Author Topic: Ferguson  (Read 22917 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 20280
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #280 on: December 22, 2014, 11:49:33 AM »
I'm confused. Did I call all cops racist assholes somewhere? Major overhauls? Where did I suggest such a thing. My problem is with the union and cops everywhere blaming this on the mayor and Holder. By extension, I think the us vs the world mentality that [I think] we both agree exists offers up next to no room for criticism that isn't automatically interpreted as cop bashing.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 19897
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #281 on: December 22, 2014, 12:00:35 PM »
@Stadler

Did you see the video of the cops in the hospital?

Offline Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 19897
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #282 on: December 22, 2014, 02:47:54 PM »
Call me a nark or whatever, but if I saw a status like that come across my news feed, I'd be calling the police immediately.

So would you have to arrest all the protesters chanting for the deaths of cops?

Did I say anything about arrests? I don't get your question, but I'll answer it. No, I wouldn't arrest the protesters. Wishing for something and and blatantly saying you're going to do something are two different things. I wish death upon Mitch McConnell and Pat Robertson in comment sections all the time. I'll admit that I'd be thrilled if either one of them died of a stroke tonight. However, that's nowhere near the level of severity of saying something like "I'm going down to DC and putting a round in McConnell's face". Saying "I wish Obama's plane would crash" and "I put a bomb on Obama's plane" are two completely different things. I don't understand your comparison.


Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12173
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #283 on: December 22, 2014, 03:07:32 PM »
@Stadler

Did you see the video of the cops in the hospital?

I did not.  I confess to not even knowing to what you refer. 

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12173
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #284 on: December 22, 2014, 03:11:53 PM »
I wish death upon Mitch McConnell and Pat Robertson in comment sections all the time.

Honestly, that's fucking sick.   Because, what, they have ideas that you disagree with? 

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 20280
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #285 on: December 22, 2014, 03:19:14 PM »
Yeah, as spiteful as I am, I don't even wish death on Cheney (although I'll probably crack a nice smile when the old bastard finally snuffs it). While I get that (at least in Mitch's case) he's in a position of power and therefore continues to fuck things up for us all everyday he continues to suck air, I'd rather just see him retire than actually croak.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12173
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #286 on: December 22, 2014, 03:23:35 PM »
I'm confused. Did I call all cops racist assholes somewhere? Major overhauls? Where did I suggest such a thing. My problem is with the union and cops everywhere blaming this on the mayor and Holder. By extension, I think the us vs the world mentality that [I think] we both agree exists offers up next to no room for criticism that isn't automatically interpreted as cop bashing.

I don't include "fair criticism" in this.  You want "fair criticism", then let's talk about that female cop who stepped up to do the right thing, took a shot to the jaw, AND lost her career (and pension) for it.   That's fair criticism.   Perhaps I got careless with my terminology to make a point, but the essence is simple:  there is debate in the Brown case.  There is debate in the Garner case.  In both instances, there was an event to which multiple parties contributed that led, ultimately, to the death of one of the actors.    Whether it is 1%/99%, or 99%/1% or somewhere in between, the actors involved have some culpability.    This case is 0%/100%.  Those cops didn't confront the suspect.  They didn't use excessive force on him.  They did nothing except BE.   He sought them out and assassinated them in cold blood.   

Events like these - where the person is a target not for what he did, not for what he said, not for who he hit, but just for BEING - is exactly why it is appropriate to be in an "us versus them" mentality.    What else could it be?  At least with Brown versus Wilson it was "Him versus him"; it was personal.  There's nothing else here it can be but "us versus them".   Surely you see that. 

(And el Barto, I'll say again that I recognize I was not as careful as I could have been with my words, and I didn't mean to say that you said "all cops are racist assholes".  But many others have, and I used your post and your idea as a springboard to make a point.)

