Another Police Shooting when dude has his hands in the air

[cnm]

Yeah, they are mostly shooting white people. Got any stats to back up your alarming rate? No? I knew you didn't have anything but hatred.

At what rate are you happy to have your police shoot unarmed civilians?

 

[cnm]

But the common thread in all these cop hater threads is that the suspect is either fighting the cops, resisting arrest, or as in this case, not following instructions...

Unbelievable. Well no, after some time on this message board quite believable. The authoritarians have moved the line from 'an imminent threat' to 'not following instructions' and are quite happy with it.

Rather you than me to have a police force that interprets 'protect and serve' as 'Ignore and shoot.'

 

[cnm]

I think the same cop haters generate these threads with a special focus and it has nothing to do with respecting law enforcement. I've been on this board a long time, kid.

Why on earth would anyone respect any of the law enforcement involved in shooting an unarmed care giver with his hands in the air? What pathology leads you to do so?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I don't get the need to twist logic to such extremes in an attempt to validate the actions of the officers. It is what it is. Regardless of what the officers "believed" was happening, they were wrong.

But the common thread in all these cop hater threads is that the suspect is either fighting the cops, resisting arrest, or as in this case, not following instructions...never a case where the suspect was doing everything right and the cop just blew him away. Police have procedures in place to keep everyone safe and in order for them to work, people have to follow instructions. Whenever this doesn't happen, it escalates the risk to everyone involved. I'll just keep yawning until the cop haters come up with a genuine case of police abuse.

First of all, understanding the need to hold police accountable for their actions is not cop hating. They operate within the public trust. A violation of that trust must be dealt with lest that trust be damaged.
Which case are you referring to? The king case or the Miami case?

The motivation for threads like these that spring up like wild grass is hatred for authority and by extension those who enforce the law. Not for a second do I entertain the notion that those pumping out these threads have any other agenda than to advertise their cop hate and solicit that hate in others.

Well, that's just cynical and dumb.
You honestly think it's not possible to support the police and be critical of some of their actions at the same time?

I think the same cop haters generate these threads with a special focus and it has nothing to do with respecting law enforcement. I've been on this board a long time, kid.

The only hate I see on this thread is coming from you and other apologists.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I think the same cop haters generate these threads with a special focus and it has nothing to do with respecting law enforcement. I've been on this board a long time, kid.

Why on earth would anyone respect any of the law enforcement involved in shooting an unarmed care giver with his hands in the air? What pathology leads you to do so?

The pathology that sees no value in brown skin.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

But the common thread in all these cop hater threads is that the suspect is either fighting the cops, resisting arrest, or as in this case, not following instructions...never a case where the suspect was doing everything right and the cop just blew him away. Police have procedures in place to keep everyone safe and in order for them to work, people have to follow instructions. Whenever this doesn't happen, it escalates the risk to everyone involved. I'll just keep yawning until the cop haters come up with a genuine case of police abuse.

First of all, understanding the need to hold police accountable for their actions is not cop hating. They operate within the public trust. A violation of that trust must be dealt with lest that trust be damaged.
Which case are you referring to? The king case or the Miami case?

The motivation for threads like these that spring up like wild grass is hatred for authority and by extension those who enforce the law. Not for a second do I entertain the notion that those pumping out these threads have any other agenda than to advertise their cop hate and solicit that hate in others.

Well, that's just cynical and dumb.
You honestly think it's not possible to support the police and be critical of some of their actions at the same time?

I think the same cop haters generate these threads with a special focus and it has nothing to do with respecting law enforcement. I've been on this board a long time, kid.

The only hate I see on this thread is coming from you and other apologists.

Then you're an idiot. Defending the cops from relentless hateful attacks is not hate.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

I think the same cop haters generate these threads with a special focus and it has nothing to do with respecting law enforcement. I've been on this board a long time, kid.

Why on earth would anyone respect any of the law enforcement involved in shooting an unarmed care giver with his hands in the air? What pathology leads you to do so?

The pathology that sees no value in brown skin.

You're an idiot. I am brown skinned.

You're an idiot.

Just had to say that again.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

But the common thread in all these cop hater threads is that the suspect is either fighting the cops, resisting arrest, or as in this case, not following instructions...

Unbelievable. Well no, after some time on this message board quite believable. The authoritarians have moved the line from 'an imminent threat' to 'not following instructions' and are quite happy with it.

Rather you than me to have a police force that interprets 'protect and serve' as 'Ignore and shoot.'

