Riley24

You don't get to rip someone out of their car for no reason and then charge them with resisting arrest. There has to be an arrest to resist for someone to be charged with that.

But the DOJ also found systemic and prevailing racism throughout the department, and found incredible racial disparities in traffic stops and arrests. And some of Darren Wilson's statements on the incident were a little questionable, specifically his description of Michael Brown during the incident. So the fact that the community was so outraged about racism in law enforcement is not due to irresponsible journalism, its because of irresponsible law enforcement. The thin blue line protects itself, that's a common and well-known trend. Reasons for quoting things are important. What people say is often not the extent of what they mean. By bringing up that case, you're opening up a pandora's box of possible thoughts and emotions of the officer. If you're going to view if from the officer's perspective, then you have to include things like fear, paranoia, anger, and possible racism. But something tells me you don't include those when you use the Supreme Court's standards for judging a shooting. So since I doubt that you actually believe in the Supreme Court's case, it would make sense that you're bringing that case up to try to discourage me from making assumptions about a shooting based on previously documented systemic problems. Why should a person in New Jersey care that police in lets say- Portland, shot and killed an armed suspect? How does that have any relevance to someone in New Jersey? The media's job isn't to report on every situation to give everyone a completely balanced view of the world, its to report on things that matter to people. Police shooting someone that is unarmed matters, because that could be any of us. If the police kill a dangerous criminal, that holds no significance to the general public, whereas a police shooting of an unarmed person points towards a possible problem that could endanger the lives of every person from coast to coast. So is my analysis. Police beatings and shootings happen regularly, I would call that a frequent pattern. In fact, there was just a horrific beating of a suspect in my city. His crime? Suspicion of robbery of a $3 piece of pizza. The suspect completely surrendered, and was brutally beaten and charged with resisting arrest. By resisting arrest, they meant shielding himself from punches and night stick blows. After that, the arresting officers falsified the police report. I'm not missing your point. You shouldn't wait for someone to get hurt but you shouldn't do shock and awe when there's no reason to think there's any danger to the officers. Its a slippery slope. No no no, don't flip this on me. You're the one that has been questioning my experience (and age) in almost all of your posts. You've consistently climbed on a high horse without explanation of your experience, and have shut my points down because I don't have training. But yet you disagreed with me when I said that the officers involved in the Gardena shooting shouldn't be cops? So you think its a problem with individual officers, but they shouldn't be fired? So when there's a questionable (or unjustified) shooting, its not the training, its not a systemic issue, its just that one officer....but that doesn't say anything bad about him? Please explain your point. A police officer guns down an unarmed man taking off his hat, what do you think went wrong and what should be done?

