• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Police Misconduct Catch All Thread

Gospel

Warning Level 9999
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
2,949
Location
Florida
Gender
Masculine
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
I have no issue with Police officers doing their Job Trausti (which is the case in that video and many others on Youtube). Situations like those are always on their minds (rightfully so). What I do have an issue with is Police officers that create dangerous situations themselves who end up getting someone killed as a result and then not be held accountable.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,813
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I got dropped by my insurance company for reporting damages that I paid for myself and didn't file a claim (5 issues 3 having to do with Hurricane damage). I was trying to keep them up to speed with crap that went down with my house in case I really needed to file a claim so they would be aware of the current updates to the home. Oh well, my second insurance company is really happy with me. They can't for the life of them understand why the flying &%#$ (I'm trying to curse less on this board as of today) they did that.

Edit: I cursed
Edit 2: Sorry for the derail. I was pissed about how they treated that woman. It just goes to show that police being given way too much leeway to screw up their dealings with "thugs" you don't like ends up hurting people you do like.

You have a house that is prone to damage. The fact you paid for it yourself doesn't change that.

Who has a house that is not damage prone? And isn't the purpose of insurance companies to make money off people who don't file claims? Besides they are the ones that wanted to make sure the work was being done properly.

Edit: I honestly think i got dropped because an algorithm sent a flag to some idiots desk that didn't check the details.

You think 5 possible claims are normal??

We have been here 25 years. There has been nothing in those years that could possibly be a claim even if you don't consider the deductible.
 

lpetrich

Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2000
Messages
19,101
Location
Eugene, OR
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
More Than Half of Police Killings Are Mislabeled, New Study Says - The New York Times - "Researchers comparing information from death certificates with data from organizations that track police killings in the United States identified a startling discrepancy."
noting
Fatal police violence by race and state in the USA, 1980–2019: a network meta-regression - The Lancet
Back to the NYT.
Researchers compared information from a federal database known as the National Vital Statistics System, which collects death certificates, with recent data from three organizations that track police killings through news reports and public records requests. When extrapolating and modeling that data back decades, they identified a startling discrepancy: About 55 percent of fatal encounters with the police between 1980 and 2018 were listed as another cause of death.

The findings reflect both the contentious role of medical examiners and coroners in obscuring the real extent of police violence, and the lack of centralized national data on an issue that has caused enormous upheaval. Private nonprofits and journalists have filled the gap by mining news reports and social media.

“I think the big takeaway is that most people in public health tend to take vital statistics for the U.S. and other countries as the absolute truth, and it turns out, as we show, the vital statistics are missing more than half of the police violence deaths,” said Dr. Christopher Murray, the director of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington, which conducted the study.

He continued: “You have to look for why those deaths that are being picked up by the open-source investigations, looking in the media and elsewhere, aren’t showing up in the official statistics. That does point to the system of medical examiners and the incentives that may exist for them to want to not classify a death as related to police violence.”
They did their research for 1980 - 2018, covering recent drug warring and the rise in mass incarceration. Of the states and territories, OK, AZ, AK, and DC had the highest rates, while MA, CT, and MN had the lowest rates. "Researchers estimated that about 20 times as many men as women were killed by the police over the past several decades; more American men died in 2019 during police encounters than from Hodgkin lymphoma or testicular cancer."

"While The Lancet study did not mention specific cases, there have been recent examples where the initial findings of coroners or medical examiners downplayed or omitted the role of the police when a Black man was killed:" then listing several examples, like Ronald Greene of Louisiana, Elijah McCain of Aurora CO, and George Floyd of Minneapolis MN
 

none

Banned
Banned
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,331
Location
outside
Basic Beliefs
atheist/ignostic
The coroner with the candlestick in the library?
 

blastula

Contributor
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
7,961
Gender
Late for dinner
Basic Beliefs
Gnostic atheist
Capitol Police officer charged with obstructing riot investigation - NBC News

A grand jury indictment charged Officer Michael Angelo Riley with repeatedly telling the man to delete all social media that would provide proof of entering the building that day.

“[I']m a capitol police officer who agrees with your political stance,” Riley said in a Facebook direct message, according to the indictment. “Take down the part about being in the building they are correctly investigating and everyone who was in the building is going to be charged. Just looking out!”
 

none

Banned
Banned
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,331
Location
outside
Basic Beliefs
atheist/ignostic
yeah I mean from the looks of the video all you can see is a black woman getting thrown around...
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
29,889
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
‘She was just doing her job’: Homeless vet loses service dog during arrest for panhandling

Joshua Graham Rohrer, a homeless veteran in North Carolina, says he was wrongfully arrested and mistreated by Gastonia police officers, who also tased his service dog Sunshine, sparking support from those who witnessed the incident.

The Gastonia Police Department told Military Times that although Rohrer will go to court for the charges against him, the department is now looking into the incident to “determine if the conduct of our officers was appropriate.”

Rohrer was standing on a median near a Gastonia shopping center with Sunshine on Oct. 13 when a 911 caller contacted police. While Rohrer wasn’t bothering anybody, having Sunshine with him was his way of using sympathy to get money from people, the caller said, according to a copy of the audio call.

