Unarmed teen killed in his home by police

[GenesisNemesis]

It happens to white kids too.

WTF? The OP didn't even bring up race in their post. But apparently you can't help but butt it into the thread on your own.

Libruls r sooo obsessed with race.

 

[Samhain]

Unfortunately, regardless of how much race does or doesn't matter in this particular thread, it remains a fact that if you are a minority the standards of justice apply differently for you in this country. If there were actually some records of all the police shootings of unarmed individuals in this country it is almost a surety that the scales would tip towards blacks as the primary victim, a tragedy to be sure considering that they make up very small percentage of the population, relatively speaking. At the very least we should expect those figures to be disproportionately weighted against blacks.

Then again, this is not the point of this topic so I will let that point rest. However, it is a sad fact that police seem far too willing to kill in the line of duty. A point that even CNN picked up on http://us.cnn.com/2014/06/20/us/albuquerque-police-investigation/index.html?sr=sharebar_facebook

 

[Archimedes]

It happens to white kids too.
No charges filed against Euharlee officer in fatal shooting
However, there were no "Dying for Wii" threads, no "hands holding Wii controller don't shoot" nationwide protests, no "white lives matter", no burnt down and/or looted businesses, Al Sharpton wasn't anywhere within a 1000 mile radius, there was no federal investigation, and Obama didn't find it important enough to comment on.

I guess victims of police shootings only matter when they are black and criminal.

Did you read the OP? It didn't mention race at all, but you just couldn't help injecting your usual boring race/gender issues into a thread that had nothing to do with it.

 

[Archimedes]

Yup, I think this is one of the biggest causes of unjust shootings--drug raids. Especially when the druggies are trying to destroy their stash to keep it out of the cop's hands.

"Especially when the druggies are trying to destroy their stash".

Why would cops shoot someone for flushing their drugs down the toilet? I can kind of understand a cop doing something stupid like shooting someone who went for their wallet or who was holding something that could be mistaken for a gun, but why on earth would cops shoot someone during a drug bust while trying to get rid of their stash?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Trying to make a drug arrest without the drugs involves more paperwork for the police. Whom would you rather have die - a drug-addicted criminal or some innocent tree? The police officer's actions were more than justifiable in this case.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Yup, I think this is one of the biggest causes of unjust shootings--drug raids. Especially when the druggies are trying to destroy their stash to keep it out of the cop's hands.

"Especially when the druggies are trying to destroy their stash".

Why would cops shoot someone for flushing their drugs down the toilet? I can kind of understand a cop doing something stupid like shooting someone who went for their wallet or who was holding something that could be mistaken for a gun, but why on earth would cops shoot someone during a drug bust while trying to get rid of their stash?

Poop gun.

 

[Derec]

Did you read the OP? It didn't mention race at all, but you just couldn't help injecting your usual boring race/gender issues into a thread that had nothing to do with it.

I am not injecting anything. The whole Brown/Garner thing is all about race - just look at slogans like "black lives matter" or editorial cartoons like these that make it all about race:

And many more. Is it then so wrong to point out that wrongful police shootings and no bill grand juries happen to white people as well?

 

[Derec]

Actually you are. I didn't mention the racial aspect in the OP. And my posting history clearly isn't one of soap box like attention to racial matters.

I apologize then.

However, your red herring was successful in engaging some posters in a tit for tat black vs white arguments. But they mostly kept focused on the primary problem of our police. Even if I were a card carrying racist I would still object to how police treat people of color because injustice against them means injustice against every non-elite eventually.

Injustice is injustice - but not all victims of injustice are black and not all blacks that die from interactions with the police are victims of injustice.

And as I touched upon in the OP it seems like the media hypes these grey area cases as a wedge between indifferent or unaware whites vs people of color and white SJWs. That's why I suggested we focus on cases of the most innocent that were victimized. To keep the petty squabbling of who's got it worse to a minimum. And focus on the primary problem of a occupying militarized police force.

It's all right to complain about a militarized police force - nobody really wants that on their streets - but it's quite ironic when protesters supply justification for all the militarized equipment and tactics by acting like a violent mob.

 

[laughing dog]

Did you read the OP? It didn't mention race at all, but you just couldn't help injecting your usual boring race/gender issues into a thread that had nothing to do with it.

I am not injecting anything. The whole Brown/Garner thing is all about race - just look at slogans like "black lives matter" or editorial cartoons like these that make it all about race:

And many more. Is it then so wrong to point out that wrongful police shootings and no bill grand juries happen to white people as well?

When it is not the topic of the OP, it is a derail.

 

[Derec]

And the local media went apeshit over it. This would have been a major story if it happened in, say, Atlanta or Marietta or even in Cartersville. But it happened in Euharlee, a bumblefuck town with a population of just over 4,000. That the story got picked up as widely as it did is actually kind of amazing.

I doubt it would have become a national story like Ferguson if it had happened in Marietta.

OTOH, even your Euharlee story actually got picked up by local media and had a relatively vigorous firestorm on affiliate networks in the aftermath. It fits the pattern of most of the other more widely reported cases, and thousands of other non-reported cases.