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 20280
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #287 on: December 22, 2014, 03:50:26 PM »
I don't include "fair criticism" in this.  You want "fair criticism", then let's talk about that female cop who stepped up to do the right thing, took a shot to the jaw, AND lost her career (and pension) for it.   That's fair criticism.   Perhaps I got careless with my terminology to make a point, but the essence is simple:  there is debate in the Brown case.  There is debate in the Garner case.  In both instances, there was an event to which multiple parties contributed that led, ultimately, to the death of one of the actors.    Whether it is 1%/99%, or 99%/1% or somewhere in between, the actors involved have some culpability.    This case is 0%/100%.  Those cops didn't confront the suspect.  They didn't use excessive force on him.  They did nothing except BE.   He sought them out and assassinated them in cold blood.   
I'm right there with you, and while I shouldn't have to explain it, I'm perfectly happy the guy who did it offed himself (he did, didn't he?). I find ambushing two people for no reason inexcusable and a far cry from the instances that contributed to him being pissed off in the first place.

Quote
Events like these - where the person is a target not for what he did, not for what he said, not for who he hit, but just for BEING - is exactly why it is appropriate to be in an "us versus them" mentality.    What else could it be?  At least with Brown versus Wilson it was "Him versus him"; it was personal.  There's nothing else here it can be but "us versus them".   Surely you see that. 
Now here's where things get interesting. I think you're logic is flawed here. These guys were killed because they were cops, but everybody is killed for one reason or another, quite often because they belong to a class. You think people don't get killed because they're black, or white, or because they have long, straight black hair parted in the middle? I'd go onto surmise that very few cops are killed specifically because they're cops; this asshole was an exception. This is important because while the reasoning for the us against them mentality tends to be that they more often find themselves engaged with bad people, that doesn't apply here. They weren't engaged at all. They were just part of a class that some random fucktard was angry at. The people they encounter regularly aren't out to kill them; those are highly exceptional. Also highly exceptional are the people who would kill you because you are white (presumably), a lawyer, or have long, straight black hair parted in the middle.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 6679
  • Gender: Male
  • I'M CAPTAIN KIRK!!!!!!!!!!!
    • The ANABASIS
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #288 on: December 22, 2014, 04:25:04 PM »
I'm certainly sympathetic to a couple of cops killed senselessly. At the same time the fact that cops everywhere want to blame this on Holder and de Blasio only reinforces my resentment towards cops. A shiny silver badge doesn't earn you blind support or immunity from criticism.

Boy, that didn't take long.  Two posts to turn it back around.

A couple bad cops act, and it's okay to tar and feather all police as racist assholes, call for major overhauls of almost every police protocol involving suspect interactions, and resent the entire class, but two police are assassinated in cold blood based not even on an altercation that could be analyzed to give rise to some dispute but merely because of the badge on their uniform, and somehow, the resentment on cops is greater?    Jesus. 


Strawman much?


Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 27279
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #289 on: December 22, 2014, 05:44:56 PM »
I'm certainly sympathetic to a couple of cops killed senselessly. At the same time the fact that cops everywhere want to blame this on Holder and de Blasio only reinforces my resentment towards cops. A shiny silver badge doesn't earn you blind support or immunity from criticism.

I agree, but considering how much cops in general have been demonized over the last few months, with protesters often chanting for the death of cops, combined with "leaders' like de Blasio not having their back at all, I can't blame them for being pissed off when two of their own are killed simply because they were cops.  The way so many have been riled up the last few months, something like that was bound to happen unfortunately.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 20280
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #290 on: December 22, 2014, 07:13:59 PM »
Quote
LA Police Commission Wants Public Opinion On How Body Cameras Should Be Used
1. When should officers turn the camera on and under what circumstances should they turn them off?
2. Are there instances or locations where you believe recordings should not take place?
3. How should the LAPD protect the privacy of those individuals who are recorded on video?
4. Do you believe officers should be able to view the video prior to writing the necessary reports?
5. Do you believe that department supervisors should regularly review the video captured to ascertain opportunities for improved training?
Wow.  Everything that seems to be grabbing the headlines related to Brown/Gardner/Liu/Ramos, has been, IMO, unhelpful.  It is nice to see some smaller headlines having discussion that is just slightly deeper than us v. them.