Well if the problems there, why not report on it? You can have whatever opinion you want on the way they cover it, but reporting on the human condition will always be controversial. Well neither of us have evidence, so its not hypocritical. Concluding that one line of work has undergone slight systemic psychological changes is more logical than a nation-wide boom of suicidal criminals. This whole time you've been shooting me down for not having evidence, but you have presented me with none. You've been calling me out out on making cultural observations, so I'd be a fool to let you do so without holding you to the same standard you've been holding me to. Would you send your friend to jail if there were no consequences to the alternative? Cop A shoots a suspect, and tells investigators that the suspect was reaching for his gun. You found no fingerprints on the gun or the holster, and the suspect was shot at point-blank. Very minor injuries to the officer indicating a struggle. You're friends with the supervisor in charge of him and he says Cop A is straight-arrow. Who do you believe? That's just a random scenario but that's sometimes the reality. Police shouldn't police themselves, especially when there's conflicts of interest. As for the DAs, you're not entirely correct. I'm sure you'll hate the progressive news site, but its worth a read: http://www.rawstory.com/2014/11/lawrence-odonnell-rips-st-louis-prosecutor-for-making-it-impossible-for-darren-wilson-to-fail/ Right indisputable facts...so we're not disputing right now? Watching countless incident videos, reading plenty of articles and interviews, and analyzing personal experience is enough to paint a picture of a particular culture. In this case, police culture. You don't need a statistic that says "X % of cops are bad people" to know that systemic problems exist in an entity that interacts with us every single day. If we held shootings of police officers to shootings of citizens, you'd be pretty frustrated right now. Out of all the interactions with citizens, how often does a police officer get shot? And why should the media care about an obviously justified shooting? There's no cultural analysis or systemic problem to be addressed, besides local news, it would be a completely pointless story on CNN and would actually be irresponsible journalism. The news doesn't cover Michael Brown because they think his life matters more than a police officer, they cover it because a large amount of people believe there is more to the overarching story than just a shooting. (Also, look on CNN. Their top story is a police officer that was shot and killed, so your point isn't even valid in the first place). So you're allowed to make cultural analysis, but I'm not? Are you sure its not that darn media hyping up drug dealers? COPS (the show) only shows you the interesting stuff, right? Of course I know that drug dealers often have guns, but do you see how futile that point can be? You only let a picture be painted when you're willing to accept what the outcome looks like. And yeah, if someone has a dangerous criminal record police should take every precaution. Nobody's arguing that. But I can pull up plenty of stories when that's not the case, and the same gear was used. This is the internet, we're all anonymous. I have no interest in what real-life experience an anonymous internet forum user claims to have. But if you're willing to swap experience, my brother lost three friends clearing buildings in Iraq. I know how dangerous it is, if his PTSD is any indication. So you say that officers don't handle situations correctly from time to time, but yet you try to shut me down when I suggest that perhaps there's room for improvement in the training? So your overall point seems to be "Cops aren't perfect but hey, what're you gonna do?" instead of "cops have a tough job and you shouldn't judge them". Is that really so much better? And my "getting out of the car" example was based on countless cases where an officer has ordered a suspect to get out of his car, and then proceeded to illegally search them without probable cause. So even then, the officer is still the one that needs to be "educated". So you're right, an officer can order you to get out of your car, but in a lot of the cases I've seen, that's often not the end of the encounter.

Biggest crime in America is disrespecting a police officer. Why didn't he just answer her when she asked 14 times why she was being arrested? I've seeb this time after time, why do they never just tell the person why they're being detained? How can you charge someone with resisting arrest when there's no reason to arrest in the first place? Was she a perfect person when she was pulled over? No, she was grumpy and challenged his authority, and it spiraled out of control. Yelled at, ripped out of the car, and threatened to be tased for being grumpy? We all know that's crazy, come on. I'm not going to bring up race because that's a touchy issue, but if this was a Bently in Beverly hills, there's no way it would've ended like this. People with no power always get the short end of the stick. As for her death, it doesn't make any sense. She was about to be released, she had a new job and was apparently happy with all of her friends and family. It just doesn't add up why someone would choose to kill themselves at that moment. There really needs to be a federal investigation into her death, its mind-boggling.

