Octopus Overlords

Ok, he was wearing a security guard's uniform and cap.

Jesus.

And it seems like they shot him in the back? He wasn't facing them it doesn't appear? Cops going around randomly shooting people just because they have a gun is a problem. I guess they haven't read the 2nd amendment?

Midlothian PD, not CPD FWIW.

In all my carry classes they emphasized that cops arriving on scene can't tell good guys from bad guys. It's another risk to weigh, that you could very well be shot by cops in a self defense situation. This guy had his CCL and probably knew this.

That said, this guy was in a uniform and was engaged with the guy on the ground. Not an immediate threat to cops or anyone other than the guy on the ground. A second to identify and asses might have been warranted
OTOH, I bet every responding officer had Twin Oaks in their mind rolling up on that club. So I can see why they might shoot first, assess later.

Lorini wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 11:16 am And it seems like they shot him in the back? He wasn't facing them it doesn't appear? Cops going around randomly shooting people just because they have a gun is a problem. I guess they haven't read the 2nd amendment?

They were responding to a shots fired call. At a bar. At 4am. Not going around randomly shooting people.

Apparently lots of security cameras at the site, might get a better sense of what happened.

edit: Never mind, Lawbeef has it covered, I'm just rehashing it.

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 3:49 pm

Lorini wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 11:16 am And it seems like they shot him in the back? He wasn't facing them it doesn't appear? Cops going around randomly shooting people just because they have a gun is a problem. I guess they haven't read the 2nd amendment?

They were responding to a shots fired call. At a bar. At 4am. Not going around randomly shooting people.

I really want to know. In your view what should have happened?

Would the suspect that was being detained by the guard be charged with murder? I thought the law in most areas was that if someone was killed during the crime then the person committing the crime could be charged with murder even if they didn't kill that person.

Lorini wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 5:37 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 3:49 pm

Lorini wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 11:16 am And it seems like they shot him in the back? He wasn't facing them it doesn't appear? Cops going around randomly shooting people just because they have a gun is a problem. I guess they haven't read the 2nd amendment?

They were responding to a shots fired call. At a bar. At 4am. Not going around randomly shooting people.

I really want to know. In your view what should have happened?

Did the police officer hear in advance that the suspect was being detained by a civilian with a gun? That would seem to be important information that the 911 dispatcher should gather and pass on. Otherwise that scene could look like a bad guy about to shoot someone, causing them to act quickly.

New Jersey

More than 20,000 people accused of drunken driving in New Jersey could have their cases tossed based on a Tuesday ruling of the state's Supreme Court.

In a unanimous decision, the high court found criminal charges against a State Police sergeant who was in charge of calibrating breath-testing devices made the test results from five counties inadmissible as evidence.
...
It also ordered state authorities to notify anyone whose case involved results from machines Sgt. Marc Dennis handled that those results weren't scientifically sound.
...
In 2016, Dennis was accused of lying on official documents about performing a legally required temperature check while calibrating just three machines, known as Alcotest devices, which gauge the blood-alcohol level of accused drunken drivers.

The criminal case against Dennis is still pending. Reached Tuesday, his attorney said the sergeant maintains his innocence.

The accusations called into question any test result involving a machine Dennis handled, including devices used by local police in Middlesex, Monmouth, Ocean, Somerset, and Union counties between 2008 and 2016.

One of the things I did in New Orleans was repair and calibrate test equipment, including the state police equipment.

Lorini wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 5:37 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 3:49 pm

Lorini wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 11:16 am And it seems like they shot him in the back? He wasn't facing them it doesn't appear? Cops going around randomly shooting people just because they have a gun is a problem. I guess they haven't read the 2nd amendment?

They were responding to a shots fired call. At a bar. At 4am. Not going around randomly shooting people.

I really want to know. In your view what should have happened?

In a perfect world, they are advised by dispatch that an armed security guard has the suspect detained, they arrive on scene, identify themselves and tell him to drop his gun/get off the other guy and get on the ground. He complies and they detain the guard and the guy he was holding. Every except the original shooter and the injured get to go home when everything is sorted out.


Thing is, you had multiple suburban departments responding, you had confusion and chaos at the scene, I don't think the responding officers were advised that the security guard was holding the shooter nor that he was also armed, and you had the shooting in California on everyone's mind.

But my main point above was that they werent, as you suggested, randomly shooting people with guns.