My thoughts on the survey (could change)
1.  The cams shouldn't be on the entire shift.  The cameras should be turned on at call acceptance, or if it is a spontaneous event, as soon as possible.    An officer not turning their camera on during that time should be written up.  If it can somehow be tied into dispatch, that might be even better.
2.  When police are not in the process of answering a call or in response mode, the camera should be off.  Once those conditions are met, the camera should be on continuously until the event is completed.  It shouldn't be released to the public until after a conviction/acquittal however.  And public release should be minimal.
3.  Good question.  It shouldn't go public until #2, and at that point those that were never charged should be disguised until they give permission.
4.  No. For the same reason #2 shouldn't allow non-officers a chance to construct their testimony by watching the video.
5.  Absolutely not.  Pandora's Box.

Thoughts?
On should be the default. Cops have to whiz, just like everybody else, so give them an off button. Same for when it's Egg Mc'Muffin time. It'll be pretty easy to determine if a cop is abusing the off button when file sizes and duration of content aren't consistent. As long as they're keeping it on the majority of the time it'll be effective. If it gets switched off after an encounter starts, then you've got trouble, but the truth is cops know they'll benefit them far more than Joe Citizen. They'll play nice and it'll be easy to tell when they don't.

As for monitoring them, there are plenty of options. Ranging from the NTSB model to the current dash-cam model. I guess I'd probably go with something along the NTSB lines where access is controlled by an impartial panel. If there's need for the footage of a specific incident, both sides get it. Footage remains confidential until after the matter is closed, at which point it can be released to the public. If one party objects to the release of the footage then it's arbitration time.

And for reasons I brought up a couple of months ago, Johnny's version of events should be laid out up front. This Dallas model where he gets 3 days to review all evidence before filing a report after UOF engagements is bullshit.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 19897
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #291 on: December 23, 2014, 06:40:17 AM »
I wish death upon Mitch McConnell and Pat Robertson in comment sections all the time.  I'll admit that I'd be thrilled if either one of them died of a stroke tonight
Really?

Quote
However, that's nowhere near the level of severity of saying something like "I'm going down to DC and putting a round in McConnell's face".
I didn't realize this killer called out the two cops' names before he killed them.

Yes, really. He didn't call them out by name, but he said "I'm going to put wings on two pigs". That'd be akin to me saying "I'm going down to DC to pop a politician". The threat is just as valid.

I wish death upon Mitch McConnell and Pat Robertson in comment sections all the time.

Honestly, that's fucking sick.   Because, what, they have ideas that you disagree with? 

Cool story bro. No. I have no problem with people having different ideas than me. You and I don't seem to agree on a damn thing and I don't want to see you dead. If that was the case, I'd be wishing death upon a third of this country. I see nothing wrong with wanting someone to die. I wouldn't want to see them brutally slaughtered or tortured in any way, but if they passed away in there sleep, I'd think to myself "finally". My problem is not that they have different opinions than me. My problem is that their actions are a cancer to the human species. Mitch McConnell has does as much damage to this planet as a politician can do. He's a threat to my decedents' well being and health. He's contributed to the demise and way of life of tens of millions, all so he can line his wallet as well as those of the rich fucks that are jerking him through his pocket.

Did you not feel the slightest bit of comfort knowing that Bin Laden died? Were Jews out of line to want to see Hitler killed? And before you accuse me of saying McConnell is equivalent to Hitler, I'm not. It was acceptable to want someone at those times and in those situations dead. Where is the line drawn? 
« Last Edit: December 23, 2014, 07:32:01 AM by Chino »

Offline jonnybaxy

  • Step after step We try controlling our fate When we finally start living it's become too late
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 1270
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #292 on: December 24, 2014, 05:22:06 AM »
WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON, GET YO SHIT TOGETHER 'MURICA

CITIZENS: DON'T PULL GUNS/ATTACK OFFICERS
POLICE: DON'T SHOOT TO KILL

IT'S NOT THAT HARD!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-30596531

Offline Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 19897
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #293 on: December 24, 2014, 06:34:38 AM »
If I'm a cop, and someone draws a gun on me, I'm shooting to kill. If this dumbass really pulled a gun on this officer, I'm not the slightest but sorry about the outcome.

