Police shootings -- what "Unarmed" really means

[Loren Pechtel]

http://lawofficer.com/exclusive/unarmed/

What many of you can't seem to understand: "unarmed" doesn't mean doesn't look like a threat. (Note that simulated or fake weapons are considered "unarmed".)

 

[prideandfall]

http://lawofficer.com/exclusive/unarmed/

What many of you can't seem to understand: "unarmed" doesn't mean doesn't look like a threat. (Note that simulated or fake weapons are considered "unarmed".)

what many of you can't seem to understand: "looks like a threat" doesn't mean "is a threat that justifies ending another human life"

what is the point of this post?
you either have spent years on this forum and... giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're not literally physically retarded irl.... have not figured out that the fundamental position here is that there is a problem with giving lethal weapons to people and authorizing them to murder other people for vague and questionable reasons because you willfully haven't wanted to figure it out, or else you're thinking that arguing "some people thought maybe there were weapons involved" validates killing a person is going to fly with a group of people who don't buy into the idea that cops should be let off when it comes to killing people.

 

[laughing dog]

http://lawofficer.com/exclusive/unarmed/

What many of you can't seem to understand: "unarmed" doesn't mean doesn't look like a threat. (Note that simulated or fake weapons are considered "unarmed".)

what many of you can't seem to understand: "looks like a threat" doesn't mean "is a threat that justifies ending another human life"

And if one bothers to read the link, one of the reasons listed for exponentially increasing one's chances of being shot by the police is "running from the police".

Unarmed to most people means not having a weapon. In most cases, a weaponless person ought to be less than a threat to life to a police officer. "Looking like a threat" is not the same as "is an actual threat".

 

[Mumbles]

http://lawofficer.com/exclusive/unarmed/

What many of you can't seem to understand: "unarmed" doesn't mean doesn't look like a threat. (Note that simulated or fake weapons are considered "unarmed".)

what many of you can't seem to understand: "looks like a threat" doesn't mean "is a threat that justifies ending another human life"

And if one bothers to read the link, one of the reasons listed for exponentially increasing one's chances of being shot by the police is "running from the police".

Unarmed to most people means not having a weapon. In most cases, a weaponless person ought to be less than a threat to life to a police officer. "Looking like a threat" is not the same as "is an actual threat".

Fun Fact: the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ruled that some people who are innocent of wrongdoing have good reason to run from police, based on their long history of abuse and violence. And really nobody is arguing about someone that purposefully drives their car at a cop is being "peaceful" or even that said person is "unarmed". But then we get to people who are simply holding a toy gun in a Wal-Mart, that they pulled off a Wal-Mart shelf.

Or choke out a person who is being arrested for selling loose cigarettes, when they actually had just broken up a fight and were not selling loose cigarettes, and selling loose cigarettes wasn't an arrestable offense to begin with.

Or police that yank high-school kids off the busses they're on to go home, and then fire rubber bullets at them because they aren't going home.

Or who jump onto the hood of a car that had simply backfired, and fire until their gun runs out, and then reload, and repeat several times.

Or who knock down doors and pull naked women out into the public and handcuff them with no signs of any emergency.

Or who beat up bikini-clad teenagers in a rage.

Or who make excuses for racist wannabe vigilantes that chase down and murder teens that were simply walking home from the store.

Or who immediately begin driving around in military surplus, threatening an entire neighborhood with dogs and shotguns, and so forth, when the people are simply outside to mourn someone's death.

Or who drive up to a preteen with a toy gun and shoot him within 2 seconds of arrival.

Or, yes, who torture a guy with severe lead poisoning to death because he simply ran away from them.

So, basically, the article is bullshit.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

http://lawofficer.com/exclusive/unarmed/

What many of you can't seem to understand: "unarmed" doesn't mean doesn't look like a threat. (Note that simulated or fake weapons are considered "unarmed".)

what many of you can't seem to understand: "looks like a threat" doesn't mean "is a threat that justifies ending another human life"

And if one bothers to read the link, one of the reasons listed for exponentially increasing one's chances of being shot by the police is "running from the police".

