Police Kill another Teen

[Uncensored2008]

Another hypocrite whining the government is murdering people while screaming the government needs to be bigger and more powerful.

You know better than that.

Saying that I support a bigger and more powerful government is as stupid and claiming RDean wants a Laissez Faire economy.

Police are hired by a community to act on behalf of that community in the investigation of crimes on the enforcement of laws.

The police MUST never be better armed than the community itself and must turn to the community for support in times of crises - ie deputize the public.

The police are an agent of the community, and a servant of the community. The police should never have the physical prowess of arms to compel anyone to do anything without the support of the armed community backing them up.

This country operated well in this fashion until about 1990, when cops got the idea that they are a military force and the people they swear to serve are the enemy.

 

[Anathema]

In that case, the ONLY rational course of action would be for people to shoot to kill at cops who pull them over. After all, you support murder by cops, so people MUST defend against certain death,.

There are not enough police in this nation to subdue and enslave the populace. Such an attempt as you promote will end in a bloodbath, and the police will lose in the end.

No. The rational action is to not give police a reason to stop you; OR ensure that if you do have to interact with them, that you do what you're told immediately and without resistance.

The fact that we have an insufficient police force needs to be addressed. Possibly via civilian auxiliaries.

 

[depotoo]

But if he has a gun...

If it's the one I saw recently he refused to comply and remove his right hand from behind his back, in which it was obvious he had an object and advanced on the cops. Do you expect them to just assume he doesn't have a gun?

I believe the LEO can use non-lethal force and if the perp refuses to stay down then lethal force should be used. I have non-lethal shells for my shotgun, so I know there are ways they can take down someone without killing the individual...

 

[The Professor]

And you support shooting him while he is on the ground with plainly nothing in his hands?

I support shooting him no matter where he is or what he's doing if a. He has committed a crime and/or b. He is/has resisted or rum from the police.

The police cannot take the most incredibly small amount of risk in order to save someone's life?

It's not their job to save him. So says the SCOTUS.

I think the SCOTUS would disagree with you:

And you support shooting him while he is on the ground with plainly nothing in his hands?

I support shooting him no matter where he is or what he's doing if a. He has committed a crime and/or b. He is/has resisted or rum from the police.

The police cannot take the most incredibly small amount of risk in order to save someone's life?

It's not their job to save him. So says the SCOTUS.

When it comes to the use of deadly force against someone who is running from police, the SCOTUS would disagree with you.

Generally, the police have no no right to shot a suspect who is fleeing to avoid arrest. There is an exception only for those suspects who are consider dangerous felons, defined as those who have inflicted or threatened to cause serious bodily injury or death. In the case of Tennessee v. Garner the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) reviewed a Tennessee law which allowed the police to use deadly force to prevent the escape of non-dangerous suspects The particular case involved a man who was suspected of burglarizing a home. The following are the relevant portions of the SCOTUS decision:

“The Tennessee statute is unconstitutional insofar as it authorizes the use of deadly force against, as in this case, an apparently unarmed, nondangerous fleeing suspect; such force may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.”

“While burglary is a serious crime, the officer in this case could not reasonably have believed that the suspect - young, slight, and unarmed - posed any threat. Nor does the fact that an unarmed suspect has broken into a dwelling at night automatically mean he is dangerous.”.

“The use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances, is constitutionally unreasonable. It is not better that all felony suspects die than that they escape. Where the suspect poses no immediate threat to the officer and no threat to others, the harm resulting from failing to apprehend him does not justify the use of deadly force to do so. It is no doubt unfortunate when a suspect who is in sight escapes, but the fact that the police arrive a little late or are a little slower afoot does not always justify killing the suspect. A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead. The Tennessee statute is unconstitutional insofar as it authorizes the use of deadly force against such fleeing suspects.”

FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions.

In one case previously discussed on this forum, on April 4, 2015, 50-year old Walter Scott was pulled over by Officer Slager for a broken tail light. There is no video of the initial encounter between Slager and Scott, but it was reported that Scott offered resistance and there was a minor scuffle between the two (neither Slager or Scott had any visible injuries). When Slager pulled out his taser Scott managed to wrestle it away from him. It was also reported that Scott fired the taser at Slager but missed. There was a video taken by an observer but it begins showing Scott running away from the scene and Slager shooting him in the back.

The question is: did Slager have the right to use deadly force to prevent Scott's escape? I contend he did not. The police can use deadly force against a fleeing suspect only if the suspect is a dangerous felon. This means that the suspect has either inflicted or threatened to inflict serious bodily harm or death. Scott was not a dangerous felon by any stretch of the imagination. A minor scuffle with a policeman certainly does not make Scott a dangerous felon. The attempt to tase the officer certainly does not qualify because a taser is considered safe (many people have volunteered to be tased just to know what it feels like) and is routinely used in situations where deadly force would not be allowed.

A federal grand jury apparently agreed with my assessment and Officer Slager was indicted on May 11, 2016. According to the following link:

“The federal grand jury's indictment charged Slager with deprivation of rights under the color of the law, use of a weapon during the commission of a violent crime and obstruction of justice.

“The deprivation of rights charge is a death penalty offense, but the federal prosecutor's office has no interest in pursuing it, Assistant U.S. Attorney Eric Klumb said.”

Walter Scott shooting death: Grand jury indicts ex-officer - CNN.com

From everything I have read, Scott had a bench warrant issued for non-payment of child support and was afraid of going to jail. He resisted arrest using force that could not possibly constitute the use or threatened use of serious bodily injury or death. I fully expect Slager to be convicted or enter into a plea bargain.

CONCLUSION A policeman can use deadly force if – at the time such force is used - the policeman has a reasonable belief that it is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury to himself or an innocent third party; however, once the threat no longer exists the use of deadly force must cease (this same right also applies to private citizens). A policeman cannot use deadly force to prevent a suspect from escaping unless the suspect is considered to be a dangerous felon.

Taking a life is a very serious matter and is only justified in extraordinary cases to prevent innocent people from suffering serious injury or death.

 

[Anathema]

Taking a life is a very serious matter and is only justified in extraordinary cases to prevent innocent people from suffering serious injury or death.

Taking a life is an incredibly serious matter. I spent many long hours considering that concept prior to getting my carry license. That doesn't mean many people don't deserve to die.

However, I do not believe in innocent people. They don't exist in reality.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

But if he has a gun...

If it's the one I saw recently he refused to comply and remove his right hand from behind his back, in which it was obvious he had an object and advanced on the cops. Do you expect them to just assume he doesn't have a gun?

I believe the LEO can use non-lethal force and if the perp refuses to stay down then lethal force should be used. I have non-lethal shells for my shotgun, so I know there are ways they can take down someone without killing the individual...

If they have a firearm then you know the answer is shoot to kill.

 

[Trump.Stamped]

The footage I saw showed the guy with a hand behind his back and advancing, disregarding the numerous orders to stop. Suicide by cop.

That is obviously not the case. He didn't put himself in the situation (in order to get killed).

When he saw how serious things were and that the policeman was close to shooting him, he panicked, maybe also because the cop appeared agitated. People act erratically when they panic. It happens.

Do you charge money for your ability to mind read, or do you just offer it for free?

Do you have a better explanation? He wasn't armed and wasn't trying to commit suicide. Go ahead genius, give us a better explanation.

Unlike you, I'm not going to pretend to know what was in that young man's mind. What you are saying is that you expect those officers to wait until he his hands out to decide what to do. [/MEDIA]

I was responding to someone who was doing just that, saying that he had suicide on his mind. I gave a far better explanation.

The cops should have told him to get out of his truck to begin with, because it is near impossible to show both hands while seated in the driver's seat. If he had twisted around and leaned out, they very likely would have shot him for doing that. He was trying to not move too much, and you can't stick both hands out the truck while trying to be still.

If they shot him for scooting out of the truck enough to show both hands, you all would say, he should not have lunged at them. You have it both ways.

Wow, you are an expert on police tactics. Maybe you should start training police departments

 

[Iceweasel]

Police are hired by a community to act on behalf of that community in the investigation of crimes on the enforcement of laws.

The police MUST never be better armed than the community itself and must turn to the community for support in times of crises - ie deputize the public.

The police are an agent of the community, and a servant of the community. The police should never have the physical prowess of arms to compel anyone to do anything without the support of the armed community backing them up.

This country operated well in this fashion until about 1990, when cops got the idea that they are a military force and the people they swear to serve are the enemy.

According to who? Police are not agents of the community, I don't even know what the hell that means. The are hired to enforce the policies of the department that hires them. The department is answerable to the government what formed them. And so on.

 

[sealybobo]

How can this story be a secret when CNN is reporting on it? lol

How many times was it reported on cnn?

They didn't need to do that. That guy was mentally ill. It's like rather than get physical cops would rather shoot first and be asked questions later

 

[sealybobo]

That is obviously not the case. He didn't put himself in the situation (in order to get killed).

When he saw how serious things were and that the policeman was close to shooting him, he panicked, maybe also because the cop appeared agitated. People act erratically when they panic. It happens.

Do you charge money for your ability to mind read, or do you just offer it for free?

Do you have a better explanation? He wasn't armed and wasn't trying to commit suicide. Go ahead genius, give us a better explanation.

Unlike you, I'm not going to pretend to know what was in that young man's mind. What you are saying is that you expect those officers to wait until he his hands out to decide what to do. [/MEDIA]

I was responding to someone who was doing just that, saying that he had suicide on his mind. I gave a far better explanation.

