Did I miss a Charlotte NC thread or have we gotten numb?

[SKL]

Also why is he not in jail if he punched his 8yo daughter in the head 3 times and threatened to shoot her dead?

[Ann.without.an.e]

Also why is he not in jail if he punched his 8yo daughter in the head 3 times and threatened to shoot her dead?

 

 

The million dollar question, right?  Who knows.

[SKL]

And he was "just there to pick up his daughter" - with a joint and a loaded gun out of the holster.  While on a restraining order resulting from child abuse.  That would freak me the hell out as a mom.

 

And I was curious about why the wife was where she was during the incident.  Seemed odd, not that it was relevant to the shooting.

[Ann.without.an.e]

nm

Edited September 27, 2016 by Attolia

[Miss Peregrine]

And he was "just there to pick up his daughter" - with a joint and a loaded gun out of the holster. While on a restraining order resulting from child abuse. That would freak me the hell out as a mom.

 

And I was curious about why the wife was where she was during the incident. Seemed odd, not that it was relevant to the shooting.

The article above says the restraining order was dropped eleven days later.

[Miss Peregrine]

Lots of domestic violence victims waffle on these sorts of things.

For sure. More common than not.

[Ann.without.an.e]

The article above says the restraining order was dropped eleven days later.

 

 

Dropping a restraining order is fairly common.  Women in abusive situations do it all.the.time.  Something spurred her to sign for one in the first place and she said he had a gun.  Then less than a year later she acts like her husband would never have a gun and never hurt anyone, she reacts like the thought is inconceivable.

Edited September 27, 2016 by Attolia

[Susan in TX]

http://www.wcnc.com/news/local/new-revelations-in-keith-scott-case_/326706427

 

The wife is a liar....she kept telling the police that he didn't have a gun, when in fact she had filed a restraining order against him and noted that he had a gun.  If he was known to have fire arms, was so violent that she filed a restraining order, then why would she act like he couldn't be violent?

 

http://www.wcnc.com/news/local/new-revelations-in-keith-scott-case_/326706427

 

This sort of thing is why I have no sympathy for BLM. A black person is shot by police and the media immediately start the false narrative that the person was innocent and doing nothing wrong. Then later, much later, after most people have believed the false narrative, information comes out that the person shot really was a criminal.

 

Meanwhile, when a white person who really is innocent gets shot by police no one hears about it.

http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/duncanville-police-shooting-victim-didnt-receive-medical-help-afterward-autopsy-says-7116119

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/23/us/north-carolina-deaf-man-police-shooting/

 

http://www.omaha.com/news/crime/co-workers-say-man-fatally-shot-by-cass-county-sheriff/article_8d8629c8-80a5-11e6-84d9-6b1abb610020.html

 

And if you take the time to google it you will find more.

 

Where is the media? Where are the protests?...oh, right..Black Lives Matter.

 

Susan in TX

Edited September 28, 2016 by Susan in TX

[MomatHWTK]

All of this blurs the issue of whether it is reasonable to be in fear and justified in using deadly force in the circumstances know to the police at the time of the altercation. 

The standards need to be clarified for every encounter. Looking back later and saying, "Well, it's ok because the guy was a criminal," isn't Constitutionally supportable. It just makes people feel better because they think it is not going to affect them. We have a system and it doesn't include summary execution without trial.

[Susan in TX]

And this just happened on Sunday

 

http://www.vnews.com/Police-Continue-to-Investigate-Fatal-Shooting-in-Claremont-NH-4995751

 

Susan in TX

[slterry]

To add to the fun we are having in Charlotte, a bomb was just found at our main police department headquarters this afternoon. Will this ever end? 😩

[maddykate]

Please disregard my post completely...my three year old got my phone without my realizing it.

Edited September 28, 2016 by maddykate

[Corraleno]

This sort of thing is why I have no sympathy for BLM. A black person is shot by police and the media immediately start the false narrative that the person was innocent and doing nothing wrong. Then later, much later, after most people have believed the false narrative, information comes out that the person shot really was a criminal.

 

Meanwhile, when a white person who really is innocent gets shot by police no one hears about it.

http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/duncanville-police-shooting-victim-didnt-receive-medical-help-afterward-autopsy-says-7116119

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/23/us/north-carolina-deaf-man-police-shooting/

 

http://www.omaha.com/news/crime/co-workers-say-man-fatally-shot-by-cass-county-sheriff/article_8d8629c8-80a5-11e6-84d9-6b1abb610020.html

 

And if you take the time to google it you will find more.

 

Where is the media? Where are the protests?...oh, right..Black Lives Matter.

