|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
August 20, 2014, 03:31 PM | #176 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 6, 2013
Posts: 456
|
This is not about white or black. Its about a person aggressively and physically challenging an officer. If an officer is going to arrest you, you have no right to resist. This looks like it went beyond simple resistance with the officer being assaulted. If it was a good shoot we will know when the investigation is complete. The media, as usual, plays up such incidents without regard for the facts and consistent with their own agenda.
|
August 20, 2014, 03:43 PM | #177 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 16, 2002
Location: alaska
Posts: 3,498
|
Quote:
I think that people forget that the majority of 'racism' in this country amounts to mere personal opinions. Is it wrong, illegal, or immoral to have your own opinion? The point where it becomes wrong is when that opinion leads to persecution. So far, I have yet to be convinced that this particular shooting was motivated by actual racism.
__________________
"Every man alone is sincere; at the entrance of a second person hypocrisy begins." - Ralph Waldo Emerson "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." - Soren Kierkegaard |
|
August 20, 2014, 04:44 PM | #178 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 9, 2007
Posts: 1,119
|
I think that racism will always be alive, I believe that it's part of human nature. IMO the question is if it's still institutionalized in places like Ferguson. I don't know. However I have yet to see any evidence that racism was a primary factor in this shooting, while the evidence supporting a justified shooting seems to grow every day.
I'm still not convinced that the Ferguson PD's response to the events following the shooting can be justified. |
August 20, 2014, 04:59 PM | #179 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,457
|
Quote:
Do you think they'd protesting the same if the officer had been black? If not, then it's obvious they are not protesting the cop's actions but simply the fact that "Whitey" killed another black kid. |
|
August 20, 2014, 05:20 PM | #180 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 6, 2013
Posts: 456
|
The problem here is that many of you have already passed judgement based on media and internet posts and you cant be convinced out of that decision. You dont make a decision without hearing all the facts to include the officers and witness version. Im sure the officer will have his day in court. The problem is by the time it reaches the court many of you will have already come to a verdict. Once the verdict is read, whatever it might be, the officer will have to live in hiding and will not work again as an officer.
|
August 20, 2014, 05:30 PM | #181 |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Race is a central part of this issue. That said, let's tread very carefully when discussing it, and let's not wander into generalized discussion of race relations.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
August 20, 2014, 06:00 PM | #182 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 9, 2007
Posts: 1,119
|
People on both sides of the debate who are quick to blame race for all of this are also the same people who are convinced they know the truth before all of the facts are presented. And I doubt that the facts will change their minds. But back to firearms, will a police response that looks like something from Gaza or Ukraine change the gun control debate?
|
August 20, 2014, 06:20 PM | #183 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 6, 2013
Posts: 456
|
The police respond with the equipment they do because of safety issues. If they did not have all that equipment and one of them gets hurt there would be a lawsuit. Also when responding to any incident its best to have a overwhelming response.
If the officers didnt have rifles and armored vehicles than whats to stop a group of young men from taking up arms and assaulting the officers? Looks like the protesters are plenty angry. If I was an officer assigned to handle that crowd I would want to have the protection of the armored vehicle, helmet, vest and rifle. Wouldnt you? |
August 20, 2014, 06:30 PM | #184 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 9, 2007
Posts: 1,119
|
If using the best equipment and resources is the most important factor then why not simply monitor all mobile phone and social media activity in the area and then take out anyone who promotes violence with a drone?
|
August 20, 2014, 07:36 PM | #185 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 298
|
Ferguson police dropped the ball by their response. The people were already upset and by responding heavy handed with the intent to intimidate (no other rational for their first actions) did nothing but create the spark needed for this mess. Seriously, what type of police organization watches protester from their rifle scopes? A lot of folks from both sides are still shaking their heads in disgust over this. Now we got Sharpton, Holder, and the bunch involved and a governor demanding prosecution which now means the likely hood of a just investigation will be pushed aside for a political solution. And now we have a cop/criminal justice professor putting out ths article “I’m a cop. If you don’t want to get hurt, don’t challenge me" which only inflames the sitiation. God only knows what will happen if this turns into an actual small shooting match...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/postev...-challenge-me/ Last edited by jrinne0430; August 20, 2014 at 07:45 PM. |
August 20, 2014, 07:45 PM | #186 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 6, 2013
Posts: 456
|
The truth is that if the police were underequipped you guys would complain and ask why they were not equipped properly. If they were overequipped you would still complain. The police cant win.
I do know one thing and that most of us here are not officers. Its best to let the officers decide what they need versus a group of non-officers. Im sure they wouldnt be wearing all that stuff if they didnt have to. I wore some equipment in the military and none of it was comfortable. |
August 20, 2014, 07:45 PM | #187 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 5, 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 358
|
just guessing
but money spent on a video / audio of a man attacking an officer might have been a better decision than spending money on filling up the 100 gallon tank on their armored truck.
I know, I know, it may not have happened that way but they should know that a an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of kevlar.
__________________
L2R |
August 20, 2014, 07:51 PM | #188 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 298
|
Quote:
|
|
August 20, 2014, 10:31 PM | #189 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 17, 2012
Posts: 1,085
|
Anyone else surprised, if not shocked, that an officer with a broken face and rung bell was able to land 6 fairly close rapid-fire hits on a guy at ten yards or less? I honestly think it would be informative to know if it was his dominant eye that was damaged, since that would make it even more remarkable.
