Another unarmed man killed by police

[ksen]

Isn't it quite amazing! People just seem to want to cling onto the authority of the cops and rely on it. You need to understand that those who defend the cops think the cops are there to defend them and their rights. Those who do not defend the cops have noticed a decided lack of concern for minorities and also people who have less than a certain amount of money and status. That lack of concern may have actually been directed toward them and they know the notion that cops are there to defend them is pure fabrication...just like the cops story in this case.

As long as they imagine the cops may someday help or probably save them, they will support the most outrageous racism the boys in blue can cook up.

Nice blanket statement against all cops and anyone who defends them during initially questionable circumstances. This is truly amazing! Instead of actually listening carefully to the evidence - you'd rather trot out this manifesto of prejudice. It says more about you than the case arkirk.

the evidence is that an unarmed man with his hands up was shot at at least 6 times and killed

everything else is conjecture

 

[laughing dog]

Lookit all these apologists for the police just rushing to their defense by making stuff up.

Maybe you would actually learn something by listening closely to the video instead of being blinded by prejudice. Just tell everyone laughing dog, mumbles, dystopian, etc where on the video does the white officer say "yo, get out of the car" that is not after the shooting. I know where you think it is and what it sounds like he's really saying. You must be hearing only what you want to hear and it's embarassing.

EVERYONE: just check out the video link I posted - close your eyes and focus on the audio... and by all means count the number of shots.

Your video does not show the victim with a gun in his hand. So, your response is yet another example of a police apologist making stuff up.

 

[dystopian]

As long as they imagine the cops may someday help or probably save them, they will support the most outrageous racism the boys in blue can cook up.

I imagine the cops may someday help or save me; because while I'm poor and don't dress like I'm rich, I'm white and generally polite and so reasonably certain I'd get treated better than many others...

...that fact does not inspire me to defend this sort of villainy.

 

[EPresence2]

Dystopian et al.,

So all that matters is an unarmed man was shot by police - circumstances be damned. It must be either the cop(s) or the suspect is completely wrong. Why then all the fuss about any other details? Seems like a shifting of the goal posts. There's also the default leap to "victim blaming" whenever information about "suspects" killed during encounters with police is provided. But it's okay to dredge up information on George Zimmerman (for example) because it's relevant to your "connect the dots" conclusions. Seems like more than a little hypocrisy.

You don't have to resort to all this and maintain a position that police overreaction is a problem. Unnecessary conflict arises with the rush to judgment that occurs after every initially questionable police shooting. The conflict arises when an emotional attachment to an opinion outpaces the trickle of facts that could modify it. When that happens, one ceases to become really serious about moving towards "justice for all" (in public opinion, at least) and away from the dead-end road of irreconcilable conflict. If the rush to judge "suspects" is wrong, so too is the rush to judge individual police officers.

Now I fully expect a "thrashing" of commentary dripping with condescending sarcasm, etc. You can take that approach, but it just shows how carelessly you are treating this important issue.

 

[laughing dog]

Dystopian et al.,

So all that matters is an unarmed man was shot by police - circumstances be damned. It must be either the cop(s) or the suspect is completely wrong. Why then all the fuss about any other details? Seems like a shifting of the goal posts. There's also the default leap to "victim blaming" whenever information about "suspects" killed during encounters with police is provided. But it's okay to dredge up information on George Zimmerman (for example) because it's relevant to your "connect the dots" conclusions. Seems like more than a little hypocrisy.

You don't have to resort to all this and maintain a position that police overreaction is a problem sometimes. Unnecessary conflict arises with the rush to judgment that occurs after every initially questionable police shooting. If the rush to judge "suspects" is wrong, so too is the rush to judge individual police officers. The conflict arises when an emotional attachment to an opinion outpaces the trickle of facts that could modify it. When that happens, one ceases to become really serious about moving towards "justice for all" (in public opinion, at least) to remain locked in petty squabbles.

Now I fully expect a "thrashing" of commentary dripping with condescending sarcasm. You can take that approach, but it just shows how carelessly you are treating this important issue.

Yawn, claiming one's opponents are "careless", etc... is a tired and lame rhetorical device especially in treating an important issue.

 

[ksen]

So all that matters is an unarmed man was shot by police

I don't know what could possibly matter more.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And how is the passenger supposed to know this, even if it's true? The cop at the driver's side doesn't say "You in the driver's seat, get out of the car!" Instead, he says "Yo! Get out of the car!" And they're both looking at the guy in the passenger seat and pointing their guns at him, so how on earth is he supposed to know who to listen to?