By the way, lost in all this is the fact that the guard very well may have stopped the next mass shooting. It's awful that he was shot and killed rather than getting to live on as the hero he was.

Do we even know that the guard had the suspect in tow before the 911 call was made?

Will save speculating about why dispatch didn't provide information they may not have had at the time.

Still, guard uniform. That reduces the probable threat level significantly in my opinion. And every second after initial contact that he didn't shoot the guy on the ground, decreases the need for lightning, on the spot, life or death decision making.

I'm fairly sure that he wouldn't have died in Canada or even the UK, for whatever that's worth. Which is not too much, admittedly.

They shot him because he was black, full stop.

If he was white, they would have inquired as to what was happening. Thinking anything else is fucking naive.

Believing that without an investigation is pretty racist too.

That doesn't mean your wrong. It does mean you need to stay the hell away from my jury.

Is it possible for cops to wrongly shoot a black man and it not be racism? Because if the answer is no then we don't have much to say to each other.

Are there cartoon villains out there on the police force, twirling their mustaches and looking for opportunities to kill black people? Probably. Is every wrongful death the result of secret KKK members? No.

You can acknowledge that racism exists, you can acknowledge that cops are unreasonably protected from the consequences of their actions, and you can acknowledge that the two together result in some terrible crimes, without assuming that every time a cop wrongfully kills an innocent black man it's racist.

Our entire legal system is set up to prevent that kind of thinking. But we're just some dudes on a forum. We're free to jump to conclusions, especially if the conclusions are probable.

Without the uniform, I can easily see a reasonable man think he's saving a civilian's life. With the uniform it gets a lot harder. But people, even cops, are human and I'm willing to listen to the results of an investigation and hear from the cop himself, as well as other witnesses including other cops.

Cops need to be held to higher standards. But not impossible standards.

Everyone can agree that this man didn't need to die, and that his death was wrong and the world is a lesser place with his passing.

Hold cops accountable. But there were a whole lotta cops there that didn't shoot him. Cops aren't the enemy, bad cops are.

Anyway way, you're free to think whatever you want to think. I even think you're likely correct. I personally need more info before I state unequivocally this is racism.

Of course I'm a white male of privilege so my perspective is not the victim's perspective. That doesn't mean I'm blind or unable or unwilling to discern the truth. I want justice for all.

Calling out other people who aren't as outraged as you or don't see the facts as cut and dry as you see them is exactly what I was talking about in my "all outrage all the time" post in R&P.

I've been called elitist and now naive in the last 24 hours. I look forward to more labels in the future.

"They" is a person who you are painting as a murderous racist cop simply because there are other murderous racist cops.

I can see a situation where an uninformed cop had to make a split-second decision to stop someone from shooting an unarmed "victim."

I don't know enough about this situation to label this a "because he was black"

tjg_marantz wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 6:13 am They shot him because he was black, full stop.

If he was white, they would have inquired as to what was happening. Thinking anything else is fucking naive.

That's ridiculous.

In Los Angeles earlier this year, there was a similar incident at Trader Joes, and the cops shot and killed an innocent bystander. Which in that case apparently was random as the bystander wasn't part of the problem. But (this is my own personal opinion) what happened there is similar. The cops come in, see mass confusion and chaos and shoot.

I do not like the response to chaos to be to shoot. I feel as if both of those people had their constitutional rights taken away from them because the cops shot them and killed them for no reason except that there was chaos and confusion. For me, this is not an acceptable response.

I don't get it. It's weird to counter tjg's comments by linking to statistics that heavily support the idea that cops are "out to get black people".

If you were actually intending to support him, then the stats also tell us that not every incident is the result of racism.

Which leads me to believe that each individual case should be judged on its merits, which has been my stance from the beginning.

So thanks for the statistics, I guess?

Lorini wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:34 am I do not like the response to chaos to be to shoot.

Neither do I.

It seems like society has moved more and more to simply accepting lethal force in response to any time a police officer perceives a threat.

Any time a cop even thinks there is a threat, lethal force is justified. I can't support that. At the same time the job is dangerous and dying at a traffic stop is not acceptable either.

Is it reasonable to tell cops they should just die in the line of duty if they aren't 100% sure and hesitation results in their death? In theory they aren't the bad guys here. Eating a bullet enforcing the laws that we as a society want enforced is a pretty shitty reward for doing their jobs.

I struggle to know what the answer is.

That's ignoring dirty or racist cops. I'm trying to find the right answer for the good cops. Dirty cops by definition shouldn't be protected.