As far as police kit... If they'd called in the Guard or state patrol (as an intermediary force) after the first night of rioting when the cops found they were incapable of restoring order, there would have been no need for them to have MRAPS, camo gear, snipers, tear gas, sonic cannons, and MREs. That's, sort of the reason we have these other more powerfully equipped organs of law enforcement/peace keeping --so the low level guys don't have to kit up both mentally and physically in the course of their daily duties. Once order is forcefully restored, the armored Guardsmen leave quickly, and the police go back to their limited role of keeping the peace. Or am I supposed to expect Officer Friendly to forget his hyper-aggressive, military inspired, Mossad licensed, 'situation control' tactics when he's going through the more mundane tasks of law enforcement? We're so focused on "officer safety" anymore, that I wonder if these training/tactics aren't convincing some cops that every plane is a missile, every suitcase a bomb... TCB
__________________
"I don't believe that the men of the distant past were any wiser than we are today. But it does seem that their science and technology were able to accomplish much grander things." -- Alex Rosewater |
August 21, 2014, 12:30 AM | #190 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,995
|
In my area, and i assume most others, local police departments are often dominated by veteran infantrymen. I find it hard to believe they suit up in the equipment they used in Iraq without returning to the mentality of a warzone.
|
August 21, 2014, 09:24 AM | #191 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
Question on the legality of the concept of a curfew.
As a non-lawyer I'm as guilty as most of not understanding my rights, privileges, and the difference between them. That's one of the reasons I'm so thankful to the lawyers who come in here and try to help us out on their own time.
My question is: How does a curfew, the first amendment, and the right to freedom of movement reconcile? If I lived in Ferguson during the Midnight to 5AM curfew: How can that curfew prevent me from driving across town at 2AM to visit my insomniac father? Isn't that Freedom of Association? If I have a 9AM meeting in Nashville, TN and Approximately 5 hour drive, I'd have to leave at 4AM. Isn't that freedom of movement going between the states? |
August 21, 2014, 09:28 AM | #192 | |
Junior member
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 8,722
|
Quote:
|
|
August 21, 2014, 11:04 AM | #193 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
That said, this is an L&CR thread, so let's stick to legal issues.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
August 21, 2014, 11:18 AM | #194 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: IOWA
Posts: 8,783
|
It's all in the details
Quote:
Be Safe !!!
__________________
'Fundamental truths' are easy to recognize because they are verified daily through simple observation and thus, require no testing. |
|
August 21, 2014, 11:31 AM | #195 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 30, 2013
Posts: 1,037
|
In another shooting, in St. Louis, video immerges which conflicts cops version of shooting. Hmm...
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/cel...sion-shooting/ |
August 21, 2014, 11:49 AM | #196 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 29, 2010
Location: The ATL (OTP)
Posts: 3,946
|
While the video is disturbing it’s a little difficult to see exactly what happened. If he had a knife as reported he was approaching the officer when they shot him, so it may be a justifiable shooting. Several of the witnesses keep stating that they should have “shot him in the leg” or “Tased him”. I’m not sure what Police are trained to do when someone comes at them with a knife, but don’t think it’s to shoot them in the leg. Anyway, obviously this is not what this community needs right now.
__________________
A major source of objection to a free economy is precisely that it ... gives people what they want instead of what a particular group thinks they ought to want. Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman |
August 21, 2014, 11:59 AM | #197 |
Member
Join Date: February 23, 2012
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 28
|
That was my question. IF...he thought his life was in danger,I would think law enforcement would be trained to shoot at the threat until it is stopped or no longer a threat. Heard the people on the dead person's side say there is no excuse for six shots. Anyone know this? I am not a cop, obviously, and I don't know how they are trained.
|
August 21, 2014, 11:59 AM | #198 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,995
|
If they had video they would pretty much have to release it unedited at some point. They can claim it was destroyed/malfunctioning, but releasing an edited only version isn't legally feasible. Claiming it was malfunctioning when it wasn't is dangerous to say the least in the computer age. "the cameras weren't working and we just replaced the memory on the computer at the vehicle, and the memory at the station computer, and the memory at our back-up site. We incinerated the old hard drives." That isn't going to fly.
There is a similar, although possibly worse, shooting in Beavercreek, Ohio right now. The states AG has delayed release of the video until after a grand jury is convened to decide on whether to indict, but then the video will have to be released. If the family of the victim/perp hadn't agreed I think it would already be released. I can only assume the video is very clear on what happened, the family expects the grand jury to support their position, and they see no reason to add fire to the flames in the couple of weeks in between. It is quite difficult to edit a photo such that it can't be seen under magnification/scrutiny by a professional analyst. Nearly impossible to do so with video. Any such video would receive plenty of scrutiny. For background: http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/...-on-job/ng6MW/ Last edited by johnwilliamson062; August 21, 2014 at 12:05 PM. |
August 21, 2014, 04:31 PM | #199 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 7, 2000
Location: AZ, WA
Posts: 1,466
|
Quote:
You need to also bear in mind that it takes time for the officer to recognize that the threat is terminated, and stop firing. In simulator training, two or three shots are often fired after the perpetrator drops the weapon. From what I've seen from the autopsy results, it appears that the officer fired several shots at Brown, which hit his right arm and didn't stop him. Then he fired one which struck him (IIRC) near the right eye. That would have been fatal, and probably instantly caused him to stop and drop. The officer fired the last shot into the top of his head as he started to drop, because he had not yet realized that Brown was stopping his aggression. Whether he was justified in shooting is ultimately a (grand) jury question. I would need to know more before rendering an opinion.
__________________
Violence is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and valorous feeling which believes that nothing is worth violence is much worse. Those who have nothing for which they are willing to fight; nothing they care about more than their own craven apathy; are miserable creatures who have no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the valor of those better than themselves. Gary L. Griffiths (Paraphrasing John Stuart Mill) |
|
August 21, 2014, 07:26 PM | #200 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
If the eye shot dropped him as Gary suggests , it's pretty well known that folks have a hard time inhibiting the next shot at a stop signal. Research has shown this and if there is a trial, the defense time needs to call the appropriate folk.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|