quote:

ORIGINAL: Yarashii1

I do believe he was trying to get into his vehicle which is not really an issue because at that point all he did wrong was leave the vehicle in the middle of the street. If cited that is $274 fine. Usually, the cop will tell you to move the vehicle. He didn't listen to command as I stated in earlier post, a misdemeanor with a $500 fine. Arrest him and charge him with more things if you like, but killing him because you are scared of something he MIGHT do IF he had this or that is a bit too much.

quote:

Yes, there was a suspicion of danger. Please do not try to equate troops abroad dealing with all the things they do with a Tulsa cop that has backup on the scene and is in a police department with a bomb unit and a special ops unit. She had many things that she could have done before shooting him. Many people do not know that 911 calls can be justification for escalated police action, but the police and dispatchers do know it. Mistakes happen. He was unarmed, there was no bomb. She should not have killed him. Again, mistakes happen. If you make a mistake that kills someone, there should be a punishment reflective of the seriousness of the consequences of your mistake.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yarashii1

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yarashii1
If the guy had been a 20-year-old white girl doing exactly the same thing, the public outrage would have been a bit more serious. We see black people getting shot and we say "what did that thug do?"

I agree we have a tendency to generalize quickly and sometime erroneously, but when 20 yr old white girls commit violent crime at the same rate as young black men do, then I would expect the same question to be applied to them.

which might be another way of saying, the blm folks might do well to address the problem of "thugs" in their midst.

meanwhile, I like to think that its just a matter of bad wording, but do you understand youre essentially saying that this guy was shot as punishment for his traffic offense? or that he was shot just because he was black---as I said to Vincent's op---right, because police NEVER shoot white people in similar situations.

yes it could have been handled with fines/slaps on the wrist---if the guy had done what the police told him to do.

how many dead policemen, because they gave too much leeway in unknown situations, are enough?

Thank you for the reply and I understand where you are going. Also there is so much depth to the situation, it is difficult to address everything said with a few short lines.

First and foremost, BLM (horrible name) is about more than JUST black people. It is made up by more than black people. It is a movement about equal treatment for people in our society. Many supporters of BLM see the treatment of certain groups as being marginalized. When talking about issues such as education, tax reform, and environmental protection blacks are not seen as stakeholders. BLM affiliates have shown support for all of these issues speaking on behalf of more than just the plight of blacks. They also go to and support vigils of people of other races to speak against police violence.

When talking about rates of crime you need not look past the NYPD statistics with stop and frisk. Stop and frisk which were to police drugs and illegal weapon possession. Like you profess, blacks (especially in the inner city) are considered to be criminals at a higher rate so why not stop and frisk them to improve the safety of the neighborhood? Yet even though NYPD has admitted to stopping far more people of color than whites, the success rate of finding criminal activity among the whites was actually higher. Weapons: 1/49 for whites but only 1/71 for latinos and only 1/93 for blacks. So they are almost twice as likely to find an illegal weapon on a white person. Drugs: 1/43 for whites, 1/57 for latinos, 1/61 for blacks. All the opposite order of the rate in which these people are unconstitutionally harassed to try to find crime. If your goal is to focus police activity on those most likely to commit a crime, you are arresting the wrong people. Yet media and pop culture have led us to believe that blacks are more likely to be criminals. So we as Americans support the idea of violations like this are good for stopping crime.

I am sure there are thugs in the BLM midsts and it would be great if BLM did something about them. There are thugs in the cops midst and it would be great if they did something about them too. The difference is BLM does not pick and choose who can become BLM yet they are all painted in the same light. Cops, on the other hand, do pick who they will let into their brotherhood yet somehow are not accountable for their actions.

I am definitely not saying that whites are not shot or killed in the same circumstances. I am noticing the difference between armed Bundy men in Nevada and Oregon getting shot at less than unarmed Souix Water Protectors. I am saying that when unarmed blacks take to the streets or social media to express outrage and injustice they are met with being placed on terrorist watch list and threats of national guard involvement. The example I gave will be lost on many because somehow after all that people have been shown, they refuse to see.

