|
Waco Panty Raid posted:Brandishing/"flashing" is almost certainly still illegal and needs to ve investigated with caution by the police. I'm unfamiliar with the specific law for Utah but I don't think there is a requirement for concealed carry holders to announce themselves as armed at the beginning of interactions with police (some states do, which I think is a good idea). I doubt even the most outspoken open carry nuts (who are literally looking to provoke police) would act like Taylor did, though. But they do not know it is these gentlemen that they were looking for? And it wouldn't be open carry it would be concealed carry and, if you have music on, how difficult would it be to know what the hell is happening when you are told something.
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 09:12 |
|
|
Josef bugman posted:But they do not know it is these gentlemen that they were looking for? And it wouldn't be open carry it would be concealed carry and, if you have music on, how difficult would it be to know what the hell is happening when you are told something. I only mentiomed open carry to reference people that are looking to provoke police wouldn't have acted in such an irresponsible manner, obviously the cop suspected Taylor had a concealed weapon.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
Do people think cops are actively deciding in the moment "I can kill this person and get away with it?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
Waco Panty Raid posted:Not very in Taylor's case since he clearly heard the police as evidenced when he responded to them. How much do you really need to understand to know not to make extremely suspicious movements like that? I'm pretty confident even a person deaf from birth could figure it out. Taylor's judgment may have been impaired by his BAC of 0.18 at the time of the incident.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:When faced with law enforcement the prudent course of action for a firearms permit holder is to comply with law enforcement, place your hands where they tell you to, and calmly state "I have a concealed carry permit. There is a handgun located [wherever] how would you like me to proceed?" Not reach for your gun. Apparently he didn't have a gun but he did exactly as you said he should. They still killed him for it. Maybe he was wondering what all the commotion was behind him and attempted to remove his headphones. Lol, wrong move, punk. Dead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Do people think cops are actively deciding in the moment "I can kill this person and get away with it?" No, but I doubt they are thinking anything other than "I am going to die and need to kill this person before he does the same to me" which is horriffic from a public official. Waco Panty Raid posted:I only mentiomed open carry to reference people that are looking to provoke police wouldn't have acted in such an irresponsible manner, obviously the cop suspected Taylor had a concealed weapon. 1) I wouldn't describe trying to raise your hands in a pancky way as suspicious and 2) If he had a license for the concealed weapon and was killed, would that make it worse?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Do people think cops are actively deciding in the moment "I can kill this person and get away with it?" In the moment, maybe, maybe not. But, throughout their careers, their training, interactions with colleagues, knowledge of zero consequences for colleagues killing people, yes, absolutely 100%.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Taylor's judgment may have been impaired by his BAC of 0.18 at the time of the incident. Drunk? Dressed like that? Listening to music instead of paying attention to his surroundings? Man, he was just asking for it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:19
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Do people think cops are actively deciding in the moment "I can kill this person and get away with it?" No, but people are thinking that a cops first thought after shooting someone is covering it as fast as possible. This can be corroborated by the number of reports where the victim survives the initial shooting and is not provided emergency medical treatment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:20
|
|
|
Shooting aside, is there some reason, that with all the dozens of innocent people shot by police we've seen, I can't recall a single officer who provided basic first aid at the scene? The guy confirmed that the victim was unarmed, why not throw on some gloves and apply pressure?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:22
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:When faced with law enforcement the prudent course of action for a firearms permit holder is to comply with law enforcement, place your hands where they tell you to, and calmly state "I have a concealed carry permit. There is a handgun located [wherever] how would you like me to proceed?" Not reach for your gun. Prior to the incident what law did Taylor break? What type of gun was he reaching for and where was it? During the interaction with the police what law did Taylor break? Did the police find anything on Taylor that was illegal? Is walking down a sidewalk being inattentive the behaviour of a suspicious individual? Did Taylor have any reasonable expectation that someone would come up behind him screaming and pointing a gun at him? Is the panicked reaction of Taylor illegal? Agrajag fucked around with this message at 17:28 on Jun 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
Waco Panty Raid posted:Brandishing/"flashing" is almost certainly still illegal and needs to ve investigated with caution by the police. I'm unfamiliar with the specific law for Utah but I don't think there is a requirement for concealed carry holders to announce themselves as armed at the beginning of interactions with police (some states do, which I think is a good idea). I doubt even the most outspoken open carry nuts (who are literally looking to provoke police) would act like Taylor did, though. So the brandishing/flashing never happened. Listen to the 911 tape. By the end of the call the only thing actually reported is "he has something in his pocket."
