Shooting an unarmed man

Well, let me be clear about this: I don't post to be useful or of a service to you.

So not only do you speak for all of the cops, you are speaking for the rest of this community as well? You seems to care plenty as you're still on and on about me not giving you a clarification. lol

We can address what it is you're saying anytime you want to. You seem too obsessed at debating semantics with me to do that tho.

Don't make assumptions. You should know better. Just because no one has asked you to clarify anything doesn't mean a thing. I asked you to clarify something, that should be enough.

When I made the statement you're taking issue to it was being said just to you. Re-read my post. That's not the point. The point is you're trying to say I'm just as confused as GazaAli. That isn't the case.

That's pretty rude of you. I post in order to be of service to you. Anyhow, that doesn't change the fact that it was a useless, pointless post.

I never said I spoke for all cops, nor the community. You need to work on your reading comprehension.

Unfortunately when the meaning of your words are in question to such a high degree, we do need to talk about semantics. Furthermore, it seems you're only concern is to try and play cheap forum games. If it wasn't you wouldn't have brought up me sounding defensive. You would have addressed my points.

Did you even see those stats? I suppose leap year happens "often" to you as well. 12.5 million arrests per year....0.0009% end with an American cop killing the suspect. That should be the end of the story right there. Yes one time is too much, but let's be realistic, practical, reasonable, and rational here please. 0.0009% of anything is a miniscule amount.

Do you know most cops will go their entire career without ever even firing their weapon?

If a cop shot me, my mother would go after his/her ass to the grave.

If a cop shot my dog, I don't know what I would do but I would sure dox and do something creative to destroy their life.

Which impels them to resort to militant practices that lead to the controversy of police brutality. It's not that those militant practices are necessarily justified in a war context, but at least they can often be rationalized there whereas in a civilian context, they have zero chance of legitimization.

I read your statistics several times actually, and I still think your explanation of them is flawed. When examined in isolation, the statistics you provide reject the claim of police brutality I concur. However, when examined relative to the context of the unnecessary death of suspects and police brutality, they allude to an unsavory reality. This is something that must remain a once in a blue moon occurrence yet it happens regularly in the U.S. It doesn't happen often, but it does happen regularly. That's unacceptable. In many developed and underdeveloped countries, the unjustified death of a suspect would spark national turmoil of significant ramifications; it'd shake the country to its core. On the other hand, it's slowly becoming established in the U.S.

In general, statistics are interpreted within the research context. This isn't me talking; this is statistics as a discipline talking. As such, you can't make such a blanket statement as "0.0009% of anything is a miniscule amount."

Lastly, let me reiterate that the unjustified death of a suspect is the absolute extreme of police brutality and it follows that it won't happen often as an outlier. What that means is that less brutal instances do take place much more frequently, reflecting a reality where police brutality is a genuine issue not a cavil.

I didn't actually, but it doesn't take a genius to realize that the U.S is lagging behind vis-a-vis the conduct of its police corps in comparison to many developed and underdeveloped countries. In the former, it's the rule of law and civil rights that make sure policemen conduct themselves properly and in the latter it's often a combination of social and ethical norms. As I said earlier, the U.S lacks an understanding of the profession of a policeman and his professional conduct in a country governed by the rule of law and vaunts civil rights.

First of all, you do realize the majority of those shootings are jusitifed, right? 0.0009% of arrests end in the police shooting and killing the suspect, but they are overwhelmingly justifiable shootings. I went with the biggets possible number of shootings, which would be all of them, and still it came out to an extremely small percentage. Now take a fraction of a percent of that and it would represent the illegal shootings the police are involved in.

You keep saying it is a regular occurence, but you are warping stats there as well. You may hear of one illegal police shooting a month....but yea that is a regular occurence right? But when you look at the big picture it is not so at all. If one person were murdered per month it would be a "regular occurence" but it would also be 12 people per year out of 320,000,000.

