Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8945 total)
24 online now:
AZPaul3, dwise1, Pressie, Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (4 members, 20 visitors)
Newest Member: ski zawaski
Upcoming Birthdays: ONESOlivia, perfect
Post Volume: Total: 865,370 Year: 20,406/19,786 Month: 803/2,023 Week: 311/392 Day: 1/41 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Police Shootings
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5858
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 331 of 340 (865531)
10-26-2019 10:46 PM
Reply to: Message 329 by Percy
10-26-2019 4:57 PM


Re: Summary execution
Percy lists lawsuits from different departments, making the insinuation that 1. all police officers are cut from the same cloth and have no agency, and, 2. that paying out a settlement is de facto evidence of guilt.

Paying out a settlement is often the cheaper route than fighting it open court. Happens all the time, especially in civil trials.

What is your purpose in taking different cases with completely different circumstances?


"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 329 by Percy, posted 10-26-2019 4:57 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 335 by Percy, posted 10-27-2019 9:01 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5858
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 332 of 340 (865532)
10-26-2019 11:35 PM
Reply to: Message 325 by Percy
10-16-2019 9:04 AM


Re: Another Wellness Check Gone Wrong
You may be somewhat pleased to know that I am aware of this incident and that, much like the Amber Guyger case, that I find the actions of the officer to be indefensible.

There's another update on the killing of Atatiana Jefferson. Rather than knocking on the front door and calling out, "Anyone home?", officer Aaron Dean chose to circumnavigate the house secretly. His body cam footage reveals him walking around the house, peering in windows, and whispering to his partner.

He found an open door and obviously assumed some kind of burglary scenario. While being cautious that this could been the case, he should not have assumed it was necessarily the case. Most departments would have at least two officers in the front and one in the back to ensure no one fleeing from the back. Its protocol that you LOUDLY announce yourself and your intentions. Why? If you get killed by a homeowner without making an announcement, they can legally justify killing a police officer. And why shouldn't they under such a scenario?

Because all homeowners, including Atatiana, have the inherent right to defend their home with physical force if necessary. Atatiana clearly saw their flashlights and she too assumed a burglary scenario. She retrieves her gun, which she is well within her rights to do as an American to defend her castle.

Had police made the LOUD announcement: "Such-and-such Police Department, make your presence known!!!" This tells the occupants, I am the police, I am on guard, do not attack me. If you attack, I will assume you are not the homeowner but an intruder. In defense of myself and the lawful occupants of this home, I will use force against you.

Well, this cop skipped all of that... he saw someone with a gun and shot without ever stopping to think that it might be the homeowner. He said she pointed the weapon at him. Maybe she did, but then you were the one lurking around in her backyard, yeah??? It was dark outside, while well-lit inside of her house. The chance that she could see you was almost nil.

So, it was a bad shoot and he needs to pay the piper. Atatiana deserves justice and while I'm sure the officer did not want this outcome, his actions manufactured the outcome. And for that he needs to pay for that outcome.

Let's look at this statistically. There are more than a million cops with guns out there, but for simplicity let's just call it an even million. Let's say each cop works a beat 200 days a year, so that's a total of 200 million cop work days a year. Let's say that the odds that a cop makes a poor decision resulting in an innocent civilian's death during the course of a work day is 0.00001%. That's 20 unnecessary civilian deaths a year. The actual number is somewhat larger than that, but it tells us that the 0.00001% error rate is pretty much in the ballpark.

If you look at the ODMP website that chronicles every police death, gunfire leads the method year after year.

2019 (thus far): 39
2018: 52
2017: 45
2016: 64
2015: 41
2014: 49
2013: 34
2012: 48
2011: 68
2010: 59

I went back all the way to 1987 and gave up trying to find a single year that gunfire wasn't the highest method of killing police officers. The 80's and 90's were particularly bad with an average of about 75 annually. This is just instances where an officer died as a result... it doesn't even go into instances where they were shot at or were shot and survived. Extrapolating, shootings period are obviously much, much higher. You can therefore see that a police officer has substantial reason to be cautious and why they should be armed and are armed.

You might argue, okay, fine, whatever, this actually summarizes why guns should be made illegal. We can make that argument. But lets agree that if anyone is being disarmed, then police should be the last to be disarmed.