Referencing this video link - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ys0OzmH_EPg. It's not clear what the driver's side officer is saying shortly before the 6+1 shots are fired. He releases the driver from the wrist hold and focuses on the passenger, and it sounds to me like he's saying "Yo... Stay inside the car!" The passenger was already insistent on getting out before that. Reid may have been responding to the earlier command by Days to "Get him out of the car." Then why did Reid fight to get out of the car when the officer who said that is holding the door and telling him not to? This just doesn't make sense. A toxicology report may reveal something that explains the odd reaction.

I doubt toxicology is going to show anything important.

Rather, we have a guy who shot it out with the cops before and knows he's going back to jail--that sounds like a recipe for someone who will take a considerable risk to get out of the situation. The cop took away his weapon, he's in a panic looking for an escape. I can think of three reasonable scenarios here:

1) He's trying to run.

2) He's trying to knock down the cop and run.

3) He's trying to take the cop's gun.

There's no way for the cop to tell #2 from #3, he shoots in either of these cases. Likewise, if the cop can't tell #1 from the others he also shoots.

 

[dystopian]

Dystopian et al.,

So all that matters is an unarmed man was shot by police - circumstances be damned.

Despite your half-assed attempts to blame the victim and; the circumstances here make it clear the cop fucked up and had no legitimate cause to shoot.

There's also the default leap to "victim blaming" whenever information about "suspects" killed during encounters with police is provided.

Default leap? You might note that neither I nor anyone else brought up the victim blaming until people actually started blaming the fucking victim.

But it's okay to dredge up information on George Zimmerman (for example) because it's relevant to your "connect the dots" conclusions. Seems like more than a little hypocrisy.

First of all, I never brought up that guy. Second of all, I seriously don't comprehend how you can connect those two things as being equivalent.

You don't have to resort to all this and maintain a position that police overreaction is a problem. Unnecessary conflict arises with the rush to judgment that occurs after every initially questionable police shooting. The conflict arises when an emotional attachment to an opinion outpaces the trickle of facts that could modify it. When that happens, one ceases to become really serious about moving towards "justice for all" (in public opinion, at least) and away from the dead-end road of irreconcilable conflict. If the rush to judge "suspects" is wrong, so too is the rush to judge individual police officers.

This is all good and well; but we don't have a "trickle of facts" supporting an emotional attachment to an opinion here; we have an entirely unambigious recording of the event supporting an objective reading of said event. And then, we have a couple of people contorting their brains in all sorts of ways trying to convince themselves that maybe the video is wrong somehow and the cop had a perfectly legitimate reason to murder an unarmed man.

Now I fully expect a "thrashing" of commentary dripping with condescending sarcasm, etc. You can take that approach, but it just shows how carelessly you are treating this important issue.

No, it just shows my utter contempt for your persecution complex.

 

[EPresence2]

Dystopian et al.,

Thank you for confirming my prediction and the apparent fact you are not serious about justice for all - The record of our discussion prooves that. Circumstances both unknown and known do matter when a "suspect" is killed by a human police officer, as opposed to the ideal of a magical cop possessing the power to read minds. I'm neither sure why the cop had to shoot or the passenger just had to get out based on what's shown on the video. I'm not the one going out on a limb supported by prejudice - YOU ARE! It's plain as day for anyone who takes the time to read the discussion. And I'm not being drawn into a pissing match that obfuscates this important issue.


Loren et al.,

It seems like the utmost in stupidity for Reid to have planned what you are suggesting. My bet is on the toxicology report - let's just wait and see.

 

[KeepTalking]

And then, we have a couple of people contorting their brains in all sorts of ways trying to convince themselves that maybe the video is wrong somehow and the cop had a perfectly legitimate reason to murder an unarmed man.

This is bullshit, and you know it. There are simply people watching the exact same video, accepting that it is what it is, and drawing a different conclusion. You react with emotional outbursts, personal attacks, and condescension, a perfectly reasonable way to conduct a discussion is some places, apparently. This is why I had dropped out of this conversation for so long. No real discussion is happening, and you have already stated that nothing is going to convince you that you are wrong, so I don't see why anyone continues to engage you on this topic.

 

[ksen]

KeepTalking, while I appreciate the viewpoint that you bring from your past experiences I can't think of any circumstances that could exonerate an officer killing a man whose hands are empty and raised.

The officer's own unprofessional actions escalated this situation and I expect much better from the men and women we entrust with the power to uphold our laws.

 

[KeepTalking]

KeepTalking, while I appreciate the viewpoint that you bring from your past experiences I can't think of any circumstances that could exonerate an officer killing a man whose hands are empty and raised.

The officer's own unprofessional actions escalated this situation and I expect much better from the men and women we entrust with the power to uphold our laws.

