|
Dexo posted:Ehhh that's a stretch, I'm against anyone getting shot. I think he meant that's why people shoot cops. If some dude just runs at you and you're armed and have no idea he's a cop your instinct would justifiably be shoot the crazy guy whose running for you. You'd still be hosed since shooting a cop who didn't identify himself as a cop is irrelevant to the justice system. Only cops get to use that 'feared for my life' when murdering people. I'm surprised there isn't more incidents of castle doctrine self defense on no-knocks at the wrong address. The one or two I have heard of the guy still got hosed because he shot (or at, have to find it) a cop despite it essentially being a bunch of people smashing in his door without any way for him to know it was police breaking down the wrong door.
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 12:11 |
|
|
Toasticle posted:I think he meant that's why people shoot cops. If some dude just runs at you and you're armed and have no idea he's a cop your instinct would justifiably be shoot the crazy guy whose running for you. You'd still be hosed since shooting a cop who didn't identify himself as a cop is irrelevant to the justice system. Only cops get to use that 'feared for my life' when murdering people. There was at least one case (can't Google it right now but it's super easy to find) where a person not only shot a cop executing a no-knock warrant on the wrong house, but surprisingly the judge ruled in his favor as it was decided that there was no warning given and he was legally justified to shoot back with all of the information he had at the time. That said, I think most cases of a homeowner mistaking overly aggressive police in the middle of the night for burglars and shooting at them tend to result in said homeowner being gunned down. Considering how many cases we've found of the police altering narratives to be more in their favor, it makes you wonder just how many apparently good shoots in SWAT raids and such were actually innocent people being killed and not having enough video or witnesses to prove otherwise. If someone has a bunch of pot that gets found during an incidental raid after the fact and he gets shot in the face for mistaking the SWAT team for burglars and attacking them and he's the only one at home, how would anybody know the cops are lying when they simply describe him as a criminal who was gunned down in a high risk raid?
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
otoh, see Cory Maye
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 06:25
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:otoh, see Cory Maye I can't recall the guy's name but it was an elderly black vet whose lifeline or similar monitor went off by accident, despite lifeline calling the police and saying it was a false alarm he's fine the loving scumbag cops refused to not break his door down saying poo poo like "Open the loving door friend of the family", the guy starts recording "This is my final testament I'm about to be killed by the police", cops break in an blow him away. I'll look it up later the whole thing is loving depressing as poo poo. Edit: This guy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Kenneth_Chamberlain,_Sr. Two of my favorite parts: quote:Theirr (polices released) transcript of the incident omitted Hart's use of the word "friend of the family," as well as the information that the original call had been for a medical emergency. quote:camera mounted on the taser captured the tasing, but was not functioning during the shooting. Of course secret grand jury found no reason to file any charges. Toasticle fucked around with this message at 19:04 on Sep 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
Toasticle posted:I can't recall the guy's name but it was an elderly black vet whose lifeline or similar monitor went off by accident, despite lifeline calling the police and saying it was a false alarm he's fine the loving scumbag cops refused to not break his door down saying poo poo like "Open the loving door friend of the family", the guy starts recording "This is my final testament I'm about to be killed by the police", cops break in an blow him away. I'll look it up later the whole thing is loving depressing as poo poo. Kenneth Chamberlain Jr, the cops who killed him on November 19, 2011 never got any time or disciplinary actions for it either. [edit]Found it before I could respond. It's funny that a cop can die and his killer is instantly brought to justice, meanwhile cops murder this guy while shouting racial epithets and years later they still walk the street. tezcat fucked around with this message at 19:02 on Sep 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
tezcat posted:Kenneth Chamberlain Jr, the cops who killed him on November 19, 2011 never got any time or disciplinary actions for it either. So now that we've let the wheels of justice come to a complete stop on this case, can we now say the system is broken? Or will the pro-brutality advocates jump out to say that this was a good shoot? Edit: it appears that the cop who said "friend of the family" was fired, but the PD won't say why they fired him: quote:"It's a small, but significant step in getting justice for the murder of my father," Kenneth Chamberlain Jr. said after being informed that Public Safety Commissioner David Chong had terminated Hart. The officer that killed Chamberlain had a long history of abuse and was already facing at abuse lawsuit at the time, but I haven't found his current employment status yet. Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 19:07 on Sep 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:So now that we've let the wheels of justice come to a complete stop on this case, can we now say the system is broken? They spent a loving HOUR breaking down his door with him saying please leave me alone I'm fine the whole time. Of course according the cops a 66 year ex-marine with a heart condition attacked them with a butcher knife. I know it's Wikipedia but the autopsy showed his arm was at his side, bullet entered his right arm and ricoched through his lungs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