No amount of training is ever going to reduce the error rate per day below something as minuscule as 0.00001%. Police should not have guns, and people who have guns should not be conducting wellness checks.

Then nobody should drive cars either if your looking to net .000001% results. That's a ridiculous standard. Do you use the same metrics for deaths at the hands of medical errors?

Medical errors are one of the HIGHEST methods of all deaths in the nation when comparing ALL deaths annually. Thousands upon thousands annually. Way under the amount of all police shootings and seriously under unjustified police shootings. Where's your consternation? Where's the moral outrage?


"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 325 by Percy, posted 10-16-2019 9:04 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 336 by Percy, posted 10-27-2019 9:17 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18965
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.4


(1)
Message 333 of 340 (865548)
10-27-2019 8:05 AM


San Bernardino Murder
On September 28th of last year an intoxicated Richard Sanchez of San Bernardino stood in the family's kitchen and threatened them with a gun while making threats and irrational statements, such as claiming he was God. His sister-in-law called 911.

When police arrived Sanchez was inside the house holding the gun. While standing outside the front door police instructed Sanchez to put down the gun. Sanchez set the gun on a couch, then started advancing toward officers. They instructed him to put his hands up. Sanchez put his hands up but kept advancing through the front door and onto the front lawn even though instructed to stop three times. One officer shot Sanchez five times. He died at the scene.

Police chief Eric McBride said the officer's decision “did not meet the standards held by our department or the community we serve,” that the officer is no longer on the force, and that the district attorney is investigating possible criminal charges.

Obviously police responding to a call about a man with a gun must carry guns. Such police must be among the best, the brightest, the most highly trained. Anything less risks, well, this.

No word about a lawsuit against San Bernardino at this time.

Source: He dropped the gun, walked out of the house and put his hands up. Then an officer shot him five times.

--Percy


  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18965
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.4


(2)
Message 334 of 340 (865551)
10-27-2019 8:52 AM
Reply to: Message 330 by Hyroglyphx
10-26-2019 10:33 PM


Re: Summary execution
Hyroglyphx writes:

Theodoric writes:

I wasn't going to even respond as you continue your practice of being a dishonest debater and misrepresent what people actually say. That you actually post what I wrote before you misrepresent it makes it more stunning.


I aim to please. I'm glad I was able to exceed your expectations.

If you have nothing true or honest to say then it is better to say nothing at all. If you take pride in dishonesty and misrepresentation then it is better not to post.

This just continues to show brown and black people that they need to do everything they can to evade police, because they will continue to be shot and killed for spurious and specious reasons.

Thank you for clarifying exactly what I said -- that you are under the fucktarded belief that police officers intentionally and savagely execute brown and black people for the sake of their brownness and blackness.

That isn't what Theodoric said, but statistics (which your posts in this thread indicate you don't understand) clearly show that the police arrest, injure and kill minorities far out of proportion to their numbers in the population.

Not sure where you got this from. He was wanted for questioning about a murder, but I do not see anywhere that he was a "murder suspect". That doesn't matter anyway. No one is allowed to summarily execute someone because they are a murder subject. Not sure what this fact was supposed to prove?

Facts taken in conjunction matter.... which is why I outlined them step by step, so that when conjoined it paints the clearest picture possible. You just didn't know any of those facts because you were too busy jacking off to a liberal rag that mangled the facts to know any different. So what you're left with is more misguided notions about how and why he died.

You succeeded in being insulting but not in mentioning any facts, let alone putting them together in context (you used the word "conjoined," but I assume that's what you meant).

Running from a cop is not a capital offense. Again not sure what you think this shows or how it exonerates the cop?

That's right, running away from the cops alone is not a capital offense. However, facts conjoined together change the dynamic: Being wanted for murder,...

Repeated misstatement of facts, particularly when correct information was just provided you more than once, can only be interpreted as persistent misrepresentation. Again, Isiah Murrietta-Golding was not wanted for murder. He was being sought for questioning about a murder. You might want to "conjoin" that with your other facts and see if it affects your conclusions.

...while grabbing your waistband, while fleeing from police, while jumping the fence to a preschool constitutes the fleeing felon defense.

Isiah wasn't a felon, and firing bullets onto the grounds of a preschool was very dangerous and imprudent in the extreme.