Even though Rohrer wasn’t armed or harassing passersby, according to witnesses at the scene, the encounter would ultimately end with his arrest and Sunshine’s death.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,813
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
‘She was just doing her job’: Homeless vet loses service dog during arrest for panhandling

Joshua Graham Rohrer, a homeless veteran in North Carolina, says he was wrongfully arrested and mistreated by Gastonia police officers, who also tased his service dog Sunshine, sparking support from those who witnessed the incident.

The Gastonia Police Department told Military Times that although Rohrer will go to court for the charges against him, the department is now looking into the incident to “determine if the conduct of our officers was appropriate.”

Rohrer was standing on a median near a Gastonia shopping center with Sunshine on Oct. 13 when a 911 caller contacted police. While Rohrer wasn’t bothering anybody, having Sunshine with him was his way of using sympathy to get money from people, the caller said, according to a copy of the audio call.

Even though Rohrer wasn’t armed or harassing passersby, according to witnesses at the scene, the encounter would ultimately end with his arrest and Sunshine’s death.

Fundamentally, it looks like he was panhandling where it's not allowed.
 

lpetrich

Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2000
Messages
19,101
Location
Eugene, OR
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
The article starts with
“Open the door now, you are going to get shot!” an officer in Rock Falls, Ill., shouted at Nathaniel Edwards after a car chase.

“Hands out the window now or you will be shot!” yelled a patrolman in Bakersfield, Calif., as Marvin Urbina wrestled with inflated airbags after a pursuit ended in a crash.

“I am going to shoot you — what part of that don’t you understand?” threatened an officer in Little Rock, Ark., adding a profanity, as she tried to pry James Hartsfield from his car.

The police officers who issued those warnings had stopped the motorists for common offenses: swerving across double yellow lines, speeding recklessly, carrying an open beer bottle. None of the men were armed. Yet within moments of pulling them over, officers fatally shot all three.
These were like some 400 police killings of unarmed people over the last 5 years, over one a week.

"Claiming a sense of mortal peril — whether genuine in the moment or only asserted later — has often shielded officers from accountability for using deadly force."
Dozens of encounters appeared to turn on what criminologists describe as officer-created jeopardy: Officers regularly — and unnecessarily — placed themselves in danger by standing in front of fleeing vehicles or reaching inside car windows, then fired their weapons in what they later said was self-defense. Frequently, officers also appeared to exaggerate the threat.

In many cases, local police officers, state troopers or sheriff’s deputies responded with outsize aggression to disrespect or disobedience — a driver talking back, revving an engine or refusing to get out of a car, what officers sometimes call “contempt of cop.”

In dashboard- and body-camera footage, officers could be seen shooting at cars driving away, or threatening deadly force in their first words to motorists, or surrounding sleeping drivers with a ring of gun barrels — then shooting them when, startled awake, they tried to take off. More than three-quarters of the unarmed motorists were killed while attempting to flee.

...
Traffic stops are by far the most common police encounters with civilians, and officers have reason to be wary in their approach: They don’t know who is inside a car or whether there are weapons. Ten officers have been killed this year in such interactions, including a Chicago officer who was shot in August by a passenger during a traffic stop for an expired registration.

But some police chiefs and criminologists said that alarmist training about vehicle stops has made officers too quick to shoot at times, resulting in needless killings. Academies and commanding officers often rely on misleading statistics, gory cop-killing videos and simulated worst-case scenarios to instill hypervigilance. Many officers are trained to place a hand on the trunk of the car as they approach, to leave fingerprints as evidence if ambushed by the driver.
Great article. Thanx, sohy.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
29,889
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
From SoHy's link:

In fact, because the police pull over so many cars and trucks — tens of millions each year — an officer’s chances of being killed at any vehicle stop are less than 1 in 3.6 million, excluding accidents, two studies have shown. At stops for common traffic infractions, the odds are as low as 1 in 6.5 million, according to a 2019 study by Jordan Blair Woods, a law professor at the University of Arkansas.

“The risk is statistically negligible, but nonetheless it is existentially amplified,” said Mr. Gill, the Salt Lake County district attorney and an outspoken proponent of increased police accountability.
 

southernhybrid

Contributor
Joined
Aug 13, 2001
Messages
6,449
Location
Georgia, US
Basic Beliefs
atheist
I was pretty shocked at how scared so many police seem to be, when statistically the chance of them being injured by a civilian is so insignificant.
 

Angry Floof

Tricksy Leftits
Staff member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
14,139
Location
Sector 001
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
I was pretty shocked at how scared so many police seem to be, when statistically the chance of them being injured by a civilian is so insignificant.
They're trained this way. Their training and police culture in general conditions them to live in a state of fear and to believe that civilians are their enemy.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,813
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
There was an interesting article in the NYT today concerning police shootings, which I'm "gifting" if anyone is interested in reading it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/31/us/police-traffic-stops-killings.html

While I do agree there is a problem note that these are people who were violently resisting. And note things like in one case the claim was that he was going for an officer's gun, but the "rebuttal" was that the video showed he never touched a gun. That's not a rebuttal! This makes me suspect what other distortions might be in the article.

