Police car hits man with knife.

[del]

you are really good. I could not tell from the film what the guys intentions were.

one word, Lasik

 

[WillowTree]

Do knives? The guy was not trying to get into the car and was obviously in a poor mental state. In regards to police getting killed; that is what they sign up for. Being a police officer you understand that you are putting your life on the line for the good of the community. It is just sad that most officers have forgotten both of those basic principles. For the most part, officers are more interested in protecting themselves then they are others. Did you ever think that if cops did not have such a bad rap for abusing the people they arrest, being so corrupt and serving their own selfish interests, the community at large might respond to them better and assist them on a larger scale?

I understand that not all cops are terrible people and some even care about the job that they do, but for the most part, it is a job for people that could not get into college and want a position of power to abuse. Cops like this deserve to be in jail with every other criminal they have arrested over the years.

exactly, then don't make them hesitate for a second and maybe lose that life.

 

[I Missthe North]

you are really good. I could not tell from the film what the guys intentions were.

Are you kidding me? Do you lack vision and perception? The car is clearly accelerating through the man and does not even slow down in the immediate aftermath. See how the first car stop when he saw the guy coming? Besides, you telling me the cop couldn't see him before he entered the parking lot? It was wide open.

In regards to the cop losing his life. He was in no danger of losing his life to a man who was running at his car HEAD ON with a KNIFE. He is protected by 3000 pounds of metal and traveling at a high speed. Even if he was, that is what I like to call a hazard of the job. If you don't know you are putting you life on the line by becoming a police officer, then you shouldn't be one. I know not all cops are in the wrong, but this one clearly is so stop trying to defend him. I bet you think that group of cops that gang beat four suspects in Philly were in the right too? Unbelievable.

 

[xsited1]

Why didn't the cop back over the guy and finish the job? A car wash would've taken care of any splatter.

 

[WillowTree]

Are you kidding me? Do you lack vision and perception? The car is clearly accelerating through the man and does not even slow down in the immediate aftermath. See how the first car stop when he saw the guy coming? Besides, you telling me the cop couldn't see him before he entered the parking lot? It was wide open.

In regards to the cop losing his life. He was in no danger of losing his life to a man who was running at his car HEAD ON with a KNIFE. He is protected by 3000 pounds of metal and traveling at a high speed. Even if he was, that is what I like to call a hazard of the job. If you don't know you are putting you life on the line by becoming a police officer, then you shouldn't be one. I know not all cops are in the wrong, but this one clearly is so stop trying to defend him. I bet you think that group of cops that gang beat four suspects in Philly were in the right too? Unbelievable.

I disagree so I will not stop defending him. Projecti much?

 

[I Missthe North]

[/B]


I disagree so I will not stop defending him. Projecti much?

This is the second time that you have used that "Project much?" line. What exactly am I projecting? I would really like to be enlightened. It is good you agree with abuse as long as it is protected by a badge. Awesome.

 

[Diuretic]

Do knives? The guy was not trying to get into the car and was obviously in a poor mental state. In regards to police getting killed; that is what they sign up for. Being a police officer you understand that you are putting your life on the line for the good of the community. It is just sad that most officers have forgotten both of those basic principles. For the most part, officers are more interested in protecting themselves then they are others. Did you ever think that if cops did not have such a bad rap for abusing the people they arrest, being so corrupt and serving their own selfish interests, the community at large might respond to them better and assist them on a larger scale?

I understand that not all cops are terrible people and some even care about the job that they do, but for the most part, it is a job for people that could not get into college and want a position of power to abuse. Cops like this deserve to be in jail with every other criminal they have arrested over the years.

Ahem, cops don't sign up to get killed. If that was in the contract you'd have no cops

 

[I Missthe North]

Ahem, cops don't sign up to get killed. If that was in the contract you'd have no cops

They sign up with the understanding that they will be putting their lives on the line everyday for the greater good. Similar to joining the military. No, they don't sign up to "get killed" but it is a hazard of the job. They need to understand that. I am not saying that should not take precautions in preventing it, but running over a mentally ill person with a knife is not the way to do it. Kind of like how beating up cuffed suspects is not the way.

 

[del]

They sign up with the understanding that they will be putting their lives on the line everyday for the greater good. Similar to joining the military. No, they don't sign up to "get killed" but it is a hazard of the job. They need to understand that. I am not saying that should not take precautions in preventing it, but running over a mentally ill person with a knife is not the way to do it. Kind of like how beating up cuffed suspects is not the way.

tell me, how do you visually identify a mentally ill person?
do they wear signs?
bow ties?
secret handshake?
bar code?

 

[WillowTree]

This is the second time that you have used that "Project much?" line. What exactly am I projecting? I would really like to be enlightened. It is good you agree with abuse as long as it is protected by a badge. Awesome.