But cases like Trayvon Martin or Michael Brown or Eric Garner spend months or longer on TV news.

It DID have national coverage. What it didn't get was national ATTENTION. Mainly because the officer in question claimed she saw a gun and because the media uncritically sides with the police officers' versions of events more often than not. FYI, same thing happens with black people more often than not.

Maybe it depends on whether the family bribes Sharpton enough. Or perhaps because it was a cut and dried situation:

At the time of the shooting, police said McIntosh, of the 1000 block of N. Central Avenue, was part of a group being questioned by police at the intersection when he attempted to flee. Police said he pulled a gun and was shot and that the gun was recovered at the scene.

If Chris Roupe had been killed while holding a Wii remote at, say, Best Buy or in full view of a dozen or so witnesses, it would be a different story. Otherwise, it's just another "cop saw what (s)he thought was a gun and righteously defended herself" story. The only reason the story got any traction at all is because someone let it be known that the Roupe definitely WASN'T armed when he was shot, so the officer's version of events was called into question by the media.

If anything the fact that he was shot at his own home makes it worse. Your OP was a shooting at the guy's home (although details are different) which is what reminded me of Roupe in the first place.
As far as witnesses, we see from the Brown case that they were highly unreliable.

I agree.And yet it still DOES.

As evidenced that black criminals are portrayed as innocent victims and media eat it up.

So you are retracting your implication that Chris Roupe was not a threat to the officer that killed him?

Wrong. Just because A doesn't imply B doesn't mean that A implies not B.
Just because somebody is unarmed doesn't mean they were not a threat - Brown attacked the police officer so he was clearly a threat. Roupe merely answered his door and thus he wasn't. Yet the former becomes a national outrage rather than the latter.

You seem to be implying that the kind of reaction we're seeing from Ferguson just kinda popped up out of nowhere. That is far from the case.

When all this happened the word was that Ferguson residents were angry because so many of them got bench warrants issued against them because they failed to pay their fines or show up for their court dates. I mean, what do they expect?

It takes a lot more than that.

So why did the story of a convenience store robber who attacked the police officer strike such a nerve and not some more factual case of police misconduct?

Chris Roupe couldn't even get a honorable mention on CNN without some witnesses to his murder. How do you suppose the people of Ferguson would have gotten the word out?

I think the big difference is still the race. Roupe was white so he could not rely on the powerful network of racial agitators.

Because being ACCUSED of being a racist by right wing reactionaries doesn't actually make you one?

No, Al Shaprton is a racist. Take Freddie's Fashion Mart. A large black church was renting a building to a Jewish owned clothes store who in turn sublet part of the building to a black store. When the church increased the rent, so did Freddie to his subtenant. That's where Al Shapton got in, protesting the rent increase to the black store only (ignoring the rent increase by the black church) and called the store owner a "white interloper". That led to a Sharpton supporter murdering 7 people at the store by arson.
Now if a white community leader were to call a black business owner in a predominantly white neighborhood a "black interloper" nobody would hesitate to call him racist. And if his agitation were to lead to a deadly arson he'd be done as a public figure. Yet calling Sharpton racist somehow makes one a "right wing reactionary".
I merely want same criteria being applied to everyone. No favoritism, no double standards.

Maybe we could get Al Sharpton to give a written apology to Chris Roupe's parents, written on the skin of Trayvon's Martin in Tawana Brawley's blood?

How about we get Sharpton to apologize to Steve Pagones, the man Sharpton and Brawley falsely accused of rape first?
Imagine if a white community leader were to start a witch hunt campaign accusing an innocent black assistant DA of raping a 15 year old white girl.

 

[laughing dog]

I think the real problem is that there are too many idolators of the police who are willing to defer to their "judgment". Just because the job of the police is difficult is no rational reason to allow them virtual free reign when it comes to killing unarmed civilians. Society allows the police the authority to make life and death decisions. Because the police can legally take lives with the imprimanteur of the state, they should be held to a higher standard of justification when they do so. Especially because they are supposedly trained professionals.

 

[Derec]

Was he made aware of that case? Why don't you contact President Obama and ask him about that case.

Unlike Sharpton, I am not buddies with Obama.

I'm willing to bet he would comment on it very much like he has commented on Michael Brown and Eric Garner because there is a similarity of misplaced deadly force by police in all three cases.

I think the Roupe case is much worse as he was sitting in his house minding his own business rather than being out robbing stores or selling illegal merchandise while being out on bail.

On the other hand, there remains the fact that black men are disproportionately targeted by police, and that issue also needs to be addressed.

Disproportionate to what? To their population? Certainly. To their involvement in crimes? That remains to be shown.
Black people are also wildly disproportionately (to the population) targeted by NBA recruiters. That doesn't necessarily make it racist though.

enough or do you need more?

Yes, I do need more. Something indicating that they still claim that there was a gun, or that there was a gun recovered at the scene. You know something that fits your assertion that they maintain that there was a gun, rather than merely having stated that in the beginning. To my knowledge no gun was recovered so they can't really maintain that there was one.