Nobody deserves to be shot for failing to follow directions, fighting the cops, or resisting arrest, but these activities escalate the situation and compromise the procedures police have in place to keep everyone safe throughout the encounter. People need to follow instructions and if they don't, they are risking injury or death. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

But the common thread in all these cop hater threads is that the suspect is either fighting the cops, resisting arrest, or as in this case, not following instructions...

Unbelievable. Well no, after some time on this message board quite believable. The authoritarians have moved the line from 'an imminent threat' to 'not following instructions' and are quite happy with it.

Rather you than me to have a police force that interprets 'protect and serve' as 'Ignore and shoot.'

Nobody deserves to be shot for failing to follow directions, fighting the cops, or resisting arrest, but these activities escalate the situation and compromise the procedures police have in place to keep everyone safe throughout the encounter. People need to follow instructions and if they don't, they are risking injury or death. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

So the onus of responsibility for the safety of the public when interacting with police is solely in the hands of the public and not on the trained professionals who are hired to protect and serve the public?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

But the common thread in all these cop hater threads is that the suspect is either fighting the cops, resisting arrest, or as in this case, not following instructions...

Unbelievable. Well no, after some time on this message board quite believable. The authoritarians have moved the line from 'an imminent threat' to 'not following instructions' and are quite happy with it.

Rather you than me to have a police force that interprets 'protect and serve' as 'Ignore and shoot.'

Nobody deserves to be shot for failing to follow directions, fighting the cops, or resisting arrest, but these activities escalate the situation and compromise the procedures police have in place to keep everyone safe throughout the encounter. People need to follow instructions and if they don't, they are risking injury or death. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

So the onus of responsibility for the safety of the public when interacting with police is solely in the hands of the public and not on the trained professionals who are hired to protect and serve the public?

I'm saying the police are aided in their effort to keep everyone safe when the people they interact with cooperate and follow instructions. This lacking, when force is required, the risk of injury or death is escalated. Just follow instructions and you'll live through the encounter and even have some cool stories about who you met in jail.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

But the common thread in all these cop hater threads is that the suspect is either fighting the cops, resisting arrest, or as in this case, not following instructions...

Unbelievable. Well no, after some time on this message board quite believable. The authoritarians have moved the line from 'an imminent threat' to 'not following instructions' and are quite happy with it.

Rather you than me to have a police force that interprets 'protect and serve' as 'Ignore and shoot.'

Nobody deserves to be shot for failing to follow directions, fighting the cops, or resisting arrest, but these activities escalate the situation and compromise the procedures police have in place to keep everyone safe throughout the encounter. People need to follow instructions and if they don't, they are risking injury or death. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

So the onus of responsibility for the safety of the public when interacting with police is solely in the hands of the public and not on the trained professionals who are hired to protect and serve the public?

I'm saying the police are aided in their effort to keep everyone safe when the people they interact with cooperate and follow instructions. This lacking, when force is required, the risk of injury or death is escalated. Just follow instructions and you'll live through the encounter and even have some cool stories about who you met in jail.

Or the trained professionals should better assess the threats they're actually facing.

What more could the man from the OP have done than lying on the ground with his arms in the air clearly explaining the situation at hand to the officers?

What more, if anything might the officers have done to better assess and understand the situation before they fired on the subjects?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I guess so? If as it looks, incompetent mistake? Forgive the guy, he probably did not mean to fire (allegedly). Make him go visit, apologize. Film it. Show it. Put him on other duties, move on.

If he's incompetent why the fuck is he a cop in the first place. Secondly if he was trying to shoot an unarmed person, who was not a threat, why is he not in jail?

OK, your all right, I am wrong. Life in prison start now. My point is a Police officrr is human. The guy appears go have freaked out, made mistake.

People get in cars and back over neighbor kids. Mistake. VA doctors kill patients out of incompetence/laziness while govt employee.

When you all don't make mistakes, then you can let us know. I don't have all the answers but good thing nobody will die. Appears to be minor. We have citizens walking around wit 30year record of "mistakes".

I am no troll either, I will watch out PW. I am not sure what troll is but it can't be good.

There's a huuuuge difference between making a "mistake" and SHOOTING AN UNARMED NON THREATENING PERSON.

I have a good feeling that if he intended to shoot the person lying on the ground, he wouldn't have shot him in the leg.

According to the information available at this time, the police union has stated that the officer hit the therapist when trying to hit the other man. The other man, supposedly the intended target, was not hit according to the reports.

So if the officer was unable to hit his intended target and instead accidentally hit another person, why would you conclude that if he'd been aiming for the therapist he would be able to choose which portion of his body the bullet would strike? At this point it appears he wasn't the most accurate shot.