I wish I could help, but there's not much to work with.

 

[WillowTree]

Ahem, cops don't sign up to get killed. If that was in the contract you'd have no cops

Oh god, someone with a little intelligence!

 

[Jon]

You know what I love about this? Everyone is bitching about this cop who ran over a lunatic wielding a knife that had already jumped onto one police car.

But when Palin's brother-in-law tasered his stepson, you guys think we should give him a raise and tenure, and that Palin is OMGCORRUPT for wanting him out of a squad car and off the streets.

 

[Diuretic]

They sign up with the understanding that they will be putting their lives on the line everyday for the greater good. Similar to joining the military. No, they don't sign up to "get killed" but it is a hazard of the job. They need to understand that. I am not saying that should not take precautions in preventing it, but running over a mentally ill person with a knife is not the way to do it. Kind of like how beating up cuffed suspects is not the way.

Okay, that makes it a bit more clear.

btw I can't view the video because (probably copyright reasons) it won't play in my region. So I'm making no comment about the actual incident unless I can see it.

 

[Diuretic]

You know what I love about this? Everyone is bitching about this cop who ran over a lunatic wielding a knife that had already jumped onto one police car.

But when Palin's brother-in-law tasered his stepson, you guys think we should give him a raise and tenure, and that Palin is OMGCORRUPT for wanting him out of a squad car and off the streets.

I don't think it was that simple. If the cop - was he an Alaska State Trooper? - was in line for discipline then it's up to his chief officer to do the disciplining. A politician should keep it at arm's length, especially if there's a conflict of interest as there apparently was (I don't know if the evidence is in yet) in that matter.

The incident here (frustrating I can't see the video) is an operational incident and the cop may have acted legally (the usual rubric is "reasonable force"). In any case the person who was subject to police action is free to sue and the courts can sort it out.

 

[Diuretic]

Oh god, someone with a little intelligence!

Not really, if they'd told me that when I signed up I'd have gone and done something else - I might be silly but I'm not stupid

 

[AshamedAmerican]

tell me, how do you visually identify a mentally ill person?
do they wear signs?
bow ties?
secret handshake?
bar code?

No, they run around with knives.
So this looney toon WAS wearing his "crazy person ID tag" that you request he wears.
And thank you for proving my point for me north, no I dont think tasers work through a windshield any better than a kitchen knife does.
Which is why engineers designed DOORS on cars, so that cop could get out and shoot the crazy guy in the head, and you could all cheer him on.

I'm not saying send the cop to the electric chair, and I'm also not saying give him the congressional medal of honor.
I guess police brutality only matters when it's del or willow on the receiving end. Any other time it's good for a cop to run over a suspect.
As for him not being able to see the guy, are cops not required to follow the same law we do stating that when you drive you are responsible for being able to CONTROL your vehicle?

So let's check the facts, cop can't steer, doesn't know where the brake pedal is, or his taser, or his public address system. But hey he sure can run over people who are "innocent until proven guilty" and who that police force knew, had a history of mental illness.

For anyone justifying this saying it's ok... I hope your wife and children are the next people this cop flattens. maybe then your eyes will be open and you won't just be spouting bullshit that even you probably dont believe.

Thinking that this is ok leads to one outcome.
Newsflash june 20, 2009. A small child running with what police thought was a weapon was 'brutally run over by a police car/ shot in the head by a police officer' (take your pick, both seem equally ok to some of you)
Police stated that after the officer put down his donut, he realized that what he believed was a weapon was actually a ruler. the child was cleaned off the bus stop with a credit card and sponge and funeral services will be held today for anyone who would like to attend, and the award ceremony for the officer will follow shortly.

 

[KittenKoder]

No, they run around with knives.
So this looney toon WAS wearing his "crazy person ID tag" that you request he wears.
And thank you for proving my point for me north, no I dont think tasers work through a windshield any better than a kitchen knife does.
Which is why engineers designed DOORS on cars, so that cop could get out and shoot the crazy guy in the head, and you could all cheer him on.

I'm not saying send the cop to the electric chair, and I'm also not saying give him the congressional medal of honor.
I guess police brutality only matters when it's del or willow on the receiving end. Any other time it's good for a cop to run over a suspect.
As for him not being able to see the guy, are cops not required to follow the same law we do stating that when you drive you are responsible for being able to CONTROL your vehicle?

So let's check the facts, cop can't steer, doesn't know where the brake pedal is, or his taser, or his public address system. But hey he sure can run over people who are "innocent until proven guilty" and who that police force knew, had a history of mental illness.

For anyone justifying this saying it's ok... I hope your wife and children are the next people this cop flattens. maybe then your eyes will be open and you won't just be spouting bullshit that even you probably dont believe.