And while the trigger normally is a low-level traffic stop that doesn't mean they aren't guilty of a lot more. Sometimes it's just a scared kid but much more likely it's someone facing serious time.
 

atrib

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
1,901
Location
Columbia, SC
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
There was an interesting article in the NYT today concerning police shootings, which I'm "gifting" if anyone is interested in reading it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/31/us/police-traffic-stops-killings.html

While I do agree there is a problem note that these are people who were violently resisting. And note things like in one case the claim was that he was going for an officer's gun, but the "rebuttal" was that the video showed he never touched a gun. That's not a rebuttal! This makes me suspect what other distortions might be in the article.

And while the trigger normally is a low-level traffic stop that doesn't mean they aren't guilty of a lot more. Sometimes it's just a scared kid but much more likely it's someone facing serious time.
Did you read the fucking article? These people were violently resisting???

Evidence often contradicted the accounts of law enforcement officers.

In many cases, local police officers, state troopers or sheriff’s deputies responded with outsize aggression to disrespect or disobedience — a driver talking back, revving an engine or refusing to get out of a car, what officers sometimes call “contempt of cop.”

In dashboard- and body-camera footage, officers could be seen shooting at cars driving away, or threatening deadly force in their first words to motorists, or surrounding sleeping drivers with a ring of gun barrels — then shooting them when, startled awake, they tried to take off. More than three-quarters of the unarmed motorists were killed while attempting to flee.

Police are trained to be hypervigilant, to treat every stop as potentially lethal, and to peremptorily use lethal force even when no actual threat is present. Police are taught that their authority is absolute and unquestionable, and any resistance, no matter how passive, is a justification to escalate the encounter to potentially lethal levels. If police are taught that the only tool in your belt is your gun, and there is zero tolerance for risk, then it should come as no surprise that a lot of police shootings cannot be reasonably justified in a later analysis.

Also, here is the US, everyone is assumed innocent until they are proven guilty in a court of law. A traffic stop is NOT a justification for police officers to "feel out" the bad apples and kill them without due process. Even if they have a warrant and are trying to flee the scene.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,813
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
There was an interesting article in the NYT today concerning police shootings, which I'm "gifting" if anyone is interested in reading it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/31/us/police-traffic-stops-killings.html

While I do agree there is a problem note that these are people who were violently resisting. And note things like in one case the claim was that he was going for an officer's gun, but the "rebuttal" was that the video showed he never touched a gun. That's not a rebuttal! This makes me suspect what other distortions might be in the article.

And while the trigger normally is a low-level traffic stop that doesn't mean they aren't guilty of a lot more. Sometimes it's just a scared kid but much more likely it's someone facing serious time.
Did you read the fucking article? These people were violently resisting???

Evidence often contradicted the accounts of law enforcement officers.

In many cases, local police officers, state troopers or sheriff’s deputies responded with outsize aggression to disrespect or disobedience — a driver talking back, revving an engine or refusing to get out of a car, what officers sometimes call “contempt of cop.”

In dashboard- and body-camera footage, officers could be seen shooting at cars driving away, or threatening deadly force in their first words to motorists, or surrounding sleeping drivers with a ring of gun barrels — then shooting them when, startled awake, they tried to take off. More than three-quarters of the unarmed motorists were killed while attempting to flee.

Police are trained to be hypervigilant, to treat every stop as potentially lethal, and to peremptorily use lethal force even when no actual threat is present. Police are taught that their authority is absolute and unquestionable, and any resistance, no matter how passive, is a justification to escalate the encounter to potentially lethal levels. If police are taught that the only tool in your belt is your gun, and there is zero tolerance for risk, then it should come as no surprise that a lot of police shootings cannot be reasonably justified in a later analysis.

Also, here is the US, everyone is assumed innocent until they are proven guilty in a court of law. A traffic stop is NOT a justification for police officers to "feel out" the bad apples and kill them without due process. Even if they have a warrant and are trying to flee the scene.

You're missing my point. I was showing the article was "supporting" claims with shifting goalposts. Thus all other claims in the article must also be considered suspect.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
29,889
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Judge throws out man’s guilty plea after bodycam footage reveals NYPD drug planting

Brenda Alexander
Tue, November 2, 2021, 6:45 PM·3 min read


The bodycam footage shows an officer planting drugs in the cupholder of a car
A Staten Island man is getting a much-deserved second chance after a judge vacated his 2018 conviction.
Body camera footage shows an NYPD officer in the arrest of Jason Serrano seemingly planting marijuana in the car he was riding in March 2018, Gothamist/WNYC reported. At the time, Serrano was arrested and charged with drug possession, resisting arrest, and obstructing governmental administration.
Serrano eventually plead guilty to the resisting charge three months later. He did so as a way to avoid being sent to the notorious Rikers Island. He was unaware of the body camera footage. Prosecutors shared the footage with Serrano’s attorneys months after his guilty plea.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,813
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Judge throws out man’s guilty plea after bodycam footage reveals NYPD drug planting

Brenda Alexander
Tue, November 2, 2021, 6:45 PM·3 min read


The bodycam footage shows an officer planting drugs in the cupholder of a car
A Staten Island man is getting a much-deserved second chance after a judge vacated his 2018 conviction.
Body camera footage shows an NYPD officer in the arrest of Jason Serrano seemingly planting marijuana in the car he was riding in March 2018, Gothamist/WNYC reported. At the time, Serrano was arrested and charged with drug possession, resisting arrest, and obstructing governmental administration.
Serrano eventually plead guilty to the resisting charge three months later. He did so as a way to avoid being sent to the notorious Rikers Island. He was unaware of the body camera footage. Prosecutors shared the footage with Serrano’s attorneys months after his guilty plea.

