Saw this video earlier, good to hear the cop got fired for it. The cop told the guy to get his license and that's what the guy tried to do. Don't know what he expected honestly.
Saw this video earlier, good to hear the cop got fired for it. The cop told the guy to get his license and that's what the guy tried to do. Don't know what he expected honestly.
That's being a little dishonest. The guy dove inside the car to get his license. The cop was wrong in shooting first without challenging the guy, but the victim was also wrong in reacting in such a way.
Saw this video earlier, good to hear the cop got fired for it. The cop told the guy to get his license and that's what the guy tried to do. Don't know what he expected honestly.
That's being a little dishonest. The guy dove inside the car to get his license. The cop was wrong in shooting first without challenging the guy, but the victim was also wrong in reacting in such a way.
"The guy dove inside the car to get his license"
No he didn't, he reached into his car normally to grab his wallet. I don't see where he dove, he wasn't even that fast.
"but the victim was also wrong in reacting in such a way."
Your're sick if you believe the victim somehow encouraged the cop to shoot at him.
I was trying to get a video from a CNN segment I saw today with two legal experts analyzing the video but CNN.com is a piece of shit of a site of course. So here is part of the transcript:
HOSTIN: It all happened so very quickly. I'll tell you when you look at the stats, traffic stops are the most dangerous part of a police officer's job.
Now to be clear, this officer made the wrong call. He did the wrong thing. He told this man, go get your license, and in trying to be compliant, this man went into his car and then got shot for it. I think it just goes to show you that these officers are under tremendous pressure to make these decisions very, very quickly. Sometimes we get it wrong.
MARK GERAGOS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Look, you can't look at this and not think for a second the officer totally overreact and committed a criminal act.
That having been said, it's enormously difficult for a prosecutor to get a conviction of an officer in this kind of a situation, because the officer is going to say I thought he was getting a gun or he made a movement and that's why I fired. They'll put up a police practices expert who is going to opine that in these split-second decisions you can't second-guess somebody. And most jurors tend to want to believe the cop over somebody else. So given all of that, a conviction is by no means a sure thing.
But it's completely disturbing because we have this, and with dash cams as Sunny says, but also in this age of having the videos on your camera, we just had a case here in California settled for $1.5 million yesterday for a CHP officer beating a woman on the freeway. I have a case in Utah where the cop shot the young lady dead. So this happens with great frequency. But convictions are very, very difficult because jurors want to believe the cops and don't want to convict cops.
COOPER: What should you do? What should this driver --
HOSTIN: Yeah.
COOPER: -- did the driver do anything wrong besides not having a seat belt? Should he have said -- I suppose he should have said to the officer, I'm going to reach for my I.D. now.
HOSTIN: Again, I think we need to be clear that the officer overreacted. There was a procedure threat that just wasn't there. But the bottom line is -- I used to teach a street law class, Anderson. I always say you have to allow the officer sort of insight into your actions. And so if an officer says to you, I want to see your license and registration, even if you're seated in the car, show the officer both of your hands and say, my license is in my glove compartment, may I reach into that compartment? That way the officer doesn't have this perceived threat. The officer is aware of what your movements mean and what your intentions are. And that really is what Mr. Jones did incorrectly. Although he was trying to be compliant, he didn't let the officer know what his movements were going to be. But this could have been deadly.
Saw this video earlier, good to hear the cop got fired for it. The cop told the guy to get his license and that's what the guy tried to do. Don't know what he expected honestly.
That's being a little dishonest. The guy dove inside the car to get his license. The cop was wrong in shooting first without challenging the guy, but the victim was also wrong in reacting in such a way.
"The guy dove inside the car to get his license"
No he didn't, he reached into his car normally to grab his wallet. I don't see where he dove, he wasn't even that fast.
"but the victim was also wrong in reacting in such a way."
Your're sick if you believe the victim somehow encouraged the cop to shoot at him.
He practically dove. He spun around so quickly that even I would have drew my gun at such a response.
First off, I already said the cop was wrong in shooting him. It doesn't make much sense for you to then say that I believe the victim somehow encouraged the cop to shoot him. I believe the victim gave the officer enough cause to draw his weapon, not to shoot him.
When you interact with a LEO you need to take into account that your actions are being scrutinized. If your wallet is in your car and you are outside of it you need to first tell the officer that it's inside the car and then ask for permission to get it. You don't immediately turn around and reach inside. Not unless you want a gun drawn on you.
