Posted on 12/11/2017 1:02:58 PM PST by JP1201
The Shaver case is well beyond politics. There is nothing conservative, liberal or constitutional about an agent of the state killing an American without just cause. It is deeply wrong regardless of party or ideology. Bernie Sanders voters and the most ardent Trump supporters all should be united in outrage over the death of Daniel Shaver.
Maricopa County District Attorney Bill Montgomery got it right by charging Brailsford with second degree murder. The jury got it very wrong. Shaver should be alive, and his death must be taken as a call to action. Police departments should establish that a suspect always has the ability to show hands and lie down on the ground for arrest. Complicated law enforcement commands that require mobility and balance — under threat of execution — cannot be an acceptable standard.
When good faith efforts to respond to police commands can be met with a hail of bullets, we are all in jeopardy, and the work of all law enforcement officers becomes more difficult and dangerous.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Fuck you and your mother. Bull shit. Your a cop. Pathetic.
[[Then we won’t have to assume you’re ALL psychos.]]
Folks can Assume all they like- but I would assume they would like to have actual facts to back up their assumptions for the purposes of truth, no? Do facts not mater anymore? Why on earth would someone assume that ALL caps are psychos? The facts don’t even come close to supporting that assumption- infact it proves most ops are selfless folks who risk their lives day in and day out for us
Because the price of being wrong is death, that's why. You asked an incredibly stupid question.
Sorry, I don’t have a clue, I was just responding to the other poster about what I meant in my post #2 of this thread.
No ... I go out of my way to avoid the buggers. I don't trust 'em.
OK Thx.
While incidents like the one posted here outrages the citizenry, even the Conservative group here on FR, what makes people fear the police and start seeing them as enemies, and not servants, is when other cops defend it.
That is a whole nuther level of outrage.
A narrow view that it’s only media hype is certain to create further separation. That’s not good for policing as a profession. It’s not good for those who cannot defend themselves and rely on it. And it’s not good for civil society at large.
Bad cops need to be taken down by good cops. In 100% of cases.
The cops in this video did not commit their first transgression that night. They were known to their peers and their leaders. It’s likely everyone who worked with them knew, one day, “he’s gonna kill somebody”.
This pro who’s analyzed thousands of shooting videos agrees. Terrible outcome, but the guy reached behind his waist. Didn’t help that he had a blood alcohol level of .29 even though he responded to the officer that he was not drunk.
Active Self Protection Extra
https://youtu.be/_AQndX39JMs
Some people should not be cops
And militarized from huge budget cop jurisdictions has to stop
They are all so jacked up now with their black guns and over geared
With roids and tats
Spec Ops imposter wannabe
When I was a kid cops were like us
Normal folks with a family and a job to do
Under appreciated and under paid
Now
It militarized and their training is frequently heavy handed overkill that’ does indeed kill needlessly more than in the past
Thank God for videos
Why was this cop in. laQuinta hall way with his personal AR15
This killer got off for one reason
His buddy testified for him that it was a legit shoot
The Blue Wall thing
I hope Feds prosecute for violating civil rights
But they won’t
So cops et to play little piggy says do .... with deadly force. They killed an unarmed man.. one got fired for previous violent behavior and the other fled the country. You think this was a good job but the 2 living participants don’t even believe it.
BOB YOU ARE JUST PLAIN STUPID. I hope you meet your beloved boots on your throat and we can cheer on your death as a valid execution.
Bob are you either a current or retired law enFORCEment officer by chance or just that scared (pussy)?
Well I have ....twice in my life
Once deservedly and once not
I had s rookie seal wannabe running towards me with his cammo motif car15 shortie stumble and fall To his knees screaming with it pointed at my non Kevlar wrapped chest
Thank god he had decent trigger management
They do get geeked up and some do love the power and hawk over it
All strutting around big dogs giggling and trash talking pumping it up with their big guns and state power
These are the ones who will come door to door to disarm you if orders are given
Do not doubt me freepers
Many are decent even under those trying circumstances but I don’t know any more given leftist police chiefs encouraging and tolerating violence towards our side
But I stand convinced that training and leadership fostering s military ops style police and deputy forces nationwide is why bad cop shoots are on the rise
And we simply know about them more....phones and cameras
[[what makes people fear the police and start seeing them as enemies, and not servants, is when other cops defend it.
