NPR - Some Key Facts We've Learned About Police Shootings Over The Past Year

Was this guy being aggressive by following the order to retrieve his license? All caught on video and then the officer LIED about what happened. The man was awareed $300k by the state. Should have been more.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/25/justice/south-carolina-trooper-shooting/





No it isn't.

I am aware of that case and it was a travesty. I agree.

But if you take ALL of the police shootings, ALL .oo5% of arrests, and sort them out, I bet that only a very small percentage are unjustified. JMO

There are always going to be some bad cops or bad actions, circumstances. But the % is very low. JMO
 
RETALIATORY is, IMO, a very key word there. LE can't just shoot someone because they're p*ssed that the person resisted them or disobeyed or ran away. They're the law, they're supposed to be better than the criminals they think they're protecting the rest of us from.

INTERESTING. So cops just think they are protecting the public, when in fact, they are not?
 
I disagree. I would say a very small percentage are justified.

Certainly not any that I've heard of in the last few years. Especially by anyone who wasn't even a 'real' cop... JMHO is all.
 
INTERESTING. So cops just think they are protecting the public, when in fact, they are not?

By shooting unarmed men? No, I don't feel they are protecting us from unarmed men stopped for a traffic violation.
 
That said, I am admittedly biased when it comes to shooting unarmed boys and men. Imho, there appears to be a serious problem that includes but is not limited to targeting people of color and/or the mentally ill, as well as a pervasive pattern of excessive force. The following are but a handful of US Department of Justice complaints/findings that inform my pov.
================================================================================

I totally disagree that people of color and the mentally ill are TARGETED by LE. The reason force is used is it is in RESPONSE to actions taken. For example, many mentally ill citizens are erratic and impulsive when confronted by officers. That in turn, makes officers defensive and reactive. And I can't blame them.

You are contradicting yourself. First you say that they are not targeting people, but then you say that they are and you can't blame them for it.

Even the mentally ill have constitutional rights. Police officers are sworn to uphold the constitution. The police can not target people just because they are mentally ill or some other minority. Thats just wrong. So most decent people who believe in the constitution will hold them accountable for that.
 
I never said anything about underage girls being to blame. I was replying specifically to someones comment about the mentally ill being targeted.

I do not believe that there are unjustified shootings by LE every day. JMO

I will be shocked if that is true.

I don't know much about New Orleans so I am researching it a bit now. Sorry it is so violent. That is very sad.


I am not in NOLA, but I think it is worse down there. ��

We just have lots of corruption in our city/parish officials, our FD, PD, and SO and we have some racial strife to boot.

Basically our state is historically known for corruption. Some of our laws are "special" and in direct conflict with federal laws. Which is fine, I am all for state's rights, but in our case it is more often than not a case of someone getting a kickback rather than standing on some ethical ground.

All this to say,


I understand why some people would be terrified of, and run away from the cops even if they were not guilty of committing a crime.

And if you were indeed guilty of something, it would be even worse. Because you know your sentence will be carried out right then, without due process.

It sucks. But that's the world we live in.
 
RETALIATORY is, IMO, a very key word there. LE can't just shoot someone because they're p*ssed that the person resisted them or disobeyed or ran away. They're the law, they're supposed to be better than the criminals they think they're protecting the rest of us from.

Sadly, they can.

And they do.
And they receive great support for having done so.

In our country, badge=unchecked power.

Very scary.
 
You are contradicting yourself. First you say that they are not targeting people, but then you say that they are and you can't blame them for it.

Even the mentally ill have constitutional rights. Police officers are sworn to uphold the constitution. The police can not target people just because they are mentally ill or some other minority. Thats just wrong. So most decent people who believe in the constitution will hold them accountable for that.

NO, I never said they were targeting them. In most cases. LE is CALLED to come deal with the mentally ill. Even their own families and friends call for help. That is not targeting them , that is reacting to the situation.

Tell me when/how they were targeted?
 
