CDZ Cell phone video from INSIDE vehicle shows murder of Levoy Finicum

[Preacher]

Shock Cell Phone Video Shows The LaVoy Finicum Shooting From Inside Vehicle

What many of us have said and suspected from the beginning it was 100% cold blooded murder. Just like Vickie and Samuel Weaver it will NEVER be prosecuted. I just hope this is remembered when patriots take back our country.

 

[Preacher]

I just got done watching entire video and its sickening. You can see the cold blooded murder of an unarmed man with his hands in the air you can see the lasers from rifles and pistols being pointed at unarmed people by the federal THUGS that murdered Lavoy.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

One less POS. He should have been Waco'ed...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Watch: New Video Details LaVoy Finicum Traffic Stop, Shooting

Go riddance, POS.

 

[Elvis Obama]

Not the clearest video I've ever seen, but what is clear is that his hands were not up, and he appears to be reaching inside his jacket. A stupid and pointless death, entirely self-inflicted.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

One cannot expect 'clean debate' when the thread premise is in fact a lie.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

They were shooting before the vehicle even stopped. Honestly if this had been a car full of Black men Black Lives Matters would have been all over it,

 

[Preacher]

Carla doesn't have the balls to reply so she finds murder of an innocent person funny....eh guess I would find the murder of libtard scum that are anti american funny when it happens.

 

[Preacher]

Not the clearest video I've ever seen, but what is clear is that his hands were not up, and he appears to be reaching inside his jacket. A stupid and pointless death, entirely self-inflicted.

Blind in one eye are we? his hands were CLEARLY up when he got out of the car and they shot at him AND they were firing at the vehicle well before he got out as well.

 

[320 Years of History]

Maybe we've all been wrong and there is equal treatment under the law in the U.S. What those cops did is little different than what black folks have been telling folks for decades is how cops respond to them in spite of the suspect not posing a treat to anyone's life and limb.

Police violence of the sort depicted in the video. I hope the "Oregon situation" convinces more folks that what blacks have averred for so long is in fact true. Though it's often characterised as a racial issue, it's not. It's a "cops abusing their power" or "cops being cruel, stupid, rash, and arrogant" issue.

 

[Elvis Obama]

Not the clearest video I've ever seen, but what is clear is that his hands were not up, and he appears to be reaching inside his jacket. A stupid and pointless death, entirely self-inflicted.

Blind in one eye are we? his hands were CLEARLY up when he got out of the car and they shot at him AND they were firing at the vehicle well before he got out as well.

Nope, not blind. If you don't see him reaching for his gun, then you're the one who's blind. In a situation like that, if you want to survive, you make no threatening gestures. You raise your hands and keep them raised. He didn't. He had also stated, quite explicitly, that he would not meekly accept arrest in such a situation. He didn't. Why? Because he wanted to be a martyr to the Waco/Ruby Ridge set. Pathetic.

 

[Elvis Obama]

Maybe we've all been wrong and there is equal treatment under the law in the U.S. What those cops did is little different than what black folks have been telling folks for decades is how cops respond to them in spite of the suspect not posing a treat to anyone's life and limb.

Police violence of the sort depicted in the video. I hope the "Oregon situation" convinces more folks that what blacks have averred for so long is in fact true. Though it's often characterised as a racial issue, it's not. It's a "cops abusing their power" or "cops being cruel, stupid, rash, and arrogant" issue.

If someone, in a confrontation with the police, reaches into their jacket, (where the police later found a gun of course), what should the rules of engagement be? Wait for him to pull the gun out and start shooting before they respond? Say, I've got an idea! How about you don't provoke a violent confrontation in the first place?

What is it about this situation that you feel reflects an abuse of police power?

 

[Preacher]

Not the clearest video I've ever seen, but what is clear is that his hands were not up, and he appears to be reaching inside his jacket. A stupid and pointless death, entirely self-inflicted.

