It is currently Fri Oct 19, 2018 11:47 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Protests/Possible Riots
PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2018 12:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:57 pm
Posts: 3142
There are already guidelinesfor use of force. Anyone getting out of a car and fleeing should not be shot unless they were carrying a weapon. These officers must make decisions in a second. Sometimes it is the wrong decision. If they do it more than once then they need to be fired and never hired again as a law enforcement officer.

_________________
To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection.
- Henri Poincaré


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Protests/Possible Riots
PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2018 12:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 1:55 pm
Posts: 4423
jebrick wrote:
There are already guidelinesfor use of force. Anyone getting out of a car and fleeing should not be shot unless they were carrying a weapon. r.


From your link:

There is no single, universally agreed-upon definition of use of force. The International Association of Chiefs of Police has described use of force as the "amount of effort required by police to compel compliance by an unwilling subject" [1].

Officers receive guidance from their individual agencies, but no universal set of rules governs when officers should use force and how much.

****************
So your post seems contradictory?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Protests/Possible Riots
PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2018 1:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 5500
swissvale72 wrote:
COR-TEN wrote:
Quote:
In a major metro, there are so many cops on scene so quickly that I'd expect there's almost no chance that guy gets away.
Just goes to show how uninformed you are. Or you've never been to North Braddock. They have exactly eight police officers. Count 'em, 8. They don't even have a training or policy manual. Ask swiss about Braddock.

And I just found out the statement released by the police department that he had an empty 9mm clip in his pocket was false; as an excuse. Not true.


Since you mentioned me, Cor-Ten, I'll way in. Yeah, Braddock & North Braddock both have way diminished populations. Braddock lost its hospital, had no restaurants, had a dollar store, that was about it. Finally, a Swissvale guy opened up Peppers N'At in Braddock a couple years ago.

Anyway....one of the news headlines that I HATE is whenever someone is continually described as...."The Unarmed Black Man." In this case, the occupants of the car had executed a drive-by, kid was found with an empty clip in his pockets, and there were two guns in the car. Yeah, I guess the cop fucked up.....but that kid certainly wasn't doing what he should have been,


Don't forget the smiling photo of the kid probably from his middle school years is always used. It really seems like the fact that he was just involved in a drive by shooting is irrelevant to most media sources or protesters.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Protests/Possible Riots
PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2018 1:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:14 pm
Posts: 1244
Donnie Brasco wrote:
jebrick wrote:
There are already guidelinesfor use of force. Anyone getting out of a car and fleeing should not be shot unless they were carrying a weapon. r.


From your link:

There is no single, universally agreed-upon definition of use of force. The International Association of Chiefs of Police has described use of force as the "amount of effort required by police to compel compliance by an unwilling subject" [1].

Officers receive guidance from their individual agencies, but no universal set of rules governs when officers should use force and how much.

****************
So your post seems contradictory?


In Tennessee vs. Garner in 1985, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an officer cannot use deadly force against a fleeing suspect unless the suspect is a significant threat to the officer or to others.

_________________
Neal Huntington on what he's been told by his bosses about $$$: "We've got assurances we're going to be able to continue to do what we've done."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Protests/Possible Riots
PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2018 3:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 1:55 pm
Posts: 4423
SteelPro wrote:
Donnie Brasco wrote:
jebrick wrote:
There are already guidelinesfor use of force. Anyone getting out of a car and fleeing should not be shot unless they were carrying a weapon. r.


From your link:

There is no single, universally agreed-upon definition of use of force. The International Association of Chiefs of Police has described use of force as the "amount of effort required by police to compel compliance by an unwilling subject" [1].

Officers receive guidance from their individual agencies, but no universal set of rules governs when officers should use force and how much.

****************
So your post seems contradictory?


In Tennessee vs. Garner in 1985, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an officer cannot use deadly force against a fleeing suspect unless the suspect is a significant threat to the officer or to others.


Isn't that a bit vague? If I'm an officer and a guy is running from me and I believe he has a weapon I can just say "well if I let him get away, he could have used that weapon (gun/knife/car) against unsuspecting civilians". It's an easy catch-all.

I'm not trying to be a dick or be argumentative, just to understand this better.

Again I believe that being a cop has to be one of the most harrowing jobs one could ever imagine.
Is the dude pulling out his wallet to willfully comply or is that a gun? You have to decide in less than 1 second.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Protests/Possible Riots
PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2018 4:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:14 pm
Posts: 1244
Donnie Brasco wrote:
SteelPro wrote:

In Tennessee vs. Garner in 1985, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an officer cannot use deadly force against a fleeing suspect unless the suspect is a significant threat to the officer or to others.


Isn't that a bit vague? If I'm an officer and a guy is running from me and I believe he has a weapon I can just say "well if I let him get away, he could have used that weapon (gun/knife/car) against unsuspecting civilians". It's an easy catch-all.

I'm not trying to be a dick or be argumentative, just to understand this better.

Again I believe that being a cop has to be one of the most harrowing jobs one could ever imagine.
Is the dude pulling out his wallet to willfully comply or is that a gun? You have to decide in less than 1 second.

