Jump to content

Reforming police, the Blue Wall of Silence


Ser Scot A Ellison

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

There is nothing in that article to say whether the use of force was justified or not. If he was being attacked by multiple members of the family and genuinely feared for his life then in this case the use of the weapon may have been reasonable.  

In addition only one shot was fired, this isn't same as the overkill you often see when US police go gun crazy. 

Also the fact that you shouldn't be able to get weapons into a court is not the same as you can't. People get bombs on planes. 

 

Oh no.  Nope, no, no way.  Fuck that nonsense.  That's why training should include reaching for a taser or pepper spray or a baton (and all should probably be included with the uniform).  There's no reason for an officer in a court room to go immediately for his gun.  Hell no.  I don't give a fuck if the officer is one of those idiots who tries to argue that someone could hit him and that could kill him.  You don't murder people like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dr. Pepper said:

Oh no.  Nope, no, no way.  Fuck that nonsense.  That's why training should include reaching for a taser or pepper spray or a baton (and all should probably be included with the uniform).  There's no reason for an officer in a court room to go immediately for his gun.  Hell no.  I don't give a fuck if the officer is one of those idiots who tries to argue that someone could hit him and that could kill him.  You don't murder people like that.

None of those would be of any use flat on your back being attacked by multiple assailants. 

 

3 hours ago, dr. thicc president said:

 

Totally, we should blindly accept the account of the family member of the victim

They have no reason to lie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

None of those would be of any use flat on your back being attacked by multiple assailants. 

 

Totally, we should blindly accept the account of the family member of the victim

They have no reason to lie.

BFC,

That is why I couched my statement with "if it went down as described".  We need more information on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

BFC,

That is why I couched my statement with "if it went down as described".  We need more information on this one.

Absolutely. In most cases i dont let my proffesion blind me to the inadequacies of others. However based on current Intel i dont think there is enough information to say unequivocally this was an unjustified shooting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

Yeah, we should blindly accept a cop who murdered a child in a courtroom where they wouldn't have had a gun.  

Cops always gonna stick up for each other.  That blue wall of silence needs to be shattered.

Read all my previous posts in this thread. I have been unfailingly critical of police actions. In this case the current information does not prove anything. But you are welcome to jump on your high horse and assume guilt with an incomplete picture of the facts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

Read all my previous posts in this thread. I have been unfailingly critical of police actions. In this case the current information does not prove anything. But you are welcome to jump on your high horse and assume guilt with an incomplete picture of the facts. 

Oh don't worry, I will.  I don't approve of murderous police.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The deputy grabbed ahold of my sister, and that's when Joey freaked out. And he told the deputy, 'Get your hands off my mom, get your hands off my mom.' Joey didn't jump on his back or nothing, he just touched him on his shoulder. 'Get your hands off my mom.' Well they end up getting into a little struggle, whatever. My mom and my sister was trying to get in to calm Joey down. That's when the deputy ended up getting knocked down."

(The deputy) responded, came in there, and was violently attacked by multiple people," said FOP Vice President Keith Ferrell. "I was with this deputy. He does have injuries that are visible. I'm not a doctor. But it was very clear to me in my experience that he was attacked. And this was a fight for his life at some point. He was assaulted, and obviously at some point, he felt there was a risk for his life and everyone else in that courtroom."

I don't really see that much difference here in the stories.  The family admits that the deputy 'got knocked down'....and that there was a 'little struggle'.  He is going to say the kid tried to get his gun.  Opinions will vary.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

where they wouldn't have had a gun.

The point, though, is if the first account in the news article is true, then the officer is on his back on the ground defending himself from the kid and possibly family members.  If that is the case then the only gun the officer needs to be concerned about is his own.  Worst case, he doesn't have time to go reaching for anything less than deadly force, because if he gets overpowered, knocked out, or otherwise disarmed then that could be the end for him and possibly other people int he courtroom.  He's got a duty to protect his weapon.

8 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

That is why I couched my statement with "if it went down as described".  We need more information on this one.

Indeed.  Footage would be helpful.  So far we have two reports of almost exact opposite circumstances.  Kid on the ground, or the officer.  The grandmother is going to make a hell of a compelling witness if there’s no video.  Though, nothing in her account explained why the officer was sent to the hospital for injuries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The Mance said:

The point, though, is if the first account in the news article is true, then the officer is on his back on the ground defending himself from the kid and possibly family members.  If that is the case then the only gun the officer needs to be concerned about is his own.  Worst case, he doesn't have time to go reaching for anything less than deadly force, because if he gets overpowered, knocked out, or otherwise disarmed then that could be the end for him and possibly other people int he courtroom.  He's got a duty to protect his weapon.

The point is that he's in a place where no one but him has a gun.  Pulling out his own gun risks it being used against him.  There's literally no question at all that a child was murdered and that police need different type of training so that they don't continue to murder people.  

