Alton Sterling shooting.

[Kalbear]

 

Quote

 

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)

 

You're jumping to a lot of conclusions.

There is no indication that they knew this individual had a firearms conviction. They did not know who he was at all. The idea that they knew he was a violent sex offender is completely incorrect. 

There is no indication that they were adequately threatened with deadly force, either. The video indicates that an officer says that he has a gun. The gun was later seen to be getting pulled from his pocket by the officer, which indicates that 'had a gun' means that Alton had the gun on his person, not in his hand or brandishing it or threatening with it. There is no sign that Alton made any threatening gestures with the gun. There is no sign that he even resisted arrest in any meaningful way.

So you are right that IF Alton Sterling was threatening with deadly force, they are justified in using deadly force. (his background is entirely immaterial and hearsay, and is pretty stupid to bring up in this context). That he was threatening anyone is very much not clear, and the evidence we have so far seen leads pretty heavily to that not being the case at all. 

[BloodRider]

25 minutes ago, peterbound said:

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.  

You are really over the top with your apologetics.  

The whole idea that police when they hear "He's got a gun" are trained to shoot the guy face down with two people on top of them is ludicrous.  It can't possibly be the most active threat for them.  Fer fucks sake, if someone yelled about an active shooter I would look the fuck around, not shoot the restrained person.  There is no way, even if Alton were to get to that gun that he could draw it, much less take aim, remove the safety and pull the trigger.  And yet police apologists call it deadly force and justify his slaughter.   

[Ice Queen]

5 minutes ago, peterbound said:

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. 

1) You're not a cop either. I have cops and career military in my family so I know how that goes. I hope you don't think cops are all sweetness and light, do you? 

2) This happened before texting was ever invented, so that blows your hypothesis out of the water. She wasn't going 100 miles over the speed limit, either. 

3) Don't you dare accuse me of making stuff up. Because I'm not. This isn't the boonies and traffic stops are very common. Whether or not they're justified is another story. Our cops don't have anything better to do than bully the locals for the smallest infraction. 

4) Clearly you've never been a teenage girl, so don't presume to think you know anything about how they feel in certain situations. 

[peterbound]

2 minutes ago, BloodRider said:

You are really over the top with your apologetics.  

The whole idea that police when they hear "He's got a gun" are trained to shoot the guy face down with two people on top of them is ludicrous.  It can't possibly be the most active threat for them.  Fer fucks sake, if someone yelled about an active shooter I would look the fuck around, not shoot the restrained person.  There is no way, even if Alton were to get to that gun that he could draw it, much less take aim, remove the safety and pull the trigger.  And yet police apologists call it deadly force and justify his slaughter.   

Ok?  Not sure where you are going with this.  If i'm on the ground, and I have a gun, and you have a gun, and you reach for your gun (or I even suspect your are trying to reach for your gun), i'm going to shoot you with my gun.  

 

Seems simple 

[peterbound]

5 minutes ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

1) You're not a cop either. I have cops and career military in my family so I know how that goes. I hope you don't think cops are all sweetness and light, do you? 

2) This happened before texting was ever invented, so that blows your hypothesis out of the water. She wasn't going 100 miles over the speed limit, either. 

3) Don't you dare accuse me of making stuff up. Because I'm not. This isn't the boonies. 

4) Clearly you've never been a teenage girl, so don't presume to think you know anything about how they feel in certain situations. 

1. I work with cops every day of my life, and am career military, so I know how that goes, and while they aren't sweethearts, most of them are just dudes/dudettes trying to do their jobs and go home to their families.  Or genuinely want to help/serve the public at large. 

 

2.  Cool?  She was still speeding.  Breaking the law.  You live in upper middle class suburbia, you're going to get a bunch of cops (also, how the hell are you trying to make something relevant that happened that long ago?)

 

3.  You are making stuff up. 

 

4. No, I've got a wife, and 4 sisters... so if you're going to use the logic of having cops in your family as you being an expert on it, i'm going to use that. See how that works?

[peterbound]

9 minutes ago, Dickwad Poster #3784 said:

 

You're jumping to a lot of conclusions.

There is no indication that they knew this individual had a firearms conviction. They did not know who he was at all. The idea that they knew he was a violent sex offender is completely incorrect. 

There is no indication that they were adequately threatened with deadly force, either. The video indicates that an officer says that he has a gun. The gun was later seen to be getting pulled from his pocket by the officer, which indicates that 'had a gun' means that Alton had the gun on his person, not in his hand or brandishing it or threatening with it. There is no sign that Alton made any threatening gestures with the gun. There is no sign that he even resisted arrest in any meaningful way.

So you are right that IF Alton Sterling was threatening with deadly force, they are justified in using deadly force. (his background is entirely immaterial and hearsay, and is pretty stupid to bring up in this context). That he was threatening anyone is very much not clear, and the evidence we have so far seen leads pretty heavily to that not being the case at all. 

I can see your side of that.  Thanks for the thoughtful reply. 

 

I'm not sure if they had his name or not, or if he was a 'frequent flyer' in the area, and they knew his background.  Most cops/first responders do. 