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:46 am

Lorini wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:34 am I do not like the response to chaos to be to shoot.

Neither do I.

It seems like society has moved more and more to simply accepting lethal force in response to any time a police officer perceives a threat.

Any time a cop even thinks there is a threat, lethal force is justified. I can't support that. At the same time the job is dangerous and dying at a traffic stop is not acceptable either.

Is it reasonable to tell cops they should just die in the line of duty if they aren't 100% sure and hesitation results in their death? In theory they aren't the bad guys here. Eating a bullet enforcing the laws that we as a society want enforced is a pretty shitty reward for doing their jobs.

I struggle to know what the answer is.

That's ignoring dirty or racist cops. I'm trying to find the right answer for the good cops. Dirty cops by definition shouldn't be protected.

Hey look we agree we agree we agree!!!

I think the stat post was sarcasm.

Just wanted to point out that a uniform isn't a guarantee that he's not the perp. How hard is it to get a real security guard's uniform, or even a costume.

I think it should have triggered even further caution (regarding shooting first and asking questions later) by the police, but not that cops should have immediately accepted that he's wasn't the perp.

Unfortunately the public has shown that they can't be trusted either, so letting your guard down because the crowd is yelling at you is not really an option.

None of this exonerates the cop, and even if the shooting wasn't the result of racism, an innocent man's life was taken from him and that's a problem.

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:34 am I don't get it. It's weird to counter tjg's comments by linking to statistics that heavily support the idea that cops are "out to get black people".

If you were actually intending to support him, then the stats also tell us that not every incident is the result of racism.

Which leads me to believe that each individual case should be judged on its merits, which has been my stance from the beginning.

So thanks for the statistics, I guess?

"If he was white, they would have inquired as to what was happening. Thinking anything else is fucking naive."

52% of all people killed by police are white including 46% (a plurality) of unarmed victims.

Of course there are huge disparities, but tgb's comment was ridiculous and could have been considered satire if not for the "fucking naive."

Ah. Got it, thanks. Sorry for the confusion.

"Cops" behaving badly.

Across Michigan, police departments have enlisted civilians to work alongside licensed officers to patrol communities and even assist real cops with arrests. But unlike the regular officers licensed by the state, these armed civilians are unregulated.

...

The Free Press found, among other problems, a convicted felon who could not legally carry a gun actually patrolled as an armed reserve police officer in Highland Park, the former leader of a hate group volunteered as a reserve with western Michigan police agencies, and a Flint reserve officer was convicted after running a vigilante force that once illegally detained teens, holding them at gunpoint.

...

There are about 3,000 unlicensed civilians supplementing the ranks of law enforcement agencies across Michigan, based on information compiled by the newspaper through Freedom of Information Act requests filed last year. Most are considered reserves or auxiliary officers, but the newspaper also identified other unlicensed civilians, such as members of sheriff’s posses and mounted and marine units. It is believed to be the first such accounting of this group of officers.

tjg_marantz wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 6:13 am They shot him because he was black, full stop.

If he was white, they would have inquired as to what was happening. Thinking anything else is fucking naive.

Sometimes being white, or even an ex-police captain doesn't make a difference.

https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/cr ... 49670.html

Scuzz wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:14 pm

tjg_marantz wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 6:13 am They shot him because he was black, full stop.

If he was white, they would have inquired as to what was happening. Thinking anything else is fucking naive.

Sometimes being white, or even an ex-police captain doesn't make a difference.

https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/cr ... 49670.html

Not quite the same league. On one hand we have someone wearing "Security" regalia holding down a suspect with a gun trained on them; executed by the cops despite everyone yelling that he's security. On the other hand we have a suicidal ex-cop who's already slit his own neck open and is coming at officers with a knife as soon as they open the door; the taser doesn't work because it misses the mark, so they have to shoot him to stop him.

Totally not the same league. I was about to post how it was even relevant but you handled that well.

As to whether we'll find out the truth? It isn't looking good - the 'impartial' state police managed to blaze a record path and released a preliminary report. A possible problem? The police report doesn't match up with witness accounts. Perhaps that isn't surprising considering they released a preliminary report in 2.5 days which is unheard of in police shootings. And they didn't interview all the witnesses at the scene.

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:56 am

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:34 am I don't get it. It's weird to counter tjg's comments by linking to statistics that heavily support the idea that cops are "out to get black people".

If you were actually intending to support him, then the stats also tell us that not every incident is the result of racism.