Offline jonnybaxy

  • Step after step We try controlling our fate When we finally start living it's become too late
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 1270
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #294 on: December 24, 2014, 06:37:52 AM »
If I'm a cop, and someone draws a gun on me, I'm shooting to kill. If this dumbass really pulled a gun on this officer, I'm not the slightest but sorry about the outcome.

Agreed but in the other 2 cases a lethal shot was not needed.

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40294
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #295 on: December 24, 2014, 08:38:56 AM »
If I'm a cop, and someone draws a gun on me, I'm shooting to kill. If this dumbass really pulled a gun on this officer, I'm not the slightest but sorry about the outcome.

Agreed but in the other 2 cases a lethal shot was not needed.
That kind of shows a misunderstanding of how shooting works.

In a situation like that, you don't choose lethal or nonlethal shots.  You shoot to stop, and you aim at the center mass of the person you are shooting at, because it is the biggest target.  If they die, they die.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Online gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 11496
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #296 on: December 24, 2014, 09:18:36 AM »
If I'm a cop, and someone draws a gun on me, I'm shooting to kill. If this dumbass really pulled a gun on this officer, I'm not the slightest but sorry about the outcome.

Agreed but in the other 2 cases a lethal shot was not needed.
That kind of shows a misunderstanding of how shooting works.

In a situation like that, you don't choose lethal or nonlethal shots.  You shoot to stop, and you aim at the center mass of the person you are shooting at, because it is the biggest target.  If they die, they die.

Yep. The idea that you can 'wing' someone or just shoot them in the leg is not accurate. That's why every class or training you'll ever take for shooting a gun teached shoot at center mass.

And, this story shouldn't even be a story. There's surveilance video that supports the account.....there's no question of what happened..... we all know why this has been reported and it's because the officer is white and the thug who pulled a gun on him and pointed it at him was black.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline jonnybaxy

  • Step after step We try controlling our fate When we finally start living it's become too late
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 1270
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #297 on: December 24, 2014, 10:57:00 AM »
If I'm a cop, and someone draws a gun on me, I'm shooting to kill. If this dumbass really pulled a gun on this officer, I'm not the slightest but sorry about the outcome.

Agreed but in the other 2 cases a lethal shot was not needed.
That kind of shows a misunderstanding of how shooting works.

In a situation like that, you don't choose lethal or nonlethal shots.  You shoot to stop, and you aim at the center mass of the person you are shooting at, because it is the biggest target.  If they die, they die.

Yep. The idea that you can 'wing' someone or just shoot them in the leg is not accurate. That's why every class or training you'll ever take for shooting a gun teached shoot at center mass.

And, this story shouldn't even be a story. There's surveilance video that supports the account.....there's no question of what happened..... we all know why this has been reported and it's because the officer is white and the thug who pulled a gun on him and pointed it at him was black.

Correct me if I'm wrong but Police over here in England are taught not to shoot lethally, but the rules are different over there as the 'gun culture' is different...

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3899
  • Shopping Cart Apologist
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #298 on: December 24, 2014, 12:31:21 PM »
Correct me if I'm wrong but Police over here in England are taught not to shoot lethally...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_use_of_firearms_in_the_United_Kingdom#.22Shoot_to_kill.22_policy

You stand corrected.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline orcus116

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 9372
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #299 on: December 24, 2014, 02:33:56 PM »
But that doesn't fit their narrative.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 20280
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #300 on: December 24, 2014, 04:55:09 PM »
Correct me if I'm wrong but Police over here in England are taught not to shoot lethally...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_use_of_firearms_in_the_United_Kingdom#.22Shoot_to_kill.22_policy

You stand corrected.
Yeah, aside from that whole Jean Charles de Menezes unpleasantness, it seems that before hand they were shooting into the torso. Again, shooting to stop which leaves death as a common consequence.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12173
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #301 on: December 29, 2014, 09:48:21 AM »
Quote
LA Police Commission Wants Public Opinion On How Body Cameras Should Be Used
1. When should officers turn the camera on and under what circumstances should they turn them off?
2. Are there instances or locations where you believe recordings should not take place?
3. How should the LAPD protect the privacy of those individuals who are recorded on video?
4. Do you believe officers should be able to view the video prior to writing the necessary reports?
5. Do you believe that department supervisors should regularly review the video captured to ascertain opportunities for improved training?
Wow.  Everything that seems to be grabbing the headlines related to Brown/Gardner/Liu/Ramos, has been, IMO, unhelpful.  It is nice to see some smaller headlines having discussion that is just slightly deeper than us v. them.