I do believe he should have listened to police commands. The penalty for not listening to those commands is not death. We have a legal system. I am all for justice, as long as justice is blind to race, color, religion, sexual preference......... I think what BLM is saying is that it is not. No one is saying the guy was innocent, what they are saying is that he should not be dead.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yarashii1

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yarashii1
If the guy had been a 20-year-old white girl doing exactly the same thing, the public outrage would have been a bit more serious. We see black people getting shot and we say "what did that thug do?"

I agree we have a tendency to generalize quickly and sometime erroneously, but when 20 yr old white girls commit violent crime at the same rate as young black men do, then I would expect the same question to be applied to them.

which might be another way of saying, the blm folks might do well to address the problem of "thugs" in their midst.

meanwhile, I like to think that its just a matter of bad wording, but do you understand youre essentially saying that this guy was shot as punishment for his traffic offense? or that he was shot just because he was black---as I said to Vincent's op---right, because police NEVER shoot white people in similar situations.

yes it could have been handled with fines/slaps on the wrist---if the guy had done what the police told him to do.

how many dead policemen, because they gave too much leeway in unknown situations, are enough?

Thank you for the reply and I understand where you are going. Also there is so much depth to the situation, it is difficult to address everything said with a few short lines.

First and foremost, BLM (horrible name) is about more than JUST black people. It is made up by more than black people. It is a movement about equal treatment for people in our society. Many supporters of BLM see the treatment of certain groups as being marginalized. When talking about issues such as education, tax reform, and environmental protection blacks are not seen as stakeholders. BLM affiliates have shown support for all of these issues speaking on behalf of more than just the plight of blacks. They also go to and support vigils of people of other races to speak against police violence.

When talking about rates of crime you need not look past the NYPD statistics with stop and frisk. Stop and frisk which were to police drugs and illegal weapon possession. Like you profess, blacks (especially in the inner city) are considered to be criminals at a higher rate so why not stop and frisk them to improve the safety of the neighborhood? Yet even though NYPD has admitted to stopping far more people of color than whites, the success rate of finding criminal activity among the whites was actually higher. Weapons: 1/49 for whites but only 1/71 for latinos and only 1/93 for blacks. So they are almost twice as likely to find an illegal weapon on a white person. Drugs: 1/43 for whites, 1/57 for latinos, 1/61 for blacks. All the opposite order of the rate in which these people are unconstitutionally harassed to try to find crime. If your goal is to focus police activity on those most likely to commit a crime, you are arresting the wrong people. Yet media and pop culture have led us to believe that blacks are more likely to be criminals. So we as Americans support the idea of violations like this are good for stopping crime.

I am sure there are thugs in the BLM midsts and it would be great if BLM did something about them. There are thugs in the cops midst and it would be great if they did something about them too. The difference is BLM does not pick and choose who can become BLM yet they are all painted in the same light. Cops, on the other hand, do pick who they will let into their brotherhood yet somehow are not accountable for their actions.

I am definitely not saying that whites are not shot or killed in the same circumstances. I am noticing the difference between armed Bundy men in Nevada and Oregon getting shot at less than unarmed Souix Water Protectors. I am saying that when unarmed blacks take to the streets or social media to express outrage and injustice they are met with being placed on terrorist watch list and threats of national guard involvement. The example I gave will be lost on many because somehow after all that people have been shown, they refuse to see.

I do believe he should have listened to police commands. The penalty for not listening to those commands is not death. We have a legal system. I am all for justice, as long as justice is blind to race, color, religion, sexual preference......... I think what BLM is saying is that it is not. No one is saying the guy was innocent, what they are saying is that he should not be dead.

If BLM isn't just about black lives why to they go bananas when someone says all lifes matter.
Why do they act like two dead white people is not nearly as bad as one dead black.
And what in the world does this case have to do with BLM?