I know you aren’t being a dick, and I agree with you. At the end of the day no matter what the guidelines are it will come down to a judgement call by the officer. And he or she doesn’t get a chance to review it on instant replay.

_________________
Neal Huntington on what he's been told by his bosses about $$$: "We've got assurances we're going to be able to continue to do what we've done."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Protests/Possible Riots
PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2018 7:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:57 pm
Posts: 3142
Donnie Brasco wrote:
Isn't that a bit vague? If I'm an officer and a guy is running from me and I believe he has a weapon I can just say "well if I let him get away, he could have used that weapon (gun/knife/car) against unsuspecting civilians". It's an easy catch-all.

I'm not trying to be a dick or be argumentative, just to understand this better.

Again I believe that being a cop has to be one of the most harrowing jobs one could ever imagine.
Is the dude pulling out his wallet to willfully comply or is that a gun? You have to decide in less than 1 second.


All handled under Garner. Does the police officer believe that the fleeing person poses a threat to the community? Did the officer see a weapon? Is the suspect fleeing from a violent crime? If the answers to these are yes then the police will be fine in court.

In the Rose case, the suspect is fleeing from a driveby shooting so it would be reasonable for the officer to think that the suspect had a weapon. Unless the officer has a record of excessive force, charging him is a placating measure for the community. There is no reasonable judge who would convict him. But it does look bad.

_________________
To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection.
- Henri Poincaré


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Protests/Possible Riots
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2018 11:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:22 pm
Posts: 2408
Steelafan77 wrote:
For me it boils down to, Simply Cooperate with the Authorities and Don't run or resist and you'll live to see another day.


Tell that to the families of Philando Castile and Eric Garner.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Protests/Possible Riots
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 4:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 11317
fortythree wrote:
Steelafan77 wrote:
For me it boils down to, Simply Cooperate with the Authorities and Don't run or resist and you'll live to see another day.


Tell that to the families of Philando Castile and Eric Garner.


Well, Eric Garner was resisting arrest/orders...so probably come up with a better example.

It's also a double-edged sword - the more people run/resist or attempt to assault officers, the more alert and aggressive officers are going to be. If we're being completely honest, if no one ever shot at the cops then our cops wouldn't even have guns.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Protests/Possible Riots
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 6:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 3:08 pm
Posts: 6327
Jesus fucking christ.

Garner was selling unlicensed cigarettes. Fucking cigarettes.

And choke holds were banned.

Fuck this country is fucked.

_________________
"I wish Fraudlin would get testicular cancer and die after he watches me anally penetrate his wife."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Protests/Possible Riots
PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2018 4:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 11317
COR-TEN wrote:
Jesus fucking christ.

Garner was selling unlicensed cigarettes. Fucking cigarettes.

And choke holds were banned.

Fuck this country is fucked.


Was he breaking the law? Did he resist arrest?

That doesn't excuse what the cops did, but he'd still be alive if not for his choice to resist arrest.

My point is don't make lawbreakers into marytyrs and you're view might be taken more seriously.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Protests/Possible Riots
PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2018 11:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:12 pm
Posts: 481
Just watched the video again, for maybe the 4th or 5th time. That is not resisting arrest. That's fucking murder.

But yeah, Kodiak, you're a libertarian! What a fucking joke.

_________________
"All for ourselves and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind." - Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Protests/Possible Riots
PostPosted: Mon Jul 23, 2018 1:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 11317
Steel Drummer wrote:
Just watched the video again, for maybe the 4th or 5th time. That is not resisting arrest. That's fucking murder.
.


He absolutely resisted arrest. You're smarter than this, I think.

Again, unnecessary use of force and resisting arrest are not mutually exclusive....and when we can dispense with the bullshit race baiting and fake martyrdom then maybe we can start having honest discussions.

Insults aren't going to make your case for you. Yes, I am a libertarian, and I'm not surprised you don't understand what that means. Typical bullshit dismissive tactic because you've got nothing.

There are honest, squeaky clean people who actually have been wrongfully shot by police. But instead the poster children are Eric Garner and Michael Brown. Have you ever wondered why that is? You need to spend some time thinking about why.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Protests/Possible Riots
PostPosted: Mon Jul 23, 2018 4:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 9:52 pm
Posts: 7291
Kodiak wrote:
COR-TEN wrote:
Jesus fucking christ.

Garner was selling unlicensed cigarettes. Fucking cigarettes.

And choke holds were banned.

Fuck this country is fucked.


Was he breaking the law? Did he resist arrest?

That doesn't excuse what the cops did, but he'd still be alive if not for his choice to resist arrest.

My point is don't make lawbreakers into marytyrs and you're view might be taken more seriously.


Totally with you on this principal, Kodiak...making martyrs out of thugs isn't very appealing.

Easy for people that have never been in the position that the cop was to criticize what he was doing....but it's very easy for properly trained officers, using the techniques in which they've been trained, to have it go awry and slip into a choke hold. This shit's not an exact science and it never does goes down like it's demonstrated in the classroom.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Protests/Possible Riots
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 6:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 7:58 pm
Posts: 802
I'm surprised you mouth breathers can turn on a computer.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
FORUM RULES --- PRIVACY POLICY




Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group