundamentally as lethal, at best very open to interpretation.

Yeah I keep going back and forth with the Atlanta case. Escalated on a dime and all.

 

At the very least charging for murder is going to prove a disappointing overreach and at worst a similar scenario  that lead to the LA riots.

 

[Hugh Neilson]

Last week, we had an MP in Parliament call a second MP a racist.  When he refused to apologize when requested by the Speaker of the House, he was removed.  Now, let's restate.  One MP referred to a second MP using a derogatory and offensive term, and as a consequence was removed from the House.

 

We talk a lot about discrimination based on sexuality, gender, race, religion - a wide variety of distinctions.

 

Then we refer to "everyone with Characteric X" being more or less the same, generally bad.  Isn't that, in itself, discrimination?

 

But it's OK if we simply say that "All law enforcement officers are generically bad, whether they are straight WASP males  or lesbian black muslims." 

 

Discrimination only ends when we judge individuals on their own merits, not by any other supposedly "defining" characteristic.

 

Of course, that would be difficult and take a long time.  Can't we just do something quick so we can feel better, even if it is largely meaningless and solves nothing?  It's always worked in the past * so why not now?

 

* Assuming we accept "allowed us to go back to our routine, ignoring the deeper issues, until the bottled-up issues explode again later".

[Dr. MID-Nite]

Ok...I'm not sure there's as many people as you thinking proclaiming "all cops are bad". What's bad is the entire system which policing is a part of. Our current socio economic system is flawed and until we fix that....not much is going to change.

 

[ScottishFox]

On 6/20/2020 at 6:07 PM, Old Man said:

In this case, a black man was shot in the back for the crime of being asleep in a stationary vehicle, by a cop who then kicked him while he was dying.

 

So the resisting arrest and multiple forcible felonies (striking one cop, dropping the other cop on his head and giving him a concussion,  taking the taser by force, firing it at an officer while fleeing the scene) weren't a contributing factor?

 

If they have footage of him actually kicking the guy I'll believe it otherwise it's more likely to be him using his feet to turn Brooks over so that they can keep their hands on their weapons.

Also, there's video footage of the officer trying to keep the guy alive after getting first aid gear from his squad car.  The footage and headline below don't seem consistent with someone so murderous they are kicking a dying man for no reason.

 

The daily mail article had some bits I hadn't seen before such as Rolfe almost letting the guy go, but he drove over the curb of the parking spot when asked to pull over and fell asleep again AFTER the police were interacting with him.

 

It's a terrible situation, but he didn't die for the crime of being asleep in a stationary vehicle.  He died for falling asleep in a vehicle in a Wendy's drive through and then giving 1 cop a concussion, punching the other and then firing a taser as he was fleeing the scene.  Your post grossly mis-characterizes this scenario.  You'll notice they didn't tap on the window and then open fire after it looked like he was asleep.

 

His criminal record is non-trivial as well:  False Imprisonment, Simple Battery/Family, Battery Simple and Felony Cruelty/Cruelty to Children.

He was the kind of fun loving person that beats his wife and kids and won't let them escape the house.

EXCLUSIVE: 'Mr. Brooks keep breathing. Keep breathing for me.' Fired officer who shot Rayshard Brooks dead begged the father-of-four to stay alive as he desperately administered CPR, bodycam footage reveals

Video footage below here: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8429013/Fired-officer-shot-Rayshard-Brooks-dead-begged-father-four-stay-alive-gave-CPR.html

 

Cops are making split second combat decisions and holding them to a standard of perfection will simply result in mass police departures, chaos and death.  Look at NY after they got rid of their plain clothes anti-crime unit.  Shootings and deaths are massively up.  The Chaz/Chop zone has had multiple shootings already and at least 1 fatality.  They won't let cops in, but are shocked when paramedics won't risk their lives to enter a lawless no-man's land to assist.  Minneapolis is also doing real swell.

 

I pretty much share the sentiment from this gentleman below. 

 

 

 

[Ragitsu]

41 minutes ago, ScottishFox said:

His criminal record is non-trivial as well:  False Imprisonment, Simple Battery/Family, Battery Simple and Felony Cruelty/Cruelty to Children.

He was the kind of fun loving person that beats his wife and kids and won't let them escape the house.

 

This tactic of yours - the second time I've seen you use it, by the way - isn't subtle, isn't helpful and isn't relevant.