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yarashii1

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yarashii1
If the guy had been a 20-year-old white girl doing exactly the same thing, the public outrage would have been a bit more serious. We see black people getting shot and we say "what did that thug do?"

I agree we have a tendency to generalize quickly and sometime erroneously, but when 20 yr old white girls commit violent crime at the same rate as young black men do, then I would expect the same question to be applied to them.

which might be another way of saying, the blm folks might do well to address the problem of "thugs" in their midst.

meanwhile, I like to think that its just a matter of bad wording, but do you understand youre essentially saying that this guy was shot as punishment for his traffic offense? or that he was shot just because he was black---as I said to Vincent's op---right, because police NEVER shoot white people in similar situations.

yes it could have been handled with fines/slaps on the wrist---if the guy had done what the police told him to do.

how many dead policemen, because they gave too much leeway in unknown situations, are enough?

Thank you for the reply and I understand where you are going. Also there is so much depth to the situation, it is difficult to address everything said with a few short lines.

First and foremost, BLM (horrible name) is about more than JUST black people. It is made up by more than black people. It is a movement about equal treatment for people in our society. Many supporters of BLM see the treatment of certain groups as being marginalized. When talking about issues such as education, tax reform, and environmental protection blacks are not seen as stakeholders. BLM affiliates have shown support for all of these issues speaking on behalf of more than just the plight of blacks. They also go to and support vigils of people of other races to speak against police violence.

When talking about rates of crime you need not look past the NYPD statistics with stop and frisk. Stop and frisk which were to police drugs and illegal weapon possession. Like you profess, blacks (especially in the inner city) are considered to be criminals at a higher rate so why not stop and frisk them to improve the safety of the neighborhood? Yet even though NYPD has admitted to stopping far more people of color than whites, the success rate of finding criminal activity among the whites was actually higher. Weapons: 1/49 for whites but only 1/71 for latinos and only 1/93 for blacks. So they are almost twice as likely to find an illegal weapon on a white person. Drugs: 1/43 for whites, 1/57 for latinos, 1/61 for blacks. All the opposite order of the rate in which these people are unconstitutionally harassed to try to find crime. If your goal is to focus police activity on those most likely to commit a crime, you are arresting the wrong people. Yet media and pop culture have led us to believe that blacks are more likely to be criminals. So we as Americans support the idea of violations like this are good for stopping crime.

I am sure there are thugs in the BLM midsts and it would be great if BLM did something about them. There are thugs in the cops midst and it would be great if they did something about them too. The difference is BLM does not pick and choose who can become BLM yet they are all painted in the same light. Cops, on the other hand, do pick who they will let into their brotherhood yet somehow are not accountable for their actions.

I am definitely not saying that whites are not shot or killed in the same circumstances. I am noticing the difference between armed Bundy men in Nevada and Oregon getting shot at less than unarmed Souix Water Protectors. I am saying that when unarmed blacks take to the streets or social media to express outrage and injustice they are met with being placed on terrorist watch list and threats of national guard involvement. The example I gave will be lost on many because somehow after all that people have been shown, they refuse to see.

I do believe he should have listened to police commands. The penalty for not listening to those commands is not death. We have a legal system. I am all for justice, as long as justice is blind to race, color, religion, sexual preference......... I think what BLM is saying is that it is not. No one is saying the guy was innocent, what they are saying is that he should not be dead.

If BLM isn't just about black lives why to they go bananas when someone says all lifes matter.
Why do they act like two dead white people is not nearly as bad as one dead black.
And what in the world does this case have to do with BLM?

