On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 11:50:11 AM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
The problem here is you expect that in a country with a million cops,
because they are trained, they all have to act perfectly, can't make
a mistake where they have to make a judgment call in a fraction of
a second. And at the same time
you refuse to acknowledge that in almost every one of these cases
where someone winds up dead, the perp is the one that created the
toxic, volatile, chaotic environment. You sound just like those
Black Lies Matter idiots, unarmed guy is dead, it's automatically
the cops fault, facts don't matter.
Wooooosh! Again we're talking about apples here, you're off onto
oranges. That volatile, toxic, chaotic scene was created by the
deaf guy. He lead police on a 7 mile journey instead of pulling
over for speeding.
They don't. So far I haven't seen one case where they've said that
and gotten away with it. And the cop here, we don't even know his side
of the story yet, no video camera evidence has been shown, no witness
testimony, yet here you are with the case all wrapped up. Just like
BLM. What kind of conservative does that?
If the civilian can show it's self defense, then they should not be charged.
You have some examples of that, you'd like to share?
Examples please. This might happen once in a blue moon, with 1 mil
cops, but it's not "quite often". It's clearly not the case here.
It's not the case with Michael Brown, the 12 year old in Cleveland,
Freddy Gray, Eric Garner, the guy last week in Louisiana.
Were you there? Again, you're just like the BLM idiots. We don't
know what the cop saw, what the cop thought he saw. Suppose the
guy had something in his hand that looked like a weapon? Suppose
he turned around reached into his waistband, then turned around
quickly, with his arms moving wildly? Why do
you make up conclusions when we barely have any of the facts?
The Michael Brown shooting, it was initially that a white cop
had gone after an innocent black child for no reason who was just
walking home and shot him when he had his hands up. In your screwy
world, that's "the cop executed him for walking in the street"!
The cop MURDERED him!
Fortunately an investigation found out that something very different
really happened. But you and the BLM type refuse to change your
ways. In their case, it's because they have an anti-cop, racist
agenda. What's your excuse?
It's not up to me to show you anything. Is that how it works now in
your little screwy world? Guilty until proven innocent? That a new
conservative principle? YOU are making the accusations, it's up to
you to prove them. All I've said is that the perp initially created
the toxic, volatile situation, and we have absolute proof of that,
he lead them on a 7 mile chase, instead of pulling over.
They usually do, whether the cops did something wrong or not.
And the cop may very well wind up charged, they are just beginning
the investigation, WTF is your hurry?
I doubt anyone following this and similar threads believes it.
Apparently the cop's life doesn't matter, because you're in a rush
to judgment, no need to wait for the facts. How did that work out
for the cops falsely accused, eg the one in the Michael Brown case?
The cop's career is over, he's been put through hell, can't work
as a cop, suffered financially, emotionally, because
people like you couldn't wait for the facts, couldn't wait for
justice. In the old days, you'd be the shrill witch in the middle
of a lynch mob.
I expect people who are highly trained to be professionals to practice
their training, and when they don't behave like professionals they
should face consequences, especially, if they KILL someone as a result
of not following training, procedure, and protocol.
LE isn't highly trained so they can excuse their fopahs (Ooops! I
accidentally KILLED someone!) - they are highly trained so they will
KNOW how to respond to a multitude of scenarios.
If they weren't trained in "deescalation and communication" techniques
with the public they might have an excuse, but the problem is that they
ARE HIGHLY trained.
WRONG! The cops bear the responsibility in this scenario for creating
the toxic, volatile, and chaotic environment. THEY are the ones who are
TRAINED in deescalation and communication techniques. Had they engaged
that training, the deaf man would still be alive.
The cop didn't lose his life.
Fact: The deaf man was speeding and the cops wanted to stop him.
Fact: The man didn't stop immediately, and drove to his home and stopped
when he got to his home.
Fact: The cops drew weapons on the deaf man, while the deaf man was
trying to use sign language to communicate with the cops.
Fact: The cops shot and killed a deaf mute while the deaf mute was
trying to communicate with them.
WHY didn't the cops attempt to subdue and cuff the man?
WHY is the speeder now dead?
WHY didn't they recognize sign language?
WHY didn't they try to seek a different outcome?
