Wonder how they'll spin this one.

[LSUmiss]

It does matter. It’s a different in definition of what they mean by “reason to fear for their life”. It doesn’t mean they are afraid of THAT person.

I don’t know or remember how they apprehended him but if he threw up his hands and went willingly, he wasn’t a threat to the officers. If they took him down and got him in cuffs, he wasn’t a threat to the officers. If he had fired on them or threatened their lives then there would have been a different outcome.

This guy in this case was not a child. He apparently wasn’t an innocent citizen. Don’t make him out to be. If he was out breaking into cars and houses, they knew he likely had a weapon. Have you even watched the video? It was dark and it seemed confusing. They thought he shot at them, for some reason and they saw what they thought was a gun. Perhaps if he had been home taking care of his kids, the outcome would have been different for him that night.

You are using phrases to twist what happened. When you put on that vest and you carry that badge, get back to me on what constitutes fearing for your life.

How was it likely he had a weapon? Typically those are crimes of opportunity & they don’t have a weapon. Again, the penalty for breaking into cars is not death.

 

[sasywtch]

TVguy, where are you? I'm amazed at a lot of the stories out there leaving out huge details fueling the fire. The helicopter was following him as he was jumping fences. Now, we have that same helicopter flying all the time telling people to stay inside, get down with your hands over your head etc. Instead of laying down and surrendering, he continued hopping fences until he got to grandma's. The newspapers would have you believe, he was just standing in grandma's yard minding his own business.
Does that justify being shot? No. However, you don't point anything at officer's in the dark. You lay down with your arms stretched out. For the person who continues to say, well, they need time to figure out if it's a gun. I've been on 10 ride alongs and out of those 10, I feared for my life twice. I can't imagine doing that job daily. 20% fearing for your life for a ridealong is pretty high. You have split seconds, not minutes to figure out if it's a gun. I also heard today that one of the officers is African American which no paper is reporting. I can't verify that but heard it on a Sacramento station.

Just to put the seconds in perspective: One ride along, the officer I was with did a quick u turn and pulled up to a group of older teens. to this day do not understand what he saw to make him do that, but he saw something???? He got out of the car and I was watching as I was in the front passenger side. All of a sudden, he had his gun out, 3 other patrol cars barrel in, jump out with guns out. One of the kids had pulled a gun. It was so fast, I didn't even see it and I was right there. That's how quickly these officers have to make a decision. It was split seconds. When all said and done, my ride along deputy asked me if I had thought about releasing the shot gun to help him. I told him heck no, I was thinking how to put the car in reverse, jump in the drivers side and backing up as fast as I could. I am not and never been a police officer and do not know how to shoot a shotgun but darn if I know how to put a car in reverse.

I think the news media is helping the fuel the fires by not giving out all information. They are aware he was hoping fences and running from the police (yes, the helicopter is part of the police department), he pointed something at the officers in the dark. Was 20 shots justified? I don't think so but I wasn't there. I can say though, never ever point anything at an officer, lay face down, hands outstretched.

 

[LSUmiss]

TVguy, where are you? I'm amazed at a lot of the stories out there leaving out huge details fueling the fire. The helicopter was following him as he was jumping fences. Now, we have that same helicopter flying all the time telling people to stay inside, get down with your hands over your head etc. Instead of laying down and surrendering, he continued hopping fences until he got to grandma's. The newspapers would have you believe, he was just standing in grandma's yard minding his own business.
Does that justify being shot? No. However, you don't point anything at officer's in the dark. You lay down with your arms stretched out. For the person who continues to say, well, they need time to figure out if it's a gun. I've been on 10 ride alongs and out of those 10, I feared for my life twice. I can't imagine doing that job daily. 20% fearing for your life for a ridealong is pretty high. You have split seconds, not minutes to figure out if it's a gun. I also heard today that one of the officers is African American which no paper is reporting. I can't verify that but heard it on a Sacramento station.

