Mike brown, Eric Garner, and now you are going to know the name of Stephen Clark-paraphrase quote

[nhbbear]

"Show your hands!"

*Shows hands*

"Gun!"

Shoots person obeying order 22 times.

Something something, getting home to their families.

Why are you being a dick?

 

[nhbbear]

Wrong... I would have shot him myself and then let the cops should him 23 times.

It's weird how you can somehow act as if this guys life meant nothing. ZOMG, he committed a (non violent crime) and god forbid ran away from the police. He must be KILLED!!

Cops likely knew who he was. There were other options but cops have a shoot first mentality and that is the problem. Also why do you guys use so many buzzwords like white knight? Does that help you somehow?

He wasn’t shot because he was breaking into stuff, he was shot because they believed he was armed.

 

[WTF2008]

Why should it matter how many times they shot him? Shoot to kill and be sure of it. And wasn't it more than just one cop shooting? I'm sure they weren't counting each other's shots.

I get what you're saying, but if he was actually shot 22 times, with no return fire and it's just one dude?

How many shots were actually fired? Cops have notoriously bad aim. If 22 hit, how many did they actually fire at an unarmed 'suspect'.

 

[Prokofievian]

Why are you making the assumption that these officers made an assumption based on race?

He wasn't, as I understand it. Kafir-kun asked a hypothetical question of whether black men should be considered armed and dangerous just based on racial violent crime statistics. This was in response to nhbbear making the argument

They shot him because they thought he was armed. And when you look at the numbers of black males involved in shootings, is it really that far fetched that police believe that he could have been armed?

Nhbbear is not saying that the authors did, he's just saying that if they did, could you really blame them?

Kafir's just saying, and I believe rightly, that yes. Yes you could blame them. In that case.

 

[WTF2008]

Wouldn’t matter if he was eating babies on his neighbors lawn . Much like some Trump supporters , the young , black martyr of the week shot by the “ man “ is exonerated in the black community of all wrong doing and becomes immortal upon death , like a magical incantation or voodoo spell. Instant life after death . Like black Jesus . To enter this immortality , all a family member of the deceased has to do is look at a camera of a news agency and say the incantation in the language of the ancientts “ hee wuzz gud boi. . Din doo nuffin!” Voila ! IMMORTALITY...

Holy shit. This is so wrong but still kind of funny.

 

[nhbbear]

So when they asked him to show his hands, how could he have shown his hands in a way that wouldn't result in his death?

If you give a command that can only result in the death of an unarmed suspect, shouldn't you be at fault for giving poor commands?

For the record, I did police simulation training with my county police. I gave shitty orders to a suspect that led to the virtual death of said suspect. It's not easy, which is why I'm not a cop.

I agree that commands have to be clear, but I give some slack when after a foot chase, they see what they think is a gun

 

[Post Mortem]

I get what you're saying, but if he was actually shot 22 times, with no return fire and it's just one dude?

How many shots were actually fired? Cops have notoriously bad aim. If 22 hit, how many did they actually fire at an unarmed 'suspect'.

I guess I just don't know why it should matter how many shots were fired. It doesn't make him any more or less dead. Once the decision to shoot has been made, why take any chances? I think you can argue the decision to shoot. That's fair. But if it were me I'd make sure my odds of PUTTING HIM DOWN, not just hitting him, were as high as they can be. Remember, it was dark too. If someone broke into your house and woke you up would you be counting your shots or would you just unload with the intent to kill as quickly as possible?

 

[nhbbear]

This narrative of “suspect turns to police officers and pull out an unidentified object” is getting really old. Really? Every single time? It’s become as believable as popped MMA fighters saying it was because of tainted supplements.

I just can’t believe that with just about every case where an unarmed black man gets shot, it’s because he, for some he unknown reason, reaches into his pants or jacket to pull out a gun-like object right at the height of tension. No way it happens that often.

And I don’t even want to address your capital punishment for all crimes statements.

But in this case, the video seems to back up that the police officers thought he had a gun. Ducking behind a house and yelling gun seems to back that up.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Why are you making the assumption that these officers made an assumption based on race?

I didn't, I was responding to this

They shot him because they thought he was armed. And when you look at the numbers of black males involved in shootings, is it really that far fetched that police believe that he could have been armed?