 

Susan in TX

 

And this just happened on Sunday

 

http://www.vnews.com/Police-Continue-to-Investigate-Fatal-Shooting-in-Claremont-NH-4995751

 

Susan in TX

 

 

Interesting choice of stories — three of the four involve people who had mental health and substance abuse issues, and the other was deaf. Those exact issues have been discussed in this thread, and obviously they were covered in the media since you linked them. Why is there no Mentally Ill & Deaf Lives Matter movement? I don't know — there should be. I would totally support that. But in no way does that diminish or obviate the need for the BLM movement.

 

Also interesting that you cited those stories as evidence of "white people who are really innocent," versus all the black people killed by police who turn out to be criminals. The deaf man, Daniel Harris, was previously charged with various traffic violations, petty theft, and resisting an officer. When police tried to pull him over for speeding, he led them on an extended chase and then allegedly "confronted" an officer, who shot him. Clinton Petersen was trying to sabotage his girlfriend's car, so she called the police. He had mental health problems and was high on amphetamine, methamphetamine, and marijuana at the time. When he disobeyed police orders and ran, he was shot in the back. Austin Baier was pulled over for reckless driving, attempted to flee in his car, then stopped and charged the officer, who shot him. He had a history of mental illness and his family say that he was intoxicated at the time of the incident. Cody Lafont had a history of mental illness and prior convictions for criminal trespassing and resisting arrest. He also had a history of abusing 911, and had called police to his house, where "an altercation" occurred. Police haven't released any more details, including whether he was armed.

 

NONE of those men deserved to die. IMO all of those incidents reflect unnecessary use of force. And yet I don't see people saying that "it served them right" because they didn't follow orders. If they'd just cooperated, they wouldn't have been shot, right? Or does that only apply to black victims?

Philando Castille was pulled over for totally bogus reasons, politely complied with the officer's instructions, and was shot at point blank range with a 4 year old sitting right behind him. But he did have a bunch of prior traffic violations, so I guess he doesn't count as "innocent"? Terence Crutcher was unarmed, standing beside his stalled vehicle with his hands in the air, when he was shot and killed. Walter Scott was pulled over for a broken taillight (aka DWB). He ran because he owed back child support and was afraid of being arrested for it; he was shot in the back by a cop who then planted fake evidence. John Crawford was looking at a pellet gun for sale in WalMart while talking on his cell phone when police shot and killed him. Tamir Rice was playing with a toy gun in a park when he was shot by a cop within seconds of the cop's arrival.

 

So if you're a white guy high on meth who was caught trying to damage your girlfriend's car, and you run from police, you're "really innocent," but if you're a black guy who was driving down the street minding his own business not bothering anybody, and you're killed by a cop while running away, owing a bunch of back child support makes you a criminal? A white guy on drugs who attempts to evade police, then charges at the officer is innocent, but a black guy sitting in his car complying with everything the officer says is a criminal because of prior traffic violations? How about a 22 year old WalMart shopper holding a pellet gun and a 12 yr old boy with a toy — they're not "really innocent" because.... ?

[KarenNC]

To add to the fun we are having in Charlotte, a bomb was just found at our main police department headquarters this afternoon. Will this ever end? 😩

 

What I've seen confirmed is that they evacuated due to an employee spotting a suspicious package about the size of a shoebox, which turned out to contain a cell phone, flashlight, and bulb. The package was removed to a safe location by the bomb squad to be dealt with. They received no threats in relation to this, and no one claiming responsibility as far as I have heard yet.

 

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/crime/article104490611.html

[Corraleno]

This afternoon, a woman in El Cajon called 911 for help with her mentally ill brother, who was walking in traffic. Police arrived and shot him for "acting erratically and failing to comply"— in other words, he was shot for acting like a mentally ill person. His sister was screaming that she called them for help, why did they shoot him??? He was transported to the hospital, no word on his condition. He is African-American.

 

ETA: He died at the hospital.

Edited September 28, 2016 by Corraleno

[Susan in TX]

NONE of those men deserved to die. IMO all of those incidents reflect unnecessary use of force. And yet I don't see people saying that "it served them right" because they didn't follow orders. If they'd just cooperated, they wouldn't have been shot, right? Or does that only apply to black victims?

Philando Castille was pulled over for totally bogus reasons, politely complied with the officer's instructions, and was shot at point blank range with a 4 year old sitting right behind him. But he did have a bunch of prior traffic violations, so I guess he doesn't count as "innocent"? Terence Crutcher was unarmed, standing beside his stalled vehicle with his hands in the air, when he was shot and killed. Walter Scott was pulled over for a broken taillight (aka DWB). He ran because he owed back child support and was afraid of being arrested for it; he was shot in the back by a cop who then planted fake evidence. John Crawford was looking at a pellet gun for sale in WalMart while talking on his cell phone when police shot and killed him. Tamir Rice was playing with a toy gun in a park when he was shot by a cop within seconds of the cop's arrival.