Just to put the seconds in perspective: One ride along, the officer I was with did a quick u turn and pulled up to a group of older teens. to this day do not understand what he saw to make him do that, but he saw something???? He got out of the car and I was watching as I was in the front passenger side. All of a sudden, he had his gun out, 3 other patrol cars barrel in, jump out with guns out. One of the kids had pulled a gun. It was so fast, I didn't even see it and I was right there. That's how quickly these officers have to make a decision. It was split seconds. When all said and done, my ride along deputy asked me if I had thought about releasing the shot gun to help him. I told him heck no, I was thinking how to put the car in reverse, jump in the drivers side and backing up as fast as I could. I am not and never been a police officer and do not know how to shoot a shotgun but darn if I know how to put a car in reverse.

I think the news media is helping the fuel the fires by not giving out all information. They are aware he was hoping fences and running from the police (yes, the helicopter is part of the police department), he pointed something at the officers in the dark. Was 20 shots justified? I don't think so but I wasn't there. I can say though, never ever point anything at an officer, lay face down, hands outstretched.

I agree. In split seconds, it can be easy to make mistakes. That doesn’t mean you don’t have to pay for mistakes. I don’t think this was intentional or racially motivated, but it was still a mistake. No one is suggesting that he did actually have a gun. So they MISTAKENLY shot an unarmed man. There still has to be consequences for that.

 

[luvsJack]

How was it likely he had a weapon? Typically those are crimes of opportunity & they don’t have a weapon. Again, the penalty for breaking into cars is not death.

I worded that wrong. I should have said they may have expected a gun or thought it likely he had a gun. Maybe they didn’t expect a gun, maybe they did. Seems to me when you are a police officer and you are dealing with a criminal, it’s best to expect a gun.

I never said it was. But then again if he had been where he should have been this wouldn’t have happened.

 

[luvsJack]

I agree. In split seconds, it can be easy to make mistakes. That doesn’t mean you don’t have to pay for mistakes. I don’t think this was intentional or racially motivated, but it was still a mistake. No one is suggesting that he did actually have a gun. So they MISTAKENLY shot an unarmed man. There still has to be consequences for that.

Unless it is found to be a justified shooting.

 

[luvsJack]

I’m sorry but “thought” is just not good enough.

Say that again when you have half a second to determine if something is a gun and you believe you have been shot at.

 

[disneyjunkie]

You are using phrases to twist what happened. When you put on that vest and you carry that badge, get back to me on what constitutes fearing for your life.

Get back to me when you have to worry about your black son being murdered by cops who fear melanin.

 

[luvsJack]

Get back to me when you have to worry about your black son being murdered by cops who fear melanin.

Even if it has nothing to do with race, it has to go back to race?

Perhaps this shooting in Sacramento will end up being on the cops and maybe it will be found to be justified. Either way it’s up to the investigators.

Do you ever accept that a shooting is justified? Any of the shootings that have resulted in protests? Have you seen any of them as justified?

We tell these people to put on a badge and a vest, strap on a gun and get in a car and do a job. We pay them very little and expect them to protect us day in and day out. We expect them to stop the bad guys, have guns pointed at them, be brave, take a bullet for any of us but when they have a gun pointed at them they are supposed to stop determine if it’s a gun, determine if it is a real gun, determine if the person is actually going to shoot said gun at them and do all of this in the 1.5 second it takes for them to keep from getting shot. Seems like we want robots not humans. But we have humans. Humans who have fear, humans who make human errors, humans who have to make split second judgements.

 

[GreatLakes]

People of all races are aprehended alive every day. We aren't the nation with the highest percentage of incarcerated citizens because the police just shoot every suspect without cause.

When in the heat of a situation a split second decision is made. Sometimes that decision is a mistake. Sometimes that mistake is deemed acceptable because an officer did legitimately fear for their life in the moment. Sometimes that mistake is deemed unacceptable and the officer is charged with a crime.

In all cases there is an investigation and with very few exceptions the correct outcome apperars to have been reached based on that case's merrits. One case should not have an effect on an unrelated case in a different department with a host of different circumstances.