Sure, maybe journalists should be more responsible. But the black community is making this all up, there are problems that exist between African Americans and their police departments. This is well documented and has been going on for decades across the country. I'm not going to find you statistics. because if you don't have that base of knowledge at this point, its quite frankly not even worth discussing it with you. Why aren't they able to do that? You keep asking me for evidence, but can you show me anything that shows that criminals are more willing to "go down fighting" now as opposed to a few years ago? Because not only is that likely not supported by evidence, it makes no logical sense. It is more likely logically that police officers have collectively set a bar for justified shootings, and its just our new normal. That's not the same as "all cops are dirty". internal Investigations is literally internal. Its the police policing the police, it shouldn't be surprising that they don't find wrongdoing. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140106/10162825772/internal-affairs-divisions-dismissing-99-misconduct-cases-against-new-jersey-police-officers.shtml I doubt you'll read this, but at least I'm doing my part. Also, remember the District Attorneys in the Michael Brown and Eric Garner case? Both DAs had strong ties to the police departments, by both familial and financial ties. The DA in the Eric Garner case relied heavily on campaign donations from the Police union, shouldn't be surprising he didn't bat an eye when they chocked out a guy in the streets. This is the same argument that gets used again and again. "You don't know what its like to be a cop, you shouldn't judge". Its completely ridiculous. We can't keep saying "well its a tough job, split-second decisions have to be made" every single time. I keep saying this, but if a firemen fucked up this much and this bad, we'd be begging them to review their training. We don't have to be firemen to do that. I'm not a drone pilot but I have every right to be pissed off that they kill a lot of innocent people. Its not like there are just a bunch of videos online and that's clouding everyone's judgement, these videos and stories pop up with great frequency, and often similar circumstances. And if you're going to put yourself in the officer's perspective, you'd be a fool to not include things like anger, paranoia, embarrassment, insecurity, and sometimes unintelligence. They're humans, as I'm sure you'd like to attest to. Remember that cop that went nuts on innocent black teenagers at the pool in Texas? He tripped and fell as he was running like an action hero, is it possible he was angry and embarrassed about that, and took it out on the people he felt he could take it out on? The "cops are humans" thing goes in all directions. What evidence do you have that supports the idea that non-violent drug consumers have guns? And the example you used is irrelevant. I brought up the use of military gear on non-violent offenders, and you told me story about how cops didn't use military gear on extremely violent offender. That is literally the opposite of what I was talking about. And either explain what your experience is or stop acting like you know what you're talking about. Everyone knows how dangerous clearing a building is. Unless you've done it yourself, put your experience card back up your sleeve. Its useless on an anonymous internet forum. That was his question. ".....and should the public really know everything?" You claim to want to know whats in people's subconscious, but yet you pay no attention to the victim's. A guy moves awkwardly and gets gunned down, and you say that police officers are trained to give clear commands. Why do you actively find ways for police officers not to be at fault? A questionable shooting comes up, and you side with the officer instead of seeing what he could have done differently. I'm not trying to insult you, but you can't say that others need to open their minds when you look up to shooting suspects as infallible authority figures. You only debate up until a point, and when you don't like what I have to say you simply say "well you don't know what its like to be a cop, its a hard job", or in some other words.

This is the same logic that pro-gun rights people use after mass shootings. I'm afraid that this gets too close to willful ignorance; if you stop covering a story, it doesn't go away. I'm sure that police departments would love it if CNN wasn't at their doorstep when they gun someone down in the streets. I think this point is an attempt to stop talking about the problem instead of fixing it. As for it not being there....its there. Research has shown that violent crime (along with officer fatalities) decreases, and police shootings increase. Logically, we can conclude that officers are shooting suspects for less violent crimes, which means that use of force policies should be reviewed. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/08/15/how-the-number-of-justified-police-homicides-has-changed-since-the-1990s/) Unfortunately, we might never know. Police departments are not required to submit cases to the FBI, and not surprisingly, they don't. And as for cases being real vs. not real, we run into another issue. Who investigates the merit of a complaint or incident? Internal Investigations? Internal Investigations aren't like they are on TV, Hollywood needed a bad guy for cop shows. The "cowboy cop that doesn't play by the rules but for the right reason" is a fictional character. In reality, cops stand by each other. "The thin blue line". Unless presented by overwhelming evidence (I.E. Michael Slager), a supervisor will stand by the statements of his officer. This is not supported by statistics, because it is impossible to find. What I have noticed, in almost all of the shooting cases, the officer simply had to state that the suspect posed a threat in any way. Its not use of force, its escalation of force. Police are supposed to de-escalate situations so that they can make arrests. But as we've seen happen, and lets pretend like we don't, officers often show up to a scene and escalate the situation until it is dangerous for them, and then shots get fired. Most people look at that situation and say "Well, it was dangerous for the cop, so the shooting was justified", but pay no attention to how the officer could've handled the situation differently. No, but when you give a boy a toy, he's going to want to play with it. The problem in my opinion, is when they can use their military gear. We shouldn't see an MRAP and 20 cops with Hk416s at the house of a non-violent drug offender or a peaceful protest. Small towns with under 5,000 residents, 20 officers, and almost no crime are purchasing IED-resistant armored vehicle. In my opinion, that kind of gear should be limited to large cities, populated counties, and state police. I don't think Story County, Iowa has an IED problem. The War on Terror produced mass-hysteria and with that, a huge spike in defense spending, and the War or Drugs has given them an outlet to use their toys. Now instead of funding police departments needs, they're just dumping overkill military gear because the government was swindled into buying more than they needed for a war we probably shouldn't have fought in the first place- but that's besides the point. I was the first one to defend the use of Bearcats and assault rifles after the Boston bombing, because they needed that gear to stay safe. Again, its more of a question of when instead of what. After the North Hollywood Shootout, police departments realized they were outgunned and began issuing .223 rifles to patrol officers. That is a perfect example of "keeping up with the bad guys". Like the first point, I think this is an attempt, unintentional or intentional , to shut down the conversation. "Pro-LEO" people can always say "Well you don't understand what its like to be a cop, so shut up". I'm not going to judge the tactics of military units because I have no base of knowledge. But when it comes to law enforcement, we all do. They're on our streets every day, interacting with us. If I get pulled over for not signalling, and the cop asks me to step out of the car without probable cause, I don't need to be "educated" on policing to know that he's overstepping his bounds. In that situation, isn't he the one that needs to be educated on policing? If I'm not educated on policing, I would love to be. Because from the vantage point of a citizen, I'm seeing some systemic problems with law enforcement. If postal workers ran over this many people, or if firefighters impaled this many people with axes, we might think there's something a little wrong there.... Disclaimer: I have great respect for police officers and the work they do. I've never uttered the words "fuck the police" and I never will.