 

So if you're a white guy high on meth who was caught trying to damage your girlfriend's car, and you run from police, you're "really innocent," but if you're a black guy who was driving down the street minding his own business not bothering anybody, and you're killed by a cop while running away, owing a bunch of back child support makes you a criminal? A white guy on drugs who attempts to evade police, then charges at the officer is innocent, but a black guy sitting in his car complying with everything the officer says is a criminal because of prior traffic violations? How about a 22 year old WalMart shopper holding a pellet gun and a 12 yr old boy with a toy — they're not "really innocent" because.... ?

 

"Really innocent" was a bad choice of words. They were unarmed, and had no prior record of violent criminal behavior.  But no, no one is  talking about how "It served them right" because no one is talking about at all. No one cares. They aren't black.

 

Susan in TX

[Corraleno]

"Really innocent" was a bad choice of words. They were unarmed, and had no prior record of violent criminal behavior.  But no, no one is  talking about how "It served them right" because no one is talking about at all. No one cares. They aren't black.

 

Susan in TX

 

Oh, you're right — white people are terribly discriminated against in this country. What we really need is an organization to fight for the rights of white people. I wonder if anything like that exists....

[SKL]

Well what I'd like to know is, if black lives matter, then why isn't the black community concerned about the crimes this man committed against people in the black community?  He has shot people, says he's a killer, abused his kid, stabbed and beat his wife, and who knows what else.  How come none of his victims matter?  Where's the march for their rights?

[Sneezyone]

Black on black crime, like white on white crime, is completely irrelevant to a discussion of use of force by state actors. Also, if you believe there have been no protests, vigils, or other forms of community activism re: violence of other kinds, you haven't been looking for it or paying attention. It's there.

Edited September 28, 2016 by Sneezyone

[Corraleno]

Well what I'd like to know is, if black lives matter, then why isn't the black community concerned about the crimes this man committed against people in the black community?  He has shot people, says he's a killer, abused his kid, stabbed and beat his wife, and who knows what else.  How come none of his victims matter?  Where's the march for their rights?

 

His "victims" are currently mourning the death of their husband and father! Instead of protesting, you think members of the black community should be asking his wife and daughter if they feel better now that he's dead? 

 

Are you seriously arguing that once someone has committed a crime, his life no longer matters and no one should protest if he's killed?

 

No one should protest the cold-blooded murder of Walter Scott, an unarmed man who was running away from police, because we should care more about the ex-wife he owed child support to?  Philando Castille's prior traffic violations mean his life no longer mattered, even though he was totally polite and compliant when he was stopped for bogus tail light violation? Maybe we should just start executing people on the spot if they have any kind of prior record.

 

This is such a bizarre argument, I don't even know what to say. :confused1:  

 

SaveSave

[SKL]

His "victims" are currently mourning the death of their husband and father! Instead of protesting, you think members of the black community should be asking his wife and daughter if they feel better now that he's dead? 

 

Are you seriously arguing that once someone has committed a crime, his life no longer matters and no one should protest if he's killed?

 

No one should protest the cold-blooded murder of Walter Scott, an unarmed man who was running away from police, because we should care more about the ex-wife he owed child support to?  Philando Castille's prior traffic violations mean his life no longer mattered, even though he was totally polite and compliant when he was stopped for bogus tail light violation? Maybe we should just start executing people on the spot if they have any kind of prior record.

 

This is such a bizarre argument, I don't even know what to say. :confused1:  

 

SaveSave

 

What I'm saying is that someone should have cared enough to do something about this guy when he was alive.  And he's just one example.  I'm talking about a principle.  Why wasn't he in jail?

 

When a white abuser / assaulter / shooter gets shot in an armed encounter with police, or dies in custody, my thought is "good riddance to bad rubbish."  I have not one ounce of protective instinct toward people who harm women and children.

[MomatHWTK]

The protective instinct should be for the Constitutional protections that keep all of us safe. Once someone decides that death may be meted out without trial and conviction, then anyone may become the "bad rubbish" that it is meted out to. That is the very nature of discrimination that our system is designed to prevent. No one is lesser and punishments are to be controlled and fair not delivered on the streets.

[Corraleno]

If anyone really doesn't understand why "Black Lives Matter" matters, please read this FB post by a teacher at the school attended by Terence Crutcher's daughter:
 

Today at school, our staff decided we needed to press pause and create a space for kids to share their thoughts and feelings in response to the killing of Mr. Crutcher. I was part of facilitating three small group discussions throughout the day: a fifth grade group, a sixth grade group, and a seventh/eighth grade group. I want to share what I experienced with the kids today, because I am convinced that if you can put yourself in the shoes of a child of color in Tulsa right now, you will have a clearer understanding of the crisis we're facing and why we say black lives matter.

