Alton Sterling shooting.

[MerenthaClone]

1 minute ago, peterbound said:

A few things though.  If you're going to focus on the PD's record, you need to focus on Brown's as well. But you won't do that.  I'm also not sure it was a mistake.  It looked like a good shooting to me.  The guy was reaching for a gun.  I don't see how that can be a bad shooting. Criticize away, but do that.  Not spread hatred.  You're not doing anything but make the situation worse, and if anything you're spreading lies and misinformation.  

He was?  Sure looked like he had both hands firmly secured to me. 

[peterbound]

3 minutes ago, MerenthaClone said:

He was?  Sure looked like he had both hands firmly secured to me. 

Have you ever tried to 'secure' a large man in a fight?  Especially one that you suspect is reaching for a gun?  

 

I've had my ass kicked by a 70 year old woman while trying to get her to lay flat on my medic pram.  I couldn't imagine trying to hold down a dude that size while he was reaching for a fire arm. 

[Boris the Blade]

3 minutes ago, peterbound said:

Have you ever tried to 'secure' a large man in a fight?  Especially one that you suspect is reaching for a gun?  

 

I've had my ass kicked by a 70 year old woman while trying to get her to lay flat on my medic pram.  I couldn't imagine trying to hold down a dude that size while he was reaching for a fire arm. 

They are trained to handle situations like this. There were two of them, and they both looked just as big as he was and in better shape.

You keep saying he was reaching for a firearm. Yet the other video that was much closer shows his hands never once reaching for a gun. Just because cops say he is reaching for a gun does not mean he is reaching for a gun. 

 

[MerenthaClone]

Just now, peterbound said:

Have you ever tried to 'secure' a large man in a fight?  Especially one that you suspect is reaching for a gun?  

Yes.  Not a gun, but a knife.  And why do you keep taking the police's word that he was going for a gun against the evidence of your own eyes?  One officer is firmly lying on one arm and draws his weapon with one hand and has time to aim it, calmly and without moving his gun arm, for several seconds while the other officer secures his other arm.  The man appears very, very pinned.  

And if that 70yo lady had a UTI, I don't blame you.Tiny ol' ladies turning into hellbeasts is certainly a sight.  

[Gertrude]

1 hour ago, Bold Barry Whitebeard said:

You can criticize the training that police officers get.  Clearly, they don't get much training in de-escalation or interacting with the mentally ill.  But the 'reasonable officer' standard is based on the training officers get, not what they 'should' get.

I thought that was what I was criticizing. I also agree that these incidents should be reviewed in light of what the current rules/procedures/training are currently and not changing expectations based on results. I want there to be consequences instead of just shrugging shoulders and saying, well, they didn't mean to and they just did the best they could. It's unfortunate, but oh well. When I say consequences I am not always talking about convictions or firings or things like that. Consequences can also mean a rigorous review and changes made. The problems we are seeing are precisely because there have been no consequences of any kind. I'm not looking to scape-goat, I am looking for ways to solve a huge problem.

And I missed the detail that he was reported showing his gun. I'm wondering why they didn't have back-up in that situation, or why the officer sounded so surprised that they found a gun on him when he was down on the ground.

[BloodRider]

1 hour ago, Harakiri said:

They are trained to handle situations like this. There were two of them, and they both looked just as big as he was and in better shape.

You keep saying he was reaching for a firearm. Yet the other video that was much closer shows his hands never once reaching for a gun. Just because cops say he is reaching for a gun does not mean he is reaching for a gun. 

The dead person is always reaching for a gun.  That's why you kill them.  Duh.

[Bold Barry Whitebeard]

2 hours ago, MerenthaClone said:

And yet you and other apologists will bend over backwards to say that its the victims' fault for not complying immediately with contradictory instructions yelled suddenly by men pointing guns in the victims' faces.  Weird how you're willing to extend the benefit of the doubt to the people trained explicitly to be calm in a fight and not the civilians who have had no practice with that situation whatsoever.  

I've never expressed that, so stop turning me into your strawman argument.

1 hour ago, Gertrude said:

I thought that was what I was criticizing. I also agree that these incidents should be reviewed in light of what the current rules/procedures/training are currently and not changing expectations based on results. I want there to be consequences instead of just shrugging shoulders and saying, well, they didn't mean to and they just did the best they could. It's unfortunate, but oh well. When I say consequences I am not always talking about convictions or firings or things like that. Consequences can also mean a rigorous review and changes made. The problems we are seeing are precisely because there have been no consequences of any kind. I'm not looking to scape-goat, I am looking for ways to solve a huge problem.

And I missed the detail that he was reported showing his gun. I'm wondering why they didn't have back-up in that situation, or why the officer sounded so surprised that they found a gun on him when he was down on the ground.

When you say "consequences" it sounds like you want to punish the officers for doing what they were trained to do.  If you want to change the way police are trained, that is another matter entirely.

