St Louis County - Police Officer Fatally Shoots 18-Year-Old (Michael Brown)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ambrosia

Grand Duchess
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
26,893
Reaction score
7,269
Location
In the Castle, of course.
To me, the contrast is fascinating. And I've got to say, the UK government is the one that comes off looking like it's trying to HELP its citizens, while the US government looks like it's trying to CONTROL its people.
However, to be fair to the police in the U.S., they do have something the UK does not have--heavily armed citizens. I have stated in this thread my belief that the police should de-militarize. They should never have been militarized in the first place, imo. But to send a policeman in the U.S. into a situation of potential violence unarmed wouldn't work. You would just have a dead cop. They do need to be able to protect themselves against the very real threat of a gun-wielding assailant. Unfortunately, I think everyone in the country has become a gun-wielding assailant in some of their eyes. And that mindset has to be addressed. Less lethal means of arresting someone who isn't firing back at you need to become the SOP. Because unarmed black men with their arms raised in surrender shouldn't be shot dead in the street. And neither should a mentally ill person walking down the street. Or beaten up. There are so many examples of police abuse of power.


Nighttimer, of course the 9 yr old's life matters. However, I do believe that is a different discussion than this one. No less important, mind. But different.
 

raburrell

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 24, 2009
Messages
6,902
Reaction score
3,781
Age
50
Location
MA
Website
www.rebeccaburrell.com
Without wanting to disrupt the present flow of the thread, which I think is a great discussion, I just came across this and I'm sitting here with my jaw open.
In the video, Page is seen addressing a St. Louis chapter of the Oath Keepers, a conservative group of former servicemen, saying, "I'm also a killer. I've killed a lot, and if I need to I'll kill a whole bunch more. If you don't want to get killed, don't show up in front of me." He also made disparaging remarks about Muslims and expressed the view that the U.S. was about to collapse. St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar apologized for the comments, calling them "bizarre." In a statement he said that while Page "has never been involved in an officer-involved shooting, the statements made about killing are unacceptable and not what we are about as a department."

What the hell is wrong with these people?
 

Captcha

Banned
Joined
Jan 27, 2010
Messages
4,456
Reaction score
637
However, to be fair to the police in the U.S., they do have something the UK does not have--heavily armed citizens. I have stated in this thread my belief that the police should de-militarize. They should never have been militarized in the first place, imo. But to send a policeman in the U.S. into a situation of potential violence unarmed wouldn't work. You would just have a dead cop. They do need to be able to protect themselves against the very real threat of a gun-wielding assailant. Unfortunately, I think everyone in the country has become a gun-wielding assailant in some of their eyes. And that mindset has to be addressed. Less lethal means of arresting someone who isn't firing back at you need to become the SOP. Because unarmed black men with their arms raised in surrender shouldn't be shot dead in the street. And neither should a mentally ill person walking down the street. Or beaten up. There are so many examples of police abuse of power.


Nighttimer, of course the 9 yr old's life matters. However, I do believe that is a different discussion than this one. No less important, mind. But different.

I wouldn't necessarily argue that US police shouldn't be armed. But I think it's telling that we're all hunting around trying to find statistics on police shootings and are having as much trouble as we are. Everyone has their favourite example of a frivolous federal government program, but with all that money being spent nobody has bothered to put together a data base on police shootings? To me, that suggests a lack of CARING, and I think that's as much of a problem as the heavily armed officers.

Maybe we can make this thread a bit more positive if we start suggesting possible solutions to the problem? Some of them are going to be pretty general, I'm sure, but maybe as a start?

I'd suggest:

Programs to make all police forces representative of the populations they serve - recruiting from all ethnic groups in the community, more women officers, etc.

Programs to regularly assess the mental health and aggressiveness of all police officers (I'm not saying they should be timid, but they shouldn't be cowboys or fascists, either).

Training for all officers in conflict resolution, de-escalation, and helping people with mental health issues.

Immediate end to the transfer of equipment from the military to the police, to be reinstated only after careful review and in a much more limited way.

Federal collection of statistics on all shootings involving police officers, with an eye to greater public awareness and the shaping of future programs.

What else might help?
 

Lyv

I meant to do that.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 5, 2007
Messages
4,958
Reaction score
1,934
Location
Outside Boston
Without wanting to disrupt the present flow of the thread, which I think is a great discussion, I just came across this and I'm sitting here with my jaw open.


What the hell is wrong with these people?