 

1. I look at the wide-eyed faces of the fifth graders surrounding me: 10 and 11 year olds, waiting to hear what I had to say. I tell them we will read a news article about the shooting together so we can all be informed. As I read, the students busily highlight and underline parts that stand out to them: Fatally shot. Hands raised. "Bad dude." Motionless. Affected forever. I finish and I ask them, "What are your thoughts?" 
They answer with questions. Why did they have to kill him? Why were they afraid of him? Why does [student] have to live life without a father? What will she do at father daughter dances? Who will walk her down the aisle? Why did no one help him after he was shot? Hasn't this happened before? Can we write her cards? Can we protest?
As the questions roll, so do the tears. Students cry softly as they speak. Others weep openly. I watch 10 year olds pass tissues to each other, to me, to our principal as he joins our circle. One girl closes our group by sharing: "I wish white people could give us a chance. We can all come together and get along. We can all be united." Let me tell you, these 10 year olds are more articulate about this than I am.
We agree to love one another, to take care of one another. I tell each of them that I am white and I love them and they matter to me.

 

2. The group of sixth grade girls that surround me are either red-eyed or withdrawn. They sit next to Mr. Crutcher's daughter in class. They are her friends. Nearly every student has a tissue as we read the article together. When I open the floor for discussion: silence. It hurts to talk about. It hurts to think about. It hurts. 
I fight the urge to fill the dead air with my voice. A few quiet words are whispered about sadness and unfairness, but the rest of the time is spent wiping eyes and hugging one another. It becomes clear that no one else is in a place to speak. I give them the space to process silently. Then I tell them, "We have different skin colors. I love you. You matter. You are worthy. You are human. You are valuable." Shoulders shake harder around the circle. I realize that this is the first time all year I have affirmed my love for them. 
The rest of the cafeteria is hushed. The sixth graders are quiet. The tragedy lives and breathes among them. It could have been their father. Boys are scattered across the cafeteria with their heads buried in their shirts. A girl who just moved to Tulsa from New Orleans because her father wanted to "escape the violence" is choked up as she speaks in the group next to mine. When we come back together whole group, one boy is still crying as another rubs his hand on his back soothingly.

 

3. These students are older-- thirteen and fourteen. They are hardened. They are angry. Some students refuse to hold or look at the article. The speak matter-of-factly. One says she feels like punching someone in the nose. 
Another student says, "I used to read about this happening and think, oh that's sad, and then kind of forget about it. But this happened so close to home. It feels real now. I take 36th St N to and from school everyday. It happened right by my house." 
"What made him 'a big bad dude?'" a boy asks. "Was it his height? His size--" I look at the boys in my circle, all former students of mine. They have grown inches since their first day in my class. Their voices have deepened. Their shoulders broadened. They all nod their heads in agreement at the student's last guess-- "The color of his skin?"

 

I share this story, because Mr. Crutcher's death does not just affect the students at my school. I share this story, because we are creating an identity crisis in all of our black and brown students. (Do I matter? Am I to be feared? Should I live in fear? Am I human?) We are shaping their world view with blood and bullets, hashtags and viral videos. Is this how we want them to feel? Is this how we want them to think?

 

I share this story because I spent the last two years teaching kids that we write to interact with and understand the world, that our voices matter and that our voices deserve to be heard. I share this story, because while I could never capture the articulate things kids said or the raw emotions students shared today, my privilege requires that I speak. I ask that you read. I ask that you use whatever privilege or platform you have to speak. I ask that you put yourself in the shoes of black and brown children growing up in a world where they see videos of their classmate's father shot and bleeding in the street. 

 

I ask that you love and love hard.

 

[SKL]

I think people are missing the point on this one.

 

A guy was in a police encounter, holding a loaded gun and refused to drop it.  Adults with guns know that kind of choice can get you shot, no matter what color you are.  Maybe that guy didn't think his own life mattered enough to drop the gun.  A black cop sized up the situation and believed the officers were in grave, immediate danger.  What followed is what I would expect to happen to me if I acted the same way.  Just because the guy is black doesn't mean his skin color was the reason the cop decided to shoot.

 

Of course it's a tragedy.  It's also a tragedy when a child is taken from an abusive parent.  It's a tragedy when a parent goes to jail or dies in military combat or has a heart attack or a car accident.  What makes this worse is that the man would probably be alive today if he'd dropped the gun, like everyone knows you need to do.  Black, brown, white, green, it doesn't matter.  Drop the gun.

 

Telling a false story about how this was just a nice guy who is dead because of racism is not helping the actual racist situations that exist.

[Scarlett]

I had to listen several times, but it seems like she's just yelling continuously, without breath, so her exclamations are both to Kieth, and then immediately to the police not to do it, from breaking the car window to then shooting him.