[Kalbear]

4 minutes ago, peterbound said:

Ok?  Not sure where you are going with this.  If i'm on the ground, and I have a gun, and you have a gun, and you reach for your gun (or I even suspect your are trying to reach for your gun), i'm going to shoot you with my gun.  

 

Seems simple 

It also appears to not be the actual facts of what occurred. So yeah, your random hypothetical is reasonably simple. It also isn't what happened to Alton Sterling.

[peterbound]

1 minute ago, Dickwad Poster #3784 said:

It also appears to not be the actual facts of what occurred. So yeah, your random hypothetical is reasonably simple. It also isn't what happened to Alton Sterling.

I think the 'facts' are being swayed heavily by some strong ass outcome bias.  What /I/ see is a large black man struggling with two police and attempting to break their holds.  I also see a gun discarded.  That leads me to a different outcome than you. 

[Kalbear]

Just now, peterbound said:

I can see your side of that.  Thanks for the thoughtful reply. 

I'm not sure if they had his name or not, or if he was a 'frequent flyer' in the area, and they knew his background.  Most cops/first responders do. 

They did not know his background. There is no indication that they did so. He did not get a lot of calls in that area about him per the convenience store clerk, who stated that he was not a problem and not causing any problems. Do you have any data indicating that they knew anything about him? The timeline has them executing him, and then they retrieve his ID and look him up and call it in. 

Quote

I think the 'facts' are being swayed heavily by some strong ass outcome bias.  What /I/ see is a large black man struggling with two police and attempting to break their holds.  I also see a gun discarded.  That leads me to a different outcome than you. 

I didn't see him struggle. At all. And there is absolutely no sign that he is reaching for his gun. 

The fact is that he had a gun. We know this to be the case. What we do not clearly know is whether or not he was actually reaching for it.

Where you and I differ is that I do not believe that if there are two cops on me and I have a gun and I move in any way that I should be killed. If that is the training of the police (which from what I've read and understood from other police is NOT the case) then the training is hugely flawed. 

And this doesn't even get into the case of Philando Castile. 

[peterbound]

4 minutes ago, Dickwad Poster #3784 said:

 

And this doesn't even get into the case of Philando Castile. 

We aren't talking about Castile, though, are we?

 

And I see two cops desperately trying to hold someone down (and he's not moving because they are almost succeeding), and probably getting tired as all fuck.  

[Kalbear]

And @peterbound - tell me what the proper police procedure is in this video? I'd love to hear your take on it.

 

[Kalbear]

Just now, peterbound said:

We aren't talking about Castile, though, are we?

We're talking about hypothetical situations involving imaginary people. I thought you might want to talk about actual people instead of ones you have made up. My bad.

[peterbound]

2 minutes ago, Dickwad Poster #3784 said:

We're talking about hypothetical situations involving imaginary people. I thought you might want to talk about actual people instead of ones you have made up. My bad.

you got me before the edit.  And i'm not making it up, although I kind of feel the same way about how you are viewing it.  Having never been in a situation where you've had to restrain someone like that, or a fight for you life, you are making large assumptions about what they can and can't do, and how the situation should have ended up.  I guess having been on scenes where PD and Fire are actually trying to control someone(and I'm not a small man) and failing spectacularly, I know that not everything is as it appears in that video. 

[Kalbear]

5 minutes ago, peterbound said:

  Having never been in a situation where you've had to restrain someone like that, or a fight for you life, you are making large assumptions about what they can and can't do, and how the situation should have ended up.

You are assuming my life experiences are something. You are also assuming that your life experiences somehow trump mine. They do not. Furthermore, when others tell you what their life experiences are, you assume for no good reason that yours are better. 

This is not arguing in good faith at all. 

5 minutes ago, peterbound said:

 I guess having been on scenes where PD and Fire are actually trying to control someone(and I'm not a small man) and failing spectacularly, I know that not everything is as it appears in that video. 

No, you have experience where a video isn't illustrative of everything. You don't know anything, because you were not there. You are willing to give the police the benefit of the doubt - the same police who have over 100 complaints registered against them, and specifically 5 citations for excessive use of force. You are willing to blame Alton Sterling and assume that the police thought him to have a history of violence, despite there being zero evidence that they knew his name or who he was and ample evidence that they had no idea who he was. 

[peterbound]

3 minutes ago, Dickwad Poster #3784 said:

You are assuming my life experiences are something. You are also assuming that your life experiences somehow trump mine. They do not. Furthermore, when others tell you what their life experiences are, you assume for no good reason that yours are better. 

This is not arguing in good faith at all. 

No, you have experience where a video isn't illustrative of everything. You don't know anything, because you were not there. You are willing to give the police the benefit of the doubt - the same police who have over 100 complaints registered against them, and specifically 5 citations for excessive use of force. You are willing to blame Alton Sterling and assume that the police thought him to have a history of violence, despite there being zero evidence that they knew his name or who he was and ample evidence that they had no idea who he was. 

So the police's past can be used against them to sway an argument, but Brown's can't?  A child rapist who was convicted of a fire arms violation?  