I'm tired of hearing stories where cops just kill people and then
excusing their lethal response as "OOOPS!"
On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 1:23:10 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
And what is the evidence in this case that you're bitching about,
that the cop is not going to face consequences? They haven't even
had an investigation yet. WTF is wrong with you?
And in your experience in the real world of "training", given that there
are 1 mil cops, 320 mil people in this country, what number of mistakes
do you expect? zero obviously. Anything above that, it's that we have
some widespread problem with cops.
Sigh. The perp lead them on a 7 mile chase instead of pulling over.
That was the start of the toxic environment. Now it goes from a speeding
ticket to potentially a felony eluding charge. The cops andrenaline
goes up, they are on heightened alert, because they figure he's running
for a reason and they don't know what it is. Had he pulled over,
stayed in his car, he'd be alive today. As would that long list of
others I gave you, Michael Brown, the kid in Cleveland, Eric Garner,
the dope in Louisiana that resisted arrest, the black teen that stole
a car and eluded police. Again, all those people
created the toxic environment. It's like throwing gasoline all around
an old building, loading it full of unknown hazards and calling in
the cops. If something goes wrong, the building blows up, according
to your deluded logic, it's all the fault of the cops and the one
that created that toxic scenario bears no responsibility.
You don't have to lose your life to suffer and have your life
ruined by those that rush to judgment.
Fact, that's a criminal charge. It's gone now from a ticket, to a more
serious charge, possibly a felony.
Fact: You must not even watch any of the COP reality shows on TV,
because it's standard practice to have guns drawn once a person has
eluded arrest, fleeing with their car, because the cops know the
perp is already not behaving normally and don't know what's coming
next. I suppose you'd just walk right on over to the door as if
it was just a routine speeding stop? Good grief!
Why are you asking us? Everyone else here has told you that we don't
know what happened at that point. Which is why we are reserving
judgment. YOU are the one making the claims, so you should know.
Because he was a dumb ass and didn't pull over, he created a toxic
volatile environment. When do people more typically wind up dead?
When they pull over for police and accept a speeding ticket or when
the lead police on a chase or create a similar toxic, volatile
environment? How did that all work out for all those on my list?
How do you know they didn't? How do we even know the guy was
using sign language? You could be signing, or speaking and still
be making actions that lead a cop to believe you've got a gun.
Again, we don't know, but you're rushing to judgment.
They did, initially all they wanted to do was give him a speeding ticket
and send him on his way.
When did this cop or anyone in law enforcement in this case say
OOOPS. Link please. IDK of a single cop who has said ooops in
any of these cases.
On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 3:26:08 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
Of course neither I nor anyone else said that here. I note you didn't
answer the question about how many mistakes you think can be reasonably
expected when you have 1 mil cops in a country of 320 mil.
Second question. Are mistakes more likely to happen in a calm,
environment, like a normal traffic stop for speeding? Or in a
chaotic, toxic environment, like the end to a 7 mile police chase
Third question. Who created that toxic environment?
The discussion has actually already been won. Everyone here is on
pretty much the same page except you and you won't even address the
essential points, you're reduced to your usual nonsense, eg
"he was executed for speeding"!
He was "stopped" for speeding.
He was probably shot accidentally because he didn't comply with normal
conduct when being stopped by the police. If he got out of the vehicle
because he still didn't know the police were stopping him, the only
sign language he needed to exhibit when he did finally noticed them was
to raise his hands up in the international sign language of surrender.
It remains to be seen whether the police were justified in their
reaction to his exiting the vehicle and whatever happened next.
If you want to jump to conclusions, maybe you should start a DLM group
and go riot somewhere.
I don't understand why a driver who gets pulled over by police for
speeding should have to put his/her arms up in surrender, even if the
speeder didn't stop immediately. That sounds so ridiculous to me.
On Monday, August 29, 2016 at 11:52:17 AM UTC-4, Bod wrote:
You don't have to. This guy didn't. You also don't have to get out of
the car and it's not a good idea to do so until the police tell you
what to do. This guy got out. It may sound ridiculous to you,
but it sounds like common sense to most of us. By leading the police
on a chase, he had committed the crime of eluding, which can be a felony,
depending on the state laws and the circumstances. Many states have
tough laws, because they are fed up with people fleeing and killing
others in auto accidents in the resulting chase.