As for the ' vulgar language' ... Really?? After watching police repeatedly shoot my husband, you can bet your a$$ I'd be upset enough to sweat. Kudos to her for remaining as composed as she did, or else there's a very possible chance she'd have been shot by them, too. I can just hear their defense-- large, angry black woman, they were in fear she, too, had a gun( cell phone charger) in her hand.

I am not a curser but yes I might be cursing if my husband had just been killed in front of me....but the repeated use of the F word over and over made it difficult to process for me.

 

I do agree that her 'don't you do it' was very probably aimed at the police.

[Ann.without.an.e]

What I'm saying is that someone should have cared enough to do something about this guy when he was alive.  And he's just one example.  I'm talking about a principle.  Why wasn't he in jail?

 

When a white abuser / assaulter / shooter gets shot in an armed encounter with police, or dies in custody, my thought is "good riddance to bad rubbish."  I have not one ounce of protective instinct toward people who harm women and children.

 

 

A local story in a local paper had more details on this.  He left the state after the restraining order and I believe that is one of the reasons it was dropped?  Then while out of state he was in a terrible accident.  He "came back a different man".  That is all I know.

Edited September 28, 2016 by Attolia

[Ann.without.an.e]

If anyone really doesn't understand why "Black Lives Matter" matters, please read this FB post by a teacher at the school attended by Terence Crutcher's daughter:

 

 

 

As far as I am concerned, the Terrence Crutcher case is an entirely different situation.  Once he was tased and hit the ground, was there a need to shoot him?  I have watched the videos over and over again and I struggle with that one.  The videos are so much clearer for it, just my opinion.  Also, he wasn't armed.  I tend to agree with the sentiment "how did someone end up dead after their car broke down?" on this one.  Maybe I am wrong, but these are my feelings.

 

I just feel that this case with Keith Scott is different.  He had a gun and he wouldn't drop it.  White, black, latino, whatever...he was a threat.  It wasn't about race.

Edited September 28, 2016 by Attolia

[Scarlett]

The crutcher case is here locally for me... The family has behaved with a lot of dignity and restraint.

 

It appears to me the officer was terrified and reacted unreasonably. Why was she terrified? Because the suspect was black? A huge man? Behaving erratically? I don't know. But she probably should not have been a police officer to begin with.

 

You can hear the terror in her voice after she shot him and said over the radio,

'Shots fired!'

[TechWife]

This sort of thing is why I have no sympathy for BLM. A black person is shot by police and the media immediately start the false narrative that the person was innocent and doing nothing wrong. Then later, much later, after most people have believed the false narrative, information comes out that the person shot really was a criminal.

 

 

The issue is unnecessary police force. The fact that someone is a criminal does not mean they should be shot.

Criminals, even those accused of murder, are arrested daily and they aren't shot. The larger issue is whether or not the police are equipped with the skills they need to de-escalate a situation so that they don't shoot someone unnecessarily. 

[TechWife]

All of this blurs the issue of whether it is reasonable to be in fear and justified in using deadly force in the circumstances know to the police at the time of the altercation. 

The standards need to be clarified for every encounter. Looking back later and saying, "Well, it's ok because the guy was a criminal," isn't Constitutionally supportable. It just makes people feel better because they think it is not going to affect them. We have a system and it doesn't include summary execution without trial.

 

This, exactly! 

[TechWife]

"Really innocent" was a bad choice of words. They were unarmed, and had no prior record of violent criminal behavior.  But no, no one is  talking about how "It served them right" because no one is talking about at all. No one cares. They aren't black.

 

Susan in TX

 

Actually, you don't have enough information on this week's case to determine if the person was armed or not. The report says there were three shots fired, maybe he fired first at an officer first. You have no idea based on this article. 

[TechWife]

Well what I'd like to know is, if black lives matter, then why isn't the black community concerned about the crimes this man committed against people in the black community?  He has shot people, says he's a killer, abused his kid, stabbed and beat his wife, and who knows what else.  How come none of his victims matter?  Where's the march for their rights?

 

There are thousands of people and organizations that advocate for abused women and children. There are a variety of events, nationwide and local, that bring attention to the issue and work to provide resources for the families and encourage and support them through the arrest and conviction process. There are organizations that seek to educate first responders on how to identify domestic abuse and to train them on the most effective interventions. Police officers are encouraged, required, actually, to provide information on shelters and other resources. They are required to involve DHS when children are involved. DHS provides safe places for children and helps adult abuse victims find shelter. 

 

I'm sorry, what was your point? 

[Ann.without.an.e]

The crutcher case is here locally for me... The family has behaved with a lot of dignity and restraint.

 

It appears to me the officer was terrified and reacted unreasonably. Why was she terrified? Because the suspect was black? A huge man? Behaving erratically? I don't know. But she probably should not have been a police officer to begin with.

 

You can hear the terror in her voice after she shot him and said over the radio,

'Shots fired!'