2 hours ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

What nuance? The police had him pinned, face-down, on the ground.

Alton Sterling wasn't a paragon of a human being. Many news sources have acknowledged this. It doesn't matter.

He was on his back, not face down.  And he wasn't exactly pinned either since he had freedom to use both his legs and arms.

 

[KingintheNorth4]

As a young black male, I've gone through a litany of emotions in the past couple days since the shootings of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile. I've felt afraid, furious, sad, fatigued, and hopeless. It always seems like the same process, the same cycle with these incidents:

1. The officer(s) are put on administrative leave.

2. Media digs up background info on the victim with comments such as "See! He was no angel or saint!"

3. Trial (if the officer(s) involved are actually charged and indicted, which dosen't happen.)

4. Said officer(s) are found not guilty.

5. The next incident occurs.

For decades and more, there's always been tension and distrust between police and the black community, hell, my father remembers when cops would march through black neighborhoods in waves, beating any anybody they came across. Now, it really feels like tensions are reaching a boiling point in this country. What's it going to take to fully achieve justice and equality?

[James Arryn]

I'll say this much: I do think the racism is institutional and, to a degree, 'trained into them'.

I don't think putting their lives ahead of other lives is, mostly. I think that's human nature for a lot of people, most probably. I just think that it's something that is supposed to be trained out of them, else why are they there? As mentioned, I think this idea that 'police lives matter more' or w/e  being an explicit thing is dangerous and counter-productive to the demands of their job, but i don't think it's the source of the problem. 

[Bold Barry Whitebeard]

2 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

I'll say this much: I do think the racism is institutional and, to a degree, 'trained into them'.

I don't think putting their lives ahead of other lives is, mostly. I think that's human nature for a lot of people, most probably. I just think that it's something that is supposed to be trained out of them, else why are they there? As mentioned, I think this idea that 'police lives matter more' or w/e  being an explicit thing is dangerous and counter-productive to the demands of their job, but i don't think it's the source of the problem. 

It's not supposed to be trained out of them, on the contrary, they're explicitly trained to put their lives ahead of civilians.

That's one of the reasons that pro-gun people want weapons for self-defense; it's not the job of the police to protect you.  It's the police's job to avenge you.  The courts have ruled again and again that the police are not responsible for our safety.

[James Arryn]

2 minutes ago, Bold Barry Whitebeard said:

It's not supposed to be trained out of them, on the contrary, they're explicitly trained to put their lives ahead of civilians.

That's one of the reasons that pro-gun people want weapons for self-defense; it's not the job of the police to protect you.  It's the police's job to avenge you.  The courts have ruled again and again that the police are not responsible for our safety.

I'm trying very hard to resist the old argument about the irony of choosing significantly higher peril (statistically and logically) in pursuit of safety, because other than that bit I think you made a valid point here. I suppose that's true, and I was looking at it a bit wrong.

[peterbound]

3 hours ago, Gertrude said:

 

And I missed the detail that he was reported showing his gun. I'm wondering why they didn't have back-up in that situation, or why the officer sounded so surprised that they found a gun on him when he was down on the ground.

Pretty sure the second officer /was/ the backup.  It's neat to live in a place with the resources to respond en masse to a back up call, but typically that's what larger cities get (if they get anything at all) with one person units.  

[peterbound]

3 hours ago, Harakiri said:

They are trained to handle situations like this. There were two of them, and they both looked just as big as he was and in better shape.

You keep saying he was reaching for a firearm. Yet the other video that was much closer shows his hands never once reaching for a gun. Just because cops say he is reaching for a gun does not mean he is reaching for a gun. 

 

You're right, they are trained for this, and they did exactly what their training (and past experience) taught them to do.  They attempted to restrain, then when threatened with deadly force (by an individual with a fire arms conviction) they responded in kind. And you keep saying he wasn't reaching for a gun, yet why were they pinning his hands down?  Probably because he was reaching for a gun. That can only last for so long with no outside restraints (chemical or physical) before he can get what he wants.  

 

Lets try it if we ever meet up.  I'm about 6'1 and 225lbs, smaller than Brown I think.  Try holding my hands down (hell, I'll give you another person as well) and keep me from getting in my pocket for 2-5 mins.  Well even film it so we can see how violent it looks, even though you're only trying to fight for you life/restrain me.  You'll have a tough time doing it, and I'll get to my pocket. 

[Ice Queen]

4 minutes ago, peterbound said:

Pretty sure the second officer /was/ the backup.  It's neat to live in a place with the resources to respond en masse to a back up call, but typically that's what larger cities get (if they get anything at all) with one person units.  

I once saw a cop pull over a (white) teenage girl...the next thing you know, five cops were on the scene as "backup", but let's call it what it was. Intimidation. 

[peterbound]

3 hours ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

What nuance? The police had him pinned, face-down, on the ground.