There is this false notion that each incident is the same or only one variable is different but in these cases almost no variable is the same. When you can't isolate a specific variable then you can't assign cause to that variable. That is junior high science.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

How was it likely he had a weapon? Typically those are crimes of opportunity & they don’t have a weapon. Again, the penalty for breaking into cars is not death.

They may have not started with a weapon but they could have ended up with one (not saying it's likely or unlikely one has or gets a weapon just giving an example here). Something like 2 years ago in like a week 2 cars in my neighborhood had things stolen out of them. Both were crimes of opportunity as the vehicles we unlocked on people's driveways. Both cars had loaded handguns left in them (stupid in most of us neighbor's eyes) and stolen. In fact one of them that was the only thing stolen whereas the other one it was the gun plus an electronic device I believe.

 

[christineann]

And the agenda continues to be pushed. Check the facts as to the number of uniformed officers, the number of calls answered, and the results of those calls.

There is no "typical" call in law enforcement. My son's sergeant and mentor was killed in the line of duty while responding to a "typical" call - he knocked on a door. I was pulled over on a sunny Saturday morning for a burned out headlight, and though I am a middle aged white female in a Chevy suv, the officer took all the precautions when approaching my vehicle, and I kept my hands on the steering wheel and did not get my registration out of the console until he asked me for it, and I told him I was going to open the console.

Another ploy of the media is to under report crime when they choose. My son called me one night to tell me he was fine in case I watched the evening news and saw his patrol car with windshield shot out on the driver side. He was doing a "typical" off duty security job at a city gym and some 13 year olds were firing a stolen handgun in the parking lot. Never made the news even though the media was there.

By the age of 24 and many times since, he has been in situations that could have resulted in justified shootings but somehow he was able to avoid it. It is a split second decision, and law enforcement does not take it lightly. It is devastating to shoot a human being, even in self defense, according to officers who have had to do it. Yes, there are mistakes that have tragic results, and those are dealt with - usually first by the media before all the facts are known, and if the shoot was justified, it is often too late to change the minds of those who thrive on pushing the agenda and won't admit they were wrong. I admire the men and women who have the calling and are willing to do the job that most can't or won't.

 

[LSUmiss]

People of all races are aprehended alive every day. We aren't the nation with the highest percentage of incarcerated citizens because the police just shoot every suspect without cause.

When in the heat of a situation a split second decision is made. Sometimes that decision is a mistake. Sometimes that mistake is deemed acceptable because an officer did legitimately fear for their life in the moment. Sometimes that mistake is deemed unacceptable and the officer is charged with a crime.

In all cases there is an investigation and with very few exceptions the correct outcome apperars to have been reached based on that case's merrits. One case should not have an effect on an unrelated case in a different department with a host of different circumstances.

There is this false notion that each incident is the same or only one variable is different but in these cases almost no variable is the same. When you can't isolate a specific variable then you can't assign cause to that variable. That is junior high science.

The statistic about being the nation with the highest incarceration rate is not b/c we aren’t killing ppl. That’s a whole other discussion that had to do more with a messed up judicial system.

 

[luvsJack]

The statistic about being the nation with the highest incarceration rate is not b/c we aren’t killing ppl. That’s a whole other discussion that had to do more with a messed up judicial system.

But the pp is right. If the cops are just out killing everyone they encounter who exactly would they be putting in jail?

The vast majority of officers do not start out their shift hoping to shoot someone, most start their shift hoping to come home alive.

They don’t even go on a call expecting to shoot someone. Most would rather not have to pull their weapon at all. So no, they aren’t just out there killing people. They aren’t the enemy.

Our judicial system may not be the best but it’s the best we have.

 

[GreatLakes]

The statistic about being the nation with the highest incarceration rate is not b/c we aren’t killing ppl. That’s a whole other discussion that had to do more with a messed up judicial system.

What it shows is that most apprehensions of criminals don't end in a shooting, they end in live suspects getting arrested. Police interactions with suspected criminals go exactly as planned the vast majority of the time.