Thinking that this is ok leads to one outcome.
Newsflash june 20, 2009. A small child running with what police thought was a weapon was 'brutally run over by a police car/ shot in the head by a police officer' (take your pick, both seem equally ok to some of you)
Police stated that after the officer put down his donut, he realized that what he believed was a weapon was actually a ruler. the child was cleaned off the bus stop with a credit card and sponge and funeral services will be held today for anyone who would like to attend, and the award ceremony for the officer will follow shortly.

Um ... your 2009 prediction has already happened. In Seattle we had a kid shot because he was playing 'Laser Tag' at night in a slightly wooded area. The officer thought it was a gun, looks like a gun, flashes like a gun, it's dark. So the cop did his job and the kid points the thing at the cop with a drawn weapon and the cop sees the flash ... the rest is easy to know what happened. Needless to say, until they started sensationalising this stuff the cops were able to get a fair trial, now they don't. It's not fair to the people who are our actual defense against dangers that are real. Needless to say, the officer gave a public apology to the city and parents, then everyone moved on. Now, any time a cop makes a simple mistake it's a federal case with so many people because it's always blown out of context.

 

[Diuretic]

What would be good, but what is impossible, would be that when an event happens then official or even quasi-official judgement is suspended until all the facts are in and considered. Yes, I know it's absurd but I can ask. I don't meant to say that people can't have a view, heck if that were the case my keyboard would be silenced.....hey you in the back cheering, cut that out

The automatic rush to immediate condemnation or to blind support doesn't help. If a cop screws up then he or she should be appropriately dealt with. Cops, unlike probably anyone else in civilian society (memo - cops ARE civilians, they are not military), have seriously invasive authorities to make your life a misery. Their ability to do so must be grudgingly given and carefully watched when it's exercised. When there's a screw up then it has to be sorted out and proper blame apportioned and fair dealing handed out. Ideology should have nothing to do with the follow-up.

A couple of years ago in London (UK) some cops shot to death an innocent man on the Underground. They thought he was a suicide bomber. He wasn't. He was an innnocent Brazilian national living in the UK (he may have been an overstayer with his visa). The cops thought he was a radical terrorist. This was in the wake of the bombings in London on 7 July 2005. Jean Charles de Menezes was killed by police on 22 July 2005.

The Wikipedia entry is here - Jean Charles de Menezes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now this is a huge issue in the UK, for many reasons. But I'd ask you to put that aside for a moment because, while it was a shocking tragedy, I want you to consider something else.

The cops pursued a man they thought was a terrorist onto the tube (Underground). They thought that he might detonate an explosive device at any moment, yet they followed him and stayed close to him knowing (well in their minds) that he might detonate at any time. When he acted in a way that caused them to think he may well be about to to do so they did what they were trained to do. They had been trained to shoot the bomber in the head. They did and they killed him.

Probably this more than any other incident I can think of illustrates my point.

If Jean Charles de Menezes had been a suicide bomber the the cops who killed him would have been feted as heroes and given accolades. The poor bugger was innocent and the cops killed an innocent man, though believing he was capable of killing many people on the tube train, including the cops who had followed him and who were sitting with him.

I'm not asking for anyone to give the authorities a clean slate, just a fair go. There is nothing that can reverse this terrible tragedy and any screwup by the authorities needs to be dealt with, if anyone was negligent or culpable they need to be dealt with, but importantly if the system screwed up then that needs to be sorted as well. I'm not advocating carte blanche, far from it.

Nor is this special pleading. All I ask is that we - you - gauge an event with a reasonably open mind as nothing, absolutely nothing is clear cut.

As I said, the cops who killed Jean Charles de Menezes made a terrible, terrible mistake. As I understand it they are not going to be indicted. But the systematic failures in this incident need to be laid out for the world to see. But brave cops put their own lives at risk to kill a man they thought was a suicide bomber who, if he had detonated, would have immediately killed them and others.

If ever you wanted an example of the difficulty of coppering you have it.

By all means hammer venal cops, I'm with you. But on the other hand (strange as this may seem) don't blindly accept that all that cops do is good. That is naieve and unhelpful. Somewhere in the middle is a zone of reasonable attitude and behaviour. You owe your police trust but your police owe you the confidence to maintain that trust. It's a fragile balance. And so it should be.

 

[WillowTree]

You know what I love about this? Everyone is bitching about this cop who ran over a lunatic wielding a knife that had already jumped onto one police car.

But when Palin's brother-in-law tasered his stepson, you guys think we should give him a raise and tenure, and that Palin is OMGCORRUPT for wanting him out of a squad car and off the streets.

they are funny aren't they, and blind, and stupid, and dopey, and silly and partisan hacks.. they really need rabies shots