 

 

My feelings exactly!  You can hear the panic in her voice, almost like she is shocked she shot him.  I think she reacted unnecessarily, he was already down from being tased.  I just think the cases have very little in common.  

[Corraleno]

I think people are missing the point on this one.

 

A guy was in a police encounter, holding a loaded gun and refused to drop it.  Adults with guns know that kind of choice can get you shot, no matter what color you are.  Maybe that guy didn't think his own life mattered enough to drop the gun.  A black cop sized up the situation and believed the officers were in grave, immediate danger.  What followed is what I would expect to happen to me if I acted the same way.  Just because the guy is black doesn't mean his skin color was the reason the cop decided to shoot.

 

Of course it's a tragedy.  It's also a tragedy when a child is taken from an abusive parent.  It's a tragedy when a parent goes to jail or dies in military combat or has a heart attack or a car accident.  What makes this worse is that the man would probably be alive today if he'd dropped the gun, like everyone knows you need to do.  Black, brown, white, green, it doesn't matter.  Drop the gun.

 

Telling a false story about how this was just a nice guy who is dead because of racism is not helping the actual racist situations that exist.

 

But why was he even put in that situation? If someone had called the cops saying he was robbing a house or threatening people with a gun, it would be different. But he was just sitting in his car minding his own business. He wasn't threatening anyone. No one called the cops on him. They were in the neighborhood looking for a different guy. 

 

If a white guy was sitting in his car rolling a joint (a minor misdemeanor in NC), and police noticed a gun in the car (in a state where open carry is legal) would they have abandoned the assignment they were on, called for backup, surrounded the guy's car while screaming orders at him, tried to smash his window in, and shot him as he was backing away? If police arrested every person in this country who smoked weed while owning a gun, there would literally be millions more people in jail.

 

Why is a black man sitting in his car with a gun such an immediate danger to public safety that he needs to be attacked by police, while a white guy walking down the street in Daytona with a loaded assault rifle is politely given a ticket? And a white guy with a bandana over his face carrying an assault rifle in front of a mosque, intimidating women who want to pray there, isn't even hassled by police. If a large white guy was standing by a stalled car, would police have offered to call a tow truck or would have automatically labeled him a "bad dude" and started screaming at him to put his hands up and get on his knees, then shot him while his hands were up?

 

I think a big part of what angers people about these shootings is that in many cases, the guy was just minding his own business. Even in cases where police were called, like Tamir Rice and John Crawford, the people who called the cops did so because they thought that a black man (or even a child) with anything that looked like a weapon, was inherently scary and threatening. Would they have called about a white kid playing with a toy gun in a park? Would police have shot a white kid within seconds of pulling up to the scene? How many white men have bought real guns in WalMart, let alone a pellet gun, without being killed on the spot by police?

[SKL]

But why was he even put in that situation? If someone had called the cops saying he was robbing a house or threatening people with a gun, it would be different. But he was just sitting in his car minding his own business. He wasn't threatening anyone. No one called the cops on him. They were in the neighborhood looking for a different guy. 

 

If a white guy was sitting in his car rolling a joint (a minor misdemeanor in NC), and police noticed a gun in the car (in a state where open carry is legal) would they have abandoned the assignment they were on, called for backup, surrounded the guy's car while screaming orders at him, tried to smash his window in, and shot him as he was backing away? If police arrested every person in this country who smoked weed while owning a gun, there would literally be millions more people in jail.

 

Why is a black man sitting in his car with a gun such an immediate danger to public safety that he needs to be attacked by police, while a white guy walking down the street in Daytona with a loaded assault rifle is politely given a ticket? And a white guy with a bandana over his face carrying an assault rifle in front of a mosque, intimidating women who want to pray there, isn't even hassled by police. If a large white guy was standing by a stalled car, would police have offered to call a tow truck or would have automatically labeled him a "bad dude" and started screaming at him to put his hands up and get on his knees, then shot him while his hands were up?

 

I think a big part of what angers people about these shootings is that in many cases, the guy was just minding his own business. Even in cases where police were called, like Tamir Rice and John Crawford, the people who called the cops did so because they thought that a black man (or even a child) with anything that looked like a weapon, was inherently scary and threatening. Would they have called about a white kid playing with a toy gun in a park? Would police have shot a white kid within seconds of pulling up to the scene? How many white men have bought real guns in WalMart, let alone a pellet gun, without being killed on the spot by police?

 

You keep wanting to make this about every racial problem in the country.  Nobody denies racism is a problem.  Nobody denies that there are times when a person is arrested and/or shot because of racism.

 

But you seem unable to consider the possibility that sometimes people of all colors do need to be confronted, arrested, and yes, shot.  Or maybe you accept that non-black people do that, but black people, never.