That officer is also the one caught on video shoving Don Lemon of CNN. He also made anti-gay remarks, and, as it says in your link as well, talked about visiting Kenya, where our undocumented president was born. At the end of this CNN piece about him, there's a reference to another Missouri police officer, who said in Facebook posts that the protesters should be "put down." He's been suspended.
 

Alessandra Kelley

Sophipygian
Staff member
Moderator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 27, 2011
Messages
16,881
Reaction score
5,197
Location
Near the gargoyles
Website
www.alessandrakelley.com
I wouldn't necessarily argue that US police shouldn't be armed. But I think it's telling that we're all hunting around trying to find statistics on police shootings and are having as much trouble as we are. Everyone has their favourite example of a frivolous federal government program, but with all that money being spent nobody has bothered to put together a data base on police shootings? To me, that suggests a lack of CARING, and I think that's as much of a problem as the heavily armed officers.

I believe the NRA has lobbied hard against every attempt to even suggest starting any kind of collection of shooting data in the US.

Believe me, many, many, many health professionals, grieving parents, security experts, statisticians, gun owners, and law officers do indeed care, deeply, about collecting that data.

The NRA prevents it, as these major mainstream news sources report:

How The NRA Killed Federal Funding For Gun Violence Research
CDC Ban on Gun Research Caused Lasting Damage
N.R.A. Stymies Firearms Research, Scientists Say
The NRA’s war on gun science
How NRA News Dismisses The Science Of Gun Violence: Host Cam Edwards: "Healthy Percentage" Of Teenagers Who Get Shot Are Criminals
CDC still can’t get funding for research on gun violence
 
Last edited:

Captcha

Banned
Joined
Jan 27, 2010
Messages
4,456
Reaction score
637
I believe the NRA has lobbied hard against every attempt to even suggest starting any kind of collection of shooting data in the US.

Believe me, many, many, many health professionals, grieving parents, security experts, statisticians, gun owners, and law officers do indeed care, deeply, about collecting that data.

The NRA prevents it.

Damn. I was trying not to rise to the tempting gun-control argument arising from the "our citizens are heavily armed so our police must be heavily armed" approach, but... seriously?!?

The NRA is THAT powerful? I don't even know what to say in response. How terrifying, and appalling.
 

clintl

Represent.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
7,611
Reaction score
603
Location
Davis, CA
Without wanting to disrupt the present flow of the thread, which I think is a great discussion, I just came across this and I'm sitting here with my jaw open.


What the hell is wrong with these people?

I saw that last night, and almost posted about it. I'm glad, though, that the St. Louis County police chief suspended him and didn't mince words about his disgust over the remarks.
 

rwam

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 17, 2006
Messages
1,741
Reaction score
188
Location
Glen Carbon, Illinois
I saw that last night, and almost posted about it. I'm glad, though, that the St. Louis County police chief suspended him and didn't mince words about his disgust over the remarks.

The video is apparently an hour long, but I haven't watched it. Apparently he's also talking about war, so I'm not sure about the context of his words. Then again, I don't think I could listen to the guy long enough to find out the context.
 