If I recall correctly this was ruled a bad shooting and the cop was fired. Not sure what's newsworthy about it, though.
another unarmed black man getting shot for no reason, nothing news worthy about that. smh
Not really, since the cop isn't one any longer. What is newsworthy is the story of a couple of POs apparently shooting a black man carrying a BB gun in Walmart and a jury declining to indict the PO. That's newsworthy.
If I recall correctly this was ruled a bad shooting and the cop was fired. Not sure what's newsworthy about it, though.
another unarmed black man getting shot for no reason, nothing news worthy about that. smh
Not really, since the cop isn't one any longer. What is newsworthy is the story of a couple of POs apparently shooting a black man carrying a BB gun in Walmart and a jury declining to indict the PO. That's newsworthy.
some BB guns look like real guns. this man was unarmed.
There is a history of African Americans being treated wrongly and a persistence of that mindset, and all the bad it has caused resulted in that medical driver to be shot at; and that former police officer to face a maximum of twenty years in prison. This is newsworthy because it shows that America still has mentalities to change from a time when Africans were widely considered subhuman.
If I recall correctly this was ruled a bad shooting and the cop was fired. Not sure what's newsworthy about it, though.
another unarmed black man getting shot for no reason, nothing news worthy about that. smh
Not really, since the cop isn't one any longer. What is newsworthy is the story of a couple of POs apparently shooting a black man carrying a BB gun in Walmart and a jury declining to indict the PO. That's newsworthy.
some BB guns look like real guns. this man was unarmed.
Doesn't matter. Again, this whole "getting away with killing unarmed black men" thing has to do with the perception that the killer GOT AWAY WITH IT because the person who got shot is black or because the shooter was a police officer. That either introduces an "institutionalized racism" narrative, or a "cops aren't held accountable for their actions" narrative. And both of those things require the shooter to GET AWAY WITH IT without punishment.
If a cop shoots an unarmed black man and is then quickly fired and charged with crimes, then that erases (or at least drastically diminishes) any story about institutionalized racism or cops not being held accountable. A cop most certainly fucked up, but how is it any kind of big news if he quickly gets his ass fired and prosecuted for fucking up? At that point, it's only "news" in the sense of "person commits crime, person then quickly gets charged with a crime." And that's not gripping news unless the crime itself happens to be extraordinarily sensational.
If I recall correctly this was ruled a bad shooting and the cop was fired. Not sure what's newsworthy about it, though.
another unarmed black man getting shot for no reason, nothing news worthy about that. smh
Not really, since the cop isn't one any longer. What is newsworthy is the story of a couple of POs apparently shooting a black man carrying a BB gun in Walmart and a jury declining to indict the PO. That's newsworthy.
some BB guns look like real guns. this man was unarmed.
Doesn't matter. Again, this whole "getting away with killing unarmed black men" thing has to do with the perception that the killer GOT AWAY WITH IT because the person who got shot is black or because the shooter was a police officer. That either introduces an "institutionalized racism" narrative, or a "cops aren't held accountable for their actions" narrative. And both of those things require the shooter to GET AWAY WITH IT without punishment.
If a cop shoots an unarmed black man and is then quickly fired and charged with crimes, then that erases (or at least drastically diminishes) any story about institutionalized racism or cops not being held accountable. A cop most certainly fucked up, but how is it any kind of big news if he quickly gets his ass fired and prosecuted for fucking up? At that point, it's only "news" in the sense of "person commits crime, person then quickly gets charged with a crime." And that's not gripping news unless the crime itself happens to be extraordinarily sensational.
ok lets agree to disagree then because i can see how a cop could mistake a BB gun for a real one.
ok lets agree to disagree then because i can see how a cop could mistake a BB gun for a real one.
which one is real, which one is fake?
I'm not even talking about the BB gun Wal-Mart incident, I'm talking about the incident that's described in the OP and how you think it's "newsworthy" just because the guy was unarmed.
That's what I was replying to. I don't know anything about the Wal-Mart BB gun incident, so I'm not making any claims about that yet. Airshocker said that the SC Circle K shooting isn't newsworthy. While I don't quite agree with him (I think it's worth reporting on), I don't think it's MAJOR news for the simple fact that the news isn't that shocking and that the dude who fucked up is apparently being held accountable. The fact that the victim was unarmed doesn't change that, that's just one of the factors that leads to the conclusion that the shooter fucked up. And, for the most part, "person fucks up on the job, gets fired and prosecuted" isn't BIG news.