 

The cops had their reasons for deciding to confront this guy based on what they saw.  I am sure part of that was their experience and instinct, things they couldn't put into the police report but that are still valid.  But they did establish that they saw enough to legally justify confronting the man.  They specifically chose not to bother him when they only saw the weed.  Doesn't sound like they were just out to harass a black guy for no reason.

 

Cops stop people all the time for not doing much.  White people too.  It's part of doing their jobs.

 

If you are suggesting the cops need to see a lot more than a crime and a gun before they can talk to black people, then I seriously wonder if you really believe that all black lives matter.  A criminal with a gun isn't something black people need more of in their neighborhoods IMO.

[poppy]

You keep wanting to make this about every racial problem in the country. Nobody denies racism is a problem. Nobody denies that there are times when a person is arrested and/or shot because of racism.

 

But you seem unable to consider the possibility that sometimes people of all colors do need to be confronted, arrested, and yes, shot. Or maybe you accept that non-black people do that, but black people, never.

 

The cops had their reasons for deciding to confront this guy based on what they saw. I am sure part of that was their experience and instinct, things they couldn't put into the police report but that are still valid. But they did establish that they saw enough to legally justify confronting the man. They specifically chose not to bother him when they only saw the weed. Doesn't sound like they were just out to harass a black guy for no reason.

 

Cops stop people all the time for not doing much. White people too. It's part of doing their jobs.

 

If you are suggesting the cops need to see a lot more than a crime and a gun before they can talk to black people, then I seriously wonder if you really believe that all black lives matter. A criminal with a gun isn't something black people need more of in their neighborhoods IMO.

 

You really think this man needed to be shot.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MomatHWTK]

Well let's hope enough people in the next generation learn about the Constitution so that the shoot on sight advocates don't win out. : (

[SKL]

You really think this man needed to be shot.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I wasn't there, but a black cop thought so and his black boss agrees.  They are in a better position to judge than I am.

 

[SKL]

Well let's hope enough people in the next generation learn about the Constitution so that the shoot on sight advocates don't win out. : (

 

They did not shoot on sight.

 

This is why these discussions are unhelpful.  Nobody wants to talk about the facts.

 

You twist my words into a "shoot on sight" belief and insult me and yourself.

 

Edited September 28, 2016 by SKL

[HomeAgain]

I think people are missing the point on this one.

 

A guy was in a police encounter, holding a loaded gun and refused to drop it.  Adults with guns know that kind of choice can get you shot, no matter what color you are.  Maybe that guy didn't think his own life mattered enough to drop the gun.  A black cop sized up the situation and believed the officers were in grave, immediate danger.  What followed is what I would expect to happen to me if I acted the same way.  Just because the guy is black doesn't mean his skin color was the reason the cop decided to shoot.

 

Of course it's a tragedy.  It's also a tragedy when a child is taken from an abusive parent.  It's a tragedy when a parent goes to jail or dies in military combat or has a heart attack or a car accident.  What makes this worse is that the man would probably be alive today if he'd dropped the gun, like everyone knows you need to do.  Black, brown, white, green, it doesn't matter.  Drop the gun.

 

Telling a false story about how this was just a nice guy who is dead because of racism is not helping the actual racist situations that exist.

 

The fact that you still think it's a black officer who shot him says you didn't watch the body cam or dash cam videos released.

[poppy]

I wasn't there, but a black cop thought so and his black boss agrees. They are in a better position to judge than I am.

 

Do you always default to 'the shooter is justified' when someone is shot dead and the shooter claims self defense ? I don't .

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SKL]

The fact that you still think it's a black officer who shot him says you didn't watch the body cam or dash cam videos released.

 

The black cop doesn't come into the dash cam until after the shooting.

 

The reports I read said the shooter was black.

 

The white cops had their guns drawn, but it didn't appear to me that their guns discharged.

 

I could be proven wrong.  Even so, the cop's black boss stands behind the shooter.  He says there is enough evidence outside of the videos.  The videos don't prove much of anything.

[SKL]

Do you always default to 'the shooter is justified' when someone is shot dead and the shooter claims self defense ? I don't .

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

No, I don't, but in this case I lean toward that unless an intelligent investigation proves otherwise.  Meanwhile I think it is unwise to use this case as an example of what BLM is fighting.  There are plenty of other cases that support the BLM cause much more clearly.

[Corraleno]

But you seem unable to consider the possibility that sometimes people of all colors do need to be confronted, arrested, and yes, shot.  Or maybe you accept that non-black people do that, but black people, never.

 

The cops had their reasons for deciding to confront this guy based on what they saw.  I am sure part of that was their experience and instinct, things they couldn't put into the police report but that are still valid.  But they did establish that they saw enough to legally justify confronting the man.  They specifically chose not to bother him when they only saw the weed.  Doesn't sound like they were just out to harass a black guy for no reason.

