Graphic video released of police killing another black man in cold blood

[Joe Bagadonuts]

The cops didn't handle the situation perfectly. They too could have come to the conclusion that it may be a toy since he was in a Walmart. But again, this wasn't a cop just strolling a long shopping and then ran across this guy with a gun. They received a 911 call saying there is a man in a store with a gun pointing it at people.

This case is entirely different than the SC case.

To your point, why don't they just get on the PA and announce there is a guy in the store with gun, just doesn't sound like a good idea to me. I'm sure most professionals would have pretty good reasons why not to do that in that situation. For one, it's gonna start a panic. Then you also warn the guy you are coming. What if the threat were real? Doing as you say and announcing a guys got a gun over the PA could cause all sorts of problems.

YouTube has more audio and video on the case.

Of course this case is different, but are you suggesting that the cop in this case bears less responsibility for his actions than the cop in the South Carolina case? I don't agree. Despite the addition of a 911 caller (who I assume the policeman never communicated directly with, anyway) the cop should not have attacked with deadly force. There were all sorts of other options available to him. I agree with you that my suggestion to use the PA was not a good one. This is the sort of thing that I hope they spend a lot of time thinking about in order to develop best strategy for future occurrences. It sure seems like assessing the situation through use of the security cameras would have been a better method than rushing in with guns blazing. Had they done that, it would have been clear to them that no innocent people were currently in danger.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

It sure seems like assessing the situation through use of the security cameras would have been a better method than rushing in with guns blazing. Had they done that, it would have been clear to them that no innocent people were currently in danger.

Because that's hindsight. The idea is to determine the threat while securing the public's safety as soon as possible. This generally requires a direct approach, rather than going to look at the tape. Any situation with people killed while police were in the video room would look extremely bad.

 

[LogGrad98]

Welp, to me it looked like the dude was waving the gun back and forth. Then he noticed the cops and tried to dive out of the way, then he came back into the frame and tried to pick up the gun. And he got shot. From what I can see, I don't think it is that crazy that the cops would think he was armed and dangerous.

For fun I had my son (17 y.o,) my daughter (13 y.o.) and my wife watch it. With my son I prepped him that another racist pig cop shot another totally innocent black man in cold blood. He then watched the video and spewed crap about the horrible racist cops running rampant in this country. I prepped my daughter telling her that a gunman was in a walmart and was confronted by police. She said it looked like he was pointing the gun at someone and asked how many he killed before the police stepped in and saved everyone. I didn't tell my wife a single thing about any of it. Her response was the same as my daughters, and she said he looked like he was anxious and brandishing a weapon. We all then watched it together and talked about it. You can see that the dude is casually swinging the gun as if it is a toy, which it is. You can also see him dive off screen and then come back and try to pick up the weapon. To none of us did it look like a toy.

Verdict: cops may have acted somewhat rashly, but under the circumstances and with the supposed 911 call to back them up, they did nothing unexpected. As my daughter put it, especially considering all the mass shootings that have been happening, they had to do something.

Was it the right something? Well hind-sight is always 20-20.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

I watched the video from S. Carolina. Absolutely appalling. This former trooper should go to jail.

That said, what would have happened IF the encounter would not have been recorded? Here's my guess:

1. The State Trooper officials would back the officer and claim that it was a justified shooting, that the suspect made a threatening move (perhaps attacking the officer or, presumably, going for a gun) thus justifying the use of potentially deadly force.

2. Unquestioning lick spittles for the police, and authority in general, along with out and out racists would emerge from the woodwork to fill social media, blog-o-sphere and comment sections on web news sites with claims about how the trooper was a hero, was fully justified, that the suspect had it coming for this and this reason, etc.

3. The same people referenced in #2 would launch a crusade to dig dirt on the suspect and portray him as a gangster type lawbreaker who, if he didn't actually have it coming in this instance, certainly had it coming to him and this was karma and just desserts.

4. The trooper would get suspended for a period of time but allowed to return to his job.

5. No action would be taken to hold the trooper accountable.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Because that's hindsight. The idea is to determine the threat while securing the public's safety as soon as possible. This generally requires a direct approach, rather than going to look at the tape. Any situation with people killed while police were in the video room would look extremely bad.

I'm saying they should think about these things in advance, and that maybe this should be part of procedure. They should not be rushing into situations with virtually no idea how they are going to handle them. There should be a plan. Also, I am not suggesting reviewing tape. I'm talking about looking at the live feed. That said, there is a good chance that you're right that if they were to analyze this particular idea they would determine that it's not practical.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

Of course this case is different, but are you suggesting that the cop in this case bears less responsibility for his actions than the cop in the South Carolina case? I don't agree. Despite the addition of a 911 caller (who I assume the policeman never communicated directly with, anyway) the cop should not have attacked with deadly force. There were all sorts of other options available to him. I agree with you that my suggestion to use the PA was not a good one. This is the sort of thing that I hope they spend a lot of time thinking about in order to develop best strategy for future occurrences. It sure seems like assessing the situation through use of the security cameras would have been a better method than rushing in with guns blazing. Had they done that, it would have been clear to them that no innocent people were currently in danger.