Of course, we just have to trust that the DA tried really hard, or just make an easy mistake that DAs make all the time or something. It can't be that the DA threw the case because they thought the victim deserved it or because they didn't want to impact their relationship with the killer's coworkers. Nope, in the absence of proof we must trust our authority figures know best.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
Apparently there's been some new info in federal court in that case http://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/westchester/white-plains/2015/09/08/explosive-claims-chamberlain-lawsuit/71901404/ quote:Cohen said some of the officers stated in sworn depositions that he was still on the floor when the fatal shots were fired, while others said he was charging at Sgt. Keith Martin with a knife. So the cops also shot him to death while he was on the ground, with broken ribs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
Dexo posted:Video of the James Blake takedown Anyone else notice the  from the dude in glasses.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Apparently there's been some new info in federal court in that case God can't you read? After being shot with a beanbag breaking his rib and knocking hm to ground he sprang up in less than a second and came after a squad of heavily armed cops who just tazed and broke his rib with a butcher knife! Duh.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
The Texas Mutual Insurance Company has straight-up purchased Travis County prosecutors and uses their indictment power to turn business disputes (and workers' comp claims) into criminal cases.quote:Still, in exchange for guaranteed payments from Texas Mutual of more than $400,000 a year, the Travis County district attorney’s office prosecutes alleged “crimes committed against the company,” according to their contract. Coming to a courtroom near you! quote:Funding deals allowing insurance companies to finance the costs of fraud investigations have blossomed around the nation in recent decades as lawmakers look for ways to help cash-strapped prosecutors pursue complex crimes that ultimately cause premiums to rise for everyone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 08:48
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:The Texas Mutual Insurance Company has straight-up purchased Travis County prosecutors and uses their indictment power to turn business disputes (and workers' comp claims) into criminal cases. How on earth is this legal!? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 09:55
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:The Texas Mutual Insurance Company has straight-up purchased Travis County prosecutors and uses their indictment power to turn business disputes (and workers' comp claims) into criminal cases.  What is our Justice Department even doing? You'd think someone, somewhere, would crack down on this poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 09:58
|
|
|
FourLeaf posted:
Yeah where is Zurich Orbital when you need it, this should go straight to the corporate court! Thor shots for Taxas Mutual!
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 12:15
|
|
|
FourLeaf posted:
Yeah, I duuno it's federalism or some poo poo like that?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 12:18
|
|
|
Dr Pepper posted:How on earth is this legal!? Texas.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 13:16
|
|
|
Dr Pepper posted:How on earth is this legal!? Texas Mutual's charter is public and in the Texas State code. Sec. 2054.455. FUNDING AGREEMENTS FOR CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS. The company may enter into funding agreements with local prosecutors to prosecute offenses against the company.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 13:37
|
|
|
Welp, Texas is now irredeemably awful.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
Dr Pepper posted:Welp, Texas is now irredeemably awful. Now?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
Where does it rank on the scale of Excellent to Florida?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:24
|
|
|
Zarkov Cortez posted:Where does it rank on the scale of Excellent to Florida? I went to Jacksonville and, as insanity threatened to envelop me each and every time I drove the rental, one thought kept me grounded: at least these roads aren't as bad as Texas.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Or will the pro-brutality advocates jump out to say that this was a good shoot? Think they all seem to have left, this being a den of cop hating filth and all. Or they got cranky for getting probated for constant one line phone snark posts. Which kind of sucks, there were a couple points where the thread actually started to creep towards "This is hosed, how do we fix it" but always seemed to backslide into "It was legal so whatever".
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
Toasticle posted:Think they all seem to have left, this being a den of cop hating filth and all. Or they got cranky for getting probated for constant one line phone snark posts. I mean, it's not like anyone in this thread actually wants to debate or discuss anything, so...
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Shukaro posted:I mean, it's not like anyone in this thread actually wants to debate or discuss anything, so... Funny how the people who make that claim never seem to try to start a discussion themselves. This thread has debated recently: Should cops be punished for lying? Should cops be punished for swearing? Is it reasonable to shoot a child with a toy gun within seconds of you seeing it? Is it constitutionally possible to make sure video evidence recorded by police equipment is admissible in court? Does someone deserve over-punishment and wrongful conviction for waiving their rights to a lawyer? Should every state become just like Indiana (I think)? Will body cameras have a sufficient effect to restore community trust in police? Are police responsible for increasing community trust? Are communities responsible for increasing police trust? And more I'm forgetting. So feel free to debate and discuss here. Why don't you share an opinion of yours on a topic related to police or criminal justice? Maybe try one that isn't universally held if you want to be adventurous!