backslashbaby

~~~~*~~~~
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
12,635
Reaction score
1,603
Location
NC
I saw that last night, and almost posted about it. I'm glad, though, that the St. Louis County police chief suspended him and didn't mince words about his disgust over the remarks.

I saw that yesterday, too, and his words on domestic violence completely sickened me, in addition to the examples y'all already gave. DV victims have to use the police directly to handle their situations, so it's especially foul that he thinks so little of them.

Captcha, I'd add transparency, robust independent investigations, and stiff sentences to your list. I think a lot of the problem is caused by how horribly we've allowed the police to get off on this sort of thing before. Rogue cops know it, and a lot of fear of the police also comes from knowing that they have been so untouchable legally. It's been an open secret that they can basically do what they please and not go to jail for it, and that should have changed long ago.
 

onuilmar

(w)ride like the wind
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
928
Reaction score
137
Location
deep in rural Western NY
Captcha, I'd add transparency, robust independent investigations, and stiff sentences to your list. I think a lot of the problem is caused by how horribly we've allowed the police to get off on this sort of thing before. Rogue cops know it, and a lot of fear of the police also comes from knowing that they have been so untouchable legally. It's been an open secret that they can basically do what they please and not go to jail for it, and that should have changed long ago.

Absolutely. That's what infuriates me about Ferguson so much....the anticipated lack of accountability.

Without accountability, some police will go on to become executioners. And if you think I'm just being hysterical, it has already happened. To wit: Alburquerque:

DOJ Investigation Confirms: Albuquerque Police 'Executing' Citizens

Following release of report, rights groups calling for removal of mayor and police chief

http://www.commondreams.org/news/20...onfirms-albuquerque-police-executing-citizens

Not sure that anything actually happened after this finding, but still, this might just be the tip of the iceberg.

Unaccountable cops means a police state.
 
Last edited:

clintl

Represent.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
7,611
Reaction score
603
Location
Davis, CA
The video is apparently an hour long, but I haven't watched it. Apparently he's also talking about war, so I'm not sure about the context of his words. Then again, I don't think I could listen to the guy long enough to find out the context.

I didn't see the whole thing, only the clips CNN had online, but I'll just say this about what was there. What he said was so outlandishly offensive over so many different subjects that I'm not sure a satirist could exaggerate it to make fun of him. He basically checked off just about every possible box of nutjobbery it's possible to cover.

I noticed that even the Oathkeepers are distancing themselves from him, saying he was just a one-time guest speaker and not an actual member.
 
Last edited:

Captcha

Banned
Joined
Jan 27, 2010
Messages
4,456
Reaction score
637
Captcha, I'd add transparency, robust independent investigations, and stiff sentences to your list. I think a lot of the problem is caused by how horribly we've allowed the police to get off on this sort of thing before. Rogue cops know it, and a lot of fear of the police also comes from knowing that they have been so untouchable legally. It's been an open secret that they can basically do what they please and not go to jail for it, and that should have changed long ago.

Good point.

Hollywood would have us believe that there's a powerful "no snitching" "Internal Affairs is the enemy" mentality among police, and I think we'd have to try to break that instinct, for sure. If the people sworn to uphold and enforce the law feel that they're honour-bound to cover for colleagues who break the law? That's an unacceptable situation.
 

ShaunHorton

AW's resident Velociraptor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2014
Messages
3,550
Reaction score
511
Location
Washington State
Website
shaunhorton.blogspot.com

cmhbob

Did...did I do that?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
5,743
Reaction score
4,840
Location
Green Country
Website
www.bobmuellerwriter.com
Responding to these late, but several people have brought up Jared Loughner and the goblin in Aurora.

It needs to be pointed out that the people on the scene had Loughner subdued long before law enforcement got there. He had been disarmed because a bunch of people swarmed him when they realized his gun was jammed. The jam was ironically due to a larger-capacity magazine for the Glock.

And the Aurora goblin was sitting or otherwise waiting by his car when officers arrived. I know had I been one of the first on the scene, I'd have had my weapon out and aimed at him while waiting for backup, given that the call was for an active shooter, had the goblin reached for his weapon, he'd have been shot multiple times.

It's hardly fair to compare either of these goblins with Brown or Powell. Completely different situations tactically.
 

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
4,103
Location
CBUS
I've had to face a kind of epiphany here, Ambrosia, and I'm not sure where I go from that.

The same people being victimized by this racism don't trust me a whole heck of a lot more than they trust the officers.

For the moment, all I can think of is for me to start recognizing where this institutional racism is happening and calling it out for what it is. Do you see store employees following the black shoppers? Call it out.

And record it. Be a witness. And a reporter.

But that feels like so little.

Nighttimer? Ideas for us white folks wanting to help turn the tide?