Ok, so what systematic problems exist and why are police officers devoid of blame for that problem? Just a little quote that came to mind. And its hard for me to accept that because its complete bullshit to be frank. Have you ever had four guns with blinding lights pointed at you with people shouting at you? We don't know how we would react, or what we would do with our hands, we simply don't. Not listening/resisting is not a legitimate reason to end someones life. And I've heard you say that before, so why do you bother bringing it up? Does part of you want to blame the victim for getting shot? Actually, it does. He talks about how because of how much weapons training he has, and how he wasn't scared when he was interacting with people in the hood, because he knew that he could use his weapon to protect himself. He also talked about how scared the other officers were, and how they could have used some better training to eliminate that fear.

Serious question: what would it take for you to see a systemic problem? Not to touch too much on the race issue, but the fact that a black man living in Southern California feels the same as a black man living in Harlem doesn't mean nothing. There is not some grand, nation-wide conspiracy against police officers to make up or over-exaggerate stories of misconduct or abuse. Parents are telling their children that its safer if they don't call 911, and honestly in some cases, they're probably right. Ricardo Diaz Zeferino would be alive if he didn't call 911. "The biggest crime in America is disrespecting a police officer". Well of course, he was given a little bit of the spotlight after the Freddie Grey, because he and Joe Crystal were the only ones from BPD that were willing to come forward. Michael Woods is a former Marine and police officer. He has much more credibility than either of us. If you're not willing to hear what he has to say, that is completely on you. The fact is, what he has to say is completely rational, and people in these communities have been living this everyday for years. No amount of debating is going to change that fact.

That's not looking at things individually, that's willfully keeping the dots unconnected. If there were this many videos of postal workers running people over, or firefighters accidentally impaling people with axes, we'd think "huh, maybe there's something wrong here". The problem is is that there are so many, and there are so many similarities. Race, socio-economic status, improper hand placement, or mental illness appear in almost all of them. These aren't random coincidences, they're symptoms. For the 100th time, I beg you to actually listen to me - I am not saying that "all cops are bad". It's just that there are systemic problems within departments across the country. If you want to hear it from an actual police officer with no reason to lie, watch an interview with Michael A. Woods jr. He talks about everything that I've been telling you and more. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ndg-JGmYryA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5nPyf-0

Question: How many videos and stories of cops shooting unarmed people would you have to watch to think that there's something wrong with police culture and use of force policies? I say "Another day in America" because cases like this pop up every so often all across the country. I've heard of multiple stories recently of US cops innocent shooting people due to imperfect hand placement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yEQDBSt58w Remember this case? Notice the similarities between this case and the one in the OP. Still don't think cops might have a little bit of a paranoia problem?

Oh right, I'm sorry. This is a perfect example of good police work. Their paranoia got an innocent man killed, which means they're unable to protect and serve the community. By definition, they are the same public safety threat that they are supposed to counter-act. Gang members gun down people in the street like this. If they're unable to set themselves apart from gang members, they shouldn't be cops. That shouldn't be a ridiculous opinion. I'm not saying "Fuck the police", and I'm not saying all cops are bad. But there's a certain paranoia that cops have, and every now and then it get someone killed. The whole point of the "few bad apples" argument is that you have to be willing to point out the bad apples when you see them. The victim in this case is the one who wanted the police to help him find his brother's bike. If this keeps happening, people in these communities will stop calling the police. Its bad for public safety, immediately and systemically for cops to be this paranoid. Not saying they're horrible people, but they should find another line of work.