Do not mistake this for not caring, one illegal police shooting is too many. I am only arguing this perception that our country is the wild west and that most of our cops are corrupt is simply not true. We have 1.2 million police in this country, 12.5 million arrests per year, and only around 1000 suspects killed by police in custody per year; the overwhelming majority of which are justified. The 1000 number is inflated by the way, the FBI reports about 500 are killed. This is not an epidemic by any means.

The second paragraph in your post is for the most part what I'm getting at. Examining the statistics of police killings from a purely statistical point of view discredits any claims of police brutality, but when examined contextually, the statistics reveal a disconcerting reality that you deflate by comparing the statistics concerned to the general population.

I'd agree with you that police brutality isn't an epidemic in the U.S, but the evidence points to it being a genuine issue. An ailment doesn't have to be compounded into an epidemic to receive attention and generate dismay, and this is what's happening in the U.S with respect to the conduct of its police corps. There's corruption and abuse of power among policemen that needs to be addressed. So far, the response remains inadequate.

But in making our country out to be this bastion of violence and our police force to be corrupted as a whole what have people on this forum done? Instead of standing side by side with you against police brutality I am forced to defend my country from misinformation and unfounded attacks. When you have 1.2 million cops and 12.5 million arrests per year mistakes are going to happen, bad apples are going to get through. The only measure not every police dept is doing that I think would solve this is body cams for all cops. There is legislation going through to allocate federal funds to provide assistance to all police depts in the country. So they are doing something about it. Every major police dept I know of makes all applicants undergo physcological exams, and extreme background checks including polygraphs. Most big ones require at least a 2 year college degree or military background with an honorable discharge.

What more can they do?

The majority of cops in this country are very professional, but when you have 1.2 million cops you will have bad ones that slip through the process. Police corruption is something that is "rampant" in countries like Mexico where police chiefs are consistently being busted for being involved in things like organized crime, not the U.S.

The police just shot an unarmed man today. It's on the news right now.

Liberals don't care.

Why?

He's white

*just found out - they shot him in the back . . . No one on any of the news stations seems to have a problem with it. . . If he was black and the cops shot him in the back - this board and every channel would be screaming "racism", ,calling for "justice", and there would be riots in the streets.

We shouldn't inflate the issue of police brutality in the U.S, but we shouldn't deflate it either; it may not be an epidemic, but it's something that needs addressing. Until recently, the matter has been poorly handled, with policemen getting nothing but a slap on the wrist for what's sometimes nothing short of a heinous murder - that's the bane of many that fuels this discourse. For instance, I couldn't believe the details concerning the last black man who died in police custody.

No one expects the police corps to be squeaky clean; a few degenerates will always make it past the most rigorous recruitment processes. When these bad-seeds are brought to light, it's the duty of their police departments to hold them accountable and deliver justice proper. This is where the police corps has been failing: the punitive measures are often trivial and an insult to the victim and his community.

But as you stated, the matter is starting to get serious attention from the authorities. Here's the thing though: they're acting because of the outrage and the discourse that has been taking place lately; otherwise, the matter would have remained untended to. Police departments will continue to be evermore rigorous in their recruitment processes. They'll focus more on the conduct of their recruits and they'll make sure they're operating within the confines of the law. This is all good, for the police corps and the American people at large. I'm not American but what I personally believe to be paramount is how culpable policemen are handled; impunity needs to vanish.

How often?

I'm just curious: out of all known cases of police misconduct, how many of them end up with the officer not being appropriately punished/disciplined?

I don't have statistics, but in retrospect, it doesn't seem that the punishment goes beyond paid leave or a few months sentence. You'll be reminded that the riots and demonstrations related to police brutality often spring into existence as a protestation against impunity and in retaliation to justice undelivered.