 

Their reason for confronting him was that he was black, he was openly carrying a gun in a state where open carry is legal, and he was committing a minor misdemeanor by smoking a joint. He was not bothering or threatening anyone, but apparently, if you're black, then smoking a joint while possessing a gun makes you so dangerous that police need  to surround your car, try to smash your window in, scream orders at you, and kill you because you have the gun that they knew you had when then tried to smash your window.

 

Possession of a small amount of marijuana is the equivalent of a traffic ticket — a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $200. NC law explicitly prohibits jail time for possession of  a half-ounce or less. The police knew nothing about him other than (1) he's black, (2) he's committing a minor misdemeanor, and (3) he is openly carrying in a state where open carry is legal. So, under those circumstances, you feel that this man, who was minding his own business not threatening anyone, "needed to be confronted, arrested, and shot"?

 

 

If you are suggesting the cops need to see a lot more than a crime and a gun before they can talk to black people, then I seriously wonder if you really believe that all black lives matter.  A criminal with a gun isn't something black people need more of in their neighborhoods IMO.

 

Yeah, clearly what black communities need more of are twitchy cops shooting black men who were minding their own business. That will make them feel much safer.

[SKL]

Well anyways ... the polarization is predictable.

 

Nothing gets solved.

[debinindy]

This quote's been bouncing around in my mind lately-

 

 â€œPeople generally see what they look for, and hear what they listen for.†

 

—To Kill a Mockingbird

[MomatHWTK]

They did not shoot on sight.

 

This is why these discussions are unhelpful.  Nobody wants to talk about the facts.

 

You twist my words into a "shoot on sight" belief and insult me and yourself.

 

So, you think that it is your comments that I consider equivalent to a shoot on sight mentality? Interesting. I wonder why you are ascribing my comment to yourself. I don't remember naming anyone on this forum or otherwise. 

 

However, I do think bringing up facts that were not known to the individuals making the decision with regard to the appropriate use of deadly force is unhelpful. That would imply that our Constitutional standard should permit the shooting of a person if enough evidence can be found after the fact to prove that he was a criminal. 

 

The only facts relevant to a genuine investigation are those known to the officers at the time of the event. To say that one believes one individual's statement of those facts over another may be disagreeable, but it is at least understandable. Attempting to post-justify an action based on a person's criminal record is not. 

 

Our laws are designed to permit the use of deadly force when necessary. The fact that individual citizens may consider someone rubbish or that the community is better off with that person dead is not relevant. The standard for state action is significantly higher than that for individuals. A person's alleged worth does not determine the protections he or she is provided under our laws. I cannot comprehend how anyone who has invested any time in studying the Constitution could not understand that basic fact. It speaks of a deep and dangerous ignorance that I certainly hope future generations overcome. If not, then we will all lose the protections that our guiding document has afforded us for over two centuries. 

[debinindy]

This afternoon, a woman in El Cajon called 911 for help with her mentally ill brother, who was walking in traffic. Police arrived and shot him for "acting erratically and failing to comply"— in other words, he was shot for acting like a mentally ill person. His sister was screaming that she called them for help, why did they shoot him??? He was transported to the hospital, no word on his condition. He is African-American.

 

ETA: He died at the hospital.

 

The bolded is not true and doesn't help to promote a truthful discourse.

[bibiche]

The bolded is not true and doesn't help to promote a truthful discourse.

All the reports I've seen say that his sister called the police for help because he was acting erratically and told them he was mentally ill and unarmed. Seems pretty true to me that he was shot for acting (being) mentally ill.

[Corraleno]

The bolded is not true and doesn't help to promote a truthful discourse.

 

The cops knew he was mentally ill — that was the sole reason they were called. He was not being aggressive or threatening anyone. He needed psychiatric help.

The dispatcher clearly stated that it was a "5150" call, asking for psychiatric help.

They did not request assistance from the Psychiatric Emergency Response Team, as they should have.

They chose to deal very aggressively with a man they knew was mentally ill, by drawing their weapons and pointing them at him.

They justified this by saying that he was "acting erratically" and "not complying with instructions." DUH! That's exactly the reason his sister asked for psychiatric help!

Police repeatedly shouted at him to take his hands out of his pockets. When he did take his hands out of his pockets he was holding an object which was not a weapon of any kind.

One cop deployed his taser but the other shot and killed him without even waiting to see what the object was or if the taser would have been effective.

 

They made no effort to deescalate the situation.

They made no effort to bring in someone from PERT who would have known how to handle the situation.

They made no effort to determine if he was actually armed or was a threat to anyone.

 

When someone calls 911 to request psychiatric help for a nonviolent, unarmed, mentally ill person, there is NO reason why that person should end up dead. 

Edited September 28, 2016 by Corraleno