Saw this video earlier, good to hear the cop got fired for it. The cop told the guy to get his license and that's what the guy tried to do. Don't know what he expected honestly.
That's being a little dishonest. The guy dove inside the car to get his license. The cop was wrong in shooting first without challenging the guy, but the victim was also wrong in reacting in such a way.
"The guy dove inside the car to get his license"
No he didn't, he reached into his car normally to grab his wallet. I don't see where he dove, he wasn't even that fast.
"but the victim was also wrong in reacting in such a way."
Your're sick if you believe the victim somehow encouraged the cop to shoot at him.
He practically dove. He spun around so quickly that even I would have drew my gun at such a response.
First off, I already said the cop was wrong in shooting him. It doesn't make much sense for you to then say that I believe the victim somehow encouraged the cop to shoot him. I believe the victim gave the officer enough cause to draw his weapon, not to shoot him.
When you interact with a LEO you need to take into account that your actions are being scrutinized. If your wallet is in your car and you are outside of it you need to first tell the officer that it's inside the car and then ask for permission to get it. You don't immediately turn around and reach inside. Not unless you want a gun drawn on you.
"He practically dove. He spun around so quickly that even I would have drew my gun at such a response."
He didn't dive, he turned around casually. Also, Considering that its a public environment and its broad day light, the chances of him actually drawing a gun are extremely low. The victim didn't even get a chance to turn around before the cop drew a gun and charged towards him. The victim was surprised, he turned around quickly, and the cop ended up shooting him because he turned around so quickly. No, I don't believe drawing your weapon is the correct response at all in that situation.
"I believe the victim gave the officer enough cause to draw his weapon."
But he didn't...drawing your weapon should only be needed when there is actual legitimate danger.
"When you interact with a LEO you need to take into account that your actions are being scrutinized. If your wallet is in your car and you are outside of it you need to first tell the officer that it's inside the car and then ask for permission to get it. You don't immediately turn around and reach inside. Not unless you want a gun drawn on you."
Sure, but not everyone will react in a slow and clam matter. Cops should be prepared for the victims reaction, but that doesn't mean they should go for a gun just because a person turns his back to you. That sort of fearful reaction is the reason why these kinds of situations keep happening.
If I recall correctly this was ruled a bad shooting and the cop was fired. Not sure what's newsworthy about it, though.
another unarmed black man getting shot for no reason, nothing news worthy about that. smh
Not really, since the cop isn't one any longer. What is newsworthy is the story of a couple of POs apparently shooting a black man carrying a BB gun in Walmart and a jury declining to indict the PO. That's newsworthy.
some BB guns look like real guns. this man was unarmed.
No, that wasn't what happened. What happened was this black guy had picked the BB gun off the shelf at his Walmart and started walking around with it. The cops responded to a 911 call and instead of telling the guy to put the gun down they shot him. They shot without identifying themselves or attempting to challenge the man. That's murder. The jury declined to indict the POs even with a CLEAR video showing the incident.
ok lets agree to disagree then because i can see how a cop could mistake a BB gun for a real one.
which one is real, which one is fake?
I'm not even talking about the BB gun Wal-Mart incident, I'm talking about the incident that's described in the OP and how you think it's "newsworthy" just because the guy was unarmed.
That's what I was replying to. I don't know anything about the Wal-Mart BB gun incident, so I'm not making any claims about that yet. Airshocker said that the SC Circle K shooting isn't newsworthy. While I don't quite agree with him (I think it's worth reporting on), I don't think it's MAJOR news for the simple fact that the news isn't that shocking and that the dude who fucked up is apparently being held accountable. The fact that the victim was unarmed doesn't change that, that's just one of the factors that leads to the conclusion that the shooter fucked up. And, for the most part, "person fucks up on the job, gets fired and prosecuted" isn't BIG news.
it kinda is when we just recently got over the riots in ferguson.
Saw this video earlier, good to hear the cop got fired for it. The cop told the guy to get his license and that's what the guy tried to do. Don't know what he expected honestly.
That's being a little dishonest. The guy dove inside the car to get his license. The cop was wrong in shooting first without challenging the guy, but the victim was also wrong in reacting in such a way.