The cops should have told him to get out of his truck to begin with, because it is near impossible to show both hands while seated in the driver's seat. If he had twisted around and leaned out, they very likely would have shot him for doing that. He was trying to not move too much, and you can't stick both hands out the truck while trying to be still.

If they shot him for scooting out of the truck enough to show both hands, you all would say, he should not have lunged at them. You have it both ways.

Wow, you are an expert on police tactics. Maybe you should start training police departments

Someone should

 

[AmericanFirst1]

The footage I saw showed the guy with a hand behind his back and advancing, disregarding the numerous orders to stop. Suicide by cop.

That is obviously not the case. He didn't put himself in the situation (in order to get killed).

When he saw how serious things were and that the policeman was close to shooting him, he panicked, maybe also because the cop appeared agitated. People act erratically when they panic. It happens.

Do you charge money for your ability to mind read, or do you just offer it for free?

Do you have a better explanation? He wasn't armed and wasn't trying to commit suicide. Go ahead genius, give us a better explanation.

He should have followed orders then. Justified.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

That is obviously not the case. He didn't put himself in the situation (in order to get killed).

When he saw how serious things were and that the policeman was close to shooting him, he panicked, maybe also because the cop appeared agitated. People act erratically when they panic. It happens.

Do you charge money for your ability to mind read, or do you just offer it for free?

Do you have a better explanation? He wasn't armed and wasn't trying to commit suicide. Go ahead genius, give us a better explanation.

Unlike you, I'm not going to pretend to know what was in that young man's mind. What you are saying is that you expect those officers to wait until he his hands out to decide what to do. [/MEDIA]

I was responding to someone who was doing just that, saying that he had suicide on his mind. I gave a far better explanation.

The cops should have told him to get out of his truck to begin with, because it is near impossible to show both hands while seated in the driver's seat. If he had twisted around and leaned out, they very likely would have shot him for doing that. He was trying to not move too much, and you can't stick both hands out the truck while trying to be still.

If they shot him for scooting out of the truck enough to show both hands, you all would say, he should not have lunged at them. You have it both ways.

Wow, you are an expert on police tactics. Maybe you should start training police departments

You don't have to be when the mistakes are so incredibly obvious.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

The footage I saw showed the guy with a hand behind his back and advancing, disregarding the numerous orders to stop. Suicide by cop.

That is obviously not the case. He didn't put himself in the situation (in order to get killed).

When he saw how serious things were and that the policeman was close to shooting him, he panicked, maybe also because the cop appeared agitated. People act erratically when they panic. It happens.

Do you charge money for your ability to mind read, or do you just offer it for free?

Do you have a better explanation? He wasn't armed and wasn't trying to commit suicide. Go ahead genius, give us a better explanation.

He should have followed orders then. Justified.

People aren't always thinking rationally and should not be shot down for such a lapse.

 

[Trump.Stamped]

Do you charge money for your ability to mind read, or do you just offer it for free?

Do you have a better explanation? He wasn't armed and wasn't trying to commit suicide. Go ahead genius, give us a better explanation.

Unlike you, I'm not going to pretend to know what was in that young man's mind. What you are saying is that you expect those officers to wait until he his hands out to decide what to do. [/MEDIA]

I was responding to someone who was doing just that, saying that he had suicide on his mind. I gave a far better explanation.

The cops should have told him to get out of his truck to begin with, because it is near impossible to show both hands while seated in the driver's seat. If he had twisted around and leaned out, they very likely would have shot him for doing that. He was trying to not move too much, and you can't stick both hands out the truck while trying to be still.

If they shot him for scooting out of the truck enough to show both hands, you all would say, he should not have lunged at them. You have it both ways.

Wow, you are an expert on police tactics. Maybe you should start training police departments

You don't have to be when the mistakes are so incredibly obvious.

Obvious to someone with no law enforcement experience, who has no f*ing idea what they are talking about. Got it.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Do you have a better explanation? He wasn't armed and wasn't trying to commit suicide. Go ahead genius, give us a better explanation.

Unlike you, I'm not going to pretend to know what was in that young man's mind. What you are saying is that you expect those officers to wait until he his hands out to decide what to do. [/MEDIA]

I was responding to someone who was doing just that, saying that he had suicide on his mind. I gave a far better explanation.

The cops should have told him to get out of his truck to begin with, because it is near impossible to show both hands while seated in the driver's seat. If he had twisted around and leaned out, they very likely would have shot him for doing that. He was trying to not move too much, and you can't stick both hands out the truck while trying to be still.

If they shot him for scooting out of the truck enough to show both hands, you all would say, he should not have lunged at them. You have it both ways.

Wow, you are an expert on police tactics. Maybe you should start training police departments

You don't have to be when the mistakes are so incredibly obvious.

Obvious to someone with no law enforcement experience, who has no f*ing idea what they are talking about. Got it.

You haven't talked about anything but have just made inane attacks.