Another cop "fears for his life" - Officer Michael Slager Shooting Unarmed Black Man In The Back

[Frikki]

Congratulations! It looks like your side finally has what it has been desperately seeking since Michael Brown - a bad shoot of a black man by a police officer.
Otoh, I doubt it will make much difference to the hardcore activists as they are still talking about the "murder of Michael Brown" despite the facts.

All that said, it was incredibly (and as it turns out terminally) stupid of Scott to flee and engage in a scuffle with the officer reportedly knocking his taser out from his hands. Especially knowing how trigger-happy US cops tend to be.

Our side? Do you mean non racists that don´t have a problem with women and think it is bad when people are shot? Well I´m ok with being on that side.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I remember "our side" whining about a white girl shot by cops. I didn't realize race was that important. Thought the whole issue of people being gunned down needlessly by cops was something that most normal people could agree on.

 

[Frikki]

And the cop knows this for sure? He certainly knows the taser has been taken from him. He certainly can't see it.



While it can't be fired again as a taser they have a secondary mode as a stun gun that still does work.

Also note that the cop never tells the retreating Scott to stop. Simply starts shooting him in the back.

This proves nothing at all. A warning about shooting a fleeing felon is normal. There's no such requirement when one is shooting because of the threat--warnings take time, something you often don't have in a threatening situation.

Loren, there was not threat.

Stop your bullshit. There was a black man within a thousand yards, that is a clear and present danger!!!! He might have had Skittles!!!!!

- - - Updated - - -

I remember "our side" whining about a white girl shot by cops. I didn't realize race was that important. Thought the whole issue of people being gunned down needlessly by cops was something that most normal people could agree on.

Shut your mouth pinko!

 

[braces_for_impact]

Ya, if you shoot someone in the back while he's running away from you then you committed murder. Full stop. There really aren't any extenuating circumstances which change that. It doesn't matter what kind of scuffle happened beforehand.

What if he was running to get his bazooka?! Huh?! HUH?!

 

[Funkytrip]

Whenever I see vids like this pop up, I am so utterly thankful I live in the Netherlands where cops are still normal human beings and not in a first-world-but-secretly-a-third-world country like the US where unarmed people who are running away get shot 8 times in the back. Heck, even if there had been a fight beforehand our normal human being dutch cops would not have been allowed to shoot as long as they are not in mortal danger. You are not in mortal danger from a man running away slugglishly. Period.

 

[RavenSky]

It is important to see the whole picture in these cases

Sorry Derec, but your continued slandering of Trayvon Martin supports the validity of my statement.

I never slandered Trayvon. And in fact, I always acknowledged that both of them made mistakes and errors of judgment that evening. It is your side which steadfastly denies that Trayvon did anything wrong. Just like now there are denials that Scott did anything wrong.
Just like Trayvon didn't "die for Skittles", Michael Brown wasn't "killed for jaywalking" and Nicholas Thomas (the guy killed in a customer's Maserati in Smyrna, GA) wasn't "killed over a traffic violation", so Scott wasn't killed because he had a busted taillight either.

Even in this thread you attempt to put blame on the black man Scott instead of on the killer Slager.

The fact is that he did several things that were not only wrong but also stupid, and but for those things he'd still be alive. That doesn't excuse the shooting, but it does put things in perspective.

Even if you think running away from cops is always stupid, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that a cop shot him 5 times (8 shots total) & killed him. But by bringing it up in this thread, you did what you generally do, deflect from the murderous behavior of the cop to shift blame to the dead black man.

It is important to "keep it 100" and acknowledge that Scott does share a portion of the blame here. Even if he was black and pointing this out is not considered politically correct.

At least in this incidence you had the good grace and common sense to acknowledge that Slager was out of line.

Unlike you I am willing to look at the whole picture.

No Derec, you do not look at the whole picture. That is exactly the problem.

 

[Archimedes]

I think Loren has officially jumped the shark.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

While it can't be fired again as a taser they have a secondary mode as a stun gun that still does work.

I have never heard that a taser could be used as a stun gun before this incident. I've tried searching, but did not find anything about tasers with a secondary stun-gun mode. Do you know of anywhere that this can be substantiated?

Google, taser, manual. There are manuals on-line for various models.

 

[RavenSky]

What kind of tart?
The video only pans to the two of them as Scott is already running away. We do not see whether he knocked the taser out of officer's hands but we do know that they were in close proximity before Scott broke away and started running.

We see the taser going backwards behind the cop as the cop is drawing his gun after Scott is running away. It looks far more likely that the cop tossed the taser as he was grabbing for his gun. Regardless, there is clearly no justification for the cop to draw his gun and start shooting.

1. The taser was never in Scott's hands
2. Even if Scott somehow knocked the taser out of Slager's hand, that does not pose a threat to Slager because Scott was retreating and did not have the taser

If true, it does show that Scott engaged in a physical scuffle with the police officer before breaking away and running.

blaming the dead black victim again. The cop did not shoot Scott in the back 5 times because of an alleged scuffle

3. The taser had already been fired. It could not be fired again. So even if Scott really did grab the taser (which he didn't), even if he pointed it right at Slager (which he didn't), it was not and could not be a threat to Slager.

And if the taser barbs connected with Scott why was he apparently impervious to it? I wonder if he was on drugs (like PCP).

slandering a dead black victim again.

Also note that the cop never tells the retreating Scott to stop. Simply starts shooting him in the back.

