Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 81 (8960 total)
37 online now:
dwise1, PaulK, Theodoric, Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (4 members, 33 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 869,133 Year: 881/23,288 Month: 881/1,851 Week: 4/321 Day: 4/48 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Police Shootings
Percy
Member
Posts: 19228
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 421 of 475 (868322)
12-10-2019 5:13 PM
Reply to: Message 418 by Tangle
12-09-2019 3:21 PM


Re: Unarmed Police Does Work
Tangle writes:

Percy writes:

Yeah, pretty much.


Thats's a real problem. The situations are not in anyway comparable,...

In the sense of being executions they pretty much are.

When the suspect was killed the police only knew that he had attacked people with knives. They didn't know if anyone had been killed, or that the suspect had served time in prison for terrorist related activities.

Let's be honest neither of us know what they knew.

Assuming you're referring to what you just quoted me saying then it's kind of obvious, but we can go over it anyway.

Since the police did not know the identify of the attacker at that time, they could not possibly know that the suspect had served time in prison for terrorist activities.

And since one victim died about fifteen minutes after the suspect was killed, and the other victim only a few minutes before the suspect was killed, it seems very unlikely that the police on the bridge with the guns could have known that the suspect had killed anyone.

But, we do know that they are armed police, that they have been called to an emergency terrorist incident and it's not the first time.

It wasn't declared a terrorist incident until after it was all over.

And I'm questioning that policy. All policies, no matter how well thought through, evolve and change over time in reaction to how well they work in reality and to changing circumstances and improved insights.

Yup, but the policies in place at the time are the ones used.

No argument there.

And so far I'm not hearing anything better.

Yes you are, right now, from me. Don't use deadly force against defenseless people lying on the ground.

I never got into the legality of the killing of the suspect. I'm simply saying that the currently available information leads me to think it was possibly wrong and unnecessary.

You have no feasible way of assessing that.

This seems like a strange thing to say. Why would anyone be unable to form an opinion based on currently available information?

It was a terrorist incident in progress,...

Again, not judged to be a terrorist incident at that time.

...they acted to policy and training.

That's my point. Policy and training is wrong. There should be an arrested suspect, not a dead one.

If they didn't they're in trouble, that's the way it works.

Well, yes, of course. I naturally agree that police should follow current policy and procedures according to their training. Time to change the policy and procedures.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 418 by Tangle, posted 12-09-2019 3:21 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 423 by Tangle, posted 12-10-2019 5:58 PM Percy has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19228
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 422 of 475 (868324)
12-10-2019 5:22 PM
Reply to: Message 405 by ringo
12-07-2019 10:42 AM


Re: Unarmed Police Does Work
ringo writes:

To be clear, my stance is pretty simple: Where there is a clear and present danger, shoot to kill. A man with a suicide vest is a clear and present danger, period.

Did the police think he was wearing a suicide vest at the time they killed him? That they shot into his chest and abdomen argues no: London Bridge terrorist bled to death after being 'repeatedly shot' by police

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 405 by ringo, posted 12-07-2019 10:42 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 426 by ringo, posted 12-11-2019 2:07 PM Percy has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7282
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 423 of 475 (868328)
12-10-2019 5:58 PM
Reply to: Message 421 by Percy
12-10-2019 5:13 PM


Re: Unarmed Police Does Work
Percy writes:

In the sense of being executions they pretty much are.

Sorry, you can't declare them both as executions in order to claim that they are therefore executions. I'm sure that you understand the difference between the two situations.

Since the police did not know the identify of the attacker at that time, they could not possibly know that the suspect had served time in prison for terrorist activities.

And since one victim died about fifteen minutes after the suspect was killed, and the other victim only a few minutes before the suspect was killed, it seems very unlikely that the police on the bridge with the guns could have known that the suspect had killed anyone.

That's just silly. The armed police would have known that they were being called to a terrorist incident. And remember, we'd just had a couple and they would have been trained how to react.