I'm not an expert on racial reconciliation, Mr. Vargas. The getting of wisdom starts with asking the right questions. The answers you have to find for yourself. Mine work for me, but might prove totally disastrous for you.

I'd suggest reading some James Baldwin like The Fire Next Time or A Rap On Race between Baldwin and Margaret Mead. Or if you just have an hour or two to spare, Frontline's two-part Prison State is essential viewing.

He had a name, NT. He had a life. Someone out there looked at a nine-year-old boy and considered him a target.

For what?

I want to go into those neighborhoods and scream that they're killing each other faster than the cops can keep up.

But the ones that need to hear it, they wouldn't listen to me.

I don't know what to do. So I'm left in my suburb, safe (relatively), but powerless.

Of course not. But you've got a white cop who gunned down a black teenager in the street, widespread vilification of that teenager to justify it, the revelation that he shot the boy six times, militarized cops tear-gassing people and arresting journalists to keep things from getting out, and clear racial divides. There's no way that doesn't get a ton of attention. People were holding vigils and peacefully protesting what happened, as is their right to. They should do it. What happened just can't be allowed to pass. That kind of thing, and of course the problems caused when police moved in with their riot gear, is going to get attention.

What happened to the 9-year-old is tragic and horrific. But it's a murder, likely a private citizen killing a kid. Deplorable, and I hope the killer is caught and put away. But I'm not sure how people protesting the--let's call it what it was--assassination of a young black man by a man with law enforcement authority behind him getting national attention can be turned around to be something that says that they only count if killed by a white man.

Nighttimer, of course the 9 yr old's life matters. However, I do believe that is a different discussion than this one. No less important, mind. But different.

Beg to differ, Ambrosia. I see the killings of Michael Brown and Antonio Smith as two sides of the same bloody coin. What it boils down to this is Black life is cheap. Cheap to the cops. Cheap to society. Cheap to each other.

We don't get hyped over Blacks killing Blacks the way we do when White cops kill Blacks or a George Zimmerman kills a Trayvon Martin. We just don't and by "we" I mean this forum as well.

I started a thread when Hadiya Pendleton was shot down in Chicago it got 24 replies and slightly over 2000 views. Another about Jonathan Ferrell who was shot 11 times by a cop spurred 134 responses and 5,400 views.

The shooting of Mike Brown stands at 638 responses and nearly 17,500 views. Why? What makes this so special? Black folks finally said, "enough" and the rest of America had to sit up and pay attention.

That doesn't happen when the shooter and the victim are both Black.

This is a different incident. But at the core it's pretty much the same. Malcolm X told us why way back when.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"There can be no black-white unity until there is first some black unity.... We cannot think of uniting with others, until after we have first united among ourselves. We cannot think of being acceptable to others until we have first proven acceptable to ourselves."~
[/FONT]
[/FONT]
 

shelleyo

Just another face in a red jumpsuit
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
2,126
Reaction score
342
I'm white. My daughter and I benefit from white privilege every day, and we know it. We live in a pretty racist, rural community, and we do what we can to change that. We're aware in a way that many here aren't. Here's my perspective.

When there's a black-on-black shooting on the news (our local news is St. Louis, so the Ferguson reports are local), we don't look at that and think black-on-black crime. It's crime. I know we have to see it differently than you do, I get that. But it affects me the same way seeing a shooting of any two people on the news affects me.

The shooting in Ferguson isn't just a murder, that's an abuse of power, a potentially (almost certainly) racially motivated one, one of so many that happen all over this country. The events that happened after, there's no way that's not going to affect me in a way that another overnight murder in St. Louis does not.

It's not that I think it's a worthy news story because there's a white involved. It pisses me off that this kind of shit still goes on with no signs of stopping. I have one aunt who simply said she didn't believe Mike Brown was going to go to college (and she wouldn't explain why, but was sure that was just something they said to make it seem worse) and was sure he must have been doing something for the cop to shoot him. Even when she found out it was six times, she default came down on the side of the cop. That racism, that's something I can affect, by talking to her, making my stand known, trying to open her bigoted little eyes a little.

I can't do anything about two people shooting each other. I can try to make a difference by changing people's attitudes about racially motivated crimes, or the fallout after these things. I feel pretty much helpless to do anything else. I've donated to defense funds, I've talked to people, and I know that's not much. But as to why this particular case and cases like Trayvon Martin spark an outrage in me that other murders don't, that's all I have.
 

robjvargas

Rob J. Vargas
Banned
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
6,543
Reaction score
511
I'm not an expert on racial reconciliation, Mr. Vargas. The getting of wisdom starts with asking the right questions. The answers you have to find for yourself. Mine work for me, but might prove totally disastrous for you.

I'd suggest reading some James Baldwin like The Fire Next Time or A Rap On Race between Baldwin and Margaret Mead. Or if you just have an hour or two to spare, Frontline's two-part Prison State is essential viewing.