"The guy dove inside the car to get his license"
No he didn't, he reached into his car normally to grab his wallet. I don't see where he dove, he wasn't even that fast.
"but the victim was also wrong in reacting in such a way."
Your're sick if you believe the victim somehow encouraged the cop to shoot at him.
He practically dove. He spun around so quickly that even I would have drew my gun at such a response.
First off, I already said the cop was wrong in shooting him. It doesn't make much sense for you to then say that I believe the victim somehow encouraged the cop to shoot him. I believe the victim gave the officer enough cause to draw his weapon, not to shoot him.
When you interact with a LEO you need to take into account that your actions are being scrutinized. If your wallet is in your car and you are outside of it you need to first tell the officer that it's inside the car and then ask for permission to get it. You don't immediately turn around and reach inside. Not unless you want a gun drawn on you.
"He practically dove. He spun around so quickly that even I would have drew my gun at such a response."
He didn't dive, he turned around casually. Also, Considering that its a public environment and its broad day light, the chances of him actually drawing a gun are extremely low. The victim didn't even get a chance to turn around before the cop drew a gun and charged towards him. The victim was surprised, he turned around quickly, and the cop ended up shooting him because he turned around so quickly. No, I don't believe drawing your weapon is the correct response at all in that situation.
"I believe the victim gave the officer enough cause to draw his weapon."
But he didn't...drawing your weapon should only be needed when there is actual legitimate danger.
"When you interact with a LEO you need to take into account that your actions are being scrutinized. If your wallet is in your car and you are outside of it you need to first tell the officer that it's inside the car and then ask for permission to get it. You don't immediately turn around and reach inside. Not unless you want a gun drawn on you."
Sure, but not everyone will react in a slow and clam matter. Cops should be prepared for the victims reaction, but that doesn't mean they should go for a gun just because a person turns his back to you. That sort of fearful reaction is the reason why these kinds of situations keep happening.
He didn't spin around casually. What does the time of day have to do with anything? It doesn't matter what you think is the correct response. You're not a PO. You're an untrained civilian.
Yes, he did. If a PO believes his life may be in danger he is allowed to draw his weapon and stop the threat. This PO jumped the gun and started shooting without even waiting to see what the guy was trying to get. It's a perfectly legal and appropriate response to have your weapon drawn and pointed at an individual if you believe that individual is doing something that might cause you harm.
The cop was prepared. He simply decided to start shooting instead of waiting for the situation to become clearer.
Saw this video earlier, good to hear the cop got fired for it. The cop told the guy to get his license and that's what the guy tried to do. Don't know what he expected honestly.
That's being a little dishonest. The guy dove inside the car to get his license. The cop was wrong in shooting first without challenging the guy, but the victim was also wrong in reacting in such a way.
"The guy dove inside the car to get his license"
No he didn't, he reached into his car normally to grab his wallet. I don't see where he dove, he wasn't even that fast.
"but the victim was also wrong in reacting in such a way."
Your're sick if you believe the victim somehow encouraged the cop to shoot at him.
He practically dove. He spun around so quickly that even I would have drew my gun at such a response.
First off, I already said the cop was wrong in shooting him. It doesn't make much sense for you to then say that I believe the victim somehow encouraged the cop to shoot him. I believe the victim gave the officer enough cause to draw his weapon, not to shoot him.
When you interact with a LEO you need to take into account that your actions are being scrutinized. If your wallet is in your car and you are outside of it you need to first tell the officer that it's inside the car and then ask for permission to get it. You don't immediately turn around and reach inside. Not unless you want a gun drawn on you.
"He practically dove. He spun around so quickly that even I would have drew my gun at such a response."
He didn't dive, he turned around casually. Also, Considering that its a public environment and its broad day light, the chances of him actually drawing a gun are extremely low. The victim didn't even get a chance to turn around before the cop drew a gun and charged towards him. The victim was surprised, he turned around quickly, and the cop ended up shooting him because he turned around so quickly. No, I don't believe drawing your weapon is the correct response at all in that situation.
"I believe the victim gave the officer enough cause to draw his weapon."
But he didn't...drawing your weapon should only be needed when there is actual legitimate danger.
"When you interact with a LEO you need to take into account that your actions are being scrutinized. If your wallet is in your car and you are outside of it you need to first tell the officer that it's inside the car and then ask for permission to get it. You don't immediately turn around and reach inside. Not unless you want a gun drawn on you."