Not sure why this is a capital offense. If a cop pulls a car over and a suspect starts reaching into his jacket, should they be shot? That seems to be what you are advocating. Please tell me why that would be different. There is no sense addressing the other facts. Just more of the same.

They should have a gun pulled on them at the very least. And if you don't know why, there's about a hundred videos online that explains why.

There could be a million online videos explaining why its okay to pull guns on people and it would still be wrong. Your attitudes only increase violence.

Again you misrepresent what I actually posted. These facts were in the article I linked to. There was no omission. If I was trying to hide those facts I would not have linked to the article. Not sure why you think this is a big gotcha. None of those facts change the argument I made. Also, again you are misrepresenting my argument. I never made any comment about black and brown people being executed everywhere. If all you have is strawman arguments maybe you should consider someplace else to hangout online.

Have the balls to at least back up your bullshit. You made the assertion that this kid was shot because he was brown. You painted the bleakest picture possible without offering any context. You dishonestly offered: 16 year old, brown, shot in the back while running away. I'm sorry, what else is left to deduce? You opened the door, all I did was walk in.

Uh, I hope you *are* aware that your bigotry and racism is on display for all to see.

I don't think I posted anything about legality. How about you try to address what I posted and not strawman arguments.

Then why post it at all? Its done. It was investigated and cleared. You obviously are under the belief that the pretense was premeditated murder of a brown kid. So defend it.

You're really going to argue that because you're responding to straw man arguments that Theodoric shouldn't be posting at all?

Theodoric never said the murder was premeditated. He only said what statistics show we already know to be true: a white boy running across a preschool yard while pulling his pants up is far less likely to be shot than a brown one.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 330 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-26-2019 10:33 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 338 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-27-2019 12:26 PM Percy has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18965
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.4


(2)
Message 335 of 340 (865552)
10-27-2019 9:01 AM
Reply to: Message 331 by Hyroglyphx
10-26-2019 10:46 PM


Re: Summary execution
Hyroglyphx writes:

Percy lists lawsuits from different departments, making the insinuation that 1. all police officers are cut from the same cloth and have no agency, and, 2. that paying out a settlement is de facto evidence of guilt.

Nope.

You're on a straw man roll. You used to argue honestly. Is this the new you, angry and lashing out with fallacies and accusations?

Paying out a settlement is often the cheaper route than fighting it open court. Happens all the time, especially in civil trials.

It is also true of civil trials that negotiating a settlement is also often cheaper than letting a court reach a decision. When the settlement is millions of dollars then you know it wasn't to save money on lawyers. Some cities self-insure, others carry insurance whose rates will increase with each settlement or court case decided against them.

What is your purpose in taking different cases with completely different circumstances?

The common theme (with the single exception of Dravon Ames) is that they were all police murders described in posts in this thread. I think it's important to maintain an awareness of the financial costs of an armed police force.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Minor change to improve clarity.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 331 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-26-2019 10:46 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18965
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.4


(2)
Message 336 of 340 (865553)
10-27-2019 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 332 by Hyroglyphx
10-26-2019 11:35 PM


Re: Another Wellness Check Gone Wrong
Hyroglyphx writes:

You can therefore see that a police officer has substantial reason to be cautious and why they should be armed and are armed.

We've already been over this. You can't disarm the police force before disarming the citizenry.

You might argue, okay, fine, whatever, this actually summarizes why guns should be made illegal.

I not only might argue that, I have argued that.

We can make that argument. But lets agree that if anyone is being disarmed, then police should be the last to be disarmed.

I have said this multiple times.

Then nobody should drive cars either if your looking to net .000001% results. That's a ridiculous standard. Do you use the same metrics for deaths at the hands of medical errors?

When you start repeating ICANT's arguments you know you're in trouble. This is the mistake of ignoring net benefit. Cars and medicine provide a net benefit. How well would you make it through a year without cars or medicine versus without your gun? And without your gun you'd be safer.

Also, automobile manufacturers and the medical establishment are engaged in continuous efforts to make their products and practices safer. The gun industry, on the other hand, labors hard to make their products more lethal.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 332 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-26-2019 11:35 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 6799
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.3


(1)
Message 337 of 340 (865559)
10-27-2019 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 330 by Hyroglyphx
10-26-2019 10:33 PM


Re: Summary execution
Well your personal attacks just reinforce my comments about your dishonest and logically fallacious arguments. I think the peanut gallery can see you in your bigotted, racist glory. I am done with trying to have a coherent respectful discussion with you. Your personal issues seem to remove an ability you have to partake in civil discourse. As I said before, if you dont want the bullshit you spew challenged maybe you shouldn't post here.

Good day, sir.

Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 330 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-26-2019 10:33 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5858
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 338 of 340 (865560)
10-27-2019 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 334 by Percy
10-27-2019 8:52 AM


Re: Summary execution
If you have nothing true or honest to say then it is better to say nothing at all. If you take pride in dishonesty and misrepresentation then it is better not to post.

Just a bit of irony given Theo's flair for the dramatic.

That isn't what Theodoric said, but statistics (which your posts in this thread indicate you don't understand) clearly show that the police arrest, injure and kill minorities far out of proportion to their numbers in the population.

So then, again, the implication is that police on the whole are racist and that brown and black people on the whole are better served by fleeing police whenever they see them. Somehow I got that wrong? Sorry, but you know good and goddamn well I didn't.

Repeated misstatement of facts, particularly when correct information was just provided you more than once, can only be interpreted as persistent misrepresentation. Again, Isiah Murrietta-Golding was not wanted for murder. He was being sought for questioning about a murder. You might want to "conjoin" that with your other facts and see if it affects your conclusions.

You cannot initiate a felony car stop, which can be seen on camera, nor can you temporally deprive people of their civil liberties to ask them questions.

firing bullets onto the grounds of a preschool was very dangerous and imprudent in the extreme.

Leaving a cornered, desperate and potentially-armed murder suspect to grab a kid in exchange for his own freedom is also dangerous.

Uh, I hope you *are* aware that your bigotry and racism is on display for all to see.

So my saying that the constant invocation of racism by others is itself racist? Fascinating bit of logic. Lets try this: who believes this kid was shot because he was of Mexican-descent and no other reason?

You're really going to argue that because you're responding to straw man arguments that Theodoric shouldn't be posting at all?

If you are brown or black you have every incentive to run from the police. That's what Theo said. If he doesn't want to defend poisonous nonsense then perhaps he ought not say it.

Theodoric never said the murder was premeditated. He only said what statistics show we already know to be true: a white boy running across a preschool yard while pulling his pants up is far less likely to be shot than a brown one.

A white guy suspected of homicide, while fleeing from police, while reaching towards his waistband, while entering the grounds of a daycare can also expect the same result. You also forget that the media itself has the bias in the stories they choose to cover. Race topics, endless racially-motivated topics sell clicks, they sell airtime, and they get people watching. All of that converts into cash. We could have identical stories where the officer and the suspect are the same race and we wouldn't hear about it.

You, Theo, and many others seem to revel in a world of racism. Nothing happens by chance anymore. It can't just be the kid happened to be Hispanic. The implication is its ONLY because he's Hispanic that he's now dead. Give me a break. Fresno is HALF Hispanic!!! And the police activity in Fresno represents that, proportionately.


"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 334 by Percy, posted 10-27-2019 8:52 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 339 by Percy, posted 10-27-2019 4:12 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18965
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.4


(1)
Message 339 of 340 (865572)
10-27-2019 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 338 by Hyroglyphx
10-27-2019 12:26 PM


Re: Summary execution
I'm done with you, too.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 338 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-27-2019 12:26 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18965
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 340 of 340 (866468)
11-11-2019 5:46 PM


It doesn't get much more ironic then this
CNN reports A police chief is killed, allegedly by one of his officers, during a training retreat. Chief Lucky (more irony) Miller of Mannford, Oklahoma, and one of his officers, Michael Nealey, were attending a training retreat in Florida and staying in a hotel room on Pensacola Beach. They argued in the hotel room Sunday night and Nealey murdered Chief Miller. He's being held without bond and has a court appearance on December 5.

Guns are extremely dangerous under any circumstances, and the danger only increases when someone armed becomes angry. Even highly trained and professional police officers become angry. The same question I ask everyone who owns a gun is just as relevant for police officers: Can you guarantee that you'll never become angry, depressed, mentally ill, careless, forgetful, elderly, come to hold the opinion that gun safety rules are for other people, or misinterpret a situation?

--Percy


  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019