I've seen the Prison State special. At the time, I bristled, because I believed that the problem was more complex than stated there. Having come to this perspective just recently, I should reexamine that, too.

There's a thoroughly human need to "do something." But this doesn't happen where I live. Not in a way that I ever get the chance to confront it. It's certainly not as bad as what you and yours face every day. But it's frustrating nonetheless, wanting to help, and not knowing how.

Beg to differ, Ambrosia. I see the killings of Michael Brown and Antonio Smith as two sides of the same bloody coin. What it boils down to this is Black life is cheap. Cheap to the cops. Cheap to society. Cheap to each other.

I wound up cancelling a post where I nearly said the same thing. I chickened out, thinking it wasn't for me to say it. But I'll go one step further: To a very large degree, "white" society has taught them that. I don't have the proof of this, but it seems so evident me now.

We don't get hyped over Blacks killing Blacks the way we do when White cops kill Blacks or a George Zimmerman kills a Trayvon Martin. We just don't and by "we" I mean this forum as well.

I started a thread when Hadiya Pendleton was shot down in Chicago it got 24 replies and slightly over 2000 views. Another about Jonathan Ferrell who was shot 11 times by a cop spurred 134 responses and 5,400 views.

The shooting of Mike Brown stands at 638 responses and nearly 17,500 views. Why? What makes this so special? Black folks finally said, "enough" and the rest of America had to sit up and pay attention.

That doesn't happen when the shooter and the victim are both Black.

This is a different incident. But at the core it's pretty much the same. Malcolm X told us why way back when.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"There can be no black-white unity until there is first some black unity.... We cannot think of uniting with others, until after we have first united among ourselves. We cannot think of being acceptable to others until we have first proven acceptable to ourselves."~
[/FONT]
[/FONT]
I've always thought Malcolm X would have been a far stronger, and better, leader than Louis Farrakhan has ever been. Those are powerful, powerful words. I think they tie in, also, to why I think black-on-black violence doesn't beget the same response.

I think there's a measure of helplessness in white inaction. I don't live in those neighborhoods. I'm not welcome there. When I've expressed outrage, I've had both opinions thrown back at me. It feels pointless to express concern, to care.

That doesn't explain it all. Not by a long shot. But it's certainly a factor for me.
 

Larry M

Banned
Joined
Jul 13, 2013
Messages
1,057
Reaction score
331
Location
Texas
Website
www.amazon.com
Related to this discussion regarding police shootings and the aftermath:

Rosemary Lehmberg, the DA that Rick Perry allegedly tried to coerce, had one opponent in the Democratic primary in 2012.

Her opponent, Judge Charlie Baird, ran on a platform that included more strict screening of police arrests and procedures. Baird suggested he would support grand juries paying more attention to shootings by police with an eye to possibly taking more of them to court.

Baird was soundly thrashed in the primary, 74% to 26%.

Lehmberg returns for second term as Travis DA
 

Don

All Living is Local
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 28, 2008
Messages
24,567
Reaction score
4,007
Location
Agorism FTW!
Related to this discussion regarding police shootings and the aftermath:

Rosemary Lehmberg, the DA that Rick Perry allegedly tried to coerce, had one opponent in the Democratic primary in 2012.

Her opponent, Judge Charlie Baird, ran on a platform that included more strict screening of police arrests and procedures. Baird suggested he would support grand juries paying more attention to shootings by police with an eye to possibly taking more of them to court.

Baird was soundly thrashed in the primary, 74% to 26%.

Lehmberg returns for second term as Travis DA
Gee, I wonder who the police unions were supporting. :rolleyes:
 

robjvargas

Rob J. Vargas
Banned
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
6,543
Reaction score
511
I found a change.org petition has been started for those who want to do something.

Please Enact New Federal Laws to Protect Citizens from Police Violence and Misconduct

Hmm...
Our 5 Policy Solutions Are As Follows:

1. The shooting and killing of an unarmed citizen who does not have an outstanding warrant for a violent crime should be a federal offense.

2. Choke holds and chest compressions by police (what the coroner lists as the official cause of death for Eric Garner) should be federally banned.

3. All police officers must wear forward-facing body cameras while on duty. They cost just $99 and are having a signficant, positive impact in several cities around the United States and the world.

4. Suspensions for violations of any of the above offenses should be UNPAID.

5. Convictions for the above offenses should have their own set of mandatory minimum penalties. The men who killed Diallo, Bell, Grant, Carter, Garner, and others all walk free while over 1,000,000 non violent offenders are currently incarcerated in American prisons.

#1 and #4 are deal breakers for me. Most importantly, police officers are sometimes the discoverers of a problem. Police Chief Michael Pimentel may not even have known that the driver he pulled over had warrants. He's just as dead for the criminal's actions. Then there are the domestic violence calls(emphasis mine).

During the study period, 89 lethal domestic violence incidents resulted in the deaths of 106 officers, with several incidents resulting in the deaths of 2 or more officers. In the majority of events, domestic violence suspects murdered officers in ambushes and unprovoked attacks. In fact, 51 percent of all lethal domestic violence incidents involved officers slain without any warning, before they had made contact with the domestic violence suspect and before officers perceived any immediate threat to their safety.