Tomorrow is the 25th Anniversary of the LA RIOTS, which were spawned in spontaneous rage when four or five white cops were acquitted for the (taped) beating of Rodney King. Nothing much has changed in those 25 years. White cops are still getting away with brutality upon and murder of unarmed black men. Where is the justice black people are entitled to? They are not a lesser breed than white folk. They are entitled to the same human dignity that you and I demand. Why are you blind to the inhumanity? Why do you make excuses for such intolerable behavior by the police?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
If BLM isn't just about black lives why to they go bananas when someone says all lifes matter.
Why do they act like two dead white people is not nearly as bad as one dead black.
And what in the world does this case have to do with BLM?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yarashii1

You are right. Hindsight makes everything clearer. In real time, she saw no weapon. She was probably justifiably scared. Being scared is understandable but it is not justification for shooting someone. She may have suspected a weapon or a bomb but suspicion does not justify lethal action. You don't have to trust me on this. NONE of the other officers there were so terrified. They were in the exact same situation she was.

I could recount the series of events to prove just how out of line her reaction was but if we are going to disregard facts because they are "hindsight" we are still led back to the simple result. She used lethal force when it was not necessary. Fear is not justification. If you cannot judge them on hindsight, how can you judge them? Real time, a professional shot an unarmed civilian. The professional obviously made an understandable mistake. The profession was not held to a standard that most amateurs would be held to. Real-time there was NO immediate threat of serious harm to anyone. Lethal force was not justified. If we, as Americans, now feel that lethal force is justifiable for misdemeanors, I will support that. I am a law and order person. If police can make these mistakes real-time and not be held accountable regardless of hindsight proof, we must admit that we live in a police state. If you, however, believe in law and order, you have to agree that those same laws must apply to those who enforce the law.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yarashii1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
If BLM isn't just about black lives why to they go bananas when someone says all lifes matter.
Why do they act like two dead white people is not nearly as bad as one dead black.
And what in the world does this case have to do with BLM?

You know Bama, I've had the same question for quite some time. I went and asked a self-professed BLM member. The answer I got was that atrocities happen all over the world and of course in our country. There are marches and memorials for persons in foreign countries for class disparities, systematic violence, treatment of refugees and victims of human trafficking. Somehow black people are only statistically relevant if something bad happens. If ALL lives truely mattered, then there would be no disparity between the treatment of blacks in all aspects of society.

Don't believe that blacks all hate the police. But there is no reason for them to trust a justice system that gives criminals in their organization a pass. We upstanding citizens should be appalled by the fact that the few dirty cops create more dirty cops by getting good cops to cover for them. It compromises the integrity of the badge.

It was not BLM that made the converse of BLM, Blue Lives Matter. Of course, the lives of cops matter, people who assault cops should be punished. Cops who make mistakes are not necessarily bad people but that does not mean they shouldn't be punished.

Your argument about the number of dead blacks vs dead whites is mistaken. The number of people killed relative to the population is where they are saying blacks are killed at a higher rate. Raw number, on the other hand, you are right. Since there are roughly 6 times as many whites as blacks, for every black person killed, 6 whites would have to be killed by police for the rate to be same. So if 66% of blacks killed by police would have to stop for them to have the same rate.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

There are bad and brutal cops.
They need to be rooted out.
The difference is that I don't care what the race of the vistim is.
Interesting how you forget that there was a followup trial.
They tried the cops for violating Kings civil rights by doing the things they were just aquited of
doing. They tried them in Federal court with a (obviously ) different jury in a place were it was easy to get a favorable jury. Now how can you pretend to just want justice when you "forget" anythng done to right the wrongs.
And this is an excuse for counting one dead black as more important than two dead white people.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yarashii1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

There are bad and brutal cops.
They need to be rooted out.
The difference is that I don't care what the race of the vistim is.
Interesting how you forget that there was a followup trial.
They tried the cops for violating Kings civil rights by doing the things they were just aquited of
doing. They tried them in Federal court with a (obviously ) different jury in a place were it was easy to get a favorable jury. Now how can you pretend to just want justice when you "forget" anythng done to right the wrongs.
And this is an excuse for counting one dead black as more important than two dead white people.

