Aseahawkfan wrote:I think each case needs to be analyzed and appropriate justice needs to be carried out if mistakes or nefarious causes are found. I think the majority of incidents are less due to racism and more due to incompetence and fear.
This case looks like two cops need to be fired, maybe prosecuted. Shooting a guy in the back without visible proof a gun is maybe criminal. We'll see what they find.
As far as long-term, part of the reason is tied to the level of violence in the communities the police are called into. Often when police are called into a majority black neighborhood, they are going into a hostile area known for gang violence with their lives at risk. They are going in scared for their lives and ready to fire on anyone that threatens or shoots at them. A scared person with a gun is going to make bad decisions even with training.
I do think they need to have harsher penalties for mistakes. There needs to be some fear of reprisals for making mistakes shooting people other than getting fired.
I would also like to see an investment in improving nonlethal weapon options. The taser is unreliable. We need nonlethal weapons that work, so the police have 99.9999% effective options other than the gun.
The "Question"; What do we as a society have to do to END these police shootings of unarmed Black men??
Then, then answer that pretty much summed up the whole thing for me in a nut shell.
1. It will stop when young black men are home in bed resting their bodies for a hard day of work the next day so you can support those kids that you brought into the world instead of running around at night doing things that you know you should not be doing and hanging out with people who you know will only bring the police down on you. That is the FIRST place to start.
obiken wrote:First place to start is at Chris Rock, can we all agree that there are some professions that don't get a bad day, or allowed to have bad apples. Airline pilots, Brain surgeons, or Cops.
With "open carry" a thing now with militia wanna-be types with a pistol on the hip and a rifle in the arms can parade around but a black kid with a B B gun is killed.
Maybe I am just not hearing about all the "open carry" killings?
Old but Slow wrote:While I try to stay out of these politically explosive topics, I am curious about one aspect. With "open carry" a thing now with militia wanna-be types with a pistol on the hip and a rifle in the arms can parade around but a black kid with a B B gun is killed. Maybe I am just not hearing about all the "open carry" killings?
burrrton wrote:As is too often the case, there was more to the Sacramento situation than I'd heard initially.
I don't know if this was already covered here, but apparently there was someone smashing car windows in the neighborhood, and a police helicopter was tracking Stephon Clark running through backyards and jumping fences (I don't know if they had seen him smashing windows or just suspected him of that part).
This of course doesn't mean he deserved to die, and I don't see how the police can justify their choice to begin shooting nearly the instant they walked around the corner and saw Mr. Clark, but this doesn't sound like what it was initially portrayed as.
Unless there were reports of shots being fired, there was no reason for them to suspect that someone's life was in danger and no justifiable reason to use deadly force, let alone shooting the suspect 8 times with 6 of those shots being in his back.
burrrton wrote:I agree with the last part, and I'm betting they're going to be facing punishment for it, but I don't agree with the bolded, and I don't think anyone in law enforcement would, either.
You don't have to have used the gun for police to consider it a threat.
Unless he was known to be armed, it's hard for me to imagine how anyone's life could be in danger.
burrrton wrote:Huh? Cops will *never* rely on *knowing* someone is armed before operating under that assumption- never have, never will. And they shouldn't. It'll get more cops killed.
What they should do, however, is assume there's at least a remote possibility a guy is unarmed, which I think we agree on.
NorthHawk wrote:Here's an opinion piece by a Police Officer that fits into the better training aspect.
For me, the most important comment is:
"To save lives, especially in urban, minority-rich environments, we must train officers to understand how the brain responds in conditions of deadly duress."
The article itself is an interesting comment.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/05/opinions ... index.html
NorthHawk wrote:The only thing I can see that relates to the article is they were in the Old Brain mode and when one fired, it heightened the pressure and the others followed.
But I'm not a psychologist, so it's just a guess.
NorthHawk wrote:...there is a difference between Peace Officers and Law Enforcement Officers in how they approach policing.
c_hawkbob wrote:There is no difference, it's just two different ways of saying the same thing.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests