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

[Hotdog]

In your experience, as a white man, it's over-exaggerated. It's amazing how easily white men think that their experience is the only relevant experience.

There you go again lumping all white people together in a conversation I don't get it. How is that not racism? How do you feel comfortable with doing that? When talking about this, I try not lump any race in one group. You clearly have that Bankrupt mindset that it's ok to lump all white people together but not any other race.

Did you want some reward for not being a jerk or for treating people equally? What do you think you deserve for that?

No, I just want people people to stop blaming me for something just because of my skin color.

My point was that plenty of white people have tried hard to help with the civil rights of black people. Black people didn't free themselves all by themselves. They had plenty of help from good white people a long the way. It's a shame that you and others refuse to acknowledge that and continue to bash all white people as a whole. The ironic thing here is that you are bending over backwards to help the cause but then turn around and blame yourself for being part of the problem because of your skin color.

As long as you are stuck in a mindset where racism is a problem of some people, and not a problem of culture, you are part of the problem.

What would you have all the white people do, magically link up their brains and start thinking the same thing? I can't stop others from being racist. We can talk about it til we are blue in the face, but it's not gonna change who racists are. I've tried arguing with racist white people plenty of times. It does little good. And really what's the point of doing it anyways. I'll just still be called a racist because of my skin color. I will always be part of the problem because of my skin color.

I guess I just don't understand what you would have me do? Want me to vote for people I think aren't racist? Done that. Want me to hand over what little money I have, my possessions and house to anyone of brown skin? Should I just give my job away too? I'm not sure how that would work, but is that one of the solutions? Every time I see a black man getting arrested, should I risk my own freedom for that stranger and bust him loose from the cops as he is is getting arrested, even though I have no idea if he really committed a crime?

As a nation, should we pass a law that says all black people are exempt from any and all laws? That way we can make sure that no racist cop puts his hands on or shoots another black man? After all, there are no bad black people, just bad white people right?

 

[Hotdog]

The 911 caller was inflammatory, said Crawford was pointing the gun at kids, said it looked to him like he was loading the gun ... really stupid. He in part was responsible for what happened.

This is a very important point that keeps getting looked over. The cops mindset running into that store was that they were looking for a man who was seen in a store loading a gun and also pointing it at kids and other people. The picture was already partially painted for them.

That idiot who called 911 played a huge role in this.

 

[Hotdog]

He was only shot once -- the first shot hit him with two bullets as it was an automatic rifle. At least, this is what I was told by a lady who works for the county in Beavercreek and whose son is a police officer. It did look like he might've been shot a second time when he came back, but this is not what I was told. Plus, you don't hear any shots after that first pop. And yes, it looked like he was reaching back for the gun but for what purpose? It was a b-b gun and unloaded.

Yes, he was already shot. But what puzzled me was that he was able to get up. Was it because the damage of the shot or shots hadn't registered? I don't know much about what happens when you get shot, never having been shot. But within a second or two after getting back up, he fell back and went into convulsions (note his body shaking). Did he fall back because he got shot again? Hard to tell. But you don't hear another pop, do you, or does anybody?

To me it looks like he is shot again after he got back up and went straight towards his gun. I'm not 100% sure either. But it it sure looks like it. It wouldn't make sense that the cop would exercise restraint at that point. That was the most threatening thing the cop should have perceived.

 

[Hotdog]

I don't think he did. To my eyes, he was trying to run and stumbled.

Well then you need to re watch the video a few more times. Running and stumbling doesn't describe what the action LogGrad is questioning about. It doesn't even sound like you are describing what is being talked about.

The part in question is when he got back up after diving/falling behind the shelf. It can be described as running in the wrong direction towards the cops and stopping when he see the cop a few feet away facing directly at him with him standing right in front of the gun he dropped. Maybe he was in shock and he didn't know where the shots came from. Maybe he thought they came from the other way and he got back up to run away from where he thought he was getting shot from. That's probably most likely what happened. I don't know why you say he was running and stumbling and why you choose to end the conversation right there and not talk about how it looked to the cops. I want to know if he was shot the second time at that point or if the cop watched him get back up and run towards him but didn't shoot at that point. I find it hard to believe the cop didn't shoot again that that point. Why would he shoot a suspect just standing there on his phone, but not in the chaos of the guy suddenly jumping back up and running in the direction towards the cop and his gun.

I think this is a very important subject point in this case. To most of us who actually watch the video. It appears he is shot at once or twice at first. Then he goes to the ground. Then he gets back up and runs towards his gun. Then he is shot again and doesn't get back up. I'd be willing to bet that's what happened. Although, Eenie-Meenie thinks maybe he was only shot before he fell the first time. I find this hard to believe based on what the video shows.

What I also don't understand is why you conveniently keep skimming over this point and avoiding it. I guess it just doesn't fit your agenda that all white cops are racist and will shoot you no matter what. You completely ignoring this point just proves how biased you really are. Any rational person who looks at that video says it looks like a very threatening move towards the cops. Even if it's not what he was doing and he wasn't thinking clearly because of how fast it was happening and because he was in shock. Maybe, the cop wouldn't have shot anymore had he just stayed on the ground and he would still be alive today. The cop doesn't have time to figure out what's going on. If the were a real threat then the perp is only a split second away from grabbing the gun and shooting back. In real life and not in some fantasy fairytale land, cops can't read minds and can't always be asking what you are doing in the heat of the moment like that. I will agree to some point that the first shot never should have been fired. The cop probably could have peeked around the corner and yelled at him to identify himself and his actions. But again, we have to go back to the 911 call. They were under the impression that his actions before they arrived were a lot worse. Maybe, they peeked around the corner and saw the rifle and thought they didn't want to get into a gun battle and it would be better to contain the threat before he got a shot off. I don't know. I don't know there training and what the protocol is there.

 

[Stoked]

Man, what an injustice. First, an officer murders him, then the officer is NOT indicted so no repercussions for him. Third, the caller who made 911 call clearly made false statements regarding this guy posing a threat gets off the hook. At the end, all the family gets is "well, **** happens".

From what I understood there are 19 people on the jury that decided this and only 7 needed to agree that charges should be brought. So that means that only 6, or less, out of 19 thought charges should be filed. I wonder what was presented to them that convinced 13(+) people.

But basically this means that legally he killed that man but did not murder him.

 

[Getting Traded]

I think this is a very important subject point in this case. To most of us who actually watch the video. It appears he is shot at once or twice at first. Then he goes to the ground. Then he gets back up and runs towards his gun. Then he is shot again and doesn't get back up. I'd be willing to bet that's what happened. Although, Eenie-Meenie thinks maybe he was only shot before he fell the first time. I find this hard to believe based on what the video shows.

I agree. I wouldn't say I think that, but I was told that. It could be a crucial piece of information if charges are brought against the cop -- as the Feds are taking over the case. If he shot once, ok, that didn't kill him, but if there was a second shot that killed him, then it could weigh heavily against the cop. In fact, I said the same to the lady I talked with whose son is a policeman. She quickly corrected me and said he wasn't shot again. But maybe she was covering it up.

 

[dodo]

From what I understood there are 19 people on the jury that decided this and only 7 needed to agree that charges should be brought. So that means that only 6, or less, out of 19 thought charges should be filed. I wonder what was presented to them that convinced 13(+) people.

But basically this means that legally he killed that man but did not murder him.

True, though after watching that vid, it feels like murder.

After reading this article: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...io-shooting-charges-911-calller-john-crawford it sounds the key lies with the person reported the victim. The 911 caller made it sound like a clear shooter case. They even cite the responding officer calling back dispatch to confirm some of the reported actions Crawford. Probably the evidence was that it was reported as active shooter situation and the officers acted this way to save others.

The 911 caller claimed children have been threatened. From the article:

The children who Ritchie appeared to claim were under threat from Crawford were in the store with their mother, Angela Williams. Williams, 37, died of a heart attack in the panic that ensued among customers following the police shooting.

So again Stoked, what happens with the 2nd amendment rights? Oregon is open carry state. The guy wasn't even given a chance to comply with a request for ID, show hands, nothing. Just shot for possessing a firearm. What happened with the 2nd ammenders on this site?