Unarmed to most people means not having a weapon. In most cases, a weaponless person ought to be less than a threat to life to a police officer. "Looking like a threat" is not the same as "is an actual threat".

The point is simulated weapons are still counted as unarmed. One of the examples was a hostage incident with a bomb--only after the sniper took him out did they find out he didn't actually have a bomb.

- - - Updated - - -

And if one bothers to read the link, one of the reasons listed for exponentially increasing one's chances of being shot by the police is "running from the police".

Unarmed to most people means not having a weapon. In most cases, a weaponless person ought to be less than a threat to life to a police officer. "Looking like a threat" is not the same as "is an actual threat".

Fun Fact: the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ruled that some people who are innocent of wrongdoing have good reason to run from police, based on their long history of abuse and violence. And really nobody is arguing about someone that purposefully drives their car at a cop is being "peaceful" or even that said person is "unarmed". But then we get to people who are simply holding a toy gun in a Wal-Mart, that they pulled off a Wal-Mart shelf.

Or choke out a person who is being arrested for selling loose cigarettes, when they actually had just broken up a fight and were not selling loose cigarettes, and selling loose cigarettes wasn't an arrestable offense to begin with.

Or police that yank high-school kids off the busses they're on to go home, and then fire rubber bullets at them because they aren't going home.

Or who jump onto the hood of a car that had simply backfired, and fire until their gun runs out, and then reload, and repeat several times.

Or who knock down doors and pull naked women out into the public and handcuff them with no signs of any emergency.

Or who beat up bikini-clad teenagers in a rage.

Or who make excuses for racist wannabe vigilantes that chase down and murder teens that were simply walking home from the store.

Or who immediately begin driving around in military surplus, threatening an entire neighborhood with dogs and shotguns, and so forth, when the people are simply outside to mourn someone's death.

Or who drive up to a preteen with a toy gun and shoot him within 2 seconds of arrival.

Or, yes, who torture a guy with severe lead poisoning to death because he simply ran away from them.

So, basically, the article is bullshit.

I was talking about shootings, most of your incidents are not shootings.

I do agree there's a problem with abusive use of force but it's normally not with guns.

 

[laughing dog]

The point is simulated weapons are still counted as unarmed.

As well they should - they are not weapons.

One of the examples was a hostage incident with a bomb--only after the sniper took him out did they find out he didn't actually have a bomb.

Interestingly, you mischaracterized the situation. The victim never had a bomb. The police believe the victim had a bomb (and the victim may have led the police to think there was a bomb). He was not an actual threat. Now, in that case, the situation may have prevented any reasonable effort to ascertain the true facts.

But that is not always the case. Tamir Rice comes to mind. Tamir Rice was unarmed. He had no weapon. Neither officer on the scene bothered to ascertain the facts - they came out guns a blazing and shot that child because they believed he was armed.

And, you conveniently ignored the observation that your cited article included "running from the police" as a reason for legitimate shooting.

The tone and "reasoning" in the article was so slanted it is laughable that anyone would use as analysis.

 

[Val]

Anyway, guns owners are idiots. The american people are reaping their wheat.

 

[Mumbles]

I was talking about shootings, most of your incidents are not shootings.

And that's a major part of the problem. As one example, the main reason that Ferguson turned into a flashpoint wasn't because a cop shot someone, it was because the police, and in truth the local government as a whole, was run as a white supremacist organization to rob wealth from black residents, and transfer it to a select group of white residents. ANd this is true no matter how much you deny the plain facts presented by the DoJ. And the main reason why Baltimore turned into a riot was because police actively preventyed high school students from going home, and then attacked them en masse because they didn't go home.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The point is simulated weapons are still counted as unarmed.

As well they should - they are not weapons.