When is the average poster on this message board going to read for comprehension? You posted the same shit other people posted AGAIN.

My statement stands on it's own.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The Klan was founded by you Dems and has been yours ever since.

Nah, it's obvious it was founded by the Confederate states in their butt hurt and is still owned by them as Republicans, with their flags from their army supporting their government based on the inferiority of the black man.

The resurgence of the Klan in the 1900s was in the northern industrial states, NOT in the South. States such as Ohio, Indiana and Illinois had much higher Klan memberships.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Yeah, they are mostly shooting white people. Got any stats to back up your alarming rate? No? I knew you didn't have anything but hatred.

At what rate are you happy to have your police shoot unarmed civilians?

What is "the alarming rate"? Answer that question first before asking me to address a ridiculous assertion.

 

[Montrovant]

If he's incompetent why the fuck is he a cop in the first place. Secondly if he was trying to shoot an unarmed person, who was not a threat, why is he not in jail?

OK, your all right, I am wrong. Life in prison start now. My point is a Police officrr is human. The guy appears go have freaked out, made mistake.

People get in cars and back over neighbor kids. Mistake. VA doctors kill patients out of incompetence/laziness while govt employee.

When you all don't make mistakes, then you can let us know. I don't have all the answers but good thing nobody will die. Appears to be minor. We have citizens walking around wit 30year record of "mistakes".

I am no troll either, I will watch out PW. I am not sure what troll is but it can't be good.

There's a huuuuge difference between making a "mistake" and SHOOTING AN UNARMED NON THREATENING PERSON.

I have a good feeling that if he intended to shoot the person lying on the ground, he wouldn't have shot him in the leg.

According to the information available at this time, the police union has stated that the officer hit the therapist when trying to hit the other man. The other man, supposedly the intended target, was not hit according to the reports.

So if the officer was unable to hit his intended target and instead accidentally hit another person, why would you conclude that if he'd been aiming for the therapist he would be able to choose which portion of his body the bullet would strike? At this point it appears he wasn't the most accurate shot.

When is the average poster on this message board going to read for comprehension? You posted the same shit other people posted AGAIN.

My statement stands on it's own.

Your statement is silly. The officer who shot, assuming the statements put out by the union are not lies (and that the media reports of those statements are not lies), completely missed his target, in fact hitting a different target accidentally. That being the case, while he might have AIMED at something other than the therapist's leg, there's no reason to assume he'd have hit anything in particular. Based on what we know at the moment, he could have hit any portion of the therapist or none at all were he trying to hit him.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

OK, your all right, I am wrong. Life in prison start now. My point is a Police officrr is human. The guy appears go have freaked out, made mistake.

People get in cars and back over neighbor kids. Mistake. VA doctors kill patients out of incompetence/laziness while govt employee.

When you all don't make mistakes, then you can let us know. I don't have all the answers but good thing nobody will die. Appears to be minor. We have citizens walking around wit 30year record of "mistakes".

I am no troll either, I will watch out PW. I am not sure what troll is but it can't be good.

There's a huuuuge difference between making a "mistake" and SHOOTING AN UNARMED NON THREATENING PERSON.

I have a good feeling that if he intended to shoot the person lying on the ground, he wouldn't have shot him in the leg.

According to the information available at this time, the police union has stated that the officer hit the therapist when trying to hit the other man. The other man, supposedly the intended target, was not hit according to the reports.

So if the officer was unable to hit his intended target and instead accidentally hit another person, why would you conclude that if he'd been aiming for the therapist he would be able to choose which portion of his body the bullet would strike? At this point it appears he wasn't the most accurate shot.

When is the average poster on this message board going to read for comprehension? You posted the same shit other people posted AGAIN.

My statement stands on it's own.

Your statement is silly. The officer who shot, assuming the statements put out by the union are not lies (and that the media reports of those statements are not lies), completely missed his target, in fact hitting a different target accidentally. That being the case, while he might have AIMED at something other than the therapist's leg, there's no reason to assume he'd have hit anything in particular. Based on what we know at the moment, he could have hit any portion of the therapist or none at all were he trying to hit him.

You do realize that information was not available at the time I made my post. Now, don't you feel just a little bit silly?

 

[jc456]

Shot the guy, on administrative leave while investigation happens.

Prediction:
No charges, my bad....Prayers and thoughts. x2 with a cherry on top

so do you have the video of the shooting?

 

[Montrovant]

There's a huuuuge difference between making a "mistake" and SHOOTING AN UNARMED NON THREATENING PERSON.

I have a good feeling that if he intended to shoot the person lying on the ground, he wouldn't have shot him in the leg.