Blind in one eye are we? his hands were CLEARLY up when he got out of the car and they shot at him AND they were firing at the vehicle well before he got out as well.

Nope, not blind. If you don't see him reaching for his gun, then you're the one who's blind. In a situation like that, if you want to survive, you make no threatening gestures. You raise your hands and keep them raised. He didn't. He had also stated, quite explicitly, that he would not meekly accept arrest in such a situation. He didn't. Why? Because he wanted to be a martyr to the Waco/Ruby Ridge set. Pathetic.

No he didn't reach for any gun. His hands were in the air plain as day when they started firing at him.

 

[320 Years of History]

Maybe we've all been wrong and there is equal treatment under the law in the U.S. What those cops did is little different than what black folks have been telling folks for decades is how cops respond to them in spite of the suspect not posing a treat to anyone's life and limb.

Police violence of the sort depicted in the video. I hope the "Oregon situation" convinces more folks that what blacks have averred for so long is in fact true. Though it's often characterised as a racial issue, it's not. It's a "cops abusing their power" or "cops being cruel, stupid, rash, and arrogant" issue.

If someone, in a confrontation with the police, reaches into their jacket, (where the police later found a gun of course), what should the rules of engagement be? Wait for him to pull the gun out and start shooting before they respond? Say, I've got an idea! How about you don't provoke a violent confrontation in the first place?

What is it about this situation that you feel reflects an abuse of police power?

Red:
That would be my solution approach.

Blue:
It looked to me like the man was out of his vehicle and not doing anything that merited the cops taking multiple "center of mass" shots at him. Given what I could tell from what I saw, the nature and extent of force the cops used to ensure their own safety and subdue Finicum exceeded what was necessary at the time. To me, the guns and the cops' authority to have and use them is the power they exerted. Using that power, in those circumstances shown on when the man was first shot, to kill, rather than maim, the man is excessive, thus abusive.

Overall, I believe most cops are not possessed of particularly high mental acuity. In recognition of that, were I to find myself interacting with one, let alone several, of them, I'd deal with them with that, along with my own survival, in mind. To me, what that means is to refrain from physical motion except as directed, or at least making the cop(s) aware of what any motion I make aims to do.

(I think. given the role they have, cops should all be well above average intelligence, but I also suspect cops aren't paid highly enough to make that happen.)

All the memorable interactions I've had with cops while they were performing their jobs has been re: traffic matters. Within the past decade in the U.S I've had two such encounters.....

1. I got pulled over and the cop said she did so because I "accelerated too quickly." She and I both knew I had not exceeded the posted speed limit nor was I driving in a manner unsafe for the road conditions. Upon being given the opportunity to speak, my remarks to her were, "Either give me a ticket for accelerating too quickly, or let me go, or arrest me, but I'm not going to discuss the matter with you either way. I will immediately request to call my attorney if you opt to arrest me and I have no comment until my attorney (or a surrogate) arrives." She told me to have a good day and drive safely.
2. I got pulled over after a cop driving an unmarked car who got so close on my rear that I could no longer see the headlights of his car. I thought it might be a carjacker, so I "brake checked" him at which point he turned on his flashing lights. He approached me and proceed to yell at the top of his lungs, gesture wildly with his arms and body, telling me about causing an accident. When he finally stopped screaming, I told him what was going through my mind.
   
   I stated that given the recent news stories about carjackers approaching cars and tapping the rear bumper to get the driver to stop and walk to the rear of the car to examine the damage, whereupon the carjacker hops into the car and drives off, I was concerned that he was a carjacker (I was driving a $100K+ car) and I wanted to make sure that if they took my car, their's would be undriveable, or at least readily identifiable. I also directed his gaze to my "infotainment" screen that showed I had 911 at the ready to call for help. I stated that I didn't call 911 because he activated his flashers and delivered a short siren burst after I "brake checked" him.
   