For example, many mentally ill citizens are erratic and impulsive when confronted by officers. That in turn, makes officers defensive and reactive. And I can't blame them.
Except that, we are paying officers not to be "defensive and reactive." Officer training is not just about learning the laws, how to make an arrest, how to cuff someone, or shoot them. Though, I will admit, it really takes a village to work with the mentally ill.

To wit.

I used to live in a town where we had what people referred to as our town schizophrenic. I'll call him "Joe" just make the story easier to tell. In any event, everyone in our community knew this man. He mostly stayed on his meds but every so often, he would go off them. When that occurred, he might run up and down the streets, screaming at people, real or imagined, sometimes cursing, and striking at his invisible tormentors.

One or many of our community would call the police department, never a 911 call, and tell them, "Joe's off his meds again." The officers were familiar with this man, so they, along with paramedics would come out and "net" him. This was basically a way of containing him that was safe for both he, the officers, the paramedics, and the public, so he could be put on a 72 hour hold.

To outsiders, or untrained LE, his behavior might seem frightening, threatening, even. And, in maybe another town, he might have gotten the Fullerton Treatment.
 
Every single morning, my son gets videos and pictures sent to his cell from his superiors. And these morning wake up videos are the most recent attacks on LE officers around the nation. So as he eats breakfast he sees the most recent traffic stop incident where a cop was shot in the face, or where a cop was hit from behind by a baseball bat. And the purpose , I suppose, is to remind them that they are ALWAYS targets when in public. ALWAYS and when they least expect it.

So it might be nice to think that they are not going to be defensive or reactive when an angry schizophrenic is ranting and hallucinating and lunging at them---but who wouldn't be? When someone's mother calls because she is afraid of her son and she wants him out of her home, why wouldn't a cop also have a difficult time with him?
 
Except that, we are paying officers not to be "defensive and reactive." Officer training is not just about learning the laws, how to make an arrest, how to cuff someone, or shoot them. Though, I will admit, it really takes a village to work with the mentally ill.

To wit.

I used to live in a town where we had what people referred to as our town schizophrenic. I'll call him "Joe" just make the story easier to tell. In any event, everyone in our community knew this man. He mostly stayed on his meds but every so often, he would go off them. When that occurred, he might run up and down the streets, screaming at people, real or imagined, sometimes cursing, and striking at his invisible tormentors.

One or many of our community would call the police department, never a 911 call, and tell them, "Joe's off his meds again." The officers were familiar with this man, so they, along with paramedics would come out and "net" him. This was basically a way of containing him that was safe for both he, the officers, the paramedics, and the public, so he could be put on a 72 hour hold.

To outsiders, or untrained LE, his behavior might seem frightening, threatening, even. And, in maybe another town, he might have gotten the Fullerton Treatment.

And that is effective when it is a long time well known circumstance. But most first responders do not have that luxury. They get dispatched to a scene with very little information to go on.

It just really bothers me how much derision is evident here. I know so many officers that put their own lives on the line here every single day. And it pains me to hear how that is just cast aside and it is assumed that they go out everyday looking for people of color or the mentally ill so they can target them for abuse.
 
INTERESTING. So cops just think they are protecting the public, when in fact, they are not?
Not all LEOs. Btw, here's an excerpt from the USDOJ Maricopa complaint:

This Complaint sets out three categories of unlawful conduct: (1) a pattern or practice of discriminatory and otherwise unconstitutional law enforcement actions against Latinos in Maricopa County; (2) discriminatory jail practices against Latino prisoners with limited English language skills; and (3) a pattern or practice of retaliatory actions against perceived critics of MCSO activities.
 
Every single morning, my son gets videos and pictures sent to his cell from his superiors. And these morning wake up videos are the most recent attacks on LE officers around the nation. So as he eats breakfast he sees the most recent traffic stop incident where a cop was shot in the face, or where a cop was hit from behind by a baseball bat. And the purpose , I suppose, is to remind them that they are ALWAYS targets when in public. ALWAYS and when they least expect it.

