Police Misconduct Catch All Thread

[Derec]

All civil unrest results in property damage.

So you defend political violence? Do you extend that to all political opinions or only those you agree with (i.e. leftist ones)?
Would you defend anti-abortion, anti-trans or pro-Trump protesters "burning this bitch down" because they are angry?

If you don't want property damage, address the conditions that give rise to the unrest.

That's just giving in to extortion of political violence. And I bet you do not think that if there were violent anti-trans or anti-gay "protest" that we should acquiesce to their demand. So why should we do the same for violent leftists?

The Black Civil Rights movement of the '60s resulted in property damage. No doubt you'd have opposed that movement too.

The violent parts of that movement certainly. Malcolm Little/Nation of Islam, Black Panthers etc. Just because they are black does not give them a carte blanche (no pun intended) to do anything they want. Then and now.
Btw, these violent parts of the movement were often racist (e.g. Malcolm 10th) or communist (e.g. Black Panthers who in particular were Maoist).

As long as black people continue to be killed by police at a much higher rate than white people, expect more civil unrest in the future.

That is a bad metric, which is exactly why you leftists love to use it. Blacks also commit violent crimes at a higher rate (>5x for homicides for example) and thus are engaged with police more frequently. So, it is to be expected that they get shot by police more frequently, without any nefarious behavior by police.
What do you want? Some sort of "affirmative action" on police shootings?

racist paramilitary organizations like the KKK

And (New) Black Panthers, Black Liberation Army, etc.?

racial segregation

Like this?
University of Chicago student organization hosts 'BIPOC-only' discussion about race on campus

racial bias in welfare/entitlements/benefits

I agree. Stuff like this is blatantly unconstitutional.
SF's guaranteed income program for pregnant Black women expands across California

racial bias in education

Do you mean things like so-called "affirmative action" or nonsense like "reparations math" (pushing leftist, racist ideology in the math curriculum)?

racist sentencing

Like Garland's DOJ giving sweetheart deals to the killer #BLM arsonist and to arsonist #BLM lawyers?

racial gerrymandering

Like SCOTUS forcing Alabama to guarantee at least 2 majority black districts no matter how salamander-like that would make the district maps?

 

[Gospel]

The protesters were not trying to keep a criminal on the streets.
How do you know that? After all, many #BLMers and Antifas are also police/prison abolitionists and in fact do want to keep criminals on the streets.

They were protesting because they believed that the man was shot without being given a chance to surrender.

He was armed with a firearm and he just shot two people. What were the police supposed to do?
By the way, this is a collection of protest signs I found especially ridiculous.

From "fuck the police" and professing love for a violent criminal whom they've never met and who'd as soon rob and shoot them as look at them, to the epic fail of "resist anceis happen ingnow".

Whether or not they were right about that is a matter of opinion, but it is important to acknowledge their REAL (not land of make-believe) reasons for protesting, even if you disagree with them.

Their reasons for protesting are simple: Pat-Pat (whom they proclaim to "love") was black and he was killed by police. That alone is enough in their eyes.
See this ridiculous article. Nowhere does it say anything about that he should have been given more of a chance to surrender. No, they object to their favorite Crip being shot by police no matter what! In addition to being racist af.

'I'm Tired of Walking in Their White Spaces'

I'm referring here to arguments that seem to dwell in a realm of fanciful speculation rather than focusing on the realities at hand. The exchanges between opposing sides can become endless when fueled by imagination rather than grounded in reality.

For instance, consider Patrick Kimmons', mother where she said;

"I'm gonna fight for my baby. How could you shoot a man after he already laid down flat."

People tend to misinterpret her statement, insisting "he wasn't a baby!", despite her explicit reference to Patrick as a man in the second part of her plea. Moreover, they often overlook her grievance about her son being shot despite having already laid down. Instead, they prefer to criticize her parenting or highlight her son's criminal past. These tangential arguments, in my opinion, are delving into the territory of 'make-believe' as it takes the discussion away from the issue.

While I maintain reservations about the Black Lives Matter organization itself, I recognize that just as there are morons on their picket lines, there are also individuals who genuinely comprehend the underlying issues and who actively protesting under its banner.