At by the cops so it is not a consolation at all for people who wanted justice.
The idea of trying police in Federal court has been around for a long time because of the close relationship cops have with local and state prosecution. If you are of the mindset that rate is not an issue then I agree 2>1 but 19.2 > 6.5.....in other words for every million white people in the U.S. 2.2 are killed by police, for every million black people 5.5 are killed by police. Of course, depending on your message you may choose to count raw numbers but when talking macro data, usually rates are what is used.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yarashii1

You are right. Hindsight makes everything clearer. In real time, she saw no weapon. She was probably justifiably scared. Being scared is understandable but it is not justification for shooting someone. She may have suspected a weapon or a bomb but suspicion does not justify lethal action. You don't have to trust me on this. NONE of the other officers there were so terrified. They were in the exact same situation she was.

I could recount the series of events to prove just how out of line her reaction was but if we are going to disregard facts because they are "hindsight" we are still led back to the simple result. She used lethal force when it was not necessary. Fear is not justification. If you cannot judge them on hindsight, how can you judge them? Real time, a professional shot an unarmed civilian. The professional obviously made an understandable mistake. The profession was not held to a standard that most amateurs would be held to. Real-time there was NO immediate threat of serious harm to anyone. Lethal force was not justified. If we, as Americans, now feel that lethal force is justifiable for misdemeanors, I will support that. I am a law and order person. If police can make these mistakes real-time and not be held accountable regardless of hindsight proof, we must admit that we live in a police state. If you, however, believe in law and order, you have to agree that those same laws must apply to those who enforce the law.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yarashii1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

There are bad and brutal cops.
They need to be rooted out.
The difference is that I don't care what the race of the vistim is.
Interesting how you forget that there was a followup trial.
They tried the cops for violating Kings civil rights by doing the things they were just aquited of
doing. They tried them in Federal court with a (obviously ) different jury in a place were it was easy to get a favorable jury. Now how can you pretend to just want justice when you "forget" anythng done to right the wrongs.
And this is an excuse for counting one dead black as more important than two dead white people.

Well Bama, that is all I have been trying to say. A cop doesn't have to be racist to not deserve the privilege to be a cop.
Civil trials are a nice financial band-aid paid for by the people of the community not by the cops so it is not a consolation at all for people who wanted justice.
The idea of trying police in Federal court has been around for a long time because of the close relationship cops have with local and state prosecution. If you are of the mindset that rate is not an issue then I agree 2>1 but 19.2 > 6.5.....in other words for every million white people in the U.S. 2.2 are killed by police, for every million black people 5.5 are killed by police. Of course, depending on your message you may choose to count raw numbers but when talking macro data, usually rates are what is used.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

FR

I note that one of the things the Depty observed was that his behaviour led her to belive
that he was on PCP. Now if had been baseless it would weigh against her. However the corener confired this.
Tat indicates that maybe she understod the situaion betteer than most people, including me , thought.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

FR

I note that one of the things the Depty observed was that his behaviour led her to belive
that he was on PCP. Now if had been baseless it would weigh against her. However the corener confired this.
Tat indicates that maybe she understod the situaion betteer than most people, including me , thought.

Some guy who is trained to hate cops (especially white cops) by the Democrats, high on PCP

What could go wrong

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

I did check the case.
I am not convinced that she is innocent.
However he disobeyed directions and tried to get something out of his vehical.
We don't know what he was after, but we do know he was on PCP so he was more dangerous than a man with a gun.
This may well have created a legitimate reasonable doubt.

Oh yeah, there are huge questions here... like why she didn't wait for some one to tazer the guy?

but ultimately there is enough there to imply that she and the other officers where in imminent danger, which does make the shooting justified. They had no idea what was in the car... he could of had a gun, he could of had a bomb, He could of leaped into the car and rolled the car back onto the lot of those officers which stupidly clumped up at the rear of the vehicle.

The only fact is that the person needed to be stopped before he did something which would of hurt people...
Why that thing wasn't a tazer is a different argument.