Sure, but not everyone will react in a slow and clam matter. Cops should be prepared for the victims reaction, but that doesn't mean they should go for a gun just because a person turns his back to you. That sort of fearful reaction is the reason why these kinds of situations keep happening.
He didn't spin around casually. What does the time of day have to do with anything? It doesn't matter what you think is the correct response. You're not a PO. You're an untrained civilian.
Yes, he did. If a PO believes his life may be in danger he is allowed to draw his weapon and stop the threat. This PO jumped the gun and started shooting without even waiting to see what the guy was trying to get. It's a perfectly legal and appropriate response to have your weapon drawn and pointed at an individual if you believe that individual is doing something that might cause you harm.
The cop was prepared. He simply decided to start shooting instead of waiting for the situation to become clearer.
He spun around casually, he definitely didn't dive into his car. It's day time, there is more people around to witness a possible crime and its less likely to surprise a cop with a hidden weapon. I expect police officers to act in the best interests of the people, I don't want a gun pointed at me if I reach into my car.
Drawing your weapon means you are prepared to shoot whatever it is your targeting. A person could react poorly to that and end up getting shot just like in the video. You should only draw your weapon if there is an actual danger and not just assuming everyone is a threat.
it kinda is when we just recently got over the riots in ferguson.
Dude...stop talking about the news if you aren't even gonna pay the slightest bit of attention to it. The Ferguson story was not about, "OMG, you guys, an unarmed man got shot by a cop!" The Ferguson story was about the perception (whether right or wrong) that there was widespread corruption and/or incompetence within the police department. It wasn't so much about a cop shooting an unarmed black man, it was about how the police department acted after the shooting. Again, were you even paying the slightest attention to that? The entire thing that people were pissed off about was how the police handled things AFTER the shooting. The narrative was that the cops botched the investigation into the shooting, and then botched the handling of the protests. That was all tangential to the shooting itself.
That does not apply when the shooter quickly gets fired and has criminal charges filed against him. The Ferguson situation wasn't about a cop shooting an unarmed black man, the Ferguson situation was about the perception (whether right or wrong) of institutionalized racism and/or corruption and incompetence being accepted policy of the people whose job it is to protect us. The narrative about institutionalized racism flies right out the window when the cop who shoots an unarmed black man gets quickly fired and charged with a crime. The narrative about corruption and incompetence flies right out the window when the guy who committed a wrongful shooting quickly gets fired and charged with a crime. Don't bring up Ferguson. Bringing up Ferguson simply shows that you haven't been paying the slightest bit of attention to any of this shit.
1.5 seconds after asking for his ID he's already firing at the guy, the guy puts his hands up and the cop fires at him two more times. Cop not only has the wrong attitude and wrong reactions, but has no regards for safety in the surrounding area with his horrible aim....could've hit bystanders or the gas station. Not officer material and glad he's gone, also glad the victim is recovering and hope he sues this fucker's ass to hell and back
What is disappointing is not really the action of the cops when things like this happen but the fact that the force hires people who do not know how to be cops. A lot of police are basically every day civilians with the license to carry guns out in public. They're scared people who think everyone they stop is out to get them. So they end up shooting first and kill innocent people. Unfortunately, there is no way around that. Cops will always hire these kind of people. Just like our military recruits people despite having a bad background. We have gangsters in our military who have murdered cops using military taught techniques, WITH ASSAULT RIFLES.
It's just the way of the world. Tough shit is always going to happen no matter what you do.
1.5 seconds after asking for his ID he's already firing at the guy, the guy puts his hands up and the cop fires at him two more times. Cop not only has the wrong attitude and wrong reactions, but has no regards for safety in the surrounding area with his horrible aim....could've hit bystanders or the gas station. Not officer material and glad he's gone, also glad the victim is recovering and hope he sues this fucker's ass to hell and back
Of course. The firing was only the first step. Now is the time for the cop to take responsibility for his actions by providing compensation for the damage that resulted in his trigger finger.
There's no defending this one...and the framing of the situation as he "dove in" to get his license is disingenuous. Cop said get your license, and he calmly turned around and reached into his car like any normal person.
Saw this video earlier, good to hear the cop got fired for it. The cop told the guy to get his license and that's what the guy tried to do. Don't know what he expected honestly.
That's being a little dishonest. The guy dove inside the car to get his license. The cop was wrong in shooting first without challenging the guy, but the victim was also wrong in reacting in such a way.