I agree. This goes back to another post on another thread, but the point is that IF we believe that the police actually do not have other options in cases like this, then we can always justify their behavior. What I refuse to accept is that there were, and are, no other options. These police reacted viscerally and went straight to deadly force as their approach. I simply do not, and will not accept, they had no other course of action.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

I'm saying they should think about these things in advance, and that maybe this should be part of procedure. They should not be rushing into situations with virtually no idea how they are going to handle them. There should be a plan. Also, I am not suggesting reviewing tape. I'm talking about looking at the live feed. That said, there is a good chance that you're right that if they were to analyze this particular idea they would determine that it's not practical.

You don't think there are procedures for a received call of an allegedly armed individual in a very public place?

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

You don't think there are procedures for a received call of an allegedly armed individual in a very public place?

I'm sure there are. But,

(1) How are they followed by men under stress?
(2) Are these procedures actually good ones? Are they dated? Are the flexible enough to allow independent action? Are they discriminatory? Do they properly consider and weigh the risks? To what extent to they represent actual 'truth' as opposed to organizational 'doctrine' along with whatever biases that entails? Etc.

I'm guessing that policing procedures have undergone significant revision over the years, which implies that at any point in time, no procedure is inviolable.

If coming in on every perceived threat guns blazing, without taking any time to actually assess the situation, is the procedure, it's a pretty damned bad one.

 

[Hotdog]

I watched the video from S. Carolina. Absolutely appalling. This former trooper should go to jail.

That said, what would have happened withe encounter would not have been recorded? Here's my guess:

1. The Statetechnoloicials would back the officer and claim that it was a justified shooting, that the suspect made a threatening move (perhaps attacking the officer or, presumably, going for a gun) thus justifying the use of potentially deadly force.

2. Unquestioning lick spittles for the police, and authority in general, along with out and out racists would emerge from the woodwork to fill social media, blog-o-sphere and comment sections on web news sites with claims about how the trooper was a hero, was fully justified, that the suspect had it coming for this and this reason, etc.

3. The same people referenced in #2 would launch a crusade to dig dirt on the suspect and portray him as a gangster type lawbreaker who, if he didn't actually have it coming in this instance, certainly had it coming to him and this was karma and just desserts.

4. The trooper would get suspended for a period of time but allowed to return to his job.

5. No action would be taken to hold the trooper accountable.

Unfortunately, that's all probably true. Which is why I'm all for implementing vest cams and as many other cams as possible too. Like maybe gun barrel cams.


I know the system isn't perfect, and there dumb and bad cops out there, but it is what it is until we can come up with better methods. Which is why citizens would be doing themselves and everyone else a favor by not carry real looking toy guns, arguing with cops, wrestling with cops, being defiant, etc.

Put yourself in their shoes and you'll see that it's not that easy to handle every situation perfectly. Especially when people try to make it hard on them. The common man doesn't understand that cops deal with a lot of violent people and so they have to assume every encounter could be a violent. It's in everyone's best interest to portray themselves as non threatening as possible to make the cops job easier and you can both be on your way. People need to stop taking their encounters with police so personal.

Having said that, I don't like how some of these cops act either, but it's sort of a necessary evil. They can't be the wuss types as go and confront real evil. When I feel a little bullied by the cop, I just deal with it because I know that's the fastest, safest, and most sure way out of the situation, along with having the best long term results. Nothing good is going to come with challenging or disobeying the cop. Unless the cop is legitimately trying to kill you or beat you down illegally.


I do think that we are heading towards better justice though. More cameras everywhere is gonna put a lot of the guilty and liars in their real place, and exonerate the innocent. I think sooner or later every car will be equipped with camera angles completely around the car, and people will have camera angles around the entire body. Technology will accomplish this one day. I'm sure of it. Only problem with that could be technology being able to make fake videos look real.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

You don't think there are procedures for a received call of an allegedly armed individual in a very public place?

Well, if they followed them in this case, apparently the procedure is to run in at full speed and start firing shots at anyone they perceive as a target. So either they need a better plan, or they need to follow the plan that is hopefully far better thought out than what we saw on that video.

 

[slc]

Hard to believe cops are on even more of a hair trigger since Michael Brown incident.
Would think all law enforcement agencies would be begging their forces not to create another Ferguson firestorm.
To show extreme restraint before pulling the trigger.
But where does a cop draw the line? It's his life on the line.
Every cop says he wants to go home to his family after his shift.

 

[dodo]

lol

It's a good point, but it would cross the mind of a smart person that carry a real looking gun around for a long period in a store, talking on your phone and not shopping for anything else could look bad. Especially in this age of public shootings.


Look, just because giving some random kid some candy and an offer for a ride in your van is harmless if that's all you are doing, doesn't mean it's a good idea because of how it looks.

Does that help put it in perspective?