It wasn't declared a terrorist incident until after it was all over.

You can't possibly think that the public announcement that it's a terrorist incident after the fact has anything to do with what will have been communicated to the armed units when called in as a result of the emergency calls? Surely you're not that naive?

Policy and training is wrong. There should be an arrested suspect, not a dead one.

Says you, half a world away from the comfort of your armchair. You're in a group of one at the moment.

Time to change the policy and procedures.

I think you should stick to your campaign to stop ignorant, prejudiced and untrained police shooting black people for no reason and don't harm your position by arguing badly about lawful and necessary shooting of armed terrorists.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 421 by Percy, posted 12-10-2019 5:13 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 434 by Percy, posted 12-11-2019 7:39 PM Tangle has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19228
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.3


(1)
Message 424 of 475 (868354)
12-11-2019 7:18 AM


The Jersey City Police Shooting
The headline is pretty informative: Jersey City Shootout: 6 Dead Including Police Detective, 2 Suspects, 3 Civilians

Because it is so early in the news cycle I believe the details provided so far are likely inaccurate and incomplete and will be amended and augmented, but the information available now says that two men wanted for questioning about a homicide were spotted by police officers at a cemetery in Jersey City. The men saw the officers and opened fire on them, injuring one of them, a Detective Michael Kelly. The suspects then fled about a mile to a local grocery in a residential neighborhood, pursued by police.

Police called for backup, which came in droves and included SWAT teams, armored vehicles, canine units, the bomb squad, aviation units and tactical squads, then engaged in an hours long gun battle with the suspects with hundreds of rounds fired. Nearby schools went into lockdown while civilians either huddled in safe places or fled the area.

When it was all over one police officer was dead (a Detective Seals), three were injured (the aforementioned Kelly, and also Ray Sanchez and Mariella Fernandez), three civilians inside the grocery were dead, and the two gunmen were dead. Police believe the civilians were killed by the suspects, but the article did not say why they think so.

I believe it was a serious mistake to engage in a gun battle in a residential neighborhood, or almost anywhere there are people for that matter, unless lives are at stake (in other words, immediate intervention required or people will die). While it's not impossible a negotiator was brought in, none is mentioned in any of the three articles I have read. I don't see how the police could be confident the civilians were killed by the suspects and think it much more likely they were killed by police bullets. Hundreds of rounds were fired into the grocery.

Police believe the stolen U-Haul used by the suspects "may contain an incendiary device," and it's being inspected by the bomb squad. The presence of a suspected "incendiary device" also argues against gunfire.

Did the grocery have a landline that police called, or did police find out who was working inside the grocery at the time and call their cell phone, or, since police knew the identities of the suspects did they know their cell phone numbers or request them from cell phone companies or contact friends who may have known their cell phone numbers? Was any attempt at all made to contact the suspects?

To me this sounds like yet another massive screwup on the part of police who are just as gun happy as the criminals they pursue.

--Percy


Replies to this message:
 Message 425 by Percy, posted 12-11-2019 9:17 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19228
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 425 of 475 (868360)
12-11-2019 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 424 by Percy
12-11-2019 7:18 AM


Re: The Jersey City Police Shooting
The Washington Post article makes possible a few corrections: Jersey City shootout: Mayor says kosher deli was ‘targeted’ by gunmen .

The police officer killed was actually the one shot at the cemetary, Detective Joseph Seals. No one named Kelly was shot. Michael Kelly is the name of the Police Chief of Jersey City.

The grocery was a kosher market that police suspect was targeted after reviewing security footage from the store, but have not yet described what the video shows. This information is from Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulup.

The gunmen's movement was "rapid and continuous for four hours within that area," said Police Chief Kelly.

The final tally is now two police officers wounded, one police officer dead, three civilian dead, and two suspects dead.

As all articles say, it is a sad day in Jersey city, but to my mind they should be mourning only one death, not six.


