Jump to content

Suggestions regarding police interactions


DizRotus
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've not heard of any studies of serious problems policing Asiatics. They make up about 14% of the US population and take up a tiny fraction of the prison population. I believe they are considered a minority in this country in terms of race.

Right. My mistake. I should have said "blacks" and not "minorities."

 

BTW, Banks never redlined "Asiatics", nor did we ever have the equivelent of Jim Crow laws for "Asiatics."

 

Thanks for catching my error. The studies are about policing of blacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recently I've been wondering about the double standard in terms of the number of shots that the police can fling out.

 

I asked my son about that since he was trained at the Police Academy a few years ago.

 

He said he was taught that in the heat of the moment in a life-or-death situation most people go into a sort-of tunnel mode.  They don't think about the little things like how many shots are fired, they resort to their training, which hopefully will kick in and keep everybody alive.  He said they shoot to "stop the threat."  They never "shoot to kill."

 

There have been WELL DOCUMENTED situations where a suspect has been shot, then gets up, grabs a gun and shoots and kills the LEO.  There is a classic textbook case in 1986 where two FBI agents were shot and killed in exactly this scenario.  It is well studied in law enforcement training.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MLO.....have you watched the videos? If so, I think maybe you haven't analyzed the footage correctly. The cops used non lethal action first and tazed him twice, to no avail. He may have been strung out and the taazing had little to no affect. Watching the Alton Sterling video shows me that in fact we have no idea what his right hand was doing. One cop was mounted low on the victim and the perp was trying to buck him off. The cops did pull a weapon out of his right pocket so to me at least, if he was trying to get his hand into his pocket, that could have resulted in an officer being shot. To me that justifies his shooting. Or are the cops supposed to wait until they are shot to react? In that case we had that happen yesterday in a courtroom in St. Joseph MI. Two court bailiffs were shot and killed after the perp grabbed a gun from a cops holster and shot them with it. After the fact the perp was shot as another officer shot him but does that seem right to you?

 

In the Minnesota shooting we know nothing outside of what his loser girlfriend has stated. The cop called in to say the driver which backs up the fact that she had mirrored her phone video so that it appeared that he was the passenger...he wasn't, he was the driver. If he was (as reported) a possible ID in a recent armed robbery I am sure the cops were on high alert approaching the suspect to start with so to bring a gun into the conversation changes everything. This girlfriend has changed her story several times and I do not give her much wiggle room in this one as she may have also been an accomplice in the armed robbery. Remember she didn't start filming and live streaming until after he was already shot....so we know nothing about what precluded the shooting itself.

 

There are plenty of cut and dried cases of police brutality and unjustified police shootings. In those cases the cops are put away as anyone else would be. Thinking for one as the shooting in a SC park where the cop tried to frame this man as trying to grab his taser and threatening him when the unknown at the time cell video shows the cop shoot him in the back for no reason.

 

I have no problem justifying bad cops but use an instance where all of the facts are known before drawing conclusions.

 

Castille video clearly shows the steering wheel in front of the victim. https://www.mprnews.org/story/2016/07/12/castile-shooting-renews-call-to-boost-minnesota-cop-training

 

 

 

 

Tim

Edited by teaman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I've not heard of any studies of serious problems policing Asiatics. They make up about 14% of the US population and take up a tiny fraction of the prison population. I believe they are considered a minority in this country in terms of race.

Right. My mistake. I should have said "blacks" and not "minorities."

 

BTW, Banks never redlined "Asiatics", nor did we ever have the equivelent of Jim Crow laws for "Asiatics."

 

Thanks for catching my error. The studies are about policing of blacks.

 

 

No problem on the "name game."  It drives me crazy.  :wacko:   :)

 

I come from the world of social services.  Like I said I was taught in school there were three races.  Throw that out in the real world.