I'm going to bypass the inevitable 'is murder bad' conversation that some of you seem to want to have.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

The point is that he's in a place where no one but him has a gun.  Pulling out his own gun risks it being used against him.  There's literally no question at all that a child was murdered and that police need different type of training so that they don't continue to murder people.  

I'm going to bypass the inevitable 'is murder bad' conversation that some of you seem to want to have.  

There literally is no way that you have used literally correctly in that sentence.

How bad a beating are you expecting this person to take before they defend themselves? Broken ribs? Fractured skull? Beat to death?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

There literally is no way that you have used literally correctly in that sentence.

How bad a beating are you expecting this person to take before they defend themselves? Broken ribs? Fractured skull? Beat to death?  

I'm pretty sure I have used it correctly.  Though I guess I could qualify it by saying that for a decent person, there is literally no question that a child was murdered.  A child is dead.  Are you so far gone in your cop defense that you're not going to deny that?  

Sure, I think all of those options are better than a cop murdering a child.  You're being ridiculous claiming that he could have been beaten to death.  He should have had other options.  Taser, pepper spray, etc.  Murder with a gun shouldn't be the only option available.  But yeah, at the end of the day I think a child's life is worth more than some pigs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

I'm pretty sure I have used it correctly.  Though I guess I could qualify it by saying that for a decent person, there is literally no question that a child was murdered.  A child is dead.  Are you so far gone in your cop defense that you're not going to deny that?  

Sure, I think all of those options are better than a cop murdering a child.  You're being ridiculous claiming that he could have been beaten to death.  He should have had other options.  Taser, pepper spray, etc.  Murder with a gun shouldn't be the only option available.  But yeah, at the end of the day I think a child's life is worth more than some pigs.

Again. Taser and pepper spray are not viable options when you are flat on you back being kicked to fuck. 

Please read my previous posts and decide if I'm mindlessly absolving police of abuses of power or unjust use of force.

I've seen many people being the victims of being beaten to death in my time, you? 

And there is no court in a civilised country in the world would convict for murder, even if the killing wasn't deemed justified. Do you even know what 'murder' means? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, we know courts rarely convict cops of murder.  That's the entire problem.  Do you understand that?  Are you capable?

 

What I'd like to know, if a cop can murder someone for attacking them and claim self defense, then why is a civilian unable to claim self defense when attacked by a cop?  The child was trying to defend his mother from an attack by a pig.  But the child was murdered and the pig is home safe and sound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dr. Pepper said:

Yes, we know courts rarely convict cops of murder.  That's the entire problem.  Do you understand that?  Are you capable?

 

What I'd like to know, if a cop can murder someone for attacking them and claim self defense, then why is a civilian unable to claim self defense when attacked by a cop?  The child was trying to defend his mother from an attack by a pig.  But the child was murdered and the pig is home safe and sound.

You are aware that BFC is not from the US, as such, his perspective toward US police is probably not particularly fraternal.  Further, he has very consistently criticized the actions and training of US police.  All he, I, and others are saying is that we need more information before we can categorically condemn the actions of this officer.  

While the grandmother’s statement is quite compelling a video of what happened would be much more objective.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

You are aware that BFC is not from the US, as such, his perspective toward US police are probably not particularly fraternal.  Further, he has very consistently criticized the actions and training of US police.  All he, I, and others are saying is that we need more information before we can categorically condemn the actions of this officer.  

While the grandmother’s statement is quite compelling a video of what happened would be much more objective.

 

I don't really care where BFC is from.  I don't know who he is.  I am going by opinions he has expressed about this case.  If he claims to be a different person, it's not like I'm a mind reader or am willing to go check his entire posting history.  

Sure, you can claim you need more information.  A child was still murdered.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

I don't really care where BFC is from.  I don't know who he is.  I am going by opinions he has expressed about this case.  If he claims to be a different person, it's not like I'm a mind reader or am willing to go check his entire posting history.  

Sure, you can claim you need more information.  A child was still murdered.  

Yes.  I do think we need more information.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Dr. Pepper said:

Yes, we know courts rarely convict cops of murder.  That's the entire problem.  Do you understand that?  Are you capable?

 

What I'd like to know, if a cop can murder someone for attacking them and claim self defense, then why is a civilian unable to claim self defense when attacked by a cop?  The child was trying to defend his mother from an attack by a pig.  But the child was murdered and the pig is home safe and sound.

My point was that you need a degree of premeditation, or malice aforethought for a murder to be committed, though i'd admit that US law is not something i know a whole lot about. 

To the bolded, non of this is known, why are you so happy to believe the family of the victim in this, each case should be taken on its merits, irregardless of what has gone before. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

My point was that you need a degree of premeditation, or malice aforethought for a murder to be committed, though i'd admit that US law is not something i know a whole lot about. 

To the bolded, non of this is known, why are you so happy to believe the family of the victim in this, each case should be taken on its merits, irregardless of what has gone before. 

Why are you so happy to believe the murderer or his allies?  He shot a child who was unarmed and who was defending his mother from attack.  At this point I have zero reason to not believe eyewitnesses.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...