I normally don't question your opinion but I have to call bullshit...are you guys so PTSD'ed that there is now a correct way of grabbing for something in your car when you haven't shown any signs of defiance or aggression? Are things so fucked up over there that instead of the police needing to be prepared to react to a violent civilian, now is the civilian who has to prepare to react to a violent police officer?
Ask for permission to reach for your car? How many people keep their driver's license and documents in their pocket? Of course it was inside the car!
"It doesn't matter what you think is the correct response. You're not a PO. You're an untrained civilian." <- And this is why shit happens all the time...
@MrGeezer said:
I don't think it's MAJOR news for the simple fact that the news isn't that shocking and that the dude who fucked up is apparently being held accountable. The fact that the victim was unarmed doesn't change that, that's just one of the factors that leads to the conclusion that the shooter fucked up. And, for the most part, "person fucks up on the job, gets fired and prosecuted" isn't BIG news.
An unarmed man is shot for no reason and not only isn't shocking but it's a simple matter of someone "fucking up on the job". I'm starting to be more and more afraid of you guys...
If I recall correctly this was ruled a bad shooting and the cop was fired. Not sure what's newsworthy about it, though.
another unarmed black man getting shot for no reason, nothing news worthy about that. smh
Not really, since the cop isn't one any longer. What is newsworthy is the story of a couple of POs apparently shooting a black man carrying a BB gun in Walmart and a jury declining to indict the PO. That's newsworthy.
some BB guns look like real guns. this man was unarmed.
While true he was unarmed.....the cop didn't know it. Perhaps he should have done what the expert did and say okay my ID is in the car. Anyway the cop was fired so that's that. Not sure why it's a thread.
Saw this video earlier, good to hear the cop got fired for it. The cop told the guy to get his license and that's what the guy tried to do. Don't know what he expected honestly.
That's being a little dishonest. The guy dove inside the car to get his license. The cop was wrong in shooting first without challenging the guy, but the victim was also wrong in reacting in such a way.
I normally don't question your opinion but I have to call bullshit...are you guys so PTSD'ed that there is now a correct way of grabbing for something in your car when you haven't shown any signs of defiance or aggression? Are things so fucked up over there that instead of the police needing to be prepared to react to a violent civilian, now is the civilian who has to prepare to react to a violent police officer?
Ask for permission to reach for your car? How many people keep their driver's license and documents in their pocket? Of course it was inside the car!
I always have my license in my wallet and my wallet is ALWAYS in my front pant pocket. Just saying...
I always have my license in my wallet and my wallet is ALWAYS in my front pant pocket. Just saying...
So is mine, but I don't carry the car documents, insurance papers and whatnot in my wallet, and maybe there it's different but here when they ask you for your license they expect you to provide the rest of the paperwork as well.
it kinda is when we just recently got over the riots in ferguson.
Dude...stop talking about the news if you aren't even gonna pay the slightest bit of attention to it. The Ferguson story was not about, "OMG, you guys, an unarmed man got shot by a cop!" The Ferguson story was about the perception (whether right or wrong) that there was widespread corruption and/or incompetence within the police department. It wasn't so much about a cop shooting an unarmed black man, it was about how the police department acted after the shooting. Again, were you even paying the slightest attention to that? The entire thing that people were pissed off about was how the police handled things AFTER the shooting. The narrative was that the cops botched the investigation into the shooting, and then botched the handling of the protests. That was all tangential to the shooting itself.
That does not apply when the shooter quickly gets fired and has criminal charges filed against him. The Ferguson situation wasn't about a cop shooting an unarmed black man, the Ferguson situation was about the perception (whether right or wrong) of institutionalized racism and/or corruption and incompetence being accepted policy of the people whose job it is to protect us. The narrative about institutionalized racism flies right out the window when the cop who shoots an unarmed black man gets quickly fired and charged with a crime. The narrative about corruption and incompetence flies right out the window when the guy who committed a wrongful shooting quickly gets fired and charged with a crime. Don't bring up Ferguson. Bringing up Ferguson simply shows that you haven't been paying the slightest bit of attention to any of this shit.
if it wasnt an unarmed black man that got shot there would not have been riots.
An unarmed man is shot for no reason and not only isn't shocking but it's a simple matter of someone "fucking up on the job". I'm starting to be more and more afraid of you guys...
