Police Shootings

Perhaps, but Occam's Razor might ring true in these instances. Its probably more likely that your current detractors share an ideology on the subject as a whole more closely to your own than, say, mine. Just because they may not agree with you in this one instance doesn't mean they don't vigorously agree with your overall premise. Each case has to be judged on its own merits and circumstances without the luxury of hindsight. I recently watched a video of a deputy who was completely out of control, inappropriately used deadly force, misses the intended target completely twice (from 3 feet away), and strikes the subject's mother instead. My take on that specific event was that she used inappropriate force, she should not be a cop, and should serve whatever time in prison because of it. You are responsible for every round that leaves the barrel of your gun. What I would not agree with is that it is representative of why all police should be stripped of their weapons. An execution is a person who is constrained, does not pose any kind of threat at the moment, and is deliberately being killed for a punitive reason. I think if your argument is against the death penalty, you and I would probably share the same view. I interpreted this event as the police responding to a rapidly evolving situation where milliseconds matter. You have to remember they ran up to the civilians and the subject and didn't kill anyone... until the moment they saw the hoax bomb. They observed a threat. Knowing that all it takes is fractions of a second to detonate a bomb, they reacted and, in my estimation, appropriately. I think it would be a mischaracterization to call it an execution.

Very well, thank you for clarifying. Not necessarily, because most of this boils down to perception and opinion. If we were discussing facts, like about the legality of the shooting, then I would agree someone is right, someone is wrong, or both could potentially be correct in some instances and incorrect on another. You and I disagreeing on the current topic, whether it was morally right or wrong to shoot this person, is a matter of opinion no different than me trying to convince you that chocolate ice cream tastes better than vanilla... which it clearly does. Sometimes we, and I include myself in this indictment, have a tendency to try to read between the lines. Sometimes it could be helpful to examine what a person's ulterior motives might be but sometimes we make false accusations by imagining motives that may not actually exist. Your interpretation is your interpretation. I can only attempt to make persuasive argumentation -- you either accept or reject my rationale. But maybe our communications at times get lost in the weeds. I'll accept any failing on my part that could have alleviated any miscommunication and try to better articulate a position going forward. The avatar change is a bit of irony, a bit of trolling but also a bit of extending an olive branch by saying "Fuck the Alt-Right, I'm not one of them and I'm willing to go this far to prove it." By way of comparison between you and I, sure, I might as well be Hitler incarnate. I certainly agree that some of my positions are far more right-leaning than that of yours -- this thread being demonstrable to that fact.But I maintain that while there may be some overlap between myself and the Alt-Right the core of what they stand for is at odds with my own ideology. Richard Spencer and I may both believe that liberal media attempts to drive a narrative versus objectively reporting facts and so he and I may agree on that point. But Richard Spencer is an actual Nazi sympathizer that wants to bring back segregation! I mean, c'mon, give me some fucking credit here! I don't want that kind of poisonous ideology in my country any more than you do.I think part of the problem is the Us vs Them mentality that is tightening more and more by the day with its ever-increasing constraints of pigeonholing. Its to the point where you have to buy into ALL of the talking points to now be on Team Conservative or Team Liberal otherwise you risk being excommunicated for not being a true believer. And if you dare go against the grain then you are either a de facto Triggered Tree Hugging Hippie or a Nazi Stormtrooper Antisemite. There's no more nuance to ideological positions... Life is complicated. Positions are complicated, especially as to how people arrive at their conclusions on any given position. Its not fair to brandish someone with a Scarlet Letter for holding a single position that may be aligned with someone who we don't agree with. Hitler apparently loved dogs... oh, you love dogs too.? Fucking fascist!!! We shouldn't have to give up our agency or individuality in trying to defend a socio-political position. Believing that kneeling during the National Anthem is more patriotic than standing doesn't make you an ANTIFA supporting anarchist. It just means that you have a compelling reason for it. Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

I think that has been sufficiently answered at this point.

[ Content removed to protect privacy. --Admin ]Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.Edited by Admin, : Remove content.

[ Content removed to protect privacy. --Admin ]Edited by Admin, : Remove content.

Percy brought this up not too long ago as evidence for why police officers shoot not be armed. As you can see from the now released Body Worn Camera footage, it speaks for itself as to what happened.Marquez was demonstrating a mental health crisis that resulted in her being placed on an Emergency Detention order. When she was advised of this she refused and instead produced a weapon.Police, after seeing the weapon, retreated downstairs. Marquez then deliberately walks downstairs and points the firearm directly at the officers, thus leaving them with no other option.I told Percy then that I would not deliberate on a case where all the facts were unknown. The power of the body camera proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the shooting was justified.