Another day in America. If you can't arrest an unarmed suspect without gunning him down in the street, you shouldn't be a cop. Its that simple. If you can't tell the difference between taking off a hat and reaching for a gun, you're too paranoid to be a cop. But then again that's just my opinion, probably not a popular one.

I appreciate the video, Pavelow. I just think that because of the suspects mental and physical state, he wouldn't be able to pull off those crazy karate moves lol. An officer facing off against a trained knife wielder is obviously an incredibly dangerous situation that obviously warrants lethal force, but I honestly don't see too many parallels. In the same way that a taser isn't as deadly as a gun, a screwdriver isn't as deadly a knife. Of course tasers can cause heart attacks, and screwdrivers could puncture flesh. Both instances are not guaranteed, and often times unlikely. But when an officer uses lethal force, he is essentially saying "There is no other way to handle this situation. If I don't fire, my partner or I, or an innocent bystander will be in immediate danger." That's essentially the mindset behind the "last resort" mentality. I'm sorry, but I just don't think that's the case here. I'm not a law enforcement professional, but European, Canadian, and Australian cops are. They manage to apprehend suspects like this without lethal force, and still maintain very low officer mortality rates. They're doing something right.

It's actually smarter to back up a few feet before engaging in lethal force, if the officers had backed up a few feet and drawn their tasers nobody would likely be dead. That's always the preferred outcome. The mother likely started screaming because she was worried the cops would shoot him, sad that we've reached that point in America. Can you explain to me with all your experience, why it would be impossible to train police officers to always try to leave a few feet of space behind them, and when operating in pairs, designate one officer to use non-lethal force? People hold objects possibly lethal objects in front of cops every day all across the world, and yet you're saying that this is the only way that two trained LEOs could've handled the situation? I've gotta call bullshit on that. Lethal force should always be the last resort, as I've seen you say before. Yeah, they're legitimate questions, and there's no legitimate reason why they couldn't have used them. "They're not always effective in every situation" is not a legitimate reason. Having a taser is almost pointless if you don't use it as soon as someone has a small maintenance tool.

So you're saying I can't judge a cop because I'm not a cop? If that were the case, nothing would get done nationwide on any issue. If the public trash collectors throw my garbage bins onto my lawn, I don't have the right to complain? I can think of 100 examples. It is very easy, and very simplistic to say "well, you don't know what its like to be a cop". But since we have video, we can literally see exactly what went wrong, and ignoring our responsibility to fix it is, well....irresponsible. I'm not a banker, but I know that the Wall Street bankers fucked up pretty bad. You keep saying "walk all over them", but what exactly do you mean? Disrespecting a police officer is not a crime. Let me give you a hypothetical that could've prevented an innocent man from being killed. What if the cops that arrived on that scene had undergone training when dealing with mentally ill suspects, and were taught that yelling only agitates the mentally ill person, and that they likely have no idea who the police are or why they're there? So that when he emerges from the door, they know to calmly tell him to put down the screwdriver or better yet, let a family member keep him calm? And if the suspect still comes at you with a screwdriver, maybe back up a few feet and tase him? If there's ever a time to use a taser, its when someone has a weapon that could be lethal. Do I need to be a law enforcement professional to think that that is a logical way to handle this situation? Please, tell me how that doesn't sound like good police work. America; where cops would rather kill you than take a risk. Its easier and safer to gun down everyone that could possibly be a threat, but that doesn't make it good police work. They have an inherently dangerous job, nobody else chases bad guys. But if you leave a mentally ill man with a screwdriver bleeding out in his driveway, you're nobody's hero.