Overall, someone has got to pay a price for what happened. AND the police owe to revisit their assessment procedures. You can't be just bursting up shooting up people because someone reported it. There was a case in Denver a month ago where a gamer was being "SWATTED" live in a game. Someone called the cops on him and reported he killed people. Swat team comes in.....

 

[Qman]

True, though after watching that vid, it feels like murder.

After reading this article: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...io-shooting-charges-911-calller-john-crawford it sounds the key lies with the person reported the victim. The 911 caller made it sound like a clear shooter case. They even cite the responding officer calling back dispatch to confirm some of the reported actions Crawford. Probably the evidence was that it was reported as active shooter situation and the officers acted this way to save others.

The 911 caller claimed children have been threatened. From the article:



So again Stoked, what happens with the 2nd amendment rights? Oregon is open carry state. The guy wasn't even given a chance to comply with a request for ID, show hands, nothing. Just shot for having a gun. What happened with the 2nd ammenders on this site?

At work so I can't see the video, but sounds like the problem is the 911 caller was a liar. He/she should be charged with some kind of murder charge.

 

[Stoked]

True, though after watching that vid, it feels like murder.

After reading this article: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...io-shooting-charges-911-calller-john-crawford it sounds the key lies with the person reported the victim. The 911 caller made it sound like a clear shooter case. They even cite the responding officer calling back dispatch to confirm some of the reported actions Crawford. Probably the evidence was that it was reported as active shooter situation and the officers acted this way to save others.

The 911 caller claimed children have been threatened. From the article:



So again Stoked, what happens with the 2nd amendment rights? Oregon is open carry state. The guy wasn't even given a chance to comply with a request for ID, show hands, nothing. Just shot for having a gun. What happened with the 2nd ammenders on this site?

What? Crawford was shot in Ohio, not Oregon. I read the article and it hammers the 911 caller. However statements that it was a crank call are just opinion. Perhaps he did exaggerate the circumstances. I don't know has I have not heard the call. Basically this is a hit piece by the Guardian agaisnt the 911 call.

I do agree that police should interview him if they haven't already.

Your 2nd amendment attack in this thread is very strange.

 

[dodo]

What? Crawford was shot in Ohio, not Oregon. I read the article and it hammers the 911 caller. However statements that it was a crank call are just opinion. Perhaps he did exaggerate the circumstances. I don't know has I have not heard the call. Basically this is a hit piece by the Guardian agaisnt the 911 call.

I do agree that police should interview him if they haven't already.

Your 2nd amendment attack in this thread is very strange.

I mistyped the state but Ohio is also traditional open-carry state just as Oregon so it doesn't change the premise of my post. I am surprised that this thread is split the way it is where traditionally right-wing, gun supporting posters are supporting whatever the police actions are while questioning every fact on the other side. Why are not these people outraged that police is killing innocent civilians exercising their 2nd amendment right?

Case in point is you calling the guardian article "hit piece".

Here is another "hit piece" that you can discard as lefties propaganda:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ohn-crawford-walmart-lied-victims-mother-says

“Sergeant Darkow repeatedly yelled ‘drop the weapon’,” said Williams, in a narrative released by Beavercreek police late last Friday. “After repeated commands to drop the weapon the male turned to us in an aggressive manner with the rifle in hand. At that time the black male was in a position where he could shoot me or sergeant Darkow.”

This is the narrative from the PD. Please, watch the video and tell me, intellectually honestly, does it fit what you saw?

 

[Stoked]

I mistyped the state but Ohio is also traditional open-carry state just as Oregon so it doesn't change the premise of my post. I am surprised that this thread is split the way it is where traditionally right-wing, gun supporting posters are supporting whatever the police actions are while questioning every fact on the other side. Why are not these people outraged that police is killing innocent civilians exercising their 2nd amendment right?

Case in point is you calling the guardian article "hit piece".

Here is another "hit piece" that you can discard as lefties propaganda:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ohn-crawford-walmart-lied-victims-mother-says




This is the narrative from the PD. Please, watch the video and tell me, intellectually honestly, does it fit what you saw?

Again, why are you targeting me with this? I never, not once, said the police shooting inthis case was justified.

 

[LogGrad98]

What I am questioning is the motives so many are trying to assign to the police. There is a big difference between making a mistake and being a murderous evil racist pig bent on killing every black person they can get away with.