And what's going to happen to the cop? This should be career-ending + face at least the same penalty the guy would have.
 

atrib

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
1,901
Location
Columbia, SC
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Judge throws out man’s guilty plea after bodycam footage reveals NYPD drug planting

Brenda Alexander
Tue, November 2, 2021, 6:45 PM·3 min read


The bodycam footage shows an officer planting drugs in the cupholder of a car
A Staten Island man is getting a much-deserved second chance after a judge vacated his 2018 conviction.
Body camera footage shows an NYPD officer in the arrest of Jason Serrano seemingly planting marijuana in the car he was riding in March 2018, Gothamist/WNYC reported. At the time, Serrano was arrested and charged with drug possession, resisting arrest, and obstructing governmental administration.
Serrano eventually plead guilty to the resisting charge three months later. He did so as a way to avoid being sent to the notorious Rikers Island. He was unaware of the body camera footage. Prosecutors shared the footage with Serrano’s attorneys months after his guilty plea.

And what's going to happen to the cop? This should be career-ending + face at least the same penalty the guy would have.
The officer's behavior violates state and federal criminal statutes. However, if the Federal or State Attorney chooses to NOT file criminal charges (which will likely be the case), at best the criminal cop will be fired or disciplined for violating PD policy. Qualified Immunity currently does not allow the victims of the officer's criminal behavior to sue the officer for violating their rights in Federal court, so there is no recourse there.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
29,889
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Whistleblower featured in USA TODAY 'Behind the Blue Wall' series ousted from police union

An Illinois police union on Wednesday ousted from its membership an officer facing criminal charges for exposing a squad car video that showed his fellow officers slapping and cursing a man dying of a drug overdose.

The case of Sgt. Javier Esqueda, a 27-year veteran of the Joliet Police Department, was featured in September as the first installment of the USA TODAY series “Behind the Blue Wall,” an investigation involving more than 300 cases of police officers over the past decade who have spoken out against alleged misconduct in their departments.

A subsequent story published this week outlined patterns of retaliation against such officers in departments large and small across the country, highlighting how some within law enforcement use internal affairs investigations and other forms of retaliation and intimidation to punish those who break the code of silence.

Esqueda told USA TODAY that he’s become a pariah among his coworkers since July 2020, when he shared with a television reporter footage from January of that year showing how officers treated a handcuffed Black man in medical distress. Officers slapped Eric Lurry, restricted his airway and shoved a baton in his mouth hours before his death. Esqueda faces up to 20 years in prison after department officials opened a criminal investigation into his actions and prosecutors charged him with four counts of official misconduct.
 

SigmatheZeta

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2021
Messages
568
Gender
she/her
Basic Beliefs
Generally, I am rooted in both ancient Epicurean and ancient Pyrrhonist sentiments, although I am somewhat sympathetic toward the intentions behind ancient Cynicism.
I will say that the Black Lives Matter protest I went to was very fun. If you ever think about going to one, though, make sure you learn to move very fast on your feet. The truth about CS gas is that it spreads slowly and then disperses quickly in open air situations, so if you retreat fast and thereby avoid exposure, you can regroup fast and thereby effectively stymie attempts by police to keep you from being where you want to be.

For me, one place where the police really crossed the line was when they tried bringing out mounted police officers. I screamed that the horses could get seriously hurt in this situation, calling out to both the police and the crowd, and when the dumbasses tried to do a charge the crowd, anyhow, the horses balked. So much for the cops having control over their mounts. The horses are not robots. They are people and not particularly bright ones. To their credit, after I loudly lectured the crowd on how badly those horses could get hurt, the cops apparently heard and backed off after that, but I was furious. They were not in an appropriate situation for that maneuver.

Anyhow, one important thing to keep in mind about these types of protests is that, as nice as it sounds to say that people with disabilities should have a voice, we had issues with people that had seizure disorders, breathing disorders, and outright being bound to a wheelchair disorders. Police are like horses, and by that, I mean that they are people with unpredictable people emotions and are kind of stupid and are therefore likely to make profoundly dangerous errors in judgment. Their training is designed for dealing with teenage and twenty-something athletes at the prime of their lives. Police do not have abstract thought. They don't know what to do with a person that has a disability unless they are specifically trained. If you have a disability that keeps you from being able to sprint about a city block, then please, in the name of our sanity, either watch from a balcony where you can help with eye-in-the-sky intel, or help by trucking in water and other supplies, thank you.

Anyhow, the good thing is that police are not really likely to start using lethal agents like nerve agents or blister agents. I don't really chalk this up to their graciousness or humanity, but I think they just recognize that if they seriously threatened the lives of more than one thousand disaffected civilians, then those civilians would quickly become bloodthirsty combatants and kill them very dead. If you are in reasonably good health, then the police are not likely to gas you with anything that they themselves are not routinely exposed to as part of their training. CS gas is inconveniencing and annoying, but it will not permanently damage you unless you are subjected to very heavy long-term exposure and do not have the presence of mind to get away from the stuff until it has dispersed.