I can't believe I am reading all these comments. In each instance of a police officers shooting someone there are people coming out and saying - he should've done that, he should've done this. Why carry toy gun in Walmart without a cart, why some racist prick called 911 and excadurated what he saw, why some black dude reached quickly in his car when he should've done it slowly, why carry decorative sword in a parking lot, etc etc. We should be questioning why those police officers did not handle those situations as they should be trained? I do have appreciation of what they do, and I aknowledge they have a tough job. But we pay them tons of money for what they do. And we didn't make them become cops. Even if you discard the racial element (which I am absolutely convinced plays a role in those situations), there is a lot more shoot first, ask questions later instead of handling professionally dangerous situations. Trigger happy, militarized guards is what is becoming of your yes-mam-I-will-get-your-kitten-from-that-tree cop....

 

[Getting Traded]

lol

It's a good point, but it would cross the mind of a smart person that carry a real looking gun around for a long period in a store, talking on your phone and not shopping for anything else could look bad. Especially in this age of public shootings.


Look, just because giving some random kid some candy and an offer for a ride in your van is harmless if that's all you are doing, doesn't mean it's a good idea because of how it looks.

Does that help put it in perspective?

Hack, you have hardly won this thread. I just watched the video. There is no doubt the police acted rashly and irrationally. Wtf, the guy is on the ground and the "pig" runs over, and it looked like to me while the kid was screaming he shot him again, with the rifle he was carrying! I wonder, is this the shot that killed him. If it is, this cop should be tried for murder.

And yes, such action merits the epithet pig for what this cop did. You know where the term came from, don't you? From Orwell's Animal Farm. It was the pigs who became the vicious dictators and oppressed the rest of the animals.

Allowing this to go unpunished or at the very least unpenalized gives police a license to kill someone whenever they feel someone is doing something wrong ... well, one thing this incident should affect is how retail stores display guns, even toy guns! Because this was a bb-gun, an unloaded bb-gun no less! To me this is outrageous and people should not accept it. We do, and it's a step on the way to a police state.

 

[dodo]

What we need is the police to gun down a white NRA member while open carrying. That would get the vocal right on this board up in their pansies. Our second amendment rights and other similar ********

 

[Hotdog]

Maybe we should dress our cops up in skirts and kid gloves. Take away their guns. Make them be nice to people. Tell them they can't touch anyone. And if they make a mistake, they will be executed.

Cause that will handle all the gang bangers, methhead thieves, crazy people, murderers, etc..


There isnt real violence in the world. Bad people don't exist. The government is trying to put us in concentration camps. It's the cops and government that we should fear.

 

[Getting Traded]

Maybe we should dress our cops up in skirts and kid gloves. Take away their guns. Make them be nice to people. Tell them they can't touch anyone. And if they make a mistake, they will be executed.

Cause that will handle all the gang bangers, methhead thieves, crazy people, murderers, etc..


There isnt real violence in the world. Bad people don't exist. The government is trying to put us in concentration camps. It's the cops and government that we should fear.

To be honest, Hack, I DO fear them, and so should the rest of us, the way things are going.

 

[Nate505]

Don't know the story on the shooting, but hoping for their families to suffer is taking this too far.

I agree, and I'm no great fan of the police in general.

 

[dodo]

Maybe we should dress our cops up in skirts and kid gloves. Take away their guns. Make them be nice to people. Tell them they can't touch anyone. And if they make a mistake, they will be executed.

Cause that will handle all the gang bangers, methhead thieves, crazy people, murderers, etc..


There isnt real violence in the world. Bad people don't exist. The government is trying to put us in concentration camps. It's the cops and government that we should fear.

How about hold them accountable for mistakes they make and give them the proper training to respond coherently to extreme (percieved or real) situations they encounter...

 

[Nate505]

I watched the video from S. Carolina. Absolutely appalling. This former trooper should go to jail.

That said, what would have happened IF the encounter would not have been recorded? Here's my guess:

1. The State Trooper officials would back the officer and claim that it was a justified shooting, that the suspect made a threatening move (perhaps attacking the officer or, presumably, going for a gun) thus justifying the use of potentially deadly force.

2. Unquestioning lick spittles for the police, and authority in general, along with out and out racists would emerge from the woodwork to fill social media, blog-o-sphere and comment sections on web news sites with claims about how the trooper was a hero, was fully justified, that the suspect had it coming for this and this reason, etc.

3. The same people referenced in #2 would launch a crusade to dig dirt on the suspect and portray him as a gangster type lawbreaker who, if he didn't actually have it coming in this instance, certainly had it coming to him and this was karma and just desserts.

4. The trooper would get suspended for a period of time but allowed to return to his job.

5. No action would be taken to hold the trooper accountable.

Absolutely 100% spot on.

Perhaps the police departments across the nation, when they are stealing someone's house because their kid sold a $20 bag worth of heroin in it, should use that theft money for cameras instead of all the other crap they spend it on.

 

[Hotdog]

How about hold them accountable for mistakes they make and give them the proper training to respond coherently to extreme (percieved or real) situations they encounter...

They do train for this.

They don't always get it right. People aren't perfect.

I don't want to generalize a group of people ( Blacks, Latinos, White cops, etc). All white cops aren't out there killing black people.
Not all cops are good and not all are smart, but they mostly get it right.

It just feels like this is going on all the time, but it's really not when you compare it to how big the world is and how many live on it.

Instant media content is just letting you know about it easier. With all of us connected now, it's making the world feel smaller and amplifying anything negative.