One of the examples was a hostage incident with a bomb--only after the sniper took him out did they find out he didn't actually have a bomb.

Interestingly, you mischaracterized the situation. The victim never had a bomb. The police believe the victim had a bomb (and the victim may have led the police to think there was a bomb). He was not an actual threat. Now, in that case, the situation may have prevented any reasonable effort to ascertain the true facts.

But that is not always the case. Tamir Rice comes to mind. Tamir Rice was unarmed. He had no weapon. Neither officer on the scene bothered to ascertain the facts - they came out guns a blazing and shot that child because they believed he was armed.

And, you conveniently ignored the observation that your cited article included "running from the police" as a reason for legitimate shooting.

The tone and "reasoning" in the article was so slanted it is laughable that anyone would use as analysis.

Apparently you think the police should be able to figure out something is fake from a distance.

How do you propose they do that? Divination spells?

- - - Updated - - -

I was talking about shootings, most of your incidents are not shootings.

And that's a major part of the problem. As one example, the main reason that Ferguson turned into a flashpoint wasn't because a cop shot someone, it was because the police, and in truth the local government as a whole, was run as a white supremacist organization to rob wealth from black residents, and transfer it to a select group of white residents. ANd this is true no matter how much you deny the plain facts presented by the DoJ. And the main reason why Baltimore turned into a riot was because police actively preventyed high school students from going home, and then attacked them en masse because they didn't go home.

Disagree. There was nothing racial about this, it was a matter of trying to fund government based on fines rather than taxes. A popular idea that produces a bad outcome.

 

[laughing dog]

Apparently you think the police should be able to figure out something is fake from a distance.

That is non-responsive to what I wrote. You are mischaracterizing what "unarmed" means.

How do you propose they do that? Divination spells?

No, I think just not blasting away because they are scared would work wonders. Perhaps Tamir Rice would be alive today.

You are still avoiding that your cited article included "running from the police" as a reason for legitimate shooting even after it has been pointed out a number of times. I wonder why.

 

[Frikki]

Funny how this is just a problem in the US. The US and Germany are similar in many ways, both are large Germany has about 80 million people, they are both majority white Germany 79% USA 77% both have large immigrant and minority populations Germany has a large population of Loren´s least favourite humans, Muslims and America has large groups of Loren´s second least favourite group, Blacks, both are wealthy and both are pretty urban. German police kill about 10 people a year while US police kill about 1000 Germany is about 4 times smaller than the US so police are 25 times more likely to kill someone in the US vs Germany.

If you think that is justified then you are a moron.

 

[Frikki]

Apparently you think the police should be able to figure out something is fake from a distance.

Police manage to do that in every single other developed country.

 

[Hermit]

Funny how this is just a problem in the US. The US and Germany are similar in many ways, both are large Germany has about 80 million people, they are both majority white Germany 79% USA 77% both have large immigrant and minority populations Germany has a large population of Loren´s least favourite humans, Muslims and America has large groups of Loren´s second least favourite group, Blacks, both are wealthy and both are pretty urban. German police kill about 10 people a year while US police kill about 1000 Germany is about 4 times smaller than the US so police are 25 times more likely to kill someone in the US vs Germany.

To be fair, the difference between of the gun cultures between the two countries is the main reason for the higher numbers of death by police in the US. What percentage of Germans carries concealable weapons? If I were a cop I'd be a lot more nervous about my own life as well as the lives of others while facing someone whom I was about to arrest who reached his hands into his waistband in the US than in Germany. In my opinion the absurd veneration of the long outdated Second Amendment is the primary reason for the proportional difference of death by police between these two countries.

 

[Frikki]

Funny how this is just a problem in the US. The US and Germany are similar in many ways, both are large Germany has about 80 million people, they are both majority white Germany 79% USA 77% both have large immigrant and minority populations Germany has a large population of Loren´s least favourite humans, Muslims and America has large groups of Loren´s second least favourite group, Blacks, both are wealthy and both are pretty urban. German police kill about 10 people a year while US police kill about 1000 Germany is about 4 times smaller than the US so police are 25 times more likely to kill someone in the US vs Germany.