It only showed the vantage point of one officer. There was another on the staircase. Look again. Hindsight really is 20/20, isn't it? If you can explain how anyone could know that at the moment it occurred, I'll give you a million dollars. If she were pointing that at you, you too would think you were about to die. How could they have detected that at the moment it occurred? It was already unusual that they retreated downstairs, but who followed them with the gun? Who produced the gun? Who refused to obey the directive of drop the weapon? There were at least three officers there. 3 x 4 = 12. Is four rounds excessive? You shoot until there is no longer a threat. The reason it appears so often is because it is the metric instituted none other than the Supreme Court of the United States, vis a vis Graham v. Conner. Do you believe it is just or moral that some people, for their own safety and for the safety of others, that they sometimes be committed against their will if they show signs of a severely diminished capacity to reason, are suicidal, or homicidal? The question isn't whether or not Marquez could have conceivably been rehabilitated. Thats precisely why she was being committed -- so that she could potentially be rehabilitated. The issue is whether or not someone, anyone, has the fundamental right to self-protection in the face of deadly force. You seem to continually lose sight of that. EMT's are trained to save people's lives. Sometimes patients in the back of an ambulance become violent for an assortment of reasons. Do EMT's have the fundamental right to protect themselves even if their primary job is protect others?

I've been wanting to discuss the recent protests as of late, however, I myself have been occupied for the last twelve days responding to it. Yesterday was the first time I've had a day off since this shit show began.I have still not met a single police officer, or anyone for that matter, who did not believe that they witnessed a murder. What's more is the sickening glee that this sociopath displayed while choking the life out of a handcuffed prisoner. He very obviously was wanting Floyd to suffer for having ever resisted and likely wanted the onlookers to know that he was in control. No doubt in my mind that this was an ego trip gone horribly awry. The other aspect is the shockingly calloused indifference that the other officers displayed, particularly the Asian officer. Its my understanding that the other two officers were on their second and fourth day on the job respectively. One of the officers allegedly questioned the legitimacy of the tactic, however, because he was so new he probably didn't want to push the issue thinking a senior officer would know what he was doing. But he should have because although very new, he still had a duty to protect that prisoner and they all failed. They are now accessories to a murder.I'm genuinely amazed that Chauvin hasn't committed suicide yet given the untold path of destruction he laid. No doubt he is in protective custody and is possibly totally insulated as to the true magnitude of the fallout. He did not only destroy his entire department but he single-handedly is the catalyst for the destruction of the entire city... Every police officer in the nation and even in some cases internationally are paying for his sins.So I'll just tell you what I've been seeing personally. I've seen the majority of the protesters peaceably assembling and redressing their government, which is a Constitutionally protected activity. Well, a lot fuck you's but say whatever you'd like so long as you don't resort to violence. I've also seen agitators intermingled in the crowd who are using this are a pretense to sow destruction and discord. Its opportunism at its finest. I've noticed that BLM are also rejecting ANTIFA. The protesters are policing themselves. I've seen lots of black protesters demanding that the angsty, white suburbanites who are setting fires and throwing rocks at the cops get out of their march out of fear that they will unfairly be blamed. They have a great point.

You already queued it up for me... It wouldn't matter with you anyhow. You think cops are supposed to magically be able to have x-ray vision and know within a split second whether a gun is real or supposed to look real. You've also said elsewhere that cops shouldn't shoot unless they're being fired upon, which is an absurdity. Look in the mirror when you say that. Even people that hate guns had said, concerning the London Bridge incident, that if there were ever a justified shooting that that would be it. Meaning?

The only sure evidence we have here is that Chauvin is a piece of shit who needs to be buried underneath the jail. I'm curious as to why you think it was racially motivated. I'm not saying it wasn't but what evidence is there to suggest that there was?A few years back the murder of Kelly Thomas occurred at the hands of sadistic cops. He was beaten so severely that he was basically unrecognizable. Kelly Thomas was white. My point is that when a black officer kills a black man there's not much media fanfare. When a white cop kills a white man there's not much media fanfare. When anybody kills a cop there's not a lot of fanfare. When a white cop kills a black man, there's always huge media coverage. And the implication is always that it was racially motivated. Then indict them too. I'm just telling you what I saw from firsthand experience, not a carefully constructed rage baiting narrative pumped over the airwaves nonstop. Almost no black protesters were engaged in rioting. But droves of little Antifa teenagers were very often stirring the pot -- staging rocks, bottles, flares, etc in innocent looking cement bags. They also created makeshift clubs and shields. The majority of black protesters kept urging them to stop because they feared that they would be blamed.Antifa just two days ago set fire to a restaurant that they found out was catering to a local police department. Why? Because they're "boot lickers." This wasn't after hours either. This was during the day with innocent people who have nothing to do with sales working and could have been burned alive.A lot of the protesters were also paid protesters. Can't tell you how many bragged about getting paid. Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