What we are faced with in this case is a situation where a presumed gang-related criminal allegedly engaged in a shooting, and was subsequently shot by Portland police during his attempted escape. This scenario seems to be a straightforward case on the surface. I tend to agree with you there. However, we should avoid overlooking a critical element: the community's immediate, visceral reaction stems from a deeper, underlying issue.

And before you think I'm talking about BLM or putting it all on Police misconduct I'm not.

Kimmons' girlfriend:

"I'm not angry at the police,'' Turner said. "I just want change.''

His grandmother:

"He tried to change his life but if you already have a record, it's kind of hard to bounce back,'' .

In addition to that, If one doesn't relocate, it becomes increasingly difficult to evade the grasp of gangs attempting to draw you back into their fold. That's just a reality.

I prefer not to indulge in fanciful conjectures when engaging in discourse. Rather, I believe it's more fruitful to address the root cause and seek viable solutions. The African American community in Portland undoubtedly faces its share of internal challenges, just as the police haven't always executed their duties flawlessly.

My two cents.

 

[bilby]

Why should there be any expectation that there's always a chance to surrender?

Because we like to pretend we live in a civilized society, and not a totalitarian police state.

 

[bilby]

the cops aren't going to wait and see if he takes hostile action or surrenders

In literally every civilized nation on Earth, not only would they do so, they would be expected to do so.

Yes, that would entail some risk to the lives of the police. It's a risky job, and if they don't like risk, they could quit and retrain as school crossing guards (unless they feel that that's too risky as well).

Why are American police such utter craven cowards, and why do the American people tolerate this level of cowardice, from people who are supposed to be protecting them?

 

[bilby]

This isn't Hollywood

Really? Where else is:

plenty of criminals take an I'm-not-going-back attitude and shoot at cops in basically hail mary moves

even vaguely true?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Why should there be any expectation that there's always a chance to surrender?

Because we like to pretend we live in a civilized society, and not a totalitarian police state.

The problem comes when there's no time for a demand to surrender. That doesn't make it a police state.

 

[laughing dog]

the cops aren't going to wait and see if he takes hostile action or surrenders

In literally every civilized nation on Earth, not only would they do so, they would be expected to do so.

Yes, that would entail some risk to the lives of the police. It's a risky job, and if they don't like risk, they could quit and retrain as school crossing guards (unless they feel that that's too risky as well).

Why are American police such utter craven cowards, and why do the American people tolerate this level of cowardice, from people who are supposed to be protecting them?

I wonder about that as well. While there a plenty of American people who do not tolerate this level of cowardice or indifference, they (which includes me) seem to be in a distinct minority.

I think most police are not craven cowards or indifferent to civilian life. Those that are such cowards are enabled by the attitudes and support from people who feel like LP.

 

[laughing dog]

Why should there be any expectation that there's always a chance to surrender?

Because we like to pretend we live in a civilized society, and not a totalitarian police state.

The problem comes when there's no time for a demand to surrender. That doesn't make it a police state.

Tell that to Tamir Rice. Who was given no time to surrender.

 

[Toni]

Committing suicide by provoking cops to shoot them? That's a good reason for cops to avoid using firearms as much as possible, and to use nonlethal and low-lethality weapons as much as possible.

Look at the article I posted the other way around. Most cases of suicide by cop involve the guy having a gun. Don't oblige their desires and the cop is liable to get shot.

Is this another belief masquerading as fact or do you evidence to support your view?

It's called paying attention rather than using faith-based positions. Suicides do sometimes shoot the cops.

Really? It’s easy to see your faith is entirely in the infallibility of police. Especially those armed with guns.

 

[Toni]

Why should there be any expectation that there's always a chance to surrender?

Because we like to pretend we live in a civilized society, and not a totalitarian police state.

The problem comes when there's no time for a demand to surrender. That doesn't make it a police state.

Tell that to Tamir Rice. Who was given no time to surrender.

Who was 12 years old and playing with a toy

 

[marc]

There was a Howie Mandel show, where at one point he looks at a woman in the audience and says "What'sYourNameWhat'sYourNameWhat'sYourName, I asked you three fucking times!" Of course he asked three times in about 2 seconds, so she had no chance to respond. So many times for police shootings the report they put in claim the victim ignored police orders or something like that. But when video of it comes out the orders, if any were actually given, were rapid fire like that, followed by shots, when the person they shot probably hadn't even had the chance to register the cops were talking to them.