To be fair, the difference between of the gun cultures between the two countries is the main reason for the higher numbers of death by police in the US. What percentage of Germans carries concealable weapons? If I were a cop I'd be a lot more nervous about my own life as well as the lives of others while facing someone whom I was about to arrest who reached his hands into his waistband in the US than in Germany. In my opinion the absurd veneration of the long outdated Second Amendment is the primary reason for the proportional difference of death by police between these two countries.

I don´t think it explains a 25 times difference. Racism, culture and legal immunity for police officers with a lack of accountability is much larger. Here and in a large part of Europe policing is a 2-4 year college degree makes for better officers.

 

[Worldtraveller]

Apparently you think the police should be able to figure out something is fake from a distance.

Police manage to do that in every single other developed country.

They are also pretty good at it when the 'threat' isn't black. Imagine that.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Apparently you think the police should be able to figure out something is fake from a distance.

That is non-responsive to what I wrote. You are mischaracterizing what "unarmed" means.

How do you propose they do that? Divination spells?

No, I think just not blasting away because they are scared would work wonders. Perhaps Tamir Rice would be alive today.

You are still avoiding that your cited article included "running from the police" as a reason for legitimate shooting even after it has been pointed out a number of times. I wonder why.

You were objecting to shooting the guy with the fake bomb.

How were the police supposed to know it was fake?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Apparently you think the police should be able to figure out something is fake from a distance.

Police manage to do that in every single other developed country.

They are also pretty good at it when the 'threat' isn't black. Imagine that.

While you're at it, imagine the sun rising in the west.

The police are actually less likely to shoot a black on a per-encounter basis.

 

[laughing dog]

That is non-responsive to what I wrote. You are mischaracterizing what "unarmed" means.
No, I think just not blasting away because they are scared would work wonders. Perhaps Tamir Rice would be alive today.

You are still avoiding that your cited article included "running from the police" as a reason for legitimate shooting even after it has been pointed out a number of times. I wonder why.

You were objecting to shooting the guy with the fake bomb.

No, I did not. Here is the relevant quote from what I posted "Now, in that case, the situation may have prevented any reasonable effort to ascertain the true facts. "

 

[Hermit]

Funny how this is just a problem in the US. The US and Germany are similar in many ways, both are large Germany has about 80 million people, they are both majority white Germany 79% USA 77% both have large immigrant and minority populations Germany has a large population of Loren´s least favourite humans, Muslims and America has large groups of Loren´s second least favourite group, Blacks, both are wealthy and both are pretty urban. German police kill about 10 people a year while US police kill about 1000 Germany is about 4 times smaller than the US so police are 25 times more likely to kill someone in the US vs Germany.

To be fair, the difference between of the gun cultures between the two countries is the main reason for the higher numbers of death by police in the US. What percentage of Germans carries concealable weapons? If I were a cop I'd be a lot more nervous about my own life as well as the lives of others while facing someone whom I was about to arrest who reached his hands into his waistband in the US than in Germany. In my opinion the absurd veneration of the long outdated Second Amendment is the primary reason for the proportional difference of death by police between these two countries.

I don´t think it explains a 25 times difference. Racism, culture and legal immunity for police officers with a lack of accountability is much larger. Here and in a large part of Europe policing is a 2-4 year college degree makes for better officers.

Certainly it is only one of many factors, but I think the greater likelihood of the person a cop is facing "carrying" in the US than in Germany and other countries is a significant one.

 

[Worldtraveller]

They are also pretty good at it when the 'threat' isn't black. Imagine that.

While you're at it, imagine the sun rising in the west.

The police are actually less likely to shoot a black on a per-encounter basis.

Can I have some of what you're smoking?

https://www.vox.com/cards/police-brutality-shootings-us/us-police-racism