 

And as far as I know, about life experiences, they do trump yours.   You have yet to prove me otherwise.  I work with this type of shit on a daily basis, do you?  I deal with this stuff on a daily basis, do you?  I've struggled in similar situations, have you?  I work with cops on a daily basis, do you?  I trying with PD on a monthly basis (large area search, active shooter, hand to hand crap) do you?  That's the stuff I have to go on, so yes, it sways my bias.  I'm more sympathetic to that side of the law enforcement curve. 

[Kalbear]

1 minute ago, peterbound said:

So the police's past can be used against them to sway an argument, but Brown's can't?  A child rapist who was convicted of a fire arms violation?  

It certainly should bear some weight if his past does, shouldn't it?

More importantly, the fact that the victim's past bears weight with you shouldn't matter, because the police didn't have that information. Whereas the police's background with being cited for excessive use of force should matter, because it makes it more likely that they were going to use excessive force. 

Put it another way: why should the victim's criminal background matter in this case at all if the police didn't have any knowledge of it? Again, that is a fact that isn't up for debate; they did not know who Alton Sterling was, they called it in after they got his ID, and from reports did not know his name whatsoever. 

1 minute ago, peterbound said:

And as far as I know, about life experiences, they do trump yours.   You have yet to prove me otherwise.  I work with this type of shit on a daily basis, do you?  I deal with this stuff on a daily basis, do you?  I've struggled in similar situations, have you?  I work with cops on a daily basis, do you?  I trying with PD on a monthly basis (large area search, active shooter, hand to hand crap) do you?  That's the stuff I have to go on, so yes, it sways my bias.  I'm more sympathetic to that side of the law enforcement curve. 

Perhaps you should ask first before assuming anything?

[peterbound]

3 minutes ago, Dickwad Poster #3784 said:

It certainly should bear some weight if his past does, shouldn't it?

More importantly, the fact that the victim's past bears weight with you shouldn't matter, because the police didn't have that information. Whereas the police's background with being cited for excessive use of force should matter, because it makes it more likely that they were going to use excessive force. 

Put it another way: why should the victim's criminal background matter in this case at all if the police didn't have any knowledge of it? Again, that is a fact that isn't up for debate; they did not know who Alton Sterling was, they called it in after they got his ID, and from reports did not know his name whatsoever. 

Perhaps you should ask first before assuming anything?

Kal, I've been here long enough to at least form some impression of you, and it doesn't strike me as public servant/prior military/cop knowledge.  Sorry man, but that's not the vibe I get.  Like I said, prove me wrong.  I've been wrong at least 5 times today (more if you ask my wife), another one couldn't hurt. 

 

And i'm saying we are assuming that they /didn't/ know brown, and that he wasn't a common problem.  We are all jumping to some big conclusions, and I'd like to see how the facts pan out in the next few days.  Nothing at this point will exonerate the PD with this crowd though, so my counter arguments will be in vain.  

 

I feel bad for everyone involved.  This idea that PD loves going around shooting black folks is absurd, and that they feel no remorse is even more ludicrous (and not statistically supported). Not sure how to change the public perception.  Focus on /all/ the shootings by PD?  White folks included? Be better at reporting statistics rather than emotion?  Focus on the great things Police do to protect us against anarchy?  Not sure.  If you've got some ideas, I'd seriously love to hear them.. although disarming the police/public can't be one of them... that shit ain't happening. 

[BloodRider]

49 minutes ago, peterbound said:

I think the 'facts' are being swayed heavily by some strong ass outcome bias.  What /I/ see is a large black man struggling with two police and attempting to break their holds.  I also see a gun discarded.  That leads me to a different outcome than you. 

Ah.  I think I see some strong ass bias on why people think he deserved to be killed.

[Swordfish]

5 minutes ago, peterbound said:

Kal, I've been here long enough to at least form some impression of you, and it doesn't strike me as public servant/prior military/cop knowledge.  Sorry man, but that's not the vibe I get.  Like I said, prove me wrong.  I've been wrong at least 5 times today (more if you ask my wife), another one couldn't hurt. 

 

And i'm saying we are assuming that they /didn't/ know brown, and that he wasn't a common problem.  We are all jumping to some big conclusions, and I'd like to see how the facts pan out in the next few days.  Nothing at this point will exonerate the PD with this crowd though, so my counter arguments will be in vain.  

 

I feel bad for everyone involved.  This idea that PD loves going around shooting black folks is absurd, and that they feel no remorse is even more ludicrous (and not statistically supported). Not sure how to change the public perception.  Focus on /all/ the shootings by PD?  White folks included? Be better at reporting statistics rather than emotion?  Focus on the great things Police do to protect us against anarchy?  Not sure.  If you've got some ideas, I'd seriously love to hear them.. although disarming the police/public can't be one of them... that shit ain't happening. 

End the war on drugs.  

Reform the justice system to stop using prisons as criminal college....

Make encounters like this less likely, we will see these incidents going down.

 

 

 

[all swedes are racist]

why do you keep calling him Brown? That's three times I've counted, kinda makes it seem deliberate