True. They both committed stupid mistakes and they both have or will pay for it. One with his life, the other with his freedom.

only one of them pulled out his gun for no good reason and shot at a retreating man, hitting him five times in the back, and killed him. That you attempt to equate cold-blooded murder with Scott's limping away from the cop is again evidence of you blaming the victim.

 

[bleubird]

Dash cam video is out.Does not look good.He said he was buying the car(Benz)The guy was behind on child support.But,still did not need to be murdered.

 

[RavenSky]

Ya, if you shoot someone in the back while he's running away from you then you committed murder. Full stop. There really aren't any extenuating circumstances which change that. It doesn't matter what kind of scuffle happened beforehand.

But you can draw a full circle around the Earth that shows that he was running *toward* the office, just the long way around.

stop giving them ideas for more ways to justify these "shoots"

 

[RavenSky]

The problem I see is that the cop pretty clearly knew that the taser was back on the ground, which seems to indicate that he shot an unarmed man in the back who posed no threat

After the fact the cop knew the taser was on the ground. That doesn't mean the cop knew it at the time.

Since the cop threw it to the ground, he knew exactly where it was. Moreover, IF we want to play your "let's pretend" game, let's pretend the cop didn't know whether Scott had the taser when he shot Scott in the back 5 times.

1. Tasers can only be deployed once. The cop knew this even if we pretend he didn't know where the taser was.
2. Scott was retreating, not threatening Slager. The cop knew this even if we pretend he didn't know where the taser was.
3. Slager knew EXACTLY where to find the taser after he strolled over and cuffed a dying Scott. Slager went STRAIGHT BACK TO THE SPOT HE TOSSED the taser, and picked it up so he could plant it on Scot.

I really really really cannot believe you are defending Slager. I truly think you are doing it only to fuck with us.

 

[RavenSky]

And the cop knows this for sure? He certainly knows the taser has been taken from him. He certainly can't see it.

The taser was never taken from the cop. Stop repeating the falsehood as if it were a fact. This is your typical M.O. Loren.

3. The taser had already been fired. It could not be fired again. So even if Scott really did grab the taser (which he didn't), even if he pointed it right at Slager (which he didn't), it was not and could not be a threat to Slager.

While it can't be fired again as a taser they have a secondary mode as a stun gun that still does work.

Not when the unarmed man is running in the opposite direction

Also note that the cop never tells the retreating Scott to stop. Simply starts shooting him in the back.

This proves nothing at all. A warning about shooting a fleeing felon is normal. There's no such requirement when one is shooting because of the threat--warnings take time, something you often don't have in a threatening situation.

Scott was not a felon. There was no threatening situation. There was plenty of time.

Give it up Loren. April 1st was over 8 days ago

 

[scombrid]

After the fact the cop knew the taser was on the ground. That doesn't mean the cop knew it at the time.

Judging by the short (non existent) search time when Slager went and picked up the taser to place it next to Scott's body, I'd say Slager knew where it was during the incident. He didn't check to see if it was on the body. He didn't hunt around for it on the ground. He cuffed Scott and walked right over to the taser and picked it up and then dropped it by the body.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

While it can't be fired again as a taser they have a secondary mode as a stun gun that still does work.

I have never heard that a taser could be used as a stun gun before this incident. I've tried searching, but did not find anything about tasers with a secondary stun-gun mode. Do you know of anywhere that this can be substantiated?

A taser is basically a stun gun with a device to fire two barbed wires at a target and thus deliver the charge at a distance. I can't imagine why anyone would build one that didn't retain the basic stun-gun functionality.

 

[Derec]

He just takes off running for no apparent reason (but in time to "Max lost his head"). Drugs?
Also between the music and the car (300E or similar) the video seemed like a 90s time shift.

 

[Ford]

He just takes off running for no apparent reason. Drugs?

Well it couldn't be anything like running from someone who will shoot him in the back.


I mean, there's never been an incidence of a black man stopped for a minor traffic violation where the situation escalated and the officer shot someone dead. Or beat them to within an inch of their life. Or beat them to death.


No, the best course of action for a black man stopped by a while police officer is to just keep their hands on the wheel and comply, because no white cop has ever shot a black man who didn't have it coming.

 

[Derec]

Well it couldn't be anything like running from someone who will shoot him in the back.

I think you are mixing up cause and effect. Unless you think Scott was a psychic. A real life "magical negro" if you will.

I mean, there's never been an incidence of a black man stopped for a minor traffic violation where the situation escalated and the officer shot someone dead.

Millions of people get stopped for minor traffic violations every day, including many blacks. In the vast majority of cases nothing happens. When there is a shooting, or other use of force, it is usually due to some sort of altercation/scuffle like with Michael Brown or Tony Robinson or because there was a weapon like with Vonderritt Myers or Antonio Martin.
What is it with some people here? First Rhea, now you defend Scott's decision to run.

Or beat them to within an inch of their life. Or beat them to death.

So you suggest every black man run if they get stopped for a traffic violation? Is that what you are saying?
I think we may have reached peak ridiculousness.

No, the best course of action for a black man stopped by a while police officer is to just keep their hands on the wheel and comply, because no white cop has ever shot a black man who didn't have it coming.

Obviously the best course of action is to take off running like a headless chicken and then scuffle with the cop when he catches up with you.

x1000

 

[Ford]

First Rhea, now you defend Scott's decision to run.

Now you defend the decision to shoot him in the back as he ran.



I get it. I really do. You think shooting a black man in the back is okay because they're all criminals.


x1000.

 

[tupac chopra]

He just takes off running for no apparent reason (but in time to "Max lost his head"). Drugs?

Maybe he was scared of being shot. I think that is more likely as there has been no report of any drugs I don't think