   He stated that he could take me to the police station, detain me, and impound my car. I told him to do so if he felt that be what he must do, for I would not resist, but whereas he has the authority to do that, I have my rights, and that I would be more than willing to make time to, by holding my rights and judgment up against his authority and judgment, convert the incident into something more than it need be if that's route he opted to pursue. He requested my license and registration, which I'd proffered the whole time, and upon returning to my car door, he returned them and huffed, "Drive safely," and walked away.

In the scheme of things, those two incidents illustrate minor abuses of police authority, but abuses all the same. In case #1, the abuses was merely pulling me over for a frivolous reason. In case #2, the cop visibly and orally lost professional control and abused his power by (1) yelling at me, and (2) attempting to use his police authority/ability to inconvenience me as a means of cowing me into silence and deference.

I am sure the "second" cop was pissed about nearly running into the rear of my car, but he's a cop as much as he's a person. Unlike the rest of us, cops, at least while on duty, to sublimate their emotion to reason. He did nothing of the sort.

 

[Elvis Obama]

Maybe we've all been wrong and there is equal treatment under the law in the U.S. What those cops did is little different than what black folks have been telling folks for decades is how cops respond to them in spite of the suspect not posing a treat to anyone's life and limb.

Police violence of the sort depicted in the video. I hope the "Oregon situation" convinces more folks that what blacks have averred for so long is in fact true. Though it's often characterised as a racial issue, it's not. It's a "cops abusing their power" or "cops being cruel, stupid, rash, and arrogant" issue.

If someone, in a confrontation with the police, reaches into their jacket, (where the police later found a gun of course), what should the rules of engagement be? Wait for him to pull the gun out and start shooting before they respond? Say, I've got an idea! How about you don't provoke a violent confrontation in the first place?

What is it about this situation that you feel reflects an abuse of police power?

Red:
That would be my solution approach.

Blue:
It looked to me like the man was out of his vehicle and not doing anything that merited the cops taking multiple "center of mass" shots at him. Given what I could tell from what I saw, the nature and extent of force the cops used to ensure their own safety and subdue Finicum exceeded what was necessary at the time. To me, the guns and the cops' authority to have and use them is the power they exerted. Using that power, in those circumstances shown on when the man was first shot, to kill, rather than maim, the man is excessive, thus abusive.

Overall, I believe most cops are not possessed of particularly high mental acuity. In recognition of that, were I to find myself interacting with one, let alone several, of them, I'd deal with them with that, along with my own survival, in mind. To me, what that means is to refrain from physical motion except as directed, or at least making the cop(s) aware of what any motion I make aims to do.

(I think. given the role they have, cops should all be well above average intelligence, but I also suspect cops aren't paid highly enough to make that happen.)

All the memorable interactions I've had with cops while they were performing their jobs has been re: traffic matters. Within the past decade in the U.S I've had two such encounters.....

1. I got pulled over and the cop said she did so because I "accelerated too quickly." She and I both knew I had not exceeded the posted speed limit nor was I driving in a manner unsafe for the road conditions. Upon being given the opportunity to speak, my remarks to her were, "Either give me a ticket for accelerating too quickly, or let me go, or arrest me, but I'm not going to discuss the matter with you either way. I will immediately request to call my attorney if you opt to arrest me and I have no comment until my attorney (or a surrogate) arrives." She told me to have a good day and drive safely.
2. I got pulled over after a cop driving an unmarked car who got so close on my rear that I could no longer see the headlights of his car. I thought it might be a carjacker, so I "brake checked" him at which point he turned on his flashing lights. He approached me and proceed to yell at the top of his lungs, gesture wildly with his arms and body, telling me about causing an accident. When he finally stopped screaming, I told him what was going through my mind.
   
   I stated that given the recent news stories about carjackers approaching cars and tapping the rear bumper to get the driver to stop and walk to the rear of the car to examine the damage, whereupon the carjacker hops into the car and drives off, I was concerned that he was a carjacker (I was driving a $100K+ car) and I wanted to make sure that if they took my car, their's would be undriveable, or at least readily identifiable. I also directed his gaze to my "infotainment" screen that showed I had 911 at the ready to call for help. I stated that I didn't call 911 because he activated his flashers and delivered a short siren burst after I "brake checked" him.
   
   He stated that he could take me to the police station, detain me, and impound my car. I told him to do so if he felt that be what he must do, for I would not resist, but whereas he has the authority to do that, I have my rights, and that I would be more than willing to make time to, by holding my rights and judgment up against his authority and judgment, convert the incident into something more than it need be if that's route he opted to pursue. He requested my license and registration, which I'd proffered the whole time, and upon returning to my car door, he returned them and huffed, "Drive safely," and walked away.

In the scheme of things, those two incidents illustrate minor abuses of police authority, but abuses all the same. In case #1, the abuses was merely pulling me over for a frivolous reason. In case #2, the cop visibly and orally lost professional control and abused his power by (1) yelling at me, and (2) attempting to use his police authority/ability to inconvenience me as a means of cowing me into silence and deference.

I am sure the "second" cop was pissed about nearly running into the rear of my car, but he's a cop as much as he's a person. Unlike the rest of us, cops, at least while on duty, to sublimate their emotion to reason. He did nothing of the sort.

Much of what you are discussing is well outside the circumstances of this particular incident. What we're talking about here is a person who was stopped by police, and rather than surrendering peacefully, chose to attempt to escape, leading the police on a high speed chase. After plowing his car into a snowbank when a police roadblock appeared before him, and apparently narrowly missing hitting one of the cops, he leaves his vehicle with his hands up. Does he keep his hands up? No. Does he reach into his jacket? Yes. Did you ever hear of a fugitive being described as "armed and dangerous"? That's a warning, intended to save the lives of the police and the public. Finnicum, interviewed while he was doing his bizarre impersonation of a tent, stated quite clearly that he intended to go down shooting rather than surrender to authorities.

Here's an interesting tidbit about this incident:

Woman says she was near killed Oregon occupier Finicum - CNN.com

"He had his hands up," Sharp said. "He was shouting that if they were going to shoot, then just shoot him. I remember him saying that if they shoot him, it's an innocent man's blood on their hands."

As seen on the FBI video, Finicum reaches twice toward a jacket pocket. Officers fire. Finicum falls to the ground. The FBI said it recovered a loaded 9mm semiautomatic handgun in that left side pocket of his jacket.

Sharp said she heard three shots and saw Finicum fall. "He wasn't doing anything aggressive, anything," she insisted. "He was just walking with his hands up."

When asked whether Finicum reached for a weapon, Sharp said, "He was not showing any signs of aggression."

Sharp agreed to sit with CNN and view the FBI video.

CNN pointed out the first, then the second time on the video where viewers can see Finicum reach across his body toward that left-side pocket.

"You know, I can't say that he was reaching for a weapon or not," said Sharp.

She watched the video again.

"OK, he was running through snow and it does not look like he is reaching to me. He's trying to keep his balance. He's running, I remember it. He didn't reach for anything."

Sharp reviewed that moment several more times. Each time, CNN pointed out what looked like a reach toward that pocket.

"I'm saying that the video does not show that he's reaching for something," said Sharp. She said she was in the truck and knows what she saw.

No, she doesn't know what she saw. She is an idiot. Finnicum was an idiot. Michael Brown was an idiot. Neither had their hands up and both got what they deserved. Eric Garner? Tamir Rice? Those are, imo, disgusting lapses in emotional self-control by police, akin to the kinds of incidents you mentioned. There are many problems with policing in this country, from an "us and them" mentality to the post-9/11 militarization of too many of our police forces. It's as unfair to blame the police in all instances as it is to assume they're blameless. In this case? I see nothing wrong with their actions.