My thoughts on the survey (could change)
1.  The cams shouldn't be on the entire shift.  The cameras should be turned on at call acceptance, or if it is a spontaneous event, as soon as possible.    An officer not turning their camera on during that time should be written up.  If it can somehow be tied into dispatch, that might be even better.
2.  When police are not in the process of answering a call or in response mode, the camera should be off.  Once those conditions are met, the camera should be on continuously until the event is completed.  It shouldn't be released to the public until after a conviction/acquittal however.  And public release should be minimal.
3.  Good question.  It shouldn't go public until #2, and at that point those that were never charged should be disguised until they give permission.
4.  No. For the same reason #2 shouldn't allow non-officers a chance to construct their testimony by watching the video.
5.  Absolutely not.  Pandora's Box.

Thoughts?

I have to think this through, but - as pro-cop as I often am - I see problems with the officer wearing the camera having an "on/off" button.  My initial gut response is like Calvin's:  when the dispatch comes in, the DISPATCHER triggers (automatically or manually) the "on" button.  If the cop wants it off for some reason (whizzing, witness won't talk with the camera on, etc.) then he/she has to request manual override from his supervisor or get the dispatcher - via some pre-agreed protocols - to turn it off.   Anything else is going to just ask for criticism and second-guessing.  Hell, if the cable company can have my cable box turned off the moment my payment is not received by the shut off date (not that that has ever happened... ;0) then we have the capability of doing this. 

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12173
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #302 on: December 29, 2014, 10:01:40 AM »

Cool story bro. No. I have no problem with people having different ideas than me. You and I don't seem to agree on a damn thing and I don't want to see you dead. If that was the case, I'd be wishing death upon a third of this country. I see nothing wrong with wanting someone to die. I wouldn't want to see them brutally slaughtered or tortured in any way, but if they passed away in there sleep, I'd think to myself "finally". My problem is not that they have different opinions than me. My problem is that their actions are a cancer to the human species. Mitch McConnell has does as much damage to this planet as a politician can do. He's a threat to my decedents' well being and health. He's contributed to the demise and way of life of tens of millions, all so he can line his wallet as well as those of the rich fucks that are jerking him through his pocket.

But - and this is meant respectfully, and conversationally - nothing you wrote changes my comment.  it's your opinion - a conflict of your ideas, if you will - that Mitch McConnell has done those things.  I don't believe them to be true (at least not in terms of 'extent') and might say the same about Nancy Pelosi, or Barack Obama or any of a number of politicians with whom I disagree ideologically.  In fact, I DO believe that Barack Obama is a cancer, and who has done (or at least set into motion) the amount of damage you ascribe to McConnell. He is ABSOLUTELY a threat to mine and my daughters well-being.   So who's right?  You get to wish your ideological foes dead, and I get to wish mine dead, and other than mine being a felony (threatening the life of a President, etc. etc.) where does that get us?  The ideas still survive, the ideas still get put forth, generation after generation as if they were new...


Quote
Did you not feel the slightest bit of comfort knowing that Bin Laden died? Were Jews out of line to want to see Hitler killed? And before you accuse me of saying McConnell is equivalent to Hitler, I'm not. It was acceptable to want someone at those times and in those situations dead. Where is the line drawn?

Caught, yes.  Died, no.  Honestly, no. Hitler, Bundy, Hussein, Dahmer, no.   Perhaps for different reasons than what this thread is intended to capture, or that your statement is intended to say, but I believe that the living hell is worse than the eternal one.  For all my alleged "right-wingery", I do think it wrong to willingly and with intent take another human's life against their will for any reason (including capital punishment).  I say "against their will" because I haven't totally made up my mind on suicide (assisted or otherwise), and you should know that I didn't always think this way.  In my 20's, I thought capital punishment was an excellent way of "thinning the herd" and potentially reducing the number of "deviants" from the population.  I also exclude self-defense from this, though I recognize that there might be a slight bit of arbitrariness to that position. 