AbE: More details from the New York Times article: Jersey City Shooting: Suspect Published Anti-Semitic Posts, Official Says

The suspects were a man and a woman.

One of the suspects had posted anti-Semetic and anti-police posts online.

After killing Detective Kelly at the cemetary, the suspects drove to the kosher grocery and entered with guns firing.

A live pipe bomb was found inside the suspects' van.

Much more information in the article, enough that I'm going to suspend judgment on the appropriateness of the police response for now.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : AbE.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 424 by Percy, posted 12-11-2019 7:18 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17817
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 426 of 475 (868383)
12-11-2019 2:07 PM
Reply to: Message 422 by Percy
12-10-2019 5:22 PM


Re: Unarmed Police Does Work
Percy writes:

Did the police think he was wearing a suicide vest at the time they killed him?


There's no point in speculating about what they were thinking.

"If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you...."
-- Rudyard Kipling

This message is a reply to:
 Message 422 by Percy, posted 12-10-2019 5:22 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 435 by Percy, posted 12-11-2019 7:58 PM ringo has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19228
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 427 of 475 (868384)
12-11-2019 2:09 PM
Reply to: Message 407 by Hyroglyphx
12-07-2019 1:33 PM


Re: Unarmed Police Does Work
Hyroglyphx writes:

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...What I would not agree with is that it is representative of why all police should be stripped of their weapons.

My objection is based upon the imperfection of human beings in that they can be careless, angry, mentally ill, depressed, poorly trained, temperamentally unsuited, etc., so it seems completely representative of why I think most police should not be armed, and especially while we have our current policies about the appropriate use of deadly force.

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.

That's pretty close to the way the police killed the suspect. If the initial shots were fired at the time most people are claiming (immediately after the last passersby is pulled off) he was constrained and he posed no threat since he had been disarmed. Maybe it was punitive for attacking people with knives, maybe not.

But you might want to look up execution in a good dictionary. For example, when Joey the hitman snuck up behind someone on a New York City street at night and shot him in the back of the head for his first hit, that was an execution.

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.

I've asked a number of times now for when in the videos people can tell that police are noticing what most are calling a suicide vest rather than a hoax bomb, but no one has been able to do so.

In any case, that the suspect was perceived as wearing such a device is unlikely since, as Tangle has helpfully informed us, guidelines call for shooting someone wearing a suicide vest in the brainstem, but in this case police shot the suspect in the chest and abdomen. Would they do so if they thought he was wearing an explosive device? I don't think so.

They observed a threat.

That hasn't been established. Did they actually observe the threat of a suicide vest or hoax bomb? Where's the evidence for this? I'm not claiming it's untrue but that there are many possibilities, and that people seem inappropriately locked in to one of the more heroic narratives but for which there is no publicly available evidence.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 407 by Hyroglyphx, posted 12-07-2019 1:33 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19228
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 428 of 475 (868386)
12-11-2019 2:19 PM
Reply to: Message 413 by Tangle
12-09-2019 11:44 AM


Re: Unarmed Police Does Work
Tangle writes:

Percy writes:

Police arrest dangerous murderous people all the time. It's why many murderers are in prisons instead in cemeteries. Why not this one?


Because it's policy and training to use lethal force in a terrorist situation where it is known that the perpetrator is trying to do as much damage as possible with no regard to his own life.

Most of that is post facto information.

That's the way the evidence falls - after studying many suicide bomber incidents in Israel and on home territory shooting them dead was found to cause the least loss of life.

It hasn't been established that the police thought he was wearing a suicide vest at the time he was killed, and that he was shot in the chest and abdomen argues against it.

I have no idea where the terrorist was shot but there will be an inquest and an internal review, and maybe we'll find out.

Might be a good idea to wait until then before reaching conclusions.

But I doubt it because nobody here cares. You won't find many, if any, here trying to second-guess the police shooting that terrorist.

Oh, I've already said that. The narrative's already been established and it's a good one. Only the most stark of evidence could dismantle it.