 

I remember forms in social services where people needed to be racially identified in any/all of 7 or more descriptors.  Back then we had "African-American" as a race, and now race is described in terms of color, which I just hate.  There is no race called "black" just like there is no race called "Hispanic."  I'm "white."  Am I a person of color?

 

I can't keep up.  I've just come to accept that I'm going to be politically incorrect by continuing to refer to "people of color" as "people." 

Edited by wvu80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

have you watched the videos?

It looked to me like one officer was holding one of his arms down with his hands, while the other had his knee/shin on the other arm.

There are plenty of cut and dried cases of police brutality and unjustified police shootings. In those cases the cops are put away as anyone else would be. Thinking for one as the shooting in a SC park where the cop tried to frame this man as trying to grab his taser and threatening him when the unknown at the time cell video shows the cop shoot him in the back for no reason.

 

Yes Michael Slager was one that I had in mind.  8 shots to the back while running away, starting when he was less than 5 yards away.  That kind of fairly high number of shots seems to be pretty normal nowadays.  I'm not familiar with other specifics though, I'm only talking about emptying like half a magazine on suspects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That's because they have a high school diploma.

 

My son (cop in Myrtle Beach) has a 4-year degree from the WVU School of Medicine.  He finished second overall in his class at the Police Academy, first overall guy had a PhD.

 

FYI.

 

 

 

My son, the DC cop, has an undergraduate degree from George Washington University and is working towards an advance degree, also at GW.  Many of his fellow officers also have college degrees.  Many have law degrees also.  Like most stereotypical blanket statements, implying that police officers have only "a high school diploma" is inaccurate and brings more heat than light to the discussion.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

That's because they have a high school diploma.

 

My son (cop in Myrtle Beach) has a 4-year degree from the WVU School of Medicine.  He finished second overall in his class at the Police Academy, first overall guy had a PhD.

 

FYI.

 

 

 

My son, the DC cop, has an undergraduate degree from George Washington University and is working towards an advance degree, also at GW.  Many of his fellow officers also have college degrees.  Many have law degrees also.  Like most stereotypical blanket statements, implying that police officers have only "a high school diploma" is inaccurate and brings more heat than light to the discussion.

 

 

I agree, most of the police I know have BA's or higher and have done their due diligence of taking criminal law through college. I don't know of a single cop that only has a high school diploma. Silly assumption

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

That's because they have a high school diploma.

 

My son (cop in Myrtle Beach) has a 4-year degree from the WVU School of Medicine.  He finished second overall in his class at the Police Academy, first overall guy had a PhD.

 

FYI.

 

 

 

My son, the DC cop, has an undergraduate degree from George Washington University and is working towards an advance degree, also at GW.  Many of his fellow officers also have college degrees.  Many have law degrees also.  Like most stereotypical blanket statements, implying that police officers have only "a high school diploma" is inaccurate and brings more heat than light to the discussion.

 

I was merely referring to the ones who act like "high school bullies."  Your response implies something as well.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I agree, most of the police I know have BA's or higher

 

A lot of people I know with BA's cause me to wonder how they were ever allowed to graduate, or at least if they ever actually learned anything in school.

 

 

I think that can be said for graduates in any field though. Medicine may be the exception to that rule although a med school grad does not mean they actually care about people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, most of the police I know have BA's or higher

The reality is that most people period with degrees are simply not working in the field that they went to school for. Most people aren't going to college to become cops, especially not law school. The only one I know that went to school for a criminal justice degree is a higher up in a SWAT team in a big city.

Edited by MetropolisLakeOutfitters
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree.  Furthermore, if you want a silly assumption, I would assume that most if not all of the police you know with good educations have not acted as "high school bullies" either. 

 

Actually one of my friends kids was bullied in school and that was the reasoning for him to go into the force. So this time he has the upper hand. I told his dad that his loser kid should pursue a different career because he already has an agenda. He is now a cop in Windsor, On. Not good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In other words, there is a basic, fundamental right to kill based on nothing other than the policeman's considerations of fear.