Agreed. The media throws whatever they can at the wall just to see what sticks.The outrage and racial animosity is largely manufactured by irresponsible journalism and social activism. Racism isn't dead because the media keeps it on life support. But its not the media alone, they are simply the conduit and the most pervasive. Its been fairly well established that some homogenous societies attack Western countries that have a wide and diverse range of cultures. Russia has been caught several times instigating race relations by creating Alt-Right propaganda and BLM propaganda for no other reason than to create division. They've been spreading disinformation since at least the 1960's and which continues on today. The goal, obviously, is to divide the nation as often as possible to create internal instability. My point is that neither the US nor the UK is as racist as people would think. This isn't to say that it does not exist when it obviously does, but the thought that the overwhelming majority of white cops are systematically hunting down black people is an absurdity so silly that its really hard to believe anyone would actually believe that. There are literally millions of calls for service around the nation where nothing controversial happens. You are being inundated with nothing but negativity -- so much so that it paints a false narrative. Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

I know a thing or two about the insidiousness of this society. I am, after all, the most despised thing on the planet.1. Male
2. Caucasian
3. American
4. Police OfficerThat is the most archetypal villain in the modern era and the first three were misfortunes at birth that I have no control over. That, in combination with my profession, is that my everyday reality is that before I have any interaction with anyone is that I'm perceived as a hideous monster. I'm a walking stereotype. Assumptions are made about me daily. How would I know with certainty? I'm motherfucked up and down. People aren't shy to tell you exactly how they feel about you before they ever meet you. Its the one profession where people can pretty much say whatever they want about you with both impunity and immunity.But this is before they meet me... What you may not know is that I do live and work amongst peers -- my peers being the community at large. Where I am assigned to is the barrio and hood. I know very well what their troubles and travails are. Because I know that just like I've been branded, they too have been branded. Their scarlet letter may differ from mine, but we've all unfortunately been subjected to stereotypes.I am acutely aware during every interaction how this interaction may be tainted through the lens of whatever stereotypes exist for the both of us. And I try to do my part by always treating everyone with the dignity and respect they deserve. I want to shatter these myths. It may be hard for me to understand that some agencies and departments really do have higher numbers of dyed-in-the-wool racists because I don't see this nonsense where I work. And if it ever does surface that it is quickly rooted out and excised like a tumor, because if left unchecked that tumor will metastasize. There are agencies that seem to have a different culture. One that cuts corners by making bullshit and chickenshit stops that are unconstitutional, some that really are inherently racist, and some that see people outside their thin blue line as some kind of enemy.I know its out there, but to the extent that people think its out there is exaggerated. I have no idea what you're referencing here. Please elaborate. What makes you think that doesn't happen? What you may not know is that when in the patrol car or back at the station that candid discussions are made. Reputations are built very, very quickly. We know which officers duck calls. We know which officers are overzealous and need to be reigned in or fired. We know which ones speak to the public disrespectfully. We know which ones bust their ass on a daily basis. We know which ones have a great relationship with the community. We know which ones are prone to escalating a call and we know which ones who have a gift to de-escalate a call. We know which ones who have a curiously high number of uses of force when compared to others.There is no other profession as scrutinized, especially in this day and age.

Hmm, maybe that's why they call cops "Blue Isis."

Maybe in the 1950's that'd be true but that's clearly not the case in this day and age. Probably because I've been busy working daily for 2.5 weeks handling our own issues. I've heard and seen some improprieties coming from different cities. But then again I've seen the media conflating peaceful protestors with agitators and selectively covering police responses. Its been my personal experience that the overwhelming majority of protestors have been peaceful and that the longer it goes on the more peaceful it becomes. That definitely was not the case for about the first 3 days where molotov cocktails, bricks, rocks, bottles, battery acid and other things hurled at police that were doing nothing except standing there and preventing protestors from taking over highways or police stations. I've definitely seen some footage that is disgusting concerning police overreactions, to the point of being criminal. As such they need to be arraigned on charges if they overstep their bounds. But then again it goes both ways. I guess what I'm trying to say is that just as it is conceivable for you to distinguish between peaceful protests and violent ones, I would hope that you would be able to distinguish between excessive force and appropriate force. Just because I see one violent protestor I cannot brush with broad strokes to think that all or even most are.

First of all, you selectively screenshot whatever frame suits you best, but even still there is clearly the officer with the rifle at the bottom of the stairs. You can even see the rifle underneath the Axon symbol of your own screenshot. You can't pull guns on officers. You can't point guns at officers or anywhere near the directions of officers. That you are somehow arguing the point is laughable. Then you wouldn't have anyway to stop violent things, Percy. I mean honestly, lets say these were unarmed social workers and she pulls a gun on them. What's the next course of action? Well, 10 out of 10 times you call the police, but since in your scenario they are as ineffectual as everyone else, what then? Same/Same