I believe that in some cases, it is probably of benefit to society to have these people analyzed and studied to the extent possible.  I know that in some cases (Ted Bundy comes to mind) that the research is by definition flawed because the subject is not giving honest or in-depth answers, but nonetheless, any information can potentially be good information as our understanding of how the brain works increases.

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3899
  • Shopping Cart Apologist
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #303 on: January 06, 2015, 11:37:14 AM »
And yet MORE instances of the media trying to race bait in what they deem to be similar cases:

Quote
UNION TOWNSHIP, N.J. (AP) A deer hunter in a tree stand fatally shot a black bear that began climbing up the tree toward him after it got within a few feet of him, state wildlife officials said.

http://news.yahoo.com/hunter-deer-stand-kills-bear-began-climbing-tree-203351480.html
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 19897
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #304 on: January 06, 2015, 11:45:24 AM »

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 20280
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #305 on: January 21, 2015, 07:17:11 PM »
Justice Dept. to Recommend No Civil Rights Charges in Ferguson Shooting

This is an Attorney General.
This is your Attorney General wearing a helmet on the short bus.
Any questions?
Yeah. What are you talking about?  :lol
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40294
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #306 on: January 22, 2015, 06:13:33 AM »
Considering the impact the ruling could have, I'm actually glad they took their time and were behind everybody.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40294
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #307 on: January 22, 2015, 07:41:41 AM »
Considering the impact the ruling could have, I'm actually glad they took their time and were behind everybody.
They should have never been involved to begin with.
That's a different argument altogether.  The fact is that they WERE involved, and given that, I'm glad they took their time.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 20280
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #308 on: January 22, 2015, 08:55:47 AM »
That might be the most reckless thing I've seen since the bridge scene in Casualties of War. It'll never happen but I'd seriously consider charges against the driver side cop for some sort of negligence.

Did the cops know that he'd shot troopers in the past? And if I understand correctly he wasn't going for the gun but license/papers in the glove box that also had the gun. While it certainly exasperated the situation it's only a very minor factor in the big picture (particularly since it had already been removed and was in Johnny's custody). And yeah, it cure seemed like he was putting his hands up to me.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 20280
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #309 on: January 22, 2015, 09:39:32 AM »
It'll never happen but I'd seriously consider charges against the driver side cop for some sort of negligence.
You have more of a problem with the driver's side cop?
Driver's side cop had a very oblique angle to the suspect and passenger side cop. Looks like he might have stood as good a chance at hitting his partner as he did the suspect. Appears to me like he tried to widen the angle to provide a safe shot but he didn't get very far and seemed to be falling back towards the straight line when shooting.

As I've said many times before, cops are fucking dangerous when using guns. They're just not good at it.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 20280
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #310 on: January 22, 2015, 10:21:42 AM »
I don't have an overhead view so I'm not going to blast the guy for the angle of the shot. I'm just saying that's something I'd definitely be looking into as from the dashcam angle it seemed rather reckless. Particularly since cops in these sorts of situations tend to not be the mos accurate shooters in the world.

I'm still not comfortable with how it went down and it is hard to say definitively what was going on between the two (either way).  But the fact that the cop was screaming not to move and the guy still pushed his way out of the door ... that could very easily be seen as a threatening move.
I wouldn't see exiting he vehicle as a threatening move in as much as a disobedient one. The guys hands were in plain view of the officer that fired first.

Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 20280
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #311 on: January 22, 2015, 11:22:19 AM »
I don't honestly have a strong enough opinion on the matter to argue with you about it, but I think you're making some very incorrect assumptions. He didn't "whip out" a gun. One was revealed when he went to the glove box. And if you were riding in a car with me would you know what was in the glove box? We don't know if it was his gun or if he had any reason to suspect there was one in there.