I think the issue is cultural and it's not something that can be fixed from the inside. And it's not something you can fix by putting body cams on cops unless all the feeds are in real time and accessible to all. I'm in no way saying that our ENTIRE police force is corrupted but the problem is worse than you seems to think. Plus there's a more pervasive issue of increasing common police mentality of "us vs them". Ferguson was a perfect example of that; you have an entire legal system with an ingrained culture of discrimination and corruption that wasn't brought into the light until something random happened. Just imagine if the shooting didn't happened, they would have kept on doing what they were doing and all the complaint of the poor and minority residents would have fallen on deaf ears just as they always had. A lot of big police department have little or no civilian oversight even those that do on paper have little power over the police force. Police themselves have the common culture and mentality of sticking by themselves instead of what's right, those who believe and act otherwise are often treated as outsider or worse as the enemy. The question of "who's going to police the police" continues to be an issue and something we can't ignore or downplay whenever the topic comes up.

I would have just ended the comment there.

@thebest31406: Why? I feel like that would need to be expounded on. I don't think it's universally understood that those are problems plaguing our legal system and the police.

**** unarmed men. Unarmed men are the worst things in the world. Did you people forget that for the majority of his life hitler was an unarmed man? Yeah! Hitler! Why do you people love hitler so much? Unarmed men should be shot on sight.

I suppose your right, though it doesn't take a genius to figure out that lapel cams don't guarantee accountability to those cops who would kill and brutalize their suspects; especially when such events are already caught on camera.

A couple of things:

1) Protestors seem to be responding to a relatively small number of incidents. That is, the small number of incidents that get major media attention. Do those incidents accurately reflect the scale of the problem, or is it far more common that police are appropriately disciplined and then the story never really gets much media coverage?

2) Riots and demonstrations result from the PERCEIVED notion that justice has not been served. I think we need a more objective way to determine whether or not justice has been served. I mean, suppose there's a shooting and then the investigation reveals that the shooting was justified. Does that mean that the shooting was in fact justified? Or does that mean that the determination that the shooting was justified is actually incorrect?

Bottom line is that I think that there needs to be an objective look at this. I'm not saying that there isn't a problem with the way police misconduct is disciplined, but I'm still not clear on the EXTENT of the problem. Is this problem really as bad as it appears, or is media coverage making this problem look more pervasive than it really is?

@MrGeezer: "Is this problem really as bad as it appears, or is media coverage making this problem look more pervasive than it really is?"

Yes the media is making a mountain out of a mole hill, considering the size of the usa these incidents are few and far between.

I like how other cops instead of physically stopping the abuse just reminds him he's being filmed. Worst thing about this is the cop had a previous incident of breaking another person's arm but was not fired because again, cops watch out for themselves.

Cop clearly lost his shit...and he probably not suited to serve on the police force...but the dude tried slapping the police officer! I can only imagine what happened in the car/before the video started but I'd imagine the the guy was giving police officers a lot of trouble. To be clear, I would expect police officers to be far more professional than this and this officer should most likely face charges, but I can only imagine what the typical officer has to deal with on a daily basis.

**** I'm glad I live in a country where if a cop pulls a gun he's under imidiate investigation and has to go about doing weeks of paper work. I no longer am willing to cross the border into the United states for the simple reason if a cop feels threatened he can shoot me no problems and go about his day life 99% of the time like nothing happened.

Went to a Buffalo football game and the amount of cops holding assault riffles, wearing military grade body armor and looking literally all hyped up on some kind of amphetamine with angry I'm going to kill you looks on their face was down right frighting. Last time I ever go to that country outside of a flight having to land so I can catch another one.

Yep, it doesn't. But some would argue that it eliminate the question of he said she said in certain scenarios.

This simply isn't true. All shootings by police officers get investigations.

Do you know why they were equipped that way? There are plausible reasons for us to be armed in such a way. It seems like you just have an irrational fear of certain pieces of gear.