Once you flee like that, the cops are on heightened alert, because
they don't know why you're fleeing, what other law you're going to
break. You've already demonstrated that you're resisting them.
So, getting out of the car, moving towards them, reaching into your
waistband, reaching into your jacket are all very bad ideas. Many
times these chases end with the perps in the car, the police then
giving them instructions, one step at a time, how to exit the
vehicle and lay down in the street for everyone's safety. I know
when I'm pulled over, I don't go reaching under the seat, opening
the glove compartment, or doing anything like that, where the cop
could think I'm going for a gun. I'm alive, so I guess it works.
I didn't say he did, he is supposed to stay in the vehicle. Having
failed at that simple task, and finding himself confronted by cops, it
is best to assume a non-threatening stance. Holding ones hands up is a
good and well understood way of looking non-threatening. Flailing ones
arms around is not. Is *that* any easier for you to understand?
Oh I understand what you are saying, it's just that it is alien to most
Brits. When we get stopped, it is a much more relaxed affair. We don't
get guns pointing at us for just getting out of our cars.
We know that the police won't have guns and the police are pretty sure
that a driver won't have any. It's a sort of mutual trust I suppose.
Yes you get the odd rogue, but that happens in every country.
I believe you, but I haven't seen anything to indicate that that was
indeed the case. It sure sounds reasonable though. IIRC you are allowed
some leeway in finding a place to pull over safely, and it usually
doesn't take 7 miles to do so. I'm not prepared to believe that the
flashing lights which were likely to be displayed were not noticed by
the victim. Rear view mirrors are supposed to be used as a part of
normal driving procedures. In fact, there is a guidline for looking at
them every so many seconds IIRC.
You've attempted to muddy the water by suggesting this incident should
be considered less of an issue if it's considered amongst overall "cop
mistake" statistics for the entire country. You're essentially saying
it should be added to the overall "OOOPS" statistics.
IOW, you want to show that, for example, "cops killing deaf people is
only 1 in 100,000 cop mistakes", or some other similar stat you can come
up with. That stat would sure appear to support your side of the
argument that "cops are human" and they "make mistakes", wouldn't it?
OTOH, I'd like you to justify why highly trained LE can't recognize sign
language, and why a highly trained officer would even choose to shoot an
unarmed man waving his hands and arms when that officer's training
taught him many other choices that preclude lethal force?
On Monday, August 29, 2016 at 10:51:32 AM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
I'm not saying it should be treated as more of an issue or less of issue.
I never said any such thing. You claimed that there is some big problem
with police shooting people. You demanded that they have to be perfect
robots, where apparently no mistakes can ever happen. I only asked how
many mistakes would a reasonable person expect in a country with 1 mil cops, 320 mil people? Do the math. How many times a day does an average
cop come into contact with the public? How many traffic stops, etc.
Sounds like there could be a billion interactions a year, yet I've only
seen a few a year where the cop was wrong in shooting someone.
Are you actually now arguing that cops are not human and like anyone
else can make mistakes? Mistakes that happen in a split section, where
they think they are facing a deadly threat?
I gave you some examples of what could have happened. The cop
could have thought he saw a gun in his waistband, thought that he
was reaching for it. The cop had a second to react to that. Now
tell us how long the perp had to stop committing the crime of
eluding and to pull over? That went on for 7 miles and THAT is
what created the toxic situation that the cops and the perp
wound up in. Clearly the perp deserves some of the responsibility
for what happened.
But not according to you. You think people can flip off a cop,
curse at him, refuse to cooperate and accept a ticket, if they
think they are right. Then they resist arrest like in TX because
according to you the cops have no right to investigate a jaywalking
incident. Or the perp can lead police on a 7 mile chase like this
guy and whatever happens in that new toxic environment, it's all the
fault of the cops.
I've asked you before, how well did that strategy work out for
Michael Brown, Eric Garner, the dope in Louisiana, and this
You are asking for facts but yet draw conclusions having none yourself.
The cop may or may not have been 100% wrong but please have the courtesy
and common sense you claim to have and see what the ivestigation reveals.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.