|
ryde posted:There's been a few lawyer types on Twitter, including Popehats, who say that his chances are "LOLno". I'll go looking, thanks.
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 05:14 |
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:You're infected with American cowboy logic if you think that was the proper way to stop her. He has pepper spray, he has a tazer, and he has a baton. He had many non-lethal options. Everything points to this being a dude looking for an excuse and he's being given one. Did you watch the video?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:15
|
|
|
It would probably help the discussion if people stopped treating hypotheticals as fact. No, it is not know for certain that the other girl would have been stabbed to death if the cop hadn't killed Bryant. It's just as likely that the cop could have missed and killed both girls, and maybe even a bystander or two. All that we know is what happened.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:17
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:No, I'm saying that the cop should not have killed the assailant. I don't see any way that the cop could have prevented the victim's likely death other than shooting the assailant. Tasers are too unreliable, grabbing someone with a knife is essentially suicidal and you don't talk down someone charging someone else with a knife, so what is the magic solution that I'm missing here?
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:17
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:You're infected with American cowboy logic if you think that was the proper way to stop her. He has pepper spray, he has a tazer, and he has a baton. He had many non-lethal options. Everything points to this being a dude looking for an excuse and he's being given one. You’d have a point if they had time to talk and try to de-escalate and try non-lethal methods. However, the cop had literally a handful of seconds to deal with the entire situation as soon as he pulled up. Everything absolutely does not point to the cop looking for an excuse to shoot someone in this case. He saved that pink girl from getting sliced in her neck.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:19
|
|
|
Lord Stimperor posted:I'll go looking, thanks. https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1384642845177352192 That's the primary one I remember ^ Also, https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1384911649228853248 There's a couple of other analysis I saw on twitter from known lawyers, that I don't remember the source to. Basically, the standard for an appeal overturning a verdict is when procedural errors can significantly damage the case. In a trial where you have the police captain, multiple policemen, and experts testifying against a person, plus actual video of the murder, its really unlikely that any procedural errors would impact the verdict.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:19
|
|
|
Vorik posted:You’d have a point if they had time to talk and try to de-escalate and try non-lethal methods. However, the cop had literally a handful of seconds to deal with the entire situation as soon as he pulled up. Everything absolutely does not point to the cop looking for an excuse to shoot someone in this case. He saved that pink girl from getting sliced in her neck. Pepper spray and tazers talk to you?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:20
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:I don't see any way that the cop could have prevented the victim's likely death other than shooting the assailant. Tasers are too unreliable, grabbing someone with a knife is essentially suicidal and you don't talk down someone charging someone else with a knife, so what is the magic solution that I'm missing here? I'm not saying that there's a magical solution. It was a bad situation, due in large part to the cops arriving to the scene so late. But I still stand by my stance that cops should not be allowed to extrajudicially execute people, even if it occasionally saves lives. As I already said, the belief that cops should be heroes that save lives by killing the bad guys is exactly why police brutality is such a huge problem.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:24
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:It would probably help the discussion if people stopped treating hypotheticals as fact. No, it is not know for certain that the other girl would have been stabbed to death if the cop hadn't killed Bryant. It's just as likely that the cop could have missed and killed both girls, and maybe even a bystander or two. All that we know is what happened. A knife is a deadly weapon and the appropriate response to an attack with a deadly weapon is lethal force if other methods aren’t guaranteed to work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:25
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:So are you saying that it would have been better for the other girl to die instead of the assailant, yes? Are you saying that it's fine he killed someone? To reverse the question. If you are happy to accept violence towards people to prevent harm then where are you drawing the line on that?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:29
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:I'm not saying that there's a magical solution. It was a bad situation, due in large part to the cops arriving to the scene so late. But I still stand by my stance that cops should not be allowed to extrajudicially execute people, even if it occasionally saves lives. As I already said, the belief that cops should be heroes that save lives by killing the bad guys is exactly why police brutality is such a huge problem. Ok, so you are saying that the victim should have died instead of the assailant, that is literally what you are saying here. Thanks for the clarification.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:30
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:It would probably help the discussion if people stopped treating hypotheticals as fact. No, it is not know for certain that the other girl would have been stabbed to death if the cop hadn't killed Bryant. It's just as likely that the cop could have missed and killed both girls, and maybe even a bystander or two. All that we know is what happened. That is generally exactly how you examine use of force scenarios. Using force/violence against someone in a way that is reasonably likely to cause death is lethal force, you don't roll the dice. Also you jumped right from bemoaning people treating hypotheticals as fact to putting up a counterfactual hypothetical.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:31
|
|
|
Vorik posted:A knife is a deadly weapon and the appropriate response to an attack with a deadly weapon is lethal force if other methods aren’t guaranteed to work. Fister Roboto's position appears to be that police should never use deadly force, even to ostensibly impede other deadly force, which honestly is a coherent and defensible position, if an unusual one in this country.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:31
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:I'm not saying that there's a magical solution. It was a bad situation, due in large part to the cops arriving to the scene so late. But I still stand by my stance that cops should not be allowed to extrajudicially execute people, even if it occasionally saves lives. As I already said, the belief that cops should be heroes that save lives by killing the bad guys is exactly why police brutality is such a huge problem. agreed in this case at least. i dont think anyone is calling this dude a hero outside the chuds and they think loving chauvin is a hero too. i just think its a hosed situation that wasnt gonna have a happy ending probably because how everything lined up time wise and the police training the way it is. that being said i think alot of people want this pig to be able to pull off some magic taser shot and hope that works. if we being realistic, he should have used a baton or something, but then you get footage of a pig breaking a teenage girl's arm or some hosed up horror. also the cop popping out a baton and using it to disarm someone that is literally stabbing someone in the span of literal seconds is some John Wick poo poo Dapper_Swindler fucked around with this message at 23:34 on Apr 21, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:31
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Are you saying that it's fine he killed someone? To reverse the question. It's generally ok to kill people who are actively attempting murder, in order to stop them
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:33
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:agreed in this case at least. i dont think anyone is calling this dude a hero outside the chuds and they think loving chauvin is a hero too. i just think its a hosed situation that wasnt gonna have a happy ending probably because how everything lined up time wise and the police training the way it is. that being said i think alot of people want this pig to be able to pull off some magic taser shot and hope that works. if we being realistic, he should have used a baton or something, but then you get footage of a pig breaking a teenage girl's arm or some hosed up horror. Uhhh yeah, that would be better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:36
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Are you saying that it's fine he killed someone? To reverse the question. I am fine with an assailant dieing if they are in the process of attempting to murder another person, yes. I draw the line in that the assailant has to be violently acting at that moment, i.e. they must be shooting a gun, swinging a knife, etc.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:36
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Uhhh yeah, that would be better. sure, but he would had to reach her in less then 3 seconds as she was mid swinging the knife.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:37
|
|
|
Piell posted:It's generally ok to kill people who are actively attempting murder, in order to stop them What about those who have orchestrated murders? Are they not just as, if not more, accountable? AVeryLargeRadish posted:I draw the line in that the assailant has to be violently acting at that moment, i.e. they must be shooting a gun, swinging a knife, etc. Why? Why draw the line there?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:38
|
|
|
ryde posted:https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1384642845177352192 Assuring. I was low key wondering whether the court was providing the defense an out but it doesn't seem that way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:39
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:sure, but he would had to reach her in less then 3 seconds as she was mid swinging the knife. Than he should of moved fast and put his own life at risk instead of shooting into a group.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:40
|
|
|
raminasi posted:Fister Roboto's position appears to be that police should never use deadly force, even to ostensibly impede other deadly force, which honestly is a coherent and defensible position, if an unusual one in this country. That's correct. Thank you for giving my posts an honest reading.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:40
|
|
|
Lord Stimperor posted:Assuring. I was low key wondering whether the court was providing the defense an out but it doesn't seem that way. I didn't catch the context but the court saying that they may use that to appeal was more like telling them to shut up about things not relevant to the facts of the case and to take it up on appeal, not implying that the defense actually had a reasonable argument.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:40
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:This has been addressed within the last few pages multiple times, including with sourced statistics. Tasers are not reliable enough to be used as a response to imminent deadly force, especially when that deadly force is directed at a third party. They're not accurate, the barbs don't always penetrate clothing, the barbs sometimes don't penetrate clothing/penetrate enough to get the full effect, the physiological effect can vary by quite a bit from person to person based on a ton of factors, and if you have any of these problems you/the 3rd party is dead because you only get one shot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:42
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:What about those who have orchestrated murders? Are they not just as, if not more, accountable? Averylargeradish didn't say anything about accountability, are you actually reading the posts you're replying to?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:43
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:What about those who have orchestrated murders? Are they not just as, if not more, accountable? People who orchestrate murder but aren't doing a murder right now generally don't need to actively stopped doing a murder right this second, whereas the person attempting to murder someone right now does need to be stopped right this second
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:43
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:No, I think that cops shouldn't be able to kill people. "Cops should let people kill other people" implies that they should do nothing at all. Gumball Gumption posted:You're infected with American cowboy logic if you think that was the proper way to stop her. He has pepper spray, he has a tazer, and he has a baton. He had many non-lethal options. Everything points to this being a dude looking for an excuse and he's being given one. My invite is open to the both of you. Arm yourselves with batons and pepper sprays, I have a sharpie representing a knife, if I get marker on you or a 3rd party, they are classed as dead. It’s been established by every law enforcement agency and everyone who knows anything about physical defence that you would be covered in ink. You are utterly clueless on how to defend yourself or your loved ones. Please don’t ever try and take someone on with a knife.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:43
|
|
|
oldskool posted:I'm curious as to the source of these "Tasers are unreliable/not useful in these situations" arguments, because it seems to me tasers wouldn't be issued at all if they are rendered inert by their target being overly angry or wearing clothing. In fairness, tasers are rendered inert in any situation in which US police were trained never to consider doing anything other than drawing their gun and firing immediately.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:46