Again the level of scrutiny is different for police shootings. Most of the post shooting investigation are handled by the local legal body which the police department is a part of. Courts and judges very rarely question the word of the LEOs, so to trust the same system to investigate police shooting impartially is unrealistic. With the few cops involved in shooting that do get charged, the conviction rate is actually really low; at about 20%. sauce It's even more surprising to me that most of those unconvicted cases involved unarmed victims (some aren't even suspects or were threatening). Those cops have effectively gotten away with murder.

@bmanva:

Well, that's disturbing. Problem is, the police don't always know if the person is armed/unarmed. For example, there was a video of a Vietnam Vet killing a cop in a traffic stop and another shooting of a female cop, again, at a traffic stop. I know the first died but not so sure about the second. You can find it on Youtube and it's fucking disturbing.

Then you have a cop shooting an elderly man with a cane when he was getting out of the car. In the cop's defense, it was dark and he thought it was a gun. Also while there is no grounds to shoot someone, you shouldn't exist the vehicle unless told to do so by an officer. I would also cite the Tamir Rice case but that shit is murky and the cops involved did lie in the investigation so **** 'em.

I think the problem persists due to extremes: One side saying cops do no wrong and they're angels with superhuman abilities and others saying that cops are evil pigs set on destroying civil liberties and black people. Cops do get shit on and there are cases where cops have acted professionally, do engage the community and help out, and some lost their lives in the line of duty, but that doesn't excuse cops committing crimes and/or not following protocol, escalating the situation (Texas Pool Party), and yes there are flaws in police accountability that need to be fixed. To me it's a part of a much bigger problem involving race relations, a justice system that discriminates against the poor, and a broken economy. You can take away bearcats and AR15s but I don't think that will do anything.

We're not talking about anything other than police shootings. That's not true, each locality is different. In my county the Sheriffs Department is responsible for investing OIS(officer involved shootings) and I believe they always either go to a grand jury, or that's a measure we're about to put in place.

Just because someone is unarmed doesn't mean we aren't allowed to shoot them if the situation calls for it. You were a cop in the Air Force. You know this.

@airshocker: No more like fear of people who are obviously in an agitated aggressive state who have the legal system allowing them to do what ever they want in the moment if they feel threatened, who also happen to be carrying Military grade assault riffles and pistols along with the armor to back them up. In Canada I've never seen a cop pull a gun once. Not a single god damn time. I've seen it happen a total of three times in person as a person visiting in the united states. Difference is the moment a cop pulls a gun in Canada and the situation is over with his gun is confiscated and he's off the job and doing paper work and under investigation for weeks even if he didn't shoot it. In the states pulling your gun is second nature it seems to these cops since the same due diligence isn't required.. **** being around that, Roided up or amphetamine out their mind cops with the ability to do what ever they want is not something I ever want to be around.

When I see a cop I get a spurt of adrenaline. If cops posed no threat then why do I have adrenaline as my bodies first response to an encounter with them? Sure as hell isn't because I'm doing extreme sports or about to get laid. No it's because every instance I have with an officer is a potential risk to my health or my way of life. Just take that guy in L.A who flagged down two officers while his hand was wrapped in a towel, then got shot at 4 times and had one fly through his head. Or the kid that got shot due to a pellet gun of legal caliber, or the kid who was shot in the back because of a plastic samurai sword. Or the 6yr child fined for pissing on his own lawn.

Cops seem to have this idea that they must be respected due to the badge. I don't show respect to people who haven't proven they are deserving and that badge doesn't put them any closer into that group of people. But don't go confusing respect and being polite as the same thing, they are far from it.

I'm a cop. I know a lot of cops. Most of us aren't in "agitated aggressive states". We are usually always vigilant. Always ready to transition from the unassuming peace officer to something a lot meaner. The legal system does not allow us to do whatever we want if we feel threatened. For instance, if you threaten me with a gun and I use deadly force to kill you, I'm not allowed to do horrible things to your corpse. The legal system doesn't allow me to do anything I want to you. Oh please, stop with the talking points. Why should we not have all of the gear that everybody else has? Good for you? As a civilian I've never seen a cop draw their weapon. I see no reason to put a cop on desk duty and investigation simply because he drew his weapon. That is absurd. Pulling out our guns is part of our training for certain situations. Roided up? Amphetamines? I think you need to lay off those, my friend.