If he was shot in the chest, the learning point would be about why not the head, not why not the leg or arm or whatever.

Well, we can agree that this represents a learning point, and about accepting the possibility of non-lethal targets. For those police who have guns I'm in favor of including policies, procedures and training for their non-lethal use.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 413 by Tangle, posted 12-09-2019 11:44 AM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 429 by DrJones*, posted 12-11-2019 2:27 PM Percy has responded
 Message 430 by Tangle, posted 12-11-2019 2:50 PM Percy has responded

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2047
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 429 of 475 (868388)
12-11-2019 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 428 by Percy
12-11-2019 2:19 PM


Re: Unarmed Police Does Work
For those police who have guns I'm in favor of including policies, procedures and training for their non-lethal use

there is no non-lethal use for guns in a police situation, if the situation has escalated to where you need to use a gun it should be to kill.

edit a couple hours after the fact: also if you widen the criteria for acceptable use of a firearm you're going to get more use of a firearm with more deaths.

Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given.


It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 428 by Percy, posted 12-11-2019 2:19 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 436 by Percy, posted 12-11-2019 8:07 PM DrJones* has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7282
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 430 of 475 (868389)
12-11-2019 2:50 PM
Reply to: Message 428 by Percy
12-11-2019 2:19 PM


Re: Unarmed Police Does Work
Percy writes:

Most of that is post facto information.

Armed police were called to a multiple stabbing and suspected terrorist attack. It is not post facto.

It hasn't been established that the police thought he was wearing a suicide vest at the time he was killed, and that he was shot in the chest and abdomen argues against it.

So lets 'hold fire' before calling the police executioners should we?

Might be a good idea to wait until then before reaching conclusions.

Quite.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 428 by Percy, posted 12-11-2019 2:19 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 437 by Percy, posted 12-11-2019 8:18 PM Tangle has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19228
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 431 of 475 (868400)
12-11-2019 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 414 by PaulK
12-09-2019 12:03 PM


Re: Unarmed Police Does Work
PaulK writes:

quote:
Tangle cut-n-pasted without attribution, and I sought out the source of his cut-n-paste and posted a link to the full Wikipedia article. Of what use would quoting from Tangle's cut-n-paste be?

To give an accurate impression of what Tangle posted of course. The fact that you quoted material that supported your claims but not more relevant material that contradicted you is quite telling.

Do tell.

quote:
...It's been insisted many multiple times that he must have been shot in the head,...

As I stated that appeared to be where the most likely shooter was aiming, and as Tangle posted, that is the correct action when a suicide vest is present.

You may have seen things in the video that weren't really there because of your certainty that the police knew he was wearing a suicide vest and would therefore have shot him in the head.

On the other hand you presented no evidence at all for him being shot in the body, until this post.

It's just one article, insufficient to be definitive.

quote:
I have also questioned at what point the police had visual evidence that the suspect was wearing a suicide vest, and there's been no answer to that either.

The video has evidence - which I pointed out - that shows that they were unlikely to have noticed it until they had pulled at least some of the people off of the attacker.

Yes, I've made the same point myself several times, that the police couldn't see any suicide vest with passersby atop him.

The audio has a civilian asking if the attacker was going to set off a bomb, which may refer to the belt.

Where in the video does that audio occur. Here's a copy again:

From the image showing the belt, it seems to me that the officers on the spot should have noticed the belt by the time they pulled the last person off.

That's a possibility, but not something that's been established. The suspect was wearing a coat, and we can't tell at what point the coat becomes positioned in such a way as to make the belt visible.

quote:
I don't know why searches didn't turn this up earlier, but I have now come across an article that states where the suspect was shot, and it wasn't in the head. This is from London Bridge terrorist bled to death after being 'repeatedly shot' by police:

That would be disturbing if it turned out to be true.

Why is that?

Given the nature of the attack and the location I am certain that terrorism was on their minds. This is not the first terrorist knife attack at London Bridge.

Yes, I agree that the possibility it was a terrorist attack was likely on their minds.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 414 by PaulK, posted 12-09-2019 12:03 PM PaulK has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19228
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 432 of 475 (868402)
12-11-2019 7:03 PM
Reply to: Message 416 by PaulK
12-09-2019 1:26 PM


Re: Unarmed Police Does Work
Thanks for your opinions.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 416 by PaulK, posted 12-09-2019 1:26 PM PaulK has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19228
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.3


(1)
Message 433 of 475 (868403)
12-11-2019 7:15 PM
Reply to: Message 419 by Hyroglyphx
12-09-2019 3:23 PM


Re: Unarmed Police Does Work
Hyroglyphx writes:

By way of comparison between you and I, sure, I might as well be Hitler incarnate.

I don't see it that way. What I do believe is that many of your posts in this thread reflect a lack of respect for human life.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 419 by Hyroglyphx, posted 12-09-2019 3:23 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19228
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 434 of 475 (868405)
12-11-2019 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 423 by Tangle
12-10-2019 5:58 PM


Re: Unarmed Police Does Work
Tangle writes:

Percy writes:

In the sense of being executions they pretty much are.

Sorry, you can't declare them both as executions in order to claim that they are therefore executions.

That wasn't my argument.

Since the police did not know the identify of the attacker at that time, they could not possibly know that the suspect had served time in prison for terrorist activities.

And since one victim died about fifteen minutes after the suspect was killed, and the other victim only a few minutes before the suspect was killed, it seems very unlikely that the police on the bridge with the guns could have known that the suspect had killed anyone.

That's just silly.

What I said is factual.

The armed police would have known that they were being called to a terrorist incident.

I could agree that the armed police officers might easily have considered the possibility that they were responding to a terrorist incident, but it wasn't classified as such until after the fact.

It wasn't declared a terrorist incident until after it was all over.

You can't possibly think that the public announcement that it's a terrorist incident after the fact has anything to do with what will have been communicated to the armed units when called in as a result of the emergency calls? Surely you're not that naive?

I believe they would have communicated factual information, not speculation. How does one tell the difference between a mass murder committed by a mass murderer versus one committed by a terrorist?

Policy and training is wrong. There should be an arrested suspect, not a dead one.

Says you, half a world away from the comfort of your armchair.

We both have access to all the same information. Neither of us was an eyewitness to any of it. You are no different from me.

You're in a group of one at the moment.

Well, yes, that part of what you say is true.

Time to change the policy and procedures.

I think you should stick to your campaign to stop ignorant, prejudiced and untrained police shooting black people for no reason and don't harm your position by arguing badly about lawful and necessary shooting of armed terrorists.

If you've been following this thread then you know that I periodically check for updates on the incidents I've posted about. At some point an official report will be issued and people can look back on what they've posted here and see how well their speculations panned out.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 423 by Tangle, posted 12-10-2019 5:58 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 439 by Tangle, posted 12-12-2019 2:40 AM Percy has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19228
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 435 of 475 (868407)
12-11-2019 7:58 PM
Reply to: Message 426 by ringo
12-11-2019 2:07 PM


Re: Unarmed Police Does Work
ringo writes:

Percy writes:

Did the police think he was wearing a suicide vest at the time they killed him?


There's no point in speculating about what they were thinking.

No, no, sorry, I wasn't clear enough. That's not what I meant.

You said that "a man with a suicide vest is a clear and present danger, period." I was trying to remind you of a point I had made in earlier posts, that it is possible, since there's a news report that police shot the suspect in the chest and abdomen, that they did not think he was wearing a suicide vest.

I agree with you that a man with an actual for real suicide vest represents a grave danger, but whatever the suspect was wearing was not a vest (it could have been a belt) and was fake anyway.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 426 by ringo, posted 12-11-2019 2:07 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 446 by ringo, posted 12-12-2019 10:42 AM Percy has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020