Officers get into situations where they don't even yet know the identity of the citizens they might be confronting/facing. And item #1 is a terrific way to make those encounters exponentially more dangerous for officers.

#4 violates innocence until proven guilty. As agents of government, immediate suspension is a proper response to any violence allegation. But as fellow citizens, they deserve and have a right to the same protections that The Constitution says we all share.

I *do* think the process for dealing with bad officers is broken. But destroying their safety and their rights is entirely the wrong answer to fixing that.
 

Ambrosia

Grand Duchess
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
26,893
Reaction score
7,269
Location
In the Castle, of course.
Rob, re: the suspensions without pay above, I read that as the officers having been found to actually have violated the choke hold ban, not wearing the camera, etc.. I don't think it is unreasonable not to pay someone on suspension who has violated policy. That isn't happening now, from the stories I have read.

The only one of the five that I question is number one. I think it could be worded better and needs to be worked to make it something that would be fair to all. But since this is a petition to change things, I see it as a starting point. No one is going to take those 5 items and use them verbatim to write legislation, regardless how many signatures they get. It is a starting point, though, to let the government know citizens want and expect change. That's why I linked to it.

As far as the thread I started about Police Chief Pimentel's death, I am surprised more people haven't commented in it. Because his life mattered, too. But it's early yet. I only posted it this morning.
 

Vince524

Are you gonna finish that bacon?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 8, 2010
Messages
15,903
Reaction score
4,652
Location
In a house
Website
vincentmorrone.com
1. The shooting and killing of an unarmed citizen who does not have an outstanding warrant for a violent crime should be a federal offense.

2. Choke holds and chest compressions by police (what the coroner lists as the official cause of death for Eric Garner) should be federally banned.

3. All police officers must wear forward-facing body cameras while on duty. They cost just $99 and are having a signficant, positive impact in several cities around the United States and the world.

4. Suspensions for violations of any of the above offenses should be UNPAID.

5. Convictions for the above offenses should have their own set of mandatory minimum penalties. The men who killed Diallo, Bell, Grant, Carter, Garner, and others all walk free while over 1,000,000 non violent offenders are currently incarcerated in American prisons.

#1 is ridiculous on its face. How does having a warrant even factor in one way or the other? A warrant doesn't mean an unarmed suspect is a threat to the life of the officer to automatically warrant the use of deadly force. In the reverse, not having one doesn't mean he wasn't a threat to the officers safety. Did the officer fear for his life? Was that fear reasonable? And were his actions reasonable based on that fear. That's what matters.

#2 is a little different. Choke holds are banned in many departments. Not sure about chest compression or even what that means. Does that mean a cop can't tackle a suspect who's resisting? Also, not sure how legally those bans translate to prosecution. Cops are tried in civilian court. A cop can do things wrong in terms of police procedure where they can lose their job and pension, but not go to jail because they were still fighting for their life.

#3 the body camera is an interesting idea and one I tend to support so we don't have to just take a cops word for things. But the downside for that is that when that footage is made public, you'll have the Hollywood training of people on the internet asking why they didn't do what Steven Segal or Chuck Norris did in such and such movie. Why didn't they shoot him in the leg on something. But I do think the benefits out weigh the negatives.

Suspensions are paid because of the entire innocent until proven guilty. Something people tend to forget when dealing with cops.

#5 I don't even get. It talks about minimum penalties and then names a bunch of cops who tired and acquitted. How are you going to sentence cops if their acquitted? And in the long run, cops are judged in a civilian court and with the same laws as anyone else. You can't have a different set of standards for cops then everyone else.
 

Xelebes

Delerium ex Ennui
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
14,205
Reaction score
884
Location
Edmonton, Canada
The petition is bad all around. It doesn't address the issues that people are crying about.

Let's turn to one of the most important reforms of the 00s: The Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the three principles: Prevent, Detect, and Correct.

1. Reformed procedure (could use some improvement)
2. Independent oversight (gaping hole in too many jurisdictions.)
3. Means of correcting (largely in place)

Number one prevents contentious incidents. Police procedure could use some improvements but this has been built up. There are some other preventative measures that lie beyond the power of the police that need to be looked at.

Number two has gaping holes in many jurisdictions due to the lack of independence. This is something that will need major reforms for the jurisdictions that can't maintain independence in their oversight.

Number three has been in place for the longest times. The reforms here will need to work in conjunction to address the previous two. The corrective measures will need parallel reform (end of the War on Drugs, etc.) to address some of the stuff beyond the power of the police that makes the prevention of contentious incidents difficult.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.