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:Averylargeradish didn't say anything about accountability, are you actually reading the posts you're replying to? More to blame then if you would prefer. If the person trying to stab someone else at fault and must be killed, then why are the people who armed and encouraged such a situation not also as guilty? Why is it only the individual to blame, as it were? Piell posted:People who orchestrate murder but aren't doing a murder right now generally don't need to actively stopped doing a murder right this second, whereas the person attempting to murder someone right now does need to be stopped right this second So it's only harm in the moment that means you should use deadly force? Wouldn't this mean that the person who arms the people who kill others is less likely to be punished than the ones who are acting on what they have been told to do?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:48
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Than he should of moved fast and put his own life at risk instead of shooting into a group. It's not his life he's putting at risk (primarily), it's the girl about to be stabbed. NoDamage posted:It has been asserted multiple times in this thread, yes, but I don't find this assertion particularly convincing. Yes, tasers can sometimes fail. Guns can also fail when the shooter misses or accidentally hits someone else. Considering that outcome in the "successful" scenario with a gun likely results in someone's death, I don't think we should be so eager to hand wave away tasers or other less lethal options. Statistics on this have been literally sourced in this thread, and people with actual training and experience have explained why this is ridiculously wrong. At this point you're just saying "nah" and declaring what you want to be true is true with no basis.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:48
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:I don't see any way that the cop could have prevented the victim's likely death other than shooting the assailant. Tasers are too unreliable, grabbing someone with a knife is essentially suicidal and you don't talk down someone charging someone else with a knife, so what is the magic solution that I'm missing here? These people are clueless when it comes to knowing anything about combat or self defence. They utterly ruin the credibility of anyone criticising cops actions because they then get held up as how people who criticise the police don’t know what they are talking about, muddying the water completely when it comes to valid criticisms of horrendous police abuse and use of force. We’ve had posters claiming knives aren’t dangerous. Now we’ve got posters claiming a police officer could use a baton to take someone on who has a knife and is mid stab of a victim. It’s utterly absurd. These people have watched too many Marvel movies or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:49
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Than he should of moved fast and put his own life at risk instead of shooting into a group. Yeah, it'd be cool if people had super powers. 
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:51
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:More to blame then if you would prefer. If the person trying to stab someone else at fault and must be killed, then why are the people who armed and encouraged such a situation not also as guilty? Why is it only the individual to blame, as it were? It is generally ok to kill people who are actively trying to murder someone at this moment because they need to be stopped right this second, not people who orchestrate murders are any less guilty
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:53
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:More to blame then if you would prefer. If the person trying to stab someone else at fault and must be killed, then why are the people who armed and encouraged such a situation not also as guilty? Why is it only the individual to blame, as it were? The point of using deadly force isn’t to punish someone. The point is to prevent harm to victims. The girl wasn’t shot because that was her punishment, she was shot to prevent her killing someone else, and rightly so. It’s why Derek Chauvin is guilty of murder. He didn’t kill GF to prevent him killing someone else, he did it as an act of unnecessary force, making it murder. The shooting of the girl with the knife is an example of a super necessary shooting by the officer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:54
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Statistics on this have been literally sourced in this thread, and people with actual training and experience have explained why this is ridiculously wrong. At this point you're just saying "nah" and declaring what you want to be true is true with no basis.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:55
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:That's correct. Thank you for giving my posts an honest reading. So I’m holding a child with a gun to its head, I’m going to kill that child, you don’t think officers should take the shot to kill me to save the child, and instead wait for me to kill the baby then arrest me for murder afterwards? I don’t see how this is defensible or even understand the logic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:57
|
|
|
Piell posted:It is generally ok to kill people who are actively trying to murder someone at this moment because they need to be stopped, not people who orchestrate murders are any less guilty But why? The damage is the same or greater in the case of the latter? This is what I can't quite wrap my head around, and I am sorry if I am being thick. Why is it that someone who does damage in that moment is worthy of death but someone who has done greater harm does not deserve it in that moment? If the idea is that you can prevent the other person from taking life via violence, why does that not extend to those that would do more harm across a longer time frame? Again, sorry if I am being slow.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2021 23:58
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:But why? The damage is the same or greater in the case of the latter? Because violence should be a last resort you use after all other options fail.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2021 00:00
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:So it's only harm in the moment that means you should use deadly force? Wouldn't this mean that the person who arms the people who kill others is less likely to be punished than the ones who are acting on what they have been told to do? Uh, absolutely? If I sell you a car and you go drive over some protestors with it I’m definitely less likely to be punished. Should I be to blame? But instead of winding up hypotheticals just look at the direct question. Is it reasonable to immediately use deadly force to prevent someone else from immediately using deadly force on another person? idiotsavant fucked around with this message at 00:02 on Apr 22, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2021 00:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 05:14 |
|
|
The police need something more reliable than a taser, less lethal than a gun or a 40mm, and longer ranged than a nightstick. Maybe some kind of long, flexible, heavy stick, perhaps carved from a hippopotamus...
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2021 00:00
|
|