- - - Updated - - -

I think the real problem is that there are too many idolators of the police who are willing to defer to their "judgment". Just because the job of the police is difficult is no rational reason to allow them virtual free reign when it comes to killing unarmed civilians. Society allows the police the authority to make life and death decisions. Because the police can legally take lives with the imprimanteur of the state, they should be held to a higher standard of justification when they do so. Especially because they are supposedly trained professionals.

That is true as far as that goes. But there is also the idolatry of "unarmed civilians". Unarmed != harmless, as Michael Brown has shown. There are much better cases of police brutality and putting so much stock into a particularly bad one actually harms efforts to combat actual police misconduct.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Unlike Sharpton, I am not buddies with Obama.

This totally destroys my image of you. I thought that since you were so tight with Reverend Sharpton that you would be tight with Obama.

 

[laughing dog]

I think the real problem is that there are too many idolators of the police who are willing to defer to their "judgment". Just because the job of the police is difficult is no rational reason to allow them virtual free reign when it comes to killing unarmed civilians. Society allows the police the authority to make life and death decisions. Because the police can legally take lives with the imprimanteur of the state, they should be held to a higher standard of justification when they do so. Especially because they are supposedly trained professionals.

That is true as far as that goes. But there is also the idolatry of "unarmed civilians". Unarmed != harmless, as Michael Brown has shown. There are much better cases of police brutality and putting so much stock into a particularly bad one actually harms efforts to combat actual police misconduct.

Believing the people do not automatically deserve execution just because they may be breaking the law is not idolatry of unarmed civilians. The police are supposed to protect and serve the public not themselves.

 

[Archimedes]

Did you read the OP? It didn't mention race at all, but you just couldn't help injecting your usual boring race/gender issues into a thread that had nothing to do with it.

I am not injecting anything. The whole Brown/Garner thing is all about race - just look at slogans like "black lives matter" or editorial cartoons like these that make it all about race:

Slogans and editorial cartoons that only you bring up and insist on injecting into the discussion. The OP was clearly about the general problem of cops shooting civilians. If they wanted to make it about race they would have done so. As it was, you insist on wading into discussions like this and making the discussion about your hobby horse.

And many more. Is it then so wrong to point out that wrongful police shootings and no bill grand juries happen to white people as well?

Yes it is. Because you're trying to steer a discussion about the general problem of cops shooting civilians without justification toward a discussion of something you want to discuss, about how awful Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are, how blacks don't really have it so bad, how the media unfairly portrays white vs. black victims of police violence etc.

 

[Rhea]

Police kill over a thousand civilians a year (and probably a lot more but we can't know for sure because no police shooting stats are kept by the government). And yet almost none get indicted.

It is beyond incredible that less than a handful are indicted.

Meanwhile 100 officers were killed in the line of duty last year. That's the least amount since 1944. And from what I understand most of the officer fatalities are not gunshot related.

Police departments are increasingly acting as occupying forces rather than peacekeepers.

27 were killed "feloniously" in 2013 by things like guns, knives and in one case, an airplane. The rest crashed their cars or had heart attacks, typically.

23 cab drivers dies by homicide in the same year. NOT ONE CABBIE WENT OUT AND SHOT SOME ONE IN FEAR OVER IT.

 

[Shadowy Man]

23 cab drivers dies by homicide in the same year. NOT ONE CABBIE WENT OUT AND SHOT SOME ONE IN FEAR OVER IT.

That's only because they aren't allowed to do so with impunity.

 

[thentian]

Reading this topic from across the pond, I've been a little intrigued by it. The impression I get is that people are being killed by police right, left and center!

So, I decided to look for statistics, which brought on the first jaw-dropper: no official statistics exist for the USA! WTF?!? Seriously?!? I'd understand if it was Uganda, but... isn't the USA supposed to be a civilized country with a working government?!?

Righty... so... according to Washington Post, it's approximately one thousand a year, with an additional five thousand wounded but not killed. Translating that to Norwegian numbers... one sixtieth of the population makes about... 15-20 every year!!! (Second jaw-dropper!)

I don't remember there being even one such killing this year here in Norway, but I'm sure that if we suddenly had that many people killed by the police, then people would lose their jobs! From the Minister of Justice to Chiefs of Police! And something like 70-100 people wounded by police each year...? *shakes head*

So... a suggestion for President Obama: make one of those executive things to ensure that proper statistics are being made! You need to know the scope of the problem before you can begin to handle it! (Yes, I realize that he probably doesn't read this forum.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Suppose it was something like this:

http://www.dx.com/p/chuangnian-wisemi-auto-pistol-shape-holder-for-wii-u-black-2-pcs-191955

Suppose you stop making shit up and read the articles

The article said a "Wii controller". I found a very gun-like Wii controller.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Yup, I think this is one of the biggest causes of unjust shootings--drug raids. Especially when the druggies are trying to destroy their stash to keep it out of the cop's hands.

"Especially when the druggies are trying to destroy their stash".

Why would cops shoot someone for flushing their drugs down the toilet? I can kind of understand a cop doing something stupid like shooting someone who went for their wallet or who was holding something that could be mistaken for a gun, but why on earth would cops shoot someone during a drug bust while trying to get rid of their stash?

The cops are shooting at sudden movement without regard for the fact that they're provoking it.