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
Finally got a chance to watch the video and holy poo poo, guy loving ignores police instructions and keeps on walking for like 30 seconds while loving around with his waste-band before he finally pulls both hands out together and up like he's drawing a gun. Also lol at the people trying to say he was startled, he clearly sees and is deliberately ignoring the cops.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
Squinty posted:Shooting aside, is there some reason, that with all the dozens of innocent people shot by police we've seen, I can't recall a single officer who provided basic first aid at the scene? The guy confirmed that the victim was unarmed, why not throw on some gloves and apply pressure? There has to be some legal reason for this, right? Does rendering aid to someone you shot imply fault or something? It can't just be cold indifference to a fellow human being in need of aid, can it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Finally got a chance to watch the video and holy poo poo, guy loving ignores police instructions and keeps on walking for like 30 seconds while loving around with his waste-band before he finally pulls both hands out together and up like he's drawing a gun. What crime was Taylor committing? Where in that video do you see anything resembling a gun, or a weapon, aside from the police officer's?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Do people think cops are actively deciding in the moment "I can kill this person and get away with it?" "People" "Cops" You can't argue no cop ever committed first degree murder on the clock. It sounds like you're more concerned with glib generalization.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
Squinty posted:Shooting aside, is there some reason, that with all the dozens of innocent people shot by police we've seen, I can't recall a single officer who provided basic first aid at the scene? The guy confirmed that the victim was unarmed, why not throw on some gloves and apply pressure? He does. Its very clear. 2:43+ in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQYlQpFXCw4
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:What crime was Taylor committing? Insufficient fealty.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:1) I wouldn't describe trying to raise your hands in a pancky way as suspicious and 2) If he had a license for the concealed weapon and was killed, would that make it worse? I don't know if it would make it "worse" because I'm assuming in this scenario someone is still dead. Perhaps it would have made it better as I'm sure the training would have yold him to not act like that around police.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:What crime was Taylor committing? That's irrelevant, the criteria for shooting someone is perceived threat, not have they committed a crime.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
hobotrashcanfires posted:Drunk? Dressed like that? Listening to music instead of paying attention to his surroundings? You see, there is a difference between trying to understand an event and trying to find blame. A caller who very much used charged language based on bias called in and reported three men, one wearing a white shirt, one wearing a red shirt, and one wearing a striped shirt. Taylor and his brother and friend were wearing shirts that matched that descritption. quote:Taylor's 22-year-old brother and 21-year-old cousin were the two men with him and whose clothing matched that described by a 911 caller, who told dispatchers "some gangbangers" walking near 200 East and 1900 South had "flashed" a gun. So you have a cop who isn't just running around scaredy-cat shooting at people. You have a cop who is responding to a report of at least one armed person flashing a gun at people, and he finds 3 people that distinctly match the description given by what, in hindsight, was a bogus report. Upon confronting the group, 2 of the 3 immediately throw their hands up, and the cop now thinks the third one who is not complying with his hands in his pants is likely the armed suspect, and the cop is doubly afraid because the one he now thinks is armed isn't responding to his orders, except to turn and face the cop and call out "No, fool!" in response to the officer's demands. When the Taylor finally does pull his hands out, the officer shoots him, because the officer mistakenly thought he was drawing a weapon rather than realizing the truth, which is that Taylor was empty-handed. His perception and attitudes may have been just a tad affected by the several minutes leading up to a split-second decision. As for why Taylor didn't respond more like his brother and friend, he could have been listening to music (unknown), and he was intoxicated, so he may have acted differently in other circumstances. Taylor had also made some vaguely suicidal postings on Facebook a few days prior to this, and he had a felony warrant out for his arrest so who knows what his state of mind was or how clearly he was thinking when he was out and about that day. quote:Taylor wrote on Aug. 7, "I feel my time is coming soon, my nightmears are telling me. im gonna have warrants out for my arrest soon ... ill die before I go do a lot of time in a cell." I wish he hadn't been shot. He in no way "deserved it" or "got what he had coming," but a rather complicated mix of issues led to his death that amounts to more than "lol, this cop sure was a scared murderer." Of all the super hosed up police killings we have, this one is far less egregious than so many others. source of quotes: http://www.sltrib.com/news/justice/1632686-155/taylor-cruz-gill-shooting-officers-hands
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
Waco Panty Raid posted:I wouldn't describe what he did as "trying to raise your hands in a pancky way" (if that's the story we're going with now). What part of raising your hands requires lifting your shirt from your waistband? I just watched it again and from the moment he was totally not subtly trying to walk away from the police (the people he was with seemed to have more sense) he was acting in an extremely suspicious manner, there's really no other way to describe it. What is the established criteria for the reaction of an innocent person to react to a situation that they would have no reasonable expectation to be in? How does the involvement of earphones distracting one's self from the immediate area complicate such established rules?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:That's irrelevant, the criteria for shooting someone is perceived threat, not have they committed a crime. The only threat in that video is the police officer with a gun pointed at an innocent man that was clumsily raising his shirt above his belly before he was shot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:That's irrelevant, the criteria for shooting someone is perceived threat, not have they committed a crime. And the problem with that is the police too often perceive threats where none exist. They are trained to do so through fear and paranoia, and are rarely held responsible for unnecessary use of lethal force. Edit: Agrajag posted:The only threat in that video is the police officer with a gun pointed at an innocent man that was clumsily raising his shirt above his belly before he was shot. Watching the video, my first reaction was "why the gently caress is the cop pulling his gun out and pointing it at someone with their back to him?" At that point literally anything the guy did could have been construed as a "sudden movement" to a jumpy cop with a drawn weapon afraid for his life. Rhesus Pieces fucked around with this message at 17:47 on Jun 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Do people think cops are actively deciding in the moment "I can kill this person and get away with it?" I think no cop in the history of cops has ever been required to think twice.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:What is the established criteria for the reaction of an innocent person to react to a situation that they would have no reasonable expectation to be in? How does the involvement of earphones distracting one's self from the immediate area complicate such established rules? A guy with a bunch of arrests warrants out on him has no reasonable expectation to be in that situation?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:What is the established criteria for the reaction of an innocent person to react to a situation that they would have no reasonable expectation to be in? How does the involvement of earphones distracting one's self from the immediate area complicate such established rules? He actually very much expected it. On Facebook he said he had warrants coming and that he'd rather die than do time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:He actually very much expected it. On Facebook he said he had warrants coming and that he'd rather die than do time. Oh, I had no idea. Guess the officer was just doing him a solid by gunning him down.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
DARPA posted:Oh, I had no idea. Guess the officer was just doing him a solid by gunning him down. Yes, that is the argument I have made, you got me!