Do you have any idea how often this kind of stuff happens on a national level? I'm not talking specifically about cops, but any job in which people's lives are in someone's hands. This is local news stuff, or the kind of thing that gets a brief mention in the national news. Because if the news media tried to captivate the nation every time this happened, it'd be literally the only thing in the news. This is the equivalent of a doctor screwing up and hurting a patient, or the equivalent of a driver being injured in a car accident because his mechanic sucked. Once the person responsible gets held accountable, there's nothing more to the story.
@MrGeezer: If this sort of thing is common enough not to be news worthy, then the situation over there is much worse than I imagined. Where I come from if a police officer injured someone who offered no threat or no resistance (I say injured and not shot because most PO's don't carry guns and the very few who do don't draw them because there's never a calling for it) it would be on the news for weeks.
@lamprey263: Horrible shot? You do realize that if you put a gun in 9/10 people's hands and ask them to shoot a still target 10 feet away they will miss completely. Shooting irl isn't like shooting in call of duty. Now add in yourself moving, the target moving erratically and stress and if you even manage to land 1/5 shots within a 5 foot proximity you did good.
As for the topic at hand. Complete bullshit. The cop overreacted and got what he deserved. I don't think it should be attempted murder or anything. Cops are under tremendous stress. He misinterpreted the guys signals and shot when he shouldn't have even drawn his gun. I am sure that guy will get a hefty life altering settlement as well. A bullet to the hip for a couple mill? Sign me up.
The only reason I say the cop shouldn't be charged with anything worse is I am sure that he understands that what he did was completely in the wrong.
@MrGeezer: If this sort of thing is common enough not to be news worthy, then the situation over there is much worse than I imagined. Where I come from if a police officer injured someone who offered no threat or no resistance (I say injured and not shot because most PO's don't carry guns and the very few who do don't draw them because there's never a calling for it) it would be on the news for weeks.
It's a very small percentage of incidents with cops that actually end that way....hence the news stories.
Saw this video earlier, good to hear the cop got fired for it. The cop told the guy to get his license and that's what the guy tried to do. Don't know what he expected honestly.
That's being a little dishonest. The guy dove inside the car to get his license. The cop was wrong in shooting first without challenging the guy, but the victim was also wrong in reacting in such a way.
I normally don't question your opinion but I have to call bullshit...are you guys so PTSD'ed that there is now a correct way of grabbing for something in your car when you haven't shown any signs of defiance or aggression? Are things so fucked up over there that instead of the police needing to be prepared to react to a violent civilian, now is the civilian who has to prepare to react to a violent police officer?
Ask for permission to reach for your car? How many people keep their driver's license and documents in their pocket? Of course it was inside the car!
I always have my license in my wallet and my wallet is ALWAYS in my front pant pocket. Just saying...
I get that but my license are always in my wallet but my wallet is always inside my backpack, wherever I go, my backpack goes meaning it's inside my car. when a cop pulls me over, [rarely if I did something out of the ordinary] and ask my driver's license, I always tell the cop it is inside my pack so he knows what I'm going to get and it's cool from there. Sure some folks keep there license inside there pockets but my wallet always stays in my backpack.
It's a very small percentage of incidents with cops that actually end that way....hence the news stories.
That was my point...it's either a rare incident and therefore it's news, or it's a very common incident and it's not news, but in that case something is seriously wrong.
@holonic- said:
I get that but my license are always in my wallet but my wallet is always inside my backpack, wherever I go, my backpack goes meaning it's inside my car. when a cop pulls me over, [rarely if I did something out of the ordinary] and ask my driver's license, I always tell the cop it is inside my pack so he knows what I'm going to get and it's cool from there. Sure some folks keep there license inside there pockets but my wallet always stays in my backpack.
Did you tell the cop it was in your pack just because or did you feel like it would be dangerous not to tell him? Last time a cop asked me for my driver's license I reached for my glove compartment and when I went to give it to him he had his back turned to me and was almost against my window...no stress there whatsoever...
@lamprey263: Horrible shot? You do realize that if you put a gun in 9/10 people's hands and ask them to shoot a still target 10 feet away they will miss completely. Shooting irl isn't like shooting in call of duty. Now add in yourself moving, the target moving erratically and stress and if you even manage to land 1/5 shots within a 5 foot proximity you did good.
That officer isn't 9/10 people, he's trained in the use of firearms, yeah I'd say he was (fortunately) a horrible shot.
Log in to comment