That is a whole nuther level of outrage.]]
That’s a valid point- however, when the facts are known, it’s still irrational to distrust the police- You don’t see a lot of cops defending blatantly criminal actions by a cop in nearly all cases-
This case we’re talking about wasn’t a blatant criminal act by cop- Everyone keeps claiming he gave ‘confusing directions’- (and just for hte record- the one with the gun apparently was not the one giving the directions)- but the directions were very clear- The police and shooter gave the man two chances- clearly laying out what would happen if the man didn’t comply- The man didn’t- and he cop yelled at him not to do that again- He gave him that chance as well- The introductions were very clear- do not move the hands at all towards the small of the back or towards the back- He asked the fella if he was drunk - the fella in a clear voice said no- and answered without slurring other questions-
This was a tragic ndig for the fella- but had the fella actually been armed, and pulled a gun, or someone in the room behind the wall popped out with an uzi or something- it could have been tragic for the police and everyone one involved-
Sure there was yelling an tension and perhaps a bit of confusion about how to crawl- but the instructions not to reach behind him was made clear- a couple of times-
[[The cops in this video did not commit their first transgression that night. They were known to their peers and their leaders. It’s likely everyone who worked with them knew, one day, “he’s gonna kill somebody”.]]
They were known as what? trigger happy murderers in waiting?
It was a tragic situaiton
Oh, I don't.
You speak as if the shooting of an unarmed man for not following confusing instructions (keep your hands up or I will shoot you) then (crawl towards me)...was somehow justified.
How is that OK? In what alternative universe was two cops armed with AR-15’s and clad in vests under an immediate threat from this drunk with his pants around his knees?
This is my point.
You are defending the indefensible.
Oh, and they were responding to a “man with a gun” call. Not shots fired. Not “somebody pointed a gun at me”.
In an open carry state.
I hope everyone in America watches that video.
I watched the video. I stand behind both my assessment of the video and my assessment of you.
At least you know where you stand with your friends. If one of their colleagues does this to you, they'll support the colleague.
If he had no way of knowing whether they lied, why did he ask the question, several times, in the first place? What's the point of asking a question at all, if you already know the answer will give you no useful information?
Well, Bob...”WHEN THE FACTS ARE KNOWN” may be the essential prerequisite to arrive at true judgment. Unfortunately, all too frequently this essential prerequisite is being suppressed by the “modern” judicial system and its occupants. The jury in this instant case was apparently not allowed to see the body-cam video (likely because the judge determined it would be “too prejudicial”). So what the jury “saw” was whatever image of the events could be inspired by the words of the two cops and the defense lawyers. The dead man’s version? Dead men tell no tales. The jury was shielded from the true facts by the judge not allowing them to see the actual video of the actual homicide. It’s no wonder they arrived at a “bad” verdict.
This shielding of juries from the “facts” is not uncommon nowadays. It happened in this case. It’s happening in the Waco biker cases and the Nevada Bundy “stand-off” cases by the prosecutors hiding or attempting to “bury” evidence while being given cover by complicit judges. In all too many instances, what should be justice is instead becoming injustice if that serves the interests of THE STATE. And that is why so many FReepers (myself included) grow angry at seeing these perversions of Justice occur.
[[How is that OK? In what alternative universe was two cops armed with AR-15’s and clad in vests under an immediate threat from this drunk with his pants around his knees?]]
And
[[Oh, and they were responding to a “man with a gun” call.]]
Exactly
If you can’t see how a suspect disobeying direct orders and reaching behind himself quickly isn’t to be seen as a Threat then there’s no point discussing further-
[[If he had no way of knowing whether they lied, why did he ask the question, several times, in the first place?]]
For the purpose of determine if the man was so drunk he couldn’t speak for one- and to try determine if the man and woman were lying for 2- police can tell when folks are lying sometimes- fairly accurately- not just by what is said, but by mannerisms, slip ups etc- There is reason to it-
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.