The police are not really going to get away from you if you and your friends run about one city block in all directions, and there are enough people watching from balconies and drone-cams that you will be able to find your cop friends again. Do not be tempted to stay there huffing gas, you inattentive douche-rocket. Tactics, logistics, and intel are how you beat them. Again, that stuff disperses very fast. You are not running away, but you are regrouping for another charge.

Hydrate, hydrate, and hydrate some more. It really annoys me when people at protests pass out from dehydration. Come on, people.

Throwing water bottles at body armored police officers...um...okay. Right. Friggin' kids. Friggin' puerile. Grumble grumble.

So about police misconduct, I want to say that, while I generally like police, I also like the fact that, when too many police have ignored basic social boundaries, the people are able to organize an effective civil uprising. By that, I do not mean an uprising to overthrow the government or to disrupt the democratic process, but I mean an uprising aimed at demonstrating that the people, if they choose to unite, are stronger than the government. The purpose of such uprisings is not to overthrow the government but, instead, to remind the government that their authority is based on trust, which is conditional, revocable, and not given for free.

As far as defunding police, don't misunderstand me when I say this, but I think it's actually brilliant. When local police are actually endangering people's lives due to chronic misconduct or acting with the demented belief that they are the ruling elites of an east Asian dictatorship, then we would better spend their wages on education, public works, new equipment for the fire department, and so on. If they don't want to lose their wages, then they can stop taking their wages for granted. They are not going to improve their behavior unless it is clear to them that there will be lasting consequences if they fail to improve their behavior.

However, I also think that the right application for defunding is at the local level, and I also think that police should be rewarded for innovation, improved community engagement, and otherwise responding in visible ways to social pressure. I don't think the "defunding" argument should go only one way. If police are revolutionizing how they do their jobs, then that is actually worthy of being rewarded. If they are willing to actively take part in reforms directed at making them more of a part of our communities, then I am aware that those kinds of improvements are more resource-intensive and require them to work longer hours. I am aware that more extensive training costs money.

Nevertheless, it actually is necessary to push for defunding when police are actually murdering civilians and not even allowing those crimes to be given thorough investigation. When civilians die and the details of their deaths are brushed under the rug and explained away with some buzzwords and bullshit, then seriously, fuck that with a nailboard.

People say, "If you don't want the police to arrest you, then don't commit crimes," but I say, "If you don't want the people to riot, then don't commit crimes against them." Actions have consequences. The police and their supporters have forgotten that that principle works both ways, and until they have acknowledged that the principle works both ways, they will continue having problems.
 
Last edited:

SigmatheZeta

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2021
Messages
568
Gender
she/her
Basic Beliefs
Generally, I am rooted in both ancient Epicurean and ancient Pyrrhonist sentiments, although I am somewhat sympathetic toward the intentions behind ancient Cynicism.
Myth: protesting against police means we hate police,

Reality: protesting against police actually means we have hope that they will listen if we make it clear that we are unified and serious.

Myth: defunding police is the same as disbanding police.

Reality: defunding just means redirecting part of police funding to other components of government, such as education, which are likely to be more effective mean of crime reduction than a police force that has developed a toxic culture. Also, full funding can always be restored when police agree to comprehensively restructure their strategy for engaging with the community.

Myth: these protests are intended to be violent.

Reality: protesters are prepared for violence by police, but most violence against property is opportunistic vandalism during chaos caused primarily by police.
 

Gospel

Warning Level 9999
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
2,949
Location
Florida
Gender
Masculine
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic

I'm pro police. However, the above is insane.


This reminds me of a theory a local homeless dude pitched to me last weekend he dubbed mockflasion. In short, the theory is that the powers that be are always squeezing wealth out of the have-nots & whenever the government attempts to help they (the powers that be) scream inflation then raise their prices so they can get a piece of the free fiat money. So in effect, they create the environment then profit from it.

He's one very entertaining MF.
 

blastula

Contributor
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
7,961
Gender
Late for dinner
Basic Beliefs
Gnostic atheist

A Massena police officer accused of purposely damaging a suspect’s car has resigned.

Video of then-Officer Brandon Huckle was posted on Facebook by the car owner’s lawyer. It happened during a search in March.

Mayor Timothy Ahlfeld says Huckle resigned in early August. That ends a disciplinary proceeding. He had been suspended since shortly after the incident.

He still faces a felony charge of criminal mischief.

 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,131
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Well he had a knife and was shoplifting.
I mean shit... I carry a staff everywhere I go.

That is like saying "well he was breathing and shoplifting". It is a clear excuse.

If them having a knife was a real motivation for fatally shooting someone, then there would be no encounters with police that end without fatal shootings.

I somehow bet that fucker who door'd that guy's car still has his job, too.
 

bleubird

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
1,323
Location
Alaska
Basic Beliefs
none
Well he had a knife and was shoplifting.
I mean shit... I carry a staff everywhere I go.

That is like saying "well he was breathing and shoplifting". It is a clear excuse.

If them having a knife was a real motivation for fatally shooting someone, then there would be no encounters with police that end without fatal shootings.

I somehow bet that fucker who door'd that guy's car still has his job, too.
Is that for me or the whole ? I don't post enough for people to know my sarcasm.
 

Shadowy Man

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2002
Messages
3,276
Location
West Coast
Basic Beliefs
Rational Pragmatism

A Massena police officer accused of purposely damaging a suspect’s car has resigned.