And when I saw the video the first thing I thought was that was a submissive gesture on his part. The movement of his hands didn't look aggressive to me at all; only disobedient.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12173
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #312 on: January 22, 2015, 11:45:21 AM »
One, shows the limitations of video as an evidentiary tool (angles and relative locations of actors; blind spots)

Two, shows the bias against cops even when it isn't warranted:
  -  the officer that began shooting was black (so no race motive)
  -  the officer that began shooting KNEW the person in the vehicle (he arrested him about a year ago) and knew of his history
  -  he told the 11 times to show his hands and 6 times to "don't move" and even told him 3 times that if he didn't stop he would be shot.

It should be noted that "negligent" or not, the driver didn't get shot.  By the WHITE cop.  Why?  HE SHOWED HIS HANDS, AND HE DIDN'T MOVE.  AS INSTRUCTED. 

Jeez, I'm not sure what people expect at this point.   

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 20280
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #313 on: January 22, 2015, 11:49:59 AM »
One, shows the limitations of video as an evidentiary tool (angles and relative locations of actors; blind spots)

Two, shows the bias against cops even when it isn't warranted:
  -  the officer that began shooting was black (so no race motive)
  -  the officer that began shooting KNEW the person in the vehicle (he arrested him about a year ago) and knew of his history
  -  he told the 11 times to show his hands and 6 times to "don't move" and even told him 3 times that if he didn't stop he would be shot.

It should be noted that "negligent" or not, the driver didn't get shot.  By the WHITE cop.  Why?  HE SHOWED HIS HANDS, AND HE DIDN'T MOVE.  AS INSTRUCTED. 

Jeez, I'm not sure what people expect at this point.
Just playing devil's advocate here, again I'm not really forming an opinion at the moment, but why does his disobedience matter? The question isn't (or at least shouldn't be) whether the dead guy was an asshole or a complete and utter moron. The question is whether or not he represented an immediate risk to Johnny that necessitated deadly force. I think the guy behaved like both, but I'm not sure he represented that risk.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12173
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ferguson
« Reply #314 on: January 22, 2015, 02:46:27 PM »
One, shows the limitations of video as an evidentiary tool (angles and relative locations of actors; blind spots)

Two, shows the bias against cops even when it isn't warranted:
  -  the officer that began shooting was black (so no race motive)
  -  the officer that began shooting KNEW the person in the vehicle (he arrested him about a year ago) and knew of his history
  -  he told the 11 times to show his hands and 6 times to "don't move" and even told him 3 times that if he didn't stop he would be shot.

It should be noted that "negligent" or not, the driver didn't get shot.  By the WHITE cop.  Why?  HE SHOWED HIS HANDS, AND HE DIDN'T MOVE.  AS INSTRUCTED. 

Jeez, I'm not sure what people expect at this point.
Just playing devil's advocate here, again I'm not really forming an opinion at the moment, but why does his disobedience matter? The question isn't (or at least shouldn't be) whether the dead guy was an asshole or a complete and utter moron. The question is whether or not he represented an immediate risk to Johnny that necessitated deadly force. I think the guy behaved like both, but I'm not sure he represented that risk.

It has nothing to do with "asshole" or "moron", and where I (very respectfully) say, it doesn't matter if you (or I) think he represented that risk, it's whether the cop, in the moment, thought he represented that risk.   Here's where I think some people (not suggesting you) don't connect the dots.    Part of assessing "risk" is evaluating scenarios and what COULD happen.   Part of that risk is the degree of control or predictability of the given situation.   That video is evidence of this.  The one suspect immediately put his hands outside the car and remained still.  NOT SHOT.   The other continued to argue, continued to ignore what was at least initially a fair request to cooperate, and continued to keep the situation vague and unpredictable, escalating the chance that he was going to act in a manner detrimental to a safe ending of that stop.  SHOT. 

Picture yourself standing on the very edge of a 10,000 foot cliff.  Which is lower risk to you:  standing on a concrete pad that extends 5,000 feet down into the cliff (controlled, very predictable) or the normal, weathered rock (uncontrolled, very unpredictable) that occurs on a cliff? 

Seriously, el Barto, this isn't about "asshole" or "moron"; I'm surprised you question why the lack of his cooperation is important (I refuse to use the word 'disobedience').