 

[disneyjunkie]

But the pp is right. If

What it shows is that most apprehensions of criminals don't end in a shooting, they end in live suspects getting arrested. Police interactions with suspected criminals go exactly as planned the vast majority of the time.

No one is complaining about MOST apprehensions.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Get back to me when you have to worry about your black son being murdered by cops who fear melanin.

A quick Google search shows 223 of the 987 people shot by police last year were black, or roughly 22.5%. While that is mildly out of proportion with the overall population, it's also much more out of proportion to note that 37% of all homicide suspects in this country are black. Similar out of proportion stats exist for the same demographic for other violent crimes. Given the entire picture, the 22.5% number doesn't seem out of balance at all - may even seem low.

Moreover, the number of people (of all races & sexes) shot by police who were not actively resisting arrest or otherwise failing to comply with police directives is very, very, very low. There's this woman, Philandro Castille, and that's pretty much all that come to mind.

 

[mi*vida*loca]

A quick Google search shows 223 of the 987 people shot by police last year were black, or roughly 22.5%. While that is mildly out of proportion with the overall population, it's also much more out of proportion to note that 37% of all homicide suspects in this country are black. Similar out of proportion stats exist for the same demographic for other violent crimes. Given the entire picture, the 22.5% number doesn't seem out of balance at all - may even seem low.

Moreover, the number of people (of all races & sexes) shot by police who were not actively resisting arrest or otherwise failing to comply with police directives is very, very, very low. There's this woman, Philandro Castille, and that's pretty much all that come to mind.

The big problem comes with what happens after the fact. Unarmed black men who are unjustifiably shot don’t get the same treatment after the fact. They don’t get the same Justice. Black man gets shot and the media and law enforcement does everything they can to dehumanize him. As if his life wasn’t as important. Digging up every piece of dirt they can. When it’s a white woman they find pictures of her saving baby ducks.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

The big problem comes with what happens after the fact. Unarmed black men who are unjustifiably shot don’t get the same treatment after the fact. They don’t get the same Justice. Black man gets shot and the media and law enforcement does everything they can to dehumanize him. As if his life wasn’t as important. Digging up every piece of dirt they can. When it’s a white woman they find pictures of her saving baby ducks.

Meh, same goes for a cop who shoots a black man. It's splashed all over the news and turned into a racial incident whether there is any justification for that accusation or not. When a white man is shot by police (which happens twice as often as black men shot by cops), it's rarely even ON the news.

And when Walter Scott's shooter received a 20-year sentence, where was the news? Everyone was screaming for justice when it went down (rightfully so), but when justice was served? Crickets. The fact justice was served is actually kind of inconvenient to the narrative.

Let's face it, the media thrives on controversy. And where none exists, they will either manufacture it, or simply ignore the situation altogether.

 

[sasywtch]

The big problem comes with what happens after the fact. Unarmed black men who are unjustifiably shot don’t get the same treatment after the fact. They don’t get the same Justice. Black man gets shot and the media and law enforcement does everything they can to dehumanize him. As if his life wasn’t as important. Digging up every piece of dirt they can. When it’s a white woman they find pictures of her saving baby ducks.

I have to disagree with this. I looked at ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX all reporting how he was a wonderful father, always smiled etc etc.... Not one of these mentioned he had numerous criminal records, just got out of jail, etc. Last night, the "peaceful" protests locked out paying patrons to the Kings game, shut down freeways downtown in rush hour, smashed two police vehicles, smashed in the rear window of a private SUV.

 

[Pacolovestacos]

A quick Google search shows 223 of the 987 people shot by police last year were black, or roughly 22.5%. While that is mildly out of proportion with the overall population, it's also much more out of proportion to note that 37% of all homicide suspects in this country are black. Similar out of proportion stats exist for the same demographic for other violent crimes. Given the entire picture, the 22.5% number doesn't seem out of balance at all - may even seem low.

Moreover, the number of people (of all races & sexes) shot by police who were not actively resisting arrest or otherwise failing to comply with police directives is very, very, very low. There's this woman, Philandro Castille, and that's pretty much all that come to mind.

Pretty solid post!