 

Absolutely!  And the same rules apply to ordinary citizens, too.  The right to legitimate self-defense has to be the most precious right any individual can have.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cops used non lethal action first and tazed him twice, to no avail. He may have been strung out and the taazing had little to no affect. Watching the Alton Sterling video shows me that in fact we have no idea what his right hand was doing. One cop was mounted low on the victim and the perp was trying to buck him off. The cops did pull a weapon out of his right pocket so to me at least, if he was trying to get his hand into his pocket, that could have resulted in an officer being shot. To me that justifies his shooting.

 

May have been "strung out?" Not according to witnesses. Maybe the cops were strung out?

He's a "perp?" What was he guilty of? Was he under arrest?

"...no idea what his right hand was doing."  Maybe trying to protect himself from this onslaught?

Trying to "buck him off?" Really? How do you know that?

 

None of that squares with any witness statements. By all accounts, Alton was a guy who was respected and regularly sold CDs in front of this store with the owner's permission. A well liked man.

 

I'm leaning a great deal about human relations here. I was telling some friends at lunch about how even Oprah was demonized and no one believed me! I had to send him the link! "Oprah Winfrey? GTFOH!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

In other words, there is a basic, fundamental right to kill based on nothing other than the policeman's considerations of fear.

 

Absolutely!  And the same rules apply to ordinary citizens, too.  The right to legitimate self-defense has to be the most precious right any individual can have.

 

 

Are you saying it's the same for citizens? All I have to do is say I feared for my life and I can kill anyone I want?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

In other words, there is a basic, fundamental right to kill based on nothing other than the policeman's considerations of fear.

 

Absolutely!  And the same rules apply to ordinary citizens, too.  The right to legitimate self-defense has to be the most precious right any individual can have.

 

 

Are you saying it's the same for citizens? All I have to do is say I feared for my life and I can kill anyone I want?

 

 

I certainly did not take your original statement above to mean that a cop could kill anyone simply by fearing for his life.

 

If a specific person assaults you or reasonably appears to be in the process of assaulting you, and if you are in reasonable fear of imminent severe bodily injury, then, yes, you can, if reasonably necessary, kill that person.

Edited by Jeff Matthews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm leaning a great deal about human relations here. I was telling some friends at lunch about how even Oprah was demonized and no one believed me! I had to send him the link! "Oprah Winfrey? GTFOH!"

 

I personally know people who have been involved in interactions with the O word and the stories are not pretty.  You may be surprised at the revelations especially in a culture that worships wealth  and by extension those with it (or is it the other way around?), but not everyone is.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the police us of deadly force is defined in various court rulings like graham v. conner. In effect, the courts allow officers to determine what was reasonable, and prosecutors and judges by tradition give way to the officer for the reason of "law enforcement" as a desired societal goal. Ergo, police can pretty much kill people and simply "say" they feared for their safety. In effect, that's the reasonableness test in a nutshell.

 

That's a wider use of deadly force than citizens enjoy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm leaning a great deal about human relations here. I was telling some friends at lunch about how even Oprah was demonized and no one believed me! I had to send him the link! "Oprah Winfrey? GTFOH!"

 

I personally know people who have been involved in interactions with the O word and the stories are not pretty.  You may be surprised at the revelations especially in a culture that worships wealth  and by extension those with it (or is it the other way around?), but not everyone is.

 

 

I wasn't surprised by your personal annecdotes, because I don't know you or them. What surprised me was that you would/could call her a classless racist in a forum that nominally precludes that kind of talk. But Mallette informed me it was only a "close call" - so I guess you didn't cross that line.

 

OTOH, I have a reasonable sensibility as a normal person, and remain surprised by the pervasive attitudes here about citizens normally considered in high regard by the mainstream. That's just my reaction. That's why I said I had stepped on to another planet. I'm not used to hearing Oprah and the First Lady regarded so boorishly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...