None of the other officers reported they felt they were in imminent danger. What he could have had is no reason to kill him. That he ignored orders is no reason to kill him. It was a senseless killing by a panicky police officer. One officer did have a tazer according to the cop in the helicopter.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yarashii1

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

Well then there you go.

Right, he was stoned. Is that a crime punishable by death now?

It is if he is so stoned he does what he did. If a guy is willing to walk that distance to his car and start to put his hand in the car, i would not feel safe. I would think he could be reaching for a weapon. If i were a cop in that situation, i'd be more concerned about myself and my fellow officers than him at that point.

Walking to his car does not present a danger to anyone, drugs or not.

We don't know that he was reaching into his car. The jury needed nine hours to make that decision. Nine fucking hours.

I am sure you would have acted in a similar fashion. Neither you nor the officer involved in the killing should be on the police force.

In your lowly, worthless opinion.

Well if we can refrain from insulting each other; He was not reaching into his car. Crime scene forensics proved the door and window were shut. You and Shelby may believe you should shoot in that situation but the other 3 experienced cops and Shelby's husband (the helicopter cop on police audio) all thought it was a taser situation. Fear can be an overwhelming force that makes you see things that are not there. I don't think she woke up and thought "today let's go kill me some black guys". She made a mistake. She was trained in noticing and handling people who are "stoned". She surely encountered them before and as we all know from going out with our drunk friends, people under the influence don't always do what they should or what they are told. She had never seen fit to pull her trigger before, so we must ask what was different about this day?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yarashii1

You are right. Hindsight makes everything clearer. In real time, she saw no weapon. She was probably justifiably scared. Being scared is understandable but it is not justification for shooting someone. She may have suspected a weapon or a bomb but suspicion does not justify lethal action. You don't have to trust me on this. NONE of the other officers there were so terrified. They were in the exact same situation she was.

I could recount the series of events to prove just how out of line her reaction was but if we are going to disregard facts because they are "hindsight" we are still led back to the simple result. She used lethal force when it was not necessary. Fear is not justification. If you cannot judge them on hindsight, how can you judge them? Real time, a professional shot an unarmed civilian. The professional obviously made an understandable mistake. The profession was not held to a standard that most amateurs would be held to. Real-time there was NO immediate threat of serious harm to anyone. Lethal force was not justified. If we, as Americans, now feel that lethal force is justifiable for misdemeanors, I will support that. I am a law and order person. If police can make these mistakes real-time and not be held accountable regardless of hindsight proof, we must admit that we live in a police state. If you, however, believe in law and order, you have to agree that those same laws must apply to those who enforce the law.

quote:

If he was high on pcp the tazer would.t affect him.
For someone who pretends to know so much about these things I am amazed you didn't know that.
Don't forget the coroner said he was high on PCP and you have already (in the op) said he was high.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yarashii1

You are right. Hindsight makes everything clearer. In real time, she saw no weapon. She was probably justifiably scared. Being scared is understandable but it is not justification for shooting someone. She may have suspected a weapon or a bomb but suspicion does not justify lethal action. You don't have to trust me on this. NONE of the other officers there were so terrified. They were in the exact same situation she was.

I could recount the series of events to prove just how out of line her reaction was but if we are going to disregard facts because they are "hindsight" we are still led back to the simple result. She used lethal force when it was not necessary. Fear is not justification. If you cannot judge them on hindsight, how can you judge them? Real time, a professional shot an unarmed civilian. The professional obviously made an understandable mistake. The profession was not held to a standard that most amateurs would be held to. Real-time there was NO immediate threat of serious harm to anyone. Lethal force was not justified. If we, as Americans, now feel that lethal force is justifiable for misdemeanors, I will support that. I am a law and order person. If police can make these mistakes real-time and not be held accountable regardless of hindsight proof, we must admit that we live in a police state. If you, however, believe in law and order, you have to agree that those same laws must apply to those who enforce the law.

Cops do not and cannot play by the same rules as the rest of us.
For example non officers are not expected to put themselves in harms way.