According to the information available at this time, the police union has stated that the officer hit the therapist when trying to hit the other man. The other man, supposedly the intended target, was not hit according to the reports.

So if the officer was unable to hit his intended target and instead accidentally hit another person, why would you conclude that if he'd been aiming for the therapist he would be able to choose which portion of his body the bullet would strike? At this point it appears he wasn't the most accurate shot.

When is the average poster on this message board going to read for comprehension? You posted the same shit other people posted AGAIN.

My statement stands on it's own.

Your statement is silly. The officer who shot, assuming the statements put out by the union are not lies (and that the media reports of those statements are not lies), completely missed his target, in fact hitting a different target accidentally. That being the case, while he might have AIMED at something other than the therapist's leg, there's no reason to assume he'd have hit anything in particular. Based on what we know at the moment, he could have hit any portion of the therapist or none at all were he trying to hit him.

You do realize that information was not available at the time I made my post. Now, don't you feel just a little bit silly?

Actually, it was. Go look at post #265. g5000 posted a link about the PBA claiming the officer was shooting at the autistic man. Your post saying, "I have a good feeling that if he intended to shoot the person lying on the ground, he wouldn't have shot him in the leg." was post #294, about 45 minutes after g5000's post. I'm not sure if anyone else brought up that the officer was supposedly shooting at the autistic man before that, I didn't check further back.

Now, don't you feel just a little bit silly?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

But the common thread in all these cop hater threads is that the suspect is either fighting the cops, resisting arrest, or as in this case, not following instructions...

Unbelievable. Well no, after some time on this message board quite believable. The authoritarians have moved the line from 'an imminent threat' to 'not following instructions' and are quite happy with it.

Rather you than me to have a police force that interprets 'protect and serve' as 'Ignore and shoot.'

Nobody deserves to be shot for failing to follow directions, fighting the cops, or resisting arrest, but these activities escalate the situation and compromise the procedures police have in place to keep everyone safe throughout the encounter. People need to follow instructions and if they don't, they are risking injury or death. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

So the onus of responsibility for the safety of the public when interacting with police is solely in the hands of the public and not on the trained professionals who are hired to protect and serve the public?

I'm saying the police are aided in their effort to keep everyone safe when the people they interact with cooperate and follow instructions. This lacking, when force is required, the risk of injury or death is escalated. Just follow instructions and you'll live through the encounter and even have some cool stories about who you met in jail.

Or the trained professionals should better assess the threats they're actually facing.

What more could the man from the OP have done than lying on the ground with his arms in the air clearly explaining the situation at hand to the officers?

What more, if anything might the officers have done to better assess and understand the situation before they fired on the subjects?

You're just as hindered by the lack of video evidence to what actually happened as I am. But you, fueled by your rabid, irrational hatred of cops, are making the leap that the cop just shot a cooperating suspect for no reason at all. That makes you two grapes short of a fruit salad.

 

[WinterBorn]

Unbelievable. Well no, after some time on this message board quite believable. The authoritarians have moved the line from 'an imminent threat' to 'not following instructions' and are quite happy with it.

Rather you than me to have a police force that interprets 'protect and serve' as 'Ignore and shoot.'

Nobody deserves to be shot for failing to follow directions, fighting the cops, or resisting arrest, but these activities escalate the situation and compromise the procedures police have in place to keep everyone safe throughout the encounter. People need to follow instructions and if they don't, they are risking injury or death. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

So the onus of responsibility for the safety of the public when interacting with police is solely in the hands of the public and not on the trained professionals who are hired to protect and serve the public?

I'm saying the police are aided in their effort to keep everyone safe when the people they interact with cooperate and follow instructions. This lacking, when force is required, the risk of injury or death is escalated. Just follow instructions and you'll live through the encounter and even have some cool stories about who you met in jail.

Or the trained professionals should better assess the threats they're actually facing.

What more could the man from the OP have done than lying on the ground with his arms in the air clearly explaining the situation at hand to the officers?

What more, if anything might the officers have done to better assess and understand the situation before they fired on the subjects?

You're just as hindered by the lack of video evidence to what actually happened as I am. But you, fueled by your rabid, irrational hatred of cops, are making the leap that the cop just shot a cooperating suspect for no reason at all. That makes you two grapes short of a fruit salad.

In your own words...
B
U
L
L
S
H
I
T

Both sides of the argument lack video evidence of the shooting. But the video evidence we DO have shows a man cooperating fully, and another man with obvious mental disabilities. It shows no threat, threatening behavior, or weapons. Yet the, moments after the video ended, officer employed deadly force.