 

[Gospel]

But but but the police shot a career criminal! It's not safe for them to take precautions. It's safer to shoot any citizen immediately then let career criminals get away. /s

 

[Derec]

Who was 12 years old and playing with a toy

We've discussed this case to death. He was not playing with a "toy" but with a realistic replica.

He was also very big for his age, in both height and girth. He looked more like George Zimmermann than a typical tween.

Curiously, there weren't many protests and certainly no riots over Rice's killing. Is it because he wasn't a thug? I know #BLMers love their thugs - George Floyd, Pat-Pat, Winston Boogie Smith etc.

 

[Derec]

Really? It’s easy to see your faith is entirely in the infallibility of police. Especially those armed with guns.

Nobody is claiming police are infallible. But in order for a police shooting to be a crime, there needs to be more than fallibility - there needs to be either gross negligence or nefarious intent.

In any case, regarding the Pat-Pat shooting, police made no mistake. Pat-Pat made several, and they turned out fatal. Too bad, so sad.

Pat-Pat, who turned his life around well, he did a 360.

Charles Leclerc at the 2018 German Grand Prix

 

[Derec]

In literally every civilized nation on Earth, not only would they do so, they would be expected to do so.

I do not think police in other countries would react differently if they encountered someone like Pat-Pat, armed with a revolver and has just shot two other people.

Yes, that would entail some risk to the lives of the police. It's a risky job, and if they don't like risk, they could quit and retrain as school crossing guards (unless they feel that that's too risky as well).

Yes, policing is risky. Police are expected to incur a certain level of risk. They are not required to incur unreasonable level of risk, which not shooting Pat-Pat would entail.

Why are American police such utter craven cowards, and why do the American people tolerate this level of cowardice, from people who are supposed to be protecting them?

Because police who hesitate too long get shot, and the gunmen is then at lagre. Better a thug go to the morgue than a police officer.
You call that "craven cowardice", but you are wrong. It's just a healthy self-preservation. At the end of the day, police officers have the right to go home after their shift.

 

[laughing dog]

Who was 12 years old and playing with a toy

We've discussed this case to death. He was not playing with a "toy" but with a realistic replica.

He was also very big for his age, in both height and girth. He looked more like George Zimmermann than a typical tween.

. Rice had a toy. It doesn’t matter what he looked like, he was killed by the police who gave him no time to react.

Curiously, there weren't many protests and certainly no riots over Rice's killing. Is it because he wasn't a thug? I know #BLMers love their thugs - George Floyd, Pat-Pat, Winston Boogie Smith etc.

The disgust over police killings had yet to reach its heights. Calling George Floyd a thug is a truly telling.

 

[Derec]

Rice had a toy. It doesn’t matter what he looked like,

His size makes a difference in how he would be perceived in real time. Rice may have treated his gun as a toy, but it looked like a firearm because the orange tip was removed. You have somebody of adult dimensions wielding something that looks like a semiauto firearm, no wonder somebody called 911!

he was killed by the police who gave him no time to react.

Yes, the responding police officers made mistakes in driving up too close and opening fire too quickly.
But mistakes are not necessarily murder.
This is one case where I do think a civil award is appropriate, because of the mistakes made by police. Unfortunately, cities and counties are quick to make families and their hearse-chasing lawyers millionaires even when police made no mistakes.

The disgust over police killings had yet to reach its heights. Calling George Floyd a thug is a truly telling.

He was a thug. Easy to forget given all the hagiographies pushed on us for three years, but he most definitely was a thug.

Between 1997 and 2005, Floyd was arrested several times on drug and theft charges, spending months in jail. Around that time, Wayne’s mother, Sheila Masters, recalled running into Floyd in the street and learning he was homeless.
“He’s so tall he’d pat me on my head ... and say, ‘Mama you know it’s going to be all right,’” Masters said.
In August 2007, Floyd was arrested and charged with aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon. Investigators said he and five other men barged into a woman’s apartment, and Floyd pushed a pistol into her abdomen before searching for items to steal. Floyd pleaded guilty in 2009 and was sentenced to five years in prison. By the time he was paroled, in January 2013, he was nearing 40.