You get a spurt of adrenaline because you are hilariously misinformed. Everything is a potential risk to your life. Walking across the street or driving in your car is more dangerous than an encounter with police. A few mistakes out of almost a million uniformed police officers...I'll take those statistics any day of the week.

You don't have to respect cops. I, for one, don't care if you respect me or not. I respect you and your rights. You do, however, have an obligation to follow the lawful, reasonable orders of a police officer. That's part of the deal you implicitly agree to as a member of society.

@airshocker:

So as a cop you have zero idea what it's like to see two cops sneak up on your friend form behind not identify themselves and force him face first into the ground breaking his nose then charge him for resisting. Giving him a criminal record when all they had to do was talk to him. Or what it's like to have a cop have it out for you, and have him pull you over again and again handing you tickets for laws that don't even exist. Or what it's like to go into the station tell them to remove the tickets, only to have my license suspended and my job threatened due to him sending them to court anyway. Or what it's like too be sitting in a parking lot waiting for your movie time to start only to be forced out by men holding tazers and a shotgun because they thought they'd break a make out session up and get a laugh by scaring us. Or be pulled over once again by the cop that doesn't like me at 2 am and then have 6 other cruisers zoom in with full lights and sirens only to be let go with a have a good night sir. Ya because scare tactics aren't a thing cops like to do.... Or what it's like to be gangbeat and told by the two officers that happen by that they can't take me to a hospital instead drop me off a block down the road and tell me to walk home(Miles), all while having sever cuts to my head and a major concussion, while barely being far enough away to run from my attackers let alone make it home which I did not but I was found in a ditch the next day and a civilian called an ambulance. Or what it's like to have your car unlawfully searched with no probable cause, even with my protest and sighting of laws they were breaking.

I think if anything your the misinformed delusional one. I'm a citizen the ones your supposed to work for and protect and those are my experiences with officers of the law. And those officers tend to not know the law, follow it or properly enforce it. So sorry if I fear and don't trust people who can **** my life up, simply because they are having a bad day, and feel like being a prick like I've seen happen and have had happen to me on multiple occasions. Cops like you are part of the problem. Unwilling to realize most people hate them because most cops act like assholes.

No I don't because I've never experienced it. I've never done such a thing, so why do you lump me in with those that did?

I do work for you. That doesn't mean that I'm going to sit here and let you characterize me as some kind of monster. I'm sorry that you've had bad experiences with police officers in the past. But 99% of us don't abuse the power we're given. The only thing I care about is finishing my shift without getting shot and coming home to do my hobbies. People like you scare me. If you want to think I'm an asshole for doing my job, that's fine. Just remember that you're contributing to the apprehension I always feel whenever I walk up to a car.

As with all public servants, it's the anomalies that are singled out and sprayed all over the media. The general public doesn't want to hear about the good cops (almost all of them) who protect us, and do a lot of work that most of us would be afraid or averse to. Same for teacher and other civil servants. The tendency is to vilify "the man", however that is represented, and rage against it.

Are there bad cops, bad teachers, bad civil servants? Sure. But are they that majority? No, not even close.

Our society has an addiction for the negative and the sensational, and rather than have rational conversational about it. Hyperpartisan politics don't help with this either.

So how exactly is what I said not true? It's certainly true with your county. The sheriffs department is a local legal body and they are responsible for investigation and making the determination of whether the case goes to a grand jury. And just because a grand jury is involved doesn't mean shit if the investigators aren't doing their job or partial to one side.