So it might be nice to think that they are not going to be defensive or reactive when an angry schizophrenic is ranting and hallucinating and lunging at them---but who wouldn't be? When someone's mother calls because she is afraid of her son and she wants him out of her home, why wouldn't a cop also have a difficult time with him?


And on that note, it would be nice to assume I could drive my car while abiding the law, and not get raped or beaten or shot to death by a LEO who had a God complex.

But, yeah. I can keep dreaming.

People with big shiny guns and badges don't have to play by the same rules.

Again, I really respect you, but I just don't agree with you here. I know your son is a LEO, which might make you see things differently, just like someone who was wrongly assaulted or killed by a LEO might see things from another side.
 
I don't have a lot of faith in the credibility of these DOJ reports. JMO
 
And on that note, it would be nice to assume I could drive my car while abiding the law, and not get raped or beaten or shot to death by a LEO who had a God complex.

But, yeah. I can keep dreaming.

People with big shiny guns and badges don't have to play by the same rules.

Again, I really respect you, but I just don't agree with you here. I know your son is a LEO, which might make you see things differently, just like someone who was wrongly assaulted or killed by a LEO might see things from another side.

How many women have been raped by LEOS in your area? I googled and didnt find any, other than one ex detective on NOLA.
 
Was this guy being aggressive by following the order to retrieve his license? All caught on video and then the officer LIED about what happened. The man was awareed $300k by the state. Should have been more.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/25/justice/south-carolina-trooper-shooting/





No it isn't.

That one should be a wake up call to the people who say that if you just do what the police say, you have nothing to worry about. The police are being trained to take zero risk, and to shoot first and ask questions later. Everybody should be worried about that. It can happen to anyone, at anytime.
 
I don't have a lot of faith in the credibility of these DOJ reports. JMO


Then honestly, why would you advise me to contact DOJ regarding the statutory rape cases in my parish?

I mean, I already don't trust our LE or DOJ. But you made it sound as if you did, and why didn't I contact DOJ.

Probably for the same reasons you say you have no faith in them.
 
The reason I started this thread is to open a respectful dialogue. I chose to excerpt from the two opinions above to provide a springboard, food for thought, so to speak. Since this thread is not case specific, it gives us an opportunity to discuss issues involving policing from a more generic (less charged?) pov.
While I, personally, do not think all LEO shootings are unjustified, neither do I think all LEO shootings are justified. I'm more of a case by case type person, and would venture to guess that the vast majority of those who participate on this site are likewise. Which, btw, is one of the many reasons I enjoy participating on this site. I learn so much!
That said, I am admittedly biased when it comes to shooting unarmed boys and men. Imho, there appears to be a serious problem that includes but is not limited to targeting people of color and/or the mentally ill, as well as a pervasive pattern of excessive force. The following are but a handful of US Department of Justice complaints/findings that inform my pov.
....
[list of links] QUOTE] sbm
Appreciate the goal of a respectful dialogue.

Thread title parallels the NPR article re policeshootings in the last year.
BUT
List of links in ^ post opens a smorgasbord of political, legal, racial, social issues, addressing a broad spectrum of topics -
police shootings; police excessive use of force; Section 8 housing programs; racial & ethnic discrimination in housing, etc.

A bit confused here.
 
Then honestly, why would you advise me to contact DOJ regarding the statutory rape cases in my parish?

I mean, I already don't trust our LE or DOJ. But you made it sound as if you did, and why didn't I contact DOJ.

Probably for the same reasons you say you have no faith in them.

You said you didn't have much faith in them either, right? LOL

I suggested it because there are not a lot of other options. I assume that if cops are raping girls then SOMETHING has to be done.

But when I was talking about the DOJ reports, I was not trusting them because Holder, the head of the DOJ is very political and very partisan, imo. And he has a political agenda, in my opinion.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
168
Guests online
4,380
Total visitors
4,548

Forum statistics

Threads
592,521
Messages
17,970,294
Members
228,793
Latest member
aztraea
Back
Top