Video of then-Officer Brandon Huckle was posted on Facebook by the car owner’s lawyer. It happened during a search in March.

Mayor Timothy Ahlfeld says Huckle resigned in early August. That ends a disciplinary proceeding. He had been suspended since shortly after the incident.

He still faces a felony charge of criminal mischief.


Let’s go Brandon!
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
29,889
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Video of the wheelchair guy shooting from two angles. Eight shots, a pause, and then a ninth, just for good measure.

 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
29,889
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist


Video in the link. The dog had actually chased away the perps.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,131
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Video of the wheelchair guy shooting from two angles. Eight shots, a pause, and then a ninth, just for good measure.


Wow. As if an officer can't figure out how to disarm someone in a fucking wheelchair, with help?

My first immediate reaction is that someone needed to walk up to those officers and do exactly as they had done.

I accept this reaction is 'too much'. But holy shit. Anyone who watches that and does not decide "these cops need to be ended in some way" needs to be treated exactly like someone who says "trump Won the Election".

It's like the second officer just wanted to make sure one of the bullets in the corpse was his.
 

lpetrich

Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2000
Messages
19,101
Location
Eugene, OR
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
St. Louis Cop Sentenced For Beating Black Undercover Officer
A federal judge gave a white former St. Louis police officer less than half the prison time his own defense lawyers had asked for on Monday after he was convicted for his role in the beating of an undercover Black colleague during the 2017 racial justice protests in the city.

Dustin Boone, 37, was sentenced to one year and one day in prison for aiding and abetting the deprivation of civil rights under color of law of undercover officer Luther Hall. He was convicted in June after a nine-day trial.

What Black Undercover Officer Beaten By White Cops - YouTube was about. Toward the end, host Cenk Uygur claimed a surprising reason for excessive policing. He claims that a Baltimore ex-cop told him that the Baltimore police department had arrest quotas for its cops to meet, presumably as a way to demonstrate that the cops were doing a good job. They didn't arrest many people in white neighborhoods, because there was a risk of arresting someone important, so they arrested people in black neighborhoods instead. They arrested people that had the least risk of fighting back in court.

How common is that?
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,813
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Video of the wheelchair guy shooting from two angles. Eight shots, a pause, and then a ninth, just for good measure.


Wow. As if an officer can't figure out how to disarm someone in a fucking wheelchair, with help?

My first immediate reaction is that someone needed to walk up to those officers and do exactly as they had done.

I accept this reaction is 'too much'. But holy shit. Anyone who watches that and does not decide "these cops need to be ended in some way" needs to be treated exactly like someone who says "trump Won the Election".

It's like the second officer just wanted to make sure one of the bullets in the corpse was his.


So they were supposed to just sit back and let the guy get a hostage? The pursued while there was no danger, when the guy went towards potential hostages they fired. It's not like they can just go up to him and take the knife away, that's a good way to get yourself stabbed.

You're focusing on the wheelchair and ignoring the knife.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,131
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Video of the wheelchair guy shooting from two angles. Eight shots, a pause, and then a ninth, just for good measure.


Wow. As if an officer can't figure out how to disarm someone in a fucking wheelchair, with help?

My first immediate reaction is that someone needed to walk up to those officers and do exactly as they had done.

I accept this reaction is 'too much'. But holy shit. Anyone who watches that and does not decide "these cops need to be ended in some way" needs to be treated exactly like someone who says "trump Won the Election".

It's like the second officer just wanted to make sure one of the bullets in the corpse was his.


So they were supposed to just sit back and let the guy get a hostage? The pursued while there was no danger, when the guy went towards potential hostages they fired. It's not like they can just go up to him and take the knife away, that's a good way to get yourself stabbed.

You're focusing on the wheelchair and ignoring the knife.

No. They were supposed to get to the front, and disarm him. They have stout sticks, and their power comes with the expectation that they also assume risk. That's why we give them armor, you know. They could as easily have grasped the chair from behind and dumped him out of it as well. The fact that neither of these people who were given guns of the public trust thought to do any of the MANY things, risky or no to immediate self, that would have prevented their use is damning.

It's kind of hair-pull level to dump a guy out of a chair, but it's absolutely nonlethal.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,813
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Video of the wheelchair guy shooting from two angles. Eight shots, a pause, and then a ninth, just for good measure.


Wow. As if an officer can't figure out how to disarm someone in a fucking wheelchair, with help?

My first immediate reaction is that someone needed to walk up to those officers and do exactly as they had done.

I accept this reaction is 'too much'. But holy shit. Anyone who watches that and does not decide "these cops need to be ended in some way" needs to be treated exactly like someone who says "trump Won the Election".

It's like the second officer just wanted to make sure one of the bullets in the corpse was his.


So they were supposed to just sit back and let the guy get a hostage? The pursued while there was no danger, when the guy went towards potential hostages they fired. It's not like they can just go up to him and take the knife away, that's a good way to get yourself stabbed.

You're focusing on the wheelchair and ignoring the knife.

No. They were supposed to get to the front, and disarm him. They have stout sticks, and their power comes with the expectation that they also assume risk. That's why we give them armor, you know. They could as easily have grasped the chair from behind and dumped him out of it as well. The fact that neither of these people who were given guns of the public trust thought to do any of the MANY things, risky or no to immediate self, that would have prevented their use is damning.