Yes, it's true that just because someone is unarmed doesn't mean they don't represent a threat, I was not SF (was an enlisted CCT then combat comm o), but even I understand that. However, that Washington Post article is listing statistics for shooting where the polices were charged. So there's evidences that the shooting were not justified. And if you had actually read the detail on each of the cases, you can see that many of the unarmed victims were not in anyway threatening, but still, the shooter was not convicted. Honestly, can you really see any civilian getting away for the same thing?

You made a blanket statement that the scrutiny is different for police shootings. Until you can show me every localities procedures, I'm not sure how you expect to prove that statement. Courts and judges question LEOs when it's determined that there will be a grand jury. You suggested that another police department wouldn't be impartial to the investigation of another. I don't see how you can prove that. As for your recent post, you said the Sheriffs Department makes the determination of whether or not a grand jury is convened. That isn't true. That is the sole purview of the district attorney. You again suggested that investigations wouldn't be doing shit because they're biased. Again, not something you can prove of every investigator.

Civilians frequently get absolved of any wrongdoing. I've never seen a civilian go to jail because they shot someone who was inside their home illegally, even if they were unarmed.

@airshocker: It is different. And burden of proof isn't on me, it's on you if you choose to challenge the statement.

Because you've seen everything so it must not happened or will never happen if you've never seen it, right?

http://therighttobear.com/outrageous-man-sentenced-to-jail-for-shooting-in-self-defense/

Yeah...about that.

There is no proof you can provide that would show that every single police department is scrutinized the same way. Each department is different and has different standards. You also can't prove that a police department investigating another police department wouldn't be impartial. Neither can you prove that all investigators are biased.

So yes, the burden of proof is certainly on you since you're trying to convince me.

@airshocker: Except I'm not trying to convince you. And you're the only person asking for and providing proof of anything, so your statement that there's no way of proving one point or another make what you posted self defending. Unlike you, I usually try to avoid posting in absolutes.

Yes you are. I'm the only person asking you for proof because you're only talking to me. I'm sure if somebody else was arguing with you they'd like to know how you would prove anything that you're saying. Nothing is self-defending. You either have proof for the statement you make, or you have an agreement that the statement you make is generally accepted to be true. You have neither hence my questioning of your statements.

For instance. The fact that the sky is blue is generally accepted to be a true statement. What you said, however, isn't generally accepted as fact.

That's not what I said at all. You asked me if I could see any civilian getting off for the same thing. I then said what you quoted. Just because I haven't seen it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Nor does it prove the point you're trying to make.

Why did you ask for proof if you didn't think proving either points was possible? Police shootings are not investigated under the same scrutiny as civilian shooting is generally accepted. You can do a survey to confirm.

As for the civilian equivalent issue, home defensive shooting isn't the same thing as police shooting since a home intruder represent a threat by simply being in the home illegally. Take the case of Jashon Bryant, the cop shot the teenager as he sat in his car. His only "crime" was his car matched description of a suspects car. The cop's partner even testified to that he was not in danger. You seriously tell me that if a civilian walked down the street, and he saw someone sitting in a car that matched the car of an escaped murder on the news. He shoots the driver and investigation later found no weapon and police who witnessed the entire incident testified that he didn't feel like the shooter was in danger. You think that civilian would have gotten off without jailed time?

Speaking of jail time, a civilian shooting suspect is jailed if he/she can't make bail. Do they jail cops for shootings even if they are under investigation?

True, but not all cops have tasers. There were some controversies over the use of tasers in the early 2000s and some people had died after being "tased" (I'm not sure if that is a real word or not, the word TASER is actually an acronym, but "tase" does seem to be used commonly as a verb rather than saying shot with a taser which may be more grammatically correct, similar to how text is used as verb to shorten "send a text message") so some departments actually got rid of them, which seems to me like it would just lead to more police using their guns instead.

@magicalclick: Is that the video with Chris Rock?

@magicalclick: somewhat, it's fairly funny. Basically it boils down to not getting arrested in the first place and not mouthing off if you do get arrested.