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Finally got a chance to watch the video and holy poo poo, guy loving ignores police instructions and keeps on walking for like 30 seconds while loving around with his waste-band before he finally pulls both hands out together and up like he's drawing a gun. This is exactly, exactly how people behave when you yell after them in a public place. "Keep on walking" is some weird instinct that exists and that basically everyone has you massive loving goon. Edit: mlmp08 posted:He actually very much expected it. On Facebook he said he had warrants coming and that he'd rather die than do time. Everyone who is looking at time thinks the exact same thing at some point or another and it doesn't matter if its six months or six years. Doesn't mean poo poo and practically never leads to anything.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:A guy with a bunch of arrests warrants out on him has no reasonable expectation to be in that situation? He should have known better.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
Woozy posted:Everyone who is looking at time thinks the exact same thing at some point or another and it doesn't matter if its six months or six years. Doesn't mean poo poo and practically never leads to anything. Sure. My point was that it could have been a motivating factor in why he chose to turn around and yell "No, fool" at the officer. We can't know, but it could be a contributing factor to why the interaction went the way it did. And I was responding to someone claiming that Taylor had no expectation that he'd interact with police when in reality he did have that expectation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:What is the established criteria for the reaction of an innocent person to react to a situation that they would have no reasonable expectation to be in? How does the involvement of earphones distracting one's self from the immediate area complicate such established rules? Kinda like how the other two acted and somehow managed to not get shot by the murder-obsessed coward patrol. Edit that was kind of an important word to leave out
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
Ahh, the not an angel argument for the killing of a person that was committing no crime. So what warrant would this be exactly? Slink away from someone you probably can not hear and that appoached from behind you while walking down a sidewalk listening to music? Keep trying to pain Taylor as the living embodiment of the devil please.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:So what warrant would this be exactly? Since you're too lazy to google: quote:Taylor was facing a $25,000 arrest warrant for allegedly violating probation he received for robbery and obstructing justice; he was arrested July 31 in North Salt Lake for being drunk and interfering with the arresting officer, according to an affidavit filed with the court. The cops didn't know who he was, so it's not like this background had any bearing on how they behaved. Whether it was affecting how Taylor behaved that day is unknowable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:I wish he hadn't been shot. He in no way "deserved it" or "got what he had coming," but a rather complicated mix of issues led to his death that amounts to more than "lol, this cop sure was a scared murderer." Of all the super hosed up police killings we have, this one is far less egregious than so many others. Incidentally, when are the words "no fool" heard on the video?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
I'm still trying to understand why it just assumed that it was OK that the cop had his gun drawn at the start of the whole confrontation. The 911 wasn't talking about anyone being violent, just that some person was "flashing" a gun (an armed society is a polite society!), not that they were threatening people with it, or being in any way violent, just that they looked suspicious and maybe had a gun, and this police starts the whole interaction with his weapon already trained on a group of people. How is that an appropriate response to a non-violent 911 call, or am I not going to get a good answer because "criminals are dangerous and the officer was just protecting himself"?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:Ahh, the not an angel argument for the killing of a person that was committing no crime. So what warrant would this be exactly? I don't need Taylor to be a devil to think the shooting was justified.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
Your cops are so bad it makes me appreciate the bad cops we have.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 09:12 |
|
|
Waco Panty Raid posted:I don't need Taylor to be a devil to think the shooting was justified. Out of curiosity, can you give me an example of a police shooting (or killing by other means) that was unjustified?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 18:05
|
|