So I wasn't the one making this assumption, its a police officer who did. Given the fact that he's directly connecting the race of the suspect to the chances that the officer believes he's armed as an officer himself and given the historical role of the police in antagonizing the black community, something that continues arguably in a different form even in the 21st century, I'm not exactly confident that the police are color blind. He's not the first law enforcement agent on this forum to bring up the stats as justification for racial profiling, he's just a lot more tactful than the other.

 

[WTF2008]

I guess I just don't know why it should matter how many shots were fired. It doesn't make him any more or less dead. Once the decision to shoot has been made, why take any chances? I think you can argue the decision to shoot. That's fair. But if it were me I'd make sure my odds of PUTTING HIM DOWN, not just hitting him, were as high as they can be. Remember, it was dark too. If someone broke into your house and woke you up would you be counting your shots or would you just unload with the intent to kill as quickly as possible?

It's because it should be meant to take down a dangerous suspect. Not see how many bullets one person can fit in their body.

Killing isn't, and shouldn't be a police officer's goal even in a potentially life or death situation.

 

[nhbbear]

Its always t shirts and teddy bear memorials before the body is even cold

I think the 7-elevens sell kits with a teddy bear, candles, and 40 oz of old English to pour out

 

[Islam Imamate]

But in this case, the video seems to back up that the police officers thought he had a gun. Ducking behind a house and yelling gun seems to back that up.

 

[Post Mortem]

It's because it should be meant to take down a dangerous suspect. Not see how many bullets one person can fit in their body.

Killing isn't, and shouldn't be a police officer's goal even in a potentially situation.

I agree, that shouldn't be the goal. But if they believe the suspect to be armed, that goal changes. And quickly.

To people upset about the number of shots fired I have to ask why? Do you think it's some form of disrespect or something like that? Is there a belief that the cops, in this case, were not only out to kill what they believed to be a running suspect with a gun but they wanted to basically say "haha fuck you bad guy. here's 10 more shots just for fun!"? Seems ridiculous to me. Help me to understand.

 

[WTF2008]

I agree, that shouldn't be the goal. But if they believe the suspect to be armed, that goal changes. And quickly.

To people upset about the number of shots fired I have to ask why? Do you think it's some form of disrespect or something like that? Is there a belief that the cops, in this case, were not only out to kill what they believed to be a running suspect with a gun but they wanted to basically say "haha fuck you bad guy. here's 10 more shots just for fun!"? Seems ridiculous to me. Help me to understand.

22 bullets in an unarmed 'suspect' means they were stupid at least 22 times.

 

[nhbbear]

I didn't, I was responding to this

So I wasn't the one making this assumption, its a police officer who did. Given the fact that he's directly connecting the race of the suspect to the chances that the officer believes he's armed as an officer himself and given the historical role of the police in antagonizing the black community, something that continues arguably in a different form even in the 21st century, I'm not exactly confident that the police are color blind. He's not the first law enforcement agent on this forum to bring up the stats as justification for racial profiling, he's just a lot more tactful than the other.

I think maybe you are reading into that too much, or maybe i did not express myself clearly enough(it was 5 am). To be clear, all I am asking, is when chasing a subject believed to be breaking into cars and a house, and the subject is a black male, based upon what police officers see on a near daily basis, whether it is some type of implicit bias or whatever, I don’t think it is completely far fetched that the subject you are chasing could be armed-regardless of race, but looking at the statistics as far back as statistics have been kept in this matter, black males are leading all other groups when it comes to homicides. Don’t think that doesn’t affect what is going on in an officer’s head as they are chasing and then confronting this subject.

Again, maybe I am coming off as prejudicial, and maybe I am coming off that way, and I don’t mean it to be crass, or a blanket statement that means “all black males carry guns” but there is a significant portion of violent people with guns in this country that happen to be black. And it’s no coincidence that police have a lot of interaction with these same subjects. The amount of illegal guns that were seized by my officers on my shift alone last year was thirty something-every single gun that was seized from a felon, or a stolen gun, or a felon with a stolen gun-was a black male. Some were caught more than once in the same year, which shows the justice system needs work.

I am not sure there is any way to express this without coming off as a dick, and I really don’t mean to, but it is just a police officer’s reality that they will deal with black males involved in criminal activity that have guns. We deal with white male criminals more often, but when it comes to who is carrying the guns, it’s not even a contest. Hell, in my sixteen years as a cop, we just had my first murder where the suspect is white.

 

[Post Mortem]

22 bullets in an unarmed 'suspect' means they were stupid at least 22 times.

It was more than one officer. I can get 10 rounds off pretty damn fast and i'm an amatuer. Now, add in the adrenaline, the poor visibility and a number of circumstances we probably aren't even aware of and maybe this isn't such a big deal. Again, you can argue the decisions made to shoot. And that will be argued in court, I'm sure. But I'd still like to know what you believe drove them to shoot 22 times. Were they trying to make an example of him like in some kind of gang movie? Were there people watching they were trying to impress? What do you believe is the motivation, if not to simply be sure they put him down as quickly as possible?

 

[WTF2008]

It was more than one officer. I can get 10 rounds off pretty damn fast and i'm an amatuer. Now, add in the adrenaline, the poor visibility and a number of circumstances we probably aren't even aware of and maybe this isn't such a big deal. Again, you can argue the decisions made to shoot. And that will be argued in court, I'm sure. But I'd still like to know what you believe drove them to shoot 22 times. Were they trying to make an example of him like in some kind of gang movie? Were there people watching they were trying to impress? What do you believe is the motivation, if not to simply be sure they put him down as quickly as possible?

They're dudes that should be working at a Home Depot instead of being cops with life and death in their hands.

No return fire, but they felt the need to empty their clips into this guy?

Hit center mass, target goes down then stop firing.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I think maybe you are reading into that too much, or maybe i did not express myself clearly enough(it was 5 am). To be clear, all I am asking, is when chasing a subject believed to be breaking into cars and a house, and the subject is a black male, based upon what police officers see on a near daily basis, whether it is some type of implicit bias or whatever, I don’t think it is completely far fetched that the subject you are chasing could be armed-regardless of race, but looking at the statistics as far back as statistics have been kept in this matter, black males are leading all other groups when it comes to homicides. Don’t think that doesn’t affect what is going on in an officer’s head as they are chasing and then confronting this subject.

Again, maybe I am coming off as prejudicial, and maybe I am coming off that way, and I don’t mean it to be crass, or a blanket statement that means “all black males carry guns” but there is a significant portion of violent people with guns in this country that happen to be black. And it’s no coincidence that police have a lot of interaction with these same subjects. The amount of illegal guns that were seized by my officers on my shift alone last year was thirty something-every single gun that was seized from a felon, or a stolen gun, or a felon with a stolen gun-was a black male. Some were caught more than once in the same year, which shows the justice system needs work.

I am not sure there is any way to express this without coming off as a dick, and I really don’t mean to, but it is just a police officer’s reality that they will deal with black males involved in criminal activity that have guns. We deal with white male criminals more often, but when it comes to who is carrying the guns, it’s not even a contest. Hell, in my sixteen years as a cop, we just had my first murder where the suspect is white.

So in response to my earlier questions

Should we allow police to racially profile people based on stats? Should they assume black men are armed and give them less a benefit of the doubt than other races?

you seem to be answering yes, police officers should racially profile and give black men less of a benefit of the doubt because of the stats. Not exactly what I'd call protect and serve, and then you wonder why the black community doesn't trust the police.

 

[Post Mortem]

They're dudes that should be working at a Home Depot instead of being cops with life and death in their hands.

No return fire, but they felt the need to empty their clips into this guy?

Hit center mass, target goes down then stop firing.

It was a good conversation but if you're just going to ignore my responses, I guess we're done here. This wasn't a guy with no cover, in broad daylight and 10 feet away. Perhaps you're just that good of a shot. Maybe you should join the force and do things "the right way". Show em' how it's done. And you never answered why you have such a problem with the number of shots. It was, really, my only question.

 

[WTF2008]

It was a good conversation but if you're just going to ignore my responses, I guess we're done here. This wasn't a guy with no cover, in broad daylight and 10 feet away. Perhaps you're just that good of a shot. Maybe you should join the force and do things "the right way". Show em' how it's done. And you never answered why you have such a problem with the number of shots. It was, really, my only question.

My problem with the number of shots is that it was 1 unarmed person. 22 hits, not shots, seems a liitle extreme.

Why they fired so much at an unarmed person has more to do with poorly trained police officers that are better suited to giving out speeding tickets.