Yes, it absolutely means that. If air traffic controllers killed 500 people in a year, I'm pretty sure we would be criticizing them. Police officers, even though they are localized, are government officials and deserve to be held to certain standards. "Hurt someones feelings"...? We're not talking about instances of a rough tackling of a dangerous suspect or a rude cop yelling at someone. We're talking about people being killed. Did the officers consider those factors? No. I'm not exactly sure whats on their belts, but we can see that they have tasers. They probably had pepper spray and/or a nightstick. (Remember that thing that cops used to brag about having, that thing that could supposedly break someones leg with one clean swing?). They didn't reach for those, they went for their guns and put the guy down before he even had a chance to understand what was happening. He was mentally ill. There's a lot of stories, mostly from local news of mentally ill people being gunned down. Cops in America are trained to never take an ounce of risk in a dangerous situation. If a suspect, in any mental capacity, has an object that could be used as a lethal weapon, end his life. How is that justice? Why can't cops just retreat a few feet and let a family member calm the suspect down? Why is the first instinct to kill the person? Do you mean to tell me that a mentally ill person in Germany has never done this with a cop? The problem is in the training, I've been saying this for years. It is NOT too much to ask of a government official to try not to kill someone. That doesn't mean that I hate cops, or I don't respect the tough job that they do. It just means that there's some work to be done.

They're justified if your qualifications for justification are that the cop was scared. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/08/15/how-the-number-of-justified-police-homicides-has-changed-since-the-1990s/ Please take a look at some of the research posted here. Violent crime and officer fatalities are decreasing, and fatal police shootings are rising. The fact that I'm an American taxpayer and a little bit of common sense. We pay them to take risks, they have a dangerous job. They don't get to gun down everyone that can pose a threat to them, that's not how it works in other countries and we should be no different. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FV53jLDlRQ Is a mentally ill man holding a screwdriver dangerous? Maybe. Does it warrant him being killed? Absolutely not. It's really that simple.

"All the cops I know are great people" is not evidence. There are SO many stories nationwide of police officers shooting suspects that are mentally ill, unarmed, and often minorities. I could link you to a whole bunch of scientific evidence and research, but would you really listen to them? All the facts are in, you're the one not willing to listen. You're living in a bubble. You want to look up to cops as infallible authority figures. Police officers are public officials paid to keep us safe. So YES, a cop that has the training or intellect to realize that he doesn't have to kill someone is a much better law enforcement officer. Protect and serve doesn't stop when a suspect resists. Wanting cops to be better at keeping us safe isn't controversial. I see you're from Germany. How many people have German police killed? How many people have American police killed this year alone? And pardon my french, but fuck off with your condescending attitude. Is this really going to be a pissing contest to see who's older? Ironically, that's incredibly childish.

You don't have to lay a finger on an officer to be charged with that. Its a pretty standard charge. Now-a-days unless you listen to every word an officer says, you can be charged with resisting arrest even if the arrest is false. But in this case he's clearly resisting arrest. One day I hope this is standard practice. Americans are obsessed with shooting people. As soon as you're threatened, shoot shoot shoot. A coward shoots an unarmed man. A hero takes the risk of not killing.

Skip to 0:35. Watch at .25 speed. The guy never touched the officer, the officer fell because he backed up too quickly when the guy charged him. A lot of my job is analyzing video. Its my little super-power haha.

Its rare to see a cop that's willing to risk their life for a suspect. Falling on your ass when you're a cop is embarrassing as hell, but he put aside his embarrassment and his anger and treated the situation rationally. A truly good police officer. A cop that CAN shoot but doesn't is 100x the police officer compared to a cop that shoots the first chance he gets.

Please point to one piece of legislation under Obama's presidency that has taken away people's guns.

People lie (yes, even cops). Sometimes, cops claim that a suspect was reaching for their gun, or claim that the suspect was reaching for a gun of their own. That's not always true. In rare cases, cops plant evidence. Legally speaking, it is beneficial to an officer in a justified shooting to have a video.

Sad that it was suicide by cop. This is an example of why we absolutely need body cameras on every police officer. You can clearly see from the video that it was justified, they had no way of knowing it was a pellet gun. In a lot of cases, the testimonies of officers after a shooting is misleading or not the whole truth, or simply their perception of events. If these officers had testified without the video, its very possible that it would have sparked needless public outrage. Compare this case to the case of Tamir Rice, and you can see the difference that video makes. Glad these officers are safe and that they have the video to prove their innocence. It just sucks that the interaction had to end that way,

I was interested to read more, and there are no search results for any part of this story. OP, are you really living in Egypt?