It's kind of hair-pull level to dump a guy out of a chair, but it's absolutely nonlethal.


So you expect them to teleport? Hint: Those power chairs tend to be able to move pretty quickly.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
29,889
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Video of the wheelchair guy shooting from two angles. Eight shots, a pause, and then a ninth, just for good measure.


Wow. As if an officer can't figure out how to disarm someone in a fucking wheelchair, with help?

My first immediate reaction is that someone needed to walk up to those officers and do exactly as they had done.

I accept this reaction is 'too much'. But holy shit. Anyone who watches that and does not decide "these cops need to be ended in some way" needs to be treated exactly like someone who says "trump Won the Election".

It's like the second officer just wanted to make sure one of the bullets in the corpse was his.


So they were supposed to just sit back and let the guy get a hostage? The pursued while there was no danger, when the guy went towards potential hostages they fired. It's not like they can just go up to him and take the knife away, that's a good way to get yourself stabbed.

You're focusing on the wheelchair and ignoring the knife.

No. They were supposed to get to the front, and disarm him. They have stout sticks, and their power comes with the expectation that they also assume risk. That's why we give them armor, you know. They could as easily have grasped the chair from behind and dumped him out of it as well. The fact that neither of these people who were given guns of the public trust thought to do any of the MANY things, risky or no to immediate self, that would have prevented their use is damning.

It's kind of hair-pull level to dump a guy out of a chair, but it's absolutely nonlethal.


So you expect them to teleport? Hint: Those power chairs tend to be able to move pretty quickly.

What is a safe power wheelchair speed? Most power wheelchairs average a top speed of approximately 5 mph. However, some power chair models can achieve maximum speeds of 10 mph and more.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,131
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Video of the wheelchair guy shooting from two angles. Eight shots, a pause, and then a ninth, just for good measure.


Wow. As if an officer can't figure out how to disarm someone in a fucking wheelchair, with help?

My first immediate reaction is that someone needed to walk up to those officers and do exactly as they had done.

I accept this reaction is 'too much'. But holy shit. Anyone who watches that and does not decide "these cops need to be ended in some way" needs to be treated exactly like someone who says "trump Won the Election".

It's like the second officer just wanted to make sure one of the bullets in the corpse was his.


So they were supposed to just sit back and let the guy get a hostage? The pursued while there was no danger, when the guy went towards potential hostages they fired. It's not like they can just go up to him and take the knife away, that's a good way to get yourself stabbed.

You're focusing on the wheelchair and ignoring the knife.

No. They were supposed to get to the front, and disarm him. They have stout sticks, and their power comes with the expectation that they also assume risk. That's why we give them armor, you know. They could as easily have grasped the chair from behind and dumped him out of it as well. The fact that neither of these people who were given guns of the public trust thought to do any of the MANY things, risky or no to immediate self, that would have prevented their use is damning.

It's kind of hair-pull level to dump a guy out of a chair, but it's absolutely nonlethal.


So you expect them to teleport? Hint: Those power chairs tend to be able to move pretty quickly.

Ooh, a power chair that moves "quickly"....

You know what else can move quickly? A running human.

Here's a hint for you: I can run down a person on a bike most days, given a full sprint. If some schlub a whole DECADE out of any kind of physical occupation can be running down cyclists and city busses, I can absolutely expect a couple cops to run down and dump a guy out of a chair.

Try again.
 

atrib

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
1,901
Location
Columbia, SC
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Video of the wheelchair guy shooting from two angles. Eight shots, a pause, and then a ninth, just for good measure.


Wow. As if an officer can't figure out how to disarm someone in a fucking wheelchair, with help?

My first immediate reaction is that someone needed to walk up to those officers and do exactly as they had done.

I accept this reaction is 'too much'. But holy shit. Anyone who watches that and does not decide "these cops need to be ended in some way" needs to be treated exactly like someone who says "trump Won the Election".

It's like the second officer just wanted to make sure one of the bullets in the corpse was his.


So they were supposed to just sit back and let the guy get a hostage? The pursued while there was no danger, when the guy went towards potential hostages they fired. It's not like they can just go up to him and take the knife away, that's a good way to get yourself stabbed.

You're focusing on the wheelchair and ignoring the knife.

So now we need to kill people in wheelchairs who are accused of shoplifting, are holding a knife, and refusing to comply with a LEO's orders because they may take hostages? While they are rolling away from the cops? Wow! Just wow! What next? He could have a nuclear weapon hidden under the seat? It is hypothetically possible, since we are talking about hypotheticals here. Do you not understand how ridiculous this sounds?
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,131
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Video of the wheelchair guy shooting from two angles. Eight shots, a pause, and then a ninth, just for good measure.


Wow. As if an officer can't figure out how to disarm someone in a fucking wheelchair, with help?

My first immediate reaction is that someone needed to walk up to those officers and do exactly as they had done.

I accept this reaction is 'too much'. But holy shit. Anyone who watches that and does not decide "these cops need to be ended in some way" needs to be treated exactly like someone who says "trump Won the Election".

It's like the second officer just wanted to make sure one of the bullets in the corpse was his.


So they were supposed to just sit back and let the guy get a hostage? The pursued while there was no danger, when the guy went towards potential hostages they fired. It's not like they can just go up to him and take the knife away, that's a good way to get yourself stabbed.

You're focusing on the wheelchair and ignoring the knife.

So now we need to kill people in wheelchairs who are accused of shoplifting, are holding a knife, and refusing to comply with a LEO's orders because they may take hostages? While they are rolling away from the cops? Wow! Just wow! What next? He could have a nuclear weapon hidden under the seat? It is hypothetically possible, since we are talking about hypotheticals here. Do you not understand how ridiculous this sounds?

Not to mention the difficulty of actually accomplishing those things in a chair. Or specifically in that chair.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,813
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
So now we need to kill people in wheelchairs who are accused of shoplifting, are holding a knife, and refusing to comply with a LEO's orders because they may take hostages? While they are rolling away from the cops? Wow! Just wow! What next? He could have a nuclear weapon hidden under the seat? It is hypothetically possible, since we are talking about hypotheticals here. Do you not understand how ridiculous this sounds?
It's not that he was holding a knife. It was that he had already threatened people with the knife.

Sorry, but once you have threatened people with a weapon the police aren't going to let you get around more people. The fact that he was in a wheelchair doesn't change that. Their decision to shoot at that point does not surprise me.
 

Gospel

Warning Level 9999
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
2,949
Location
Florida
Gender
Masculine
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
Does not surprise you doesn't mean you're ok with it right Loren? Please confirm that you're not ok with this.

Thanks
 

Angry Floof

Tricksy Leftits
Staff member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
14,139
Location
Sector 001
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
So now we need to kill people in wheelchairs who are accused of shoplifting, are holding a knife, and refusing to comply with a LEO's orders because they may take hostages? While they are rolling away from the cops? Wow! Just wow! What next? He could have a nuclear weapon hidden under the seat? It is hypothetically possible, since we are talking about hypotheticals here. Do you not understand how ridiculous this sounds?
It's not that he was holding a knife. It was that he had already threatened people with the knife.

Sorry, but once you have threatened people with a weapon the police aren't going to let you get around more people. The fact that he was in a wheelchair doesn't change that. Their decision to shoot at that point does not surprise me.
His own PD condemned the action as a violation of policy on excessive force and "directly contradicts multiple aspects of our use of force training."

So you're not surprised that a police officer violated policy and shot a man in a wheelchair from the back? (Because that I would agree with. I'm never surprised by police brutality and violation of numerous aspects of dept policy,.) Or you think it was reasonable for the police to respond to this situation due to what the now dead man was doing?
 

atrib

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
1,901
Location
Columbia, SC
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
So now we need to kill people in wheelchairs who are accused of shoplifting, are holding a knife, and refusing to comply with a LEO's orders because they may take hostages? While they are rolling away from the cops? Wow! Just wow! What next? He could have a nuclear weapon hidden under the seat? It is hypothetically possible, since we are talking about hypotheticals here. Do you not understand how ridiculous this sounds?
It's not that he was holding a knife. It was that he had already threatened people with the knife.
He had shown the clerk a knife when asked for a receipt. He had not attempted to, or even threatened to hurt anyone. Please don't exaggerate the facts.


Sorry, but once you have threatened people with a weapon the police aren't going to let you get around more people. The fact that he was in a wheelchair doesn't change that. Their decision to shoot at that point does not surprise me.
His employer, the police department, doesn't agree with you. They say that he violated department policy and that his use of force was excessive. Perhaps you should do some research before you pontificate on police policy.

This officer shot a man in a wheelchair nine times in the back as the man was trying to roll away from him. The man was not an immediate threat to anyone. And you feel that this homicide was reasonable?
 

marc

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2008
Messages
1,808
Location
always on the move
Basic Beliefs
Atheist, skeptic, nerd
Lets see what other options there were

1. Get in front of the cart. Those things are pretty slow, and it would be easy to obstruct its path. Not sure how much force they exert, but I don't think it would be that hard to stop. Keep your foot low on it and the guy won't be able to reach you without getting out of the seat.
2. Taser. They are not always a safe option, potentially causing heart attack in some people, but a better option than a gun.
3. Pepper spray
4. Baton, use to disarm or subdue the guy. Good advantage of reach.
5. There were at least two cops there, one can distract while the other moves in to take the guy down.
6. Knock the cart over or push him off of it. Won't be as big a threat prone on the ground.
7. Stand where he can see you with the gun drawn and order him to stop. Seeing the cop is serious might make him reconsider his actions.
8. Shoot once to disable, like in the arm or leg, maybe shoulder. because come on!! At that range if you miss then you have no business holding a gun
9. Shoot once or even twice to take them down. Still might kill him, but he would have a better chance than someone emptying their clip into him at point blank range.
 

Gospel

Warning Level 9999
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
2,949
Location
Florida
Gender
Masculine
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
I just can't believe my own eyes right now. Do we seriously need to debate the top speed of a wheelchair? We have two officers on the scene, all they needed to do was dump the wheelchair then arrest him. Even a roundhouse kick to the chest would have been more reasonable than shooting him 9 damn times. The man clearly wasn't athletic and had limited directions to attack with a knife. Also, where were their tasers?
 
Top Bottom