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Funny how the people who make that claim never seem to try to start a discussion themselves. Yeah there's not much benefit to starting a discussion when one side is just posting "I hate cops let's waive due process," strawmen, gotcha's, and anecdotes no matter what gets said or how civil everyone tries to remain. edit for discussion content: gently caress the Police
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Shukaro posted:Yeah there's not much benefit to starting a discussion when one side is just posting "I hate cops let's waive due process," strawmen, gotcha's, and anecdotes no matter what gets said or how civil everyone tries to remain. hosed up if true
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
The posts with videos of cops beating and/or shooting people are OK though, keep on truckin' with those. Also these are nice too because lol Texas. PostNouveau posted:The Texas Mutual Insurance Company has straight-up purchased Travis County prosecutors and uses their indictment power to turn business disputes (and workers' comp claims) into criminal cases. Syenite fucked around with this message at 19:00 on Sep 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
Shukaro posted:Yeah there's not much benefit to starting a discussion when one side is just posting "I hate cops let's waive due process," strawmen, gotcha's, and anecdotes no matter what gets said or how civil everyone tries to remain. It is your mistake if you want to ignore all the content just so you can jump on a few gotchas. But lead a horse to water etc. (Also fabulous juxtaposition there) Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 19:02 on Sep 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:It is your mistake if you want to ignore all the content just so you can jump on a few gotchas. The water is actually just some horse poop next to a fire hydrant in this analogy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
Shukaro posted:Yeah there's not much benefit to starting a discussion when one side is just posting "I hate cops let's waive due process," strawmen, gotcha's, and anecdotes no matter what gets said or how civil everyone tries to remain. The problem you (and a bunch of other posters) seem to have is that, on a public internet forum, many people will post things and, as a result, some of those things will be dumb or incorrect. There's this one useful tip that I think might greatly improve your forum experience: ignore bad posts and respond to good ones! There are only few posters in this thread who post or have posted dumb/wrong things, but it seems like you and others see those posts and use them as an excuse to not address the better posts. Hell, even if there were only one or two good posters, that would still be enough to have a discussion. Instead, you seem content to just point at the bad ones and go "heh look at these dummies, if only they had correct opinions like me." I mean, if you don't feel like having your beliefs about a certain topic challenged (or don't feel like having an argument) that is totally fine, but if that's the case you just shouldn't post in a thread about that topic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:The problem you (and a bunch of other posters) seem to have is that, on a public internet forum, many people will post things and, as a result, some of those things will be dumb or incorrect. There's this one useful tip that I think might greatly improve your forum experience: ignore bad posts and respond to good ones! Hey, I've got free time, I'm up for debating & discussing if you want. Shoot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
Shukaro posted:Hey, I've got free time, I'm up for debating & discussing if you want. Shoot. For example you seem to think that "it is impossible to ensure that body cameras or dash cameras are admissible as evidence without violating the constitutional rights of the police officer being recorded". Is that correct? If so, why do you think a chain of evidence structure where someone in IA (or the video tech or w/e) is able to authenticate the video would be impossible to create within the constitution?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:For example you seem to think that "it is impossible to ensure that body cameras or dash cameras are admissible as evidence without violating the constitutional rights of the police officer being recorded". Is that correct? I don't think I've ever made a post where I said I thought that, but OK. (Correct me if I forgot a post somewhere though.) It's perfectly possible, and (the not insanely lovely) police departments like having cameras because it can cut down on random complaints where the officer was perfectly behaved. It's not really a constitutional issue though, just a big ol' budget+bureaucratic+regulatory one. The DoJ could easily say "Hey y'all you gotta have cameras meeting these specs, here's some sick dosh for that also if you don't in a few months we're gonna sue your lazy asses." but budget+beuracracy. Next.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
it's not that people don't want to debate and discuss (at least from what i've observed), it's that the sides are often talking past each other. there have been several "pro-police" posters who just approach everything from an angle of "is the cop acting within the bounds of the law" which I don't think anyone is relying on on the "anti-police" side--the latter is more interested in whether cops are behaving justly and how to improve the percentage of cops behaving justly, acting in good faith, etc. If new laws are a route to that then great if you can't agree on what you're discussing you can't really discuss, and especially on this forum things quickly degenerate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
The massive problem for months has been discussion shut down because people seem to think pointing out that what happened in Take old sarge. For pages and pages people were trying to get ANYONE to at least acknowledge non-wife-killing sergeants don't get to wander around armed, keep shooting the possible living victim while the cops put together a photo album of his kids then hug him. Nearly every reply was "So you think its easy to shoot your friend, whats wrong with you" completely ignoring the issue people have that all suspects should get that treatment not just their buddies. Which the common reply was "What, you think shooting a fiend is easy? Whats wrong with you". That's not discussion. The people most accusing of their not being a discussion were the most egregious in trying to shut down discussions because posters weren't cops/lawyers and didn't understand the law/how hard it is to be a cop enough to have opinions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
Toasticle posted:Think they all seem to have left, this being a den of cop hating filth and all. Or they got cranky for getting probated for constant one line phone snark posts. Shukaro posted:I mean, it's not like anyone in this thread actually wants to debate or discuss anything, so... Pretty much. We "racists" are still lurking, but you dont really want anything from us. Wouldnt want to legitimize the "other side" by bringing another point of view you dont want to hear to the table. Hey, looks like Matt Damon expressed an opinion to a black woman filmmaker. Like he knows anything about filmmaking or diversity. loving white dudes, amirite? MattD1zzl3 fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Sep 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 20:14
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:Pretty much. We "racists" are still lurking, but you dont really want anything from us. Wouldnt want to legitimize the "other side" by bringing another point of view you dont want to hear to the table. What does Matt Damon have to do with the disturbing trend of police killing unarmed black people?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
itt we take personal offense that one crazy poster called someone a racist and thus generalize an entire side of an argument. Dexo fucked around with this message at 20:22 on Sep 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 12:11 |
|
|
Talmonis posted:What does Matt Damon have to do with the disturbing trend of police killing unarmed black people? Please don't ask me 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 20:19
|
|