A long look at the complicated life of George Floyd

 

[Derec]

Because we like to pretend we live in a civilized society, and not a totalitarian police state.

Ability to offer an active gunman a chance to surrender is dictated by circumstances, not by pretenses of civilized society.

 

[Derec]

"I'm gonna fight for my baby. How could you shoot a man after he already laid down flat."

People tend to misinterpret her statement, insisting "he wasn't a baby!", despite her explicit reference to Patrick as a man in the second part of her plea.

Calling him baby, while not literal, is certainly an attempt to make him look more innocent.

His uncle used similar language:

"Kids are going to be kids, but he turned his life around," added another uncle, Clarence Kimmons, in an interview. "It could have been anybody, and now we've got to bury him."

Nigga My brother in Christ, that "kid" was 27 years old!

Moreover, they often overlook her grievance about her son being shot despite having already laid down.

We have the video. He wasn't lying down when he was shot. He certainly wasn't lying flat. That would have been a lot safer in hindsight.

Instead, they prefer to criticize her parenting or highlight her son's criminal past. These tangential arguments, in my opinion, are delving into the territory of 'make-believe' as it takes the discussion away from the issue.

His criminal past (and present) is at the center of the issue here. That's why he was shooting at a rival banger (hitting both him and his homie) and why police ultimately shot him dead.
His involvement with Rolling 60 Crips is certainly more relevant than the fact that he engaged in unprotected sex, and yet the media reports and the family love to dwell on his children.

While I maintain reservations about the Black Lives Matter organization itself, I recognize that just as there are morons on their picket lines, there are also individuals who genuinely comprehend the underlying issues and who actively protesting under its banner.

What is the "underlying issue" here? We have a long-time gangbanger who was shooting at a rival. He got shot by police. Good riddance!
There are certainly more worthy causes for protest.

What we are faced with in this case is a situation where a presumed gang-related criminal allegedly engaged in a shooting, and was subsequently shot by Portland police during his attempted escape.

Nothing presumed or alleged about that.

This scenario seems to be a straightforward case on the surface. I tend to agree with you there. However, we should avoid overlooking a critical element: the community's immediate, visceral reaction stems from a deeper, underlying issue.

That there are a lot of LWNJs in Portland? The whole point of the TV show "Portlandia" was to poke fun at the type.

And before you think I'm talking about BLM or putting it all on Police misconduct I'm not.

Yes, there are some in the family who recognize the reality. Others are wilfully blind, most notably the mother and the uncles. Btw, this wasn't just the issue in 2018 when he was shot. The "Justice for Pat-Pat" was repeated in 2019, 2020 and 2021 at least. Rarely is there so much effort expanded for somebody so little deserving of the honor.

In addition to that, If one doesn't relocate, it becomes increasingly difficult to evade the grasp of gangs attempting to draw you back into their fold. That's just a reality.

Well, maybe he should have relocated then. But ultimately, his choices are his responsibility. He made a choice to go back to that life, and he paid the price.

I prefer not to indulge in fanciful conjectures when engaging in discourse. Rather, I believe it's more fruitful to address the root cause and seek viable solutions. The African American community in Portland undoubtedly faces its share of internal challenges, just as the police haven't always executed their duties flawlessly.

It's not even primarily about the (relatively small) Portland black community in this case. Most of the "We love you Pat-Pat" contingent are whiter than I am.

 

[bilby]

Because we like to pretend we live in a civilized society, and not a totalitarian police state.

Ability to offer an active gunman a chance to surrender is dictated by circumstances, not by pretenses of civilized society.

Those circumstances are largely dictated by the authorities.

There are a LOT of better options than to rush in, heavily armed but clueless, and to then find yourself in a position where the only remaining option is to shoot or be shot.

Perhaps you could try employing police officers who receive training in tactics, strategy, communications, intelligence gathering, coordination, negotiation and the use of non-lethal force.

Just giving them a pistol and a load of ammunition, and then letting them act like a bunch of violent clowns whose only idea is to shoot first and ask questions later, really doesn't seem to be working well for you.