Alton Sterling wasn't a paragon of a human being. Many news sources have acknowledged this. It doesn't matter.

It /does/ matter.  You think a police is going to approach people with an extensive (and dangerous) criminal background the same way they would you are me?

[peterbound]

Just now, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

I once saw a cop pull over a (white) teenage girl...the next thing you know, five cops were on the scene as "backup", but let's call it what it was. Intimidation. 

Was she cute?  I think they do that shit sometimes.  It's not right, but they get bored. 

[Ice Queen]

Just now, peterbound said:

Was she cute?  I think they do that shit sometimes.  It's not right, but they get bored. 

That's not even funny. It's still intimidation. They're supposed to be adults and professionals, not teenage boys with guns. 

A teenage girl should have to worry about being raped by a bunch of hard up cops. 

 

[peterbound]

3 minutes ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

That's not even funny. It's still intimidation. They're supposed to be adults and professionals, not teenage boys with guns. 

A teenage girl should have to worry about being raped by a bunch of hard up cops. 

 

Did I say rape?  My god, don't jump to that conclusion.  

 

You're coming to some pretty extreme ends there.  Why would they need to intimidate a teenage girl?  Is this a small town, or a larger city?  What time of day was it?  What were the circumstances surrounding the hold?  Where they waiting on a female police to conduct a search?  Did they need witnesses to assure nothing was going to be said about the arresting/investigating officer? Was there a medical issue?  Did they need to conduct a DUI check?  Was it a missing person?  Was it a runaway?

 

There is a shit ton of details you are leaving out, and let's be honest; you just don't know, so you can come to the conclusion that police are assholes.  Pretty major outcome bias.  You want them to be jerks, so you'll find every way to make them into jerks. 

[Ice Queen]

2 minutes ago, peterbound said:

Did I say rape?  My god, don't jump to that conclusion.  

 

You're coming to some pretty extreme ends there.  Why would they need to intimidate a teenage girl?  Is this a small town, or a larger city?  What time of day was it?  What were the circumstances surrounding the hold?  Where they waiting on a female police to conduct a search?  Did they need witnesses to assure nothing was going to be said about the arresting/investigating officer? Was there a medical issue?  Did they need to conduct a DUI check?  Was it a missing person?  Was it a runaway?

 

There is a shit ton of details you are leaving out, and let's be honest; you just don't know, so you can come to the conclusion that police are assholes.  Pretty major outcome bias.  You want them to be jerks, so you'll find every way to make them into jerks. 

Any woman is going to think rape or assault when five men show up on the scene to harass her. That's just the way that goes. It's too bad you're not sensitive to how vulnerable women feel in these situations. And this was a young girl. How was she supposed to feel? 

Cops get off on that power trip. Intimidating people makes them feel important and feeds their already inflated egos. Doing that to a 16 or 17 year old girl is bullying, pure and simple. 

This girl didn't do anything except maybe go a few miles over the speed limit. Certainly not worth wasting our tax dollars on five cops. It was daylight, by the way.  

That's not an isolated incident, either. Around here, there's always more than one cop for ANY stop. Always. This is the suburbs of a small to medium sized city. 

So, please stop making excuses for the cops. There's no excuse to bully a teenager like that. None at all. 

[peterbound]

Just now, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

Any woman is going to think rape or assault when five men show up on the scene to harass her. That's just the way that goes. It's too bad you're not sensitive to how vulnerable women feel in these situations. And this was a young girl. How was she supposed to feel? 

Cops get off on that power trip. Intimidating people makes them feel important and feeds their already inflated egos. Doing that to a 16 or 17 year old girl is bullying, pure and simple. 

This girl didn't do anything except maybe go a few miles over the speed limit. Certainly not worth wasting our tax dollars on five cops. It was daylight, by the way.  

That's not an isolated incident, either. Around here, there's always more than one cop for ANY stop. Always. This is the suburbs of a small to medium sized city. 

So, please stop making excuses for the cops. There's no excuse to bully a teenager like that. None at all. 

No, they don't.  You think you're going to be rape, don't speak for your entire gender. 

 

Have you ever been a cop?  Don't speak for them either.  

You know nothing of the situation, yet you are speaking like an authority on the subject.  She was speeding.  The cop probably felt like he needed back up to ensure the offender felt safe (not sure how many police gang rapes happen on the side of the road in your part of the world, but they are pretty rare.  What, with all the witness around and all) and that the police officer wasn't accused of any mischief by a teenage girl (we will always have a second party ride in the medic unit if there is an underage girl with them.  Just to avoid this sort of thing).  It's great you are able to have that many police respond to an incident, this is a good thing.  The police feel less threaten, and therefore will act more rational, and you are safer due to their numbers.  You should feel better about that, not worse. 

 

Please stop making excuses for a teenager breaking the law, there's no excuse for speeding (and probably texting... hell, you're making stuff up, so I will too).  None at all.