I actually agree that Officer Days acted unprofessionally during the stop. This does not mean that he is guilty of murder, nor does it prevent the shooting from being justified. I think Days was genuinely in fear for his life, and did not see that Fields' hands were empty before opening fire.

 

[ksen]

KeepTalking, while I appreciate the viewpoint that you bring from your past experiences I can't think of any circumstances that could exonerate an officer killing a man whose hands are empty and raised.

The officer's own unprofessional actions escalated this situation and I expect much better from the men and women we entrust with the power to uphold our laws.

I actually agree that Officer Days acted unprofessionally during the stop. This does not mean that he is guilty of murder,

Agreed.

Although Days did keep yelling that he was going to kill the man and did end up killing him I think at most it should be manslaughter.

nor does it prevent the shooting from being justified.

That part I don't agree with. If the actions of the officers directly contributed to them feeling they had no other option but to shoot someone I don't think that shooting should be classified as justified.

I think Days was genuinely in fear for his life, and did not see that Fields' hands were empty before opening fire.

Only because Days was out of control and didn't take the time to properly assess the situation.

 

[EPresence2]

And then, we have a couple of people contorting their brains in all sorts of ways trying to convince themselves that maybe the video is wrong somehow and the cop had a perfectly legitimate reason to murder an unarmed man.

This is bullshit, and you know it. There are simply people watching the exact same video, accepting that it is what it is, and drawing a different conclusion. You react with emotional outbursts, personal attacks, and condescension, a perfectly reasonable way to conduct a discussion is some places, apparently. This is why I had dropped out of this conversation for so long. No real discussion is happening, and you have already stated that nothing is going to convince you that you are wrong, so I don't see why anyone continues to engage you on this topic.

To further document the maladies you and I are exposing. Maybe mine was overkill

 

[EPresence2]

IGNORED

I actually agree that Officer Days acted unprofessionally during the stop. This does not mean that he is guilty of murder, nor does it prevent the shooting from being justified. I think Days was genuinely in fear for his life, and did not see that Fields' hands were empty before opening fire.

And I agree Days acted with disproportionate fear, given we know the passenger was (in fact) unarmed. Days did not know that.

 

[ksen]

IGNORED

lol

 

[Rhea]

In Texas, a perp first put his hands up, feigning surrender, before opening fire at police.
WATCH: Texas cop fatally shoots gunman following wild chase (WARNING, GRAPHIC CONTENT)

So much for "his hands were up" being relevant.

I'm trying to figure out if you are saying that, because of this link (which I cannot watch due to bandwidth but I assume shows a man with hands up yet still managed to kill cop who could not react in time to save himself), you think it is appropriate for hands up to NO LONGER MEAN ANYTHING and no longer be a way to keep from getting shot? That police are JUSTIFIED in shooting people with their hands up and empty because of this incident?

If you don't mean to say that, what do you mean?

 

[Rhea]

I actually agree that Officer Days acted unprofessionally during the stop. This does not mean that he is guilty of murder, nor does it prevent the shooting from being justified. I think Days was genuinely in fear for his life, and did not see that Fields' hands were empty before opening fire.

And I agree Days acted with disproportionate fear, given we know the passenger was (in fact) unarmed. Days did not know that.

And are you saying that he could not have known that, and that having hands up no longer is a sign to not shoot? That police are justified in shooting people with empty hands in the air because they should not expect to pause long enough to check (even after they have escalated the situation by stupid contradictary non-stop shouting that prevents them from hearing the victim state that they are complying)?

 

[EPresence2]

And I agree Days acted with disproportionate fear, given we know the passenger was (in fact) unarmed. Days did not know that.

And are you saying that he could not have known that, and that having hands up no longer is a sign to not shoot? That police are justified in shooting people with empty hands in the air because they should not expect to pause long enough to check (even after they have escalated the situation by stupid contradictary non-stop shouting that prevents them from hearing the victim state that they are complying)?

Rhea - you are incorrect about the contradictory shouting. Please review the video again and listen more carefully - the other officer is saying "Yo... stay inside the car!" And how do you know what Days could or could not have known? I'm not making that determination either way.

 

[ksen]

And I agree Days acted with disproportionate fear, given we know the passenger was (in fact) unarmed. Days did not know that.

And are you saying that he could not have known that, and that having hands up no longer is a sign to not shoot? That police are justified in shooting people with empty hands in the air because they should not expect to pause long enough to check (even after they have escalated the situation by stupid contradictary non-stop shouting that prevents them from hearing the victim state that they are complying)?

I think it's safe for cops to just assume everybody is wearing one of those arm contraptions that gamblers used to wear in the old west that will put a loaded weapon into the perp's hands at the flick of a wrist.

And honestly, a wrist flick doesn't give nearly enough time to react so it's safer just to shoot them.