Which leads me to believe that each individual case should be judged on its merits, which has been my stance from the beginning.

So thanks for the statistics, I guess?

"If he was white, they would have inquired as to what was happening. Thinking anything else is fucking naive."

52% of all people killed by police are white including 46% (a plurality) of unarmed victims.

Of course there are huge disparities, but tgb's comment was ridiculous and could have been considered satire if not for the "fucking naive."

except it wasn't tgb who said it.... He's been awol for awhile

naednek wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:31 pm except it wasn't tgb who said it.... He's been awol for awhile

gah. all those 3 letter t names look alike.

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:56 am

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:34 am I don't get it. It's weird to counter tjg's comments by linking to statistics that heavily support the idea that cops are "out to get black people".

If you were actually intending to support him, then the stats also tell us that not every incident is the result of racism.

Which leads me to believe that each individual case should be judged on its merits, which has been my stance from the beginning.

So thanks for the statistics, I guess?

"If he was white, they would have inquired as to what was happening. Thinking anything else is fucking naive."

52% of all people killed by police are white including 46% (a plurality) of unarmed victims.

Of course there are huge disparities, but tgb's comment was ridiculous and could have been considered satire if not for the "fucking naive."

That's well and good until you realize that white people make up 75% of the population. Black people make up 11% of the population but get shot three times as much as white people. Thus the issue, and thus Black Lives Matter.

Lorini wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:05 pm

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:56 am

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:34 am I don't get it. It's weird to counter tjg's comments by linking to statistics that heavily support the idea that cops are "out to get black people".

If you were actually intending to support him, then the stats also tell us that not every incident is the result of racism.

Which leads me to believe that each individual case should be judged on its merits, which has been my stance from the beginning.

So thanks for the statistics, I guess?

"If he was white, they would have inquired as to what was happening. Thinking anything else is fucking naive."

52% of all people killed by police are white including 46% (a plurality) of unarmed victims.

Of course there are huge disparities, but tgb's comment was ridiculous and could have been considered satire if not for the "fucking naive."

That's well and good until you realize that white people make up 75% of the population. Black people make up 11% of the population but get shot three times as much as white people. Thus the issue, and thus Black Lives Matter.

Except that they don't. They get shot nominally 40% less than white people but a rate nearly 3 times as high.

Which is why it is still an issue and thus Black Lives Matter.

It's inevitable that every now and then the police will shoot a "good guy with a gun" but what are the odds that guy would be black?

Alabama police admit killing wrong man after mall shooting

Protesters have demanded answers after Alabama police admitted killing a man who they wrongly suspected of shooting two people in a shopping mall.

Emantic Fitzgerald Bradford Jr, 21, was shot dead at the mall in Hoover.

But on Friday, authorities said Bradford was probably not the gunman, and the actual perpetrator remained at large.

His mother, April Pipkins, said in an interview on Saturday that her son was licensed to carry a weapon, and that he may have been trying to protect shoppers, the New York Times reported.

According to the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, Alabama does not have laws against public carrying of firearms.

"He was trying to be somebody who helped save people, yet he was killed," Ms Pipkins lawyer, Benjamin Crump said.

Moliere wrote: ↑Fri Jan 12, 2018 6:05 pm L.A. 'swatting' suspect to answer charges in Kansas over hoax call that led to fatal police shooting

Krebs

A California man who pleaded guilty Tuesday to causing dozens of swatting attacks — including a deadly incident in Kansas last year — now faces 20 or more years in prison.
...
U.S. Attorney Stephen McAllister said Barriss faces 20 years or more in prison. Barriss is due to be sentenced Jan. 30, 2019.

Fuckin' good.

When you cross the line from trolling to actively screwing with peoples' lives, especially putting them in danger, you deserve having the anvil fall on you.

The timing of this posting is interesting to me, because just last night we had a "run-in" with one of my adolescent daughter's friends, who has solidified her status as a "bad kid", and I later dwelled on the possibility she might do something just like this. Yay.

Max Peck wrote: ↑Sun Nov 25, 2018 4:24 pm It's inevitable that every now and then the police will shoot a "good guy with a gun" but what are the odds that guy would be black?

Alabama police admit killing wrong man after mall shooting

Protesters have demanded answers after Alabama police admitted killing a man who they wrongly suspected of shooting two people in a shopping mall.

Emantic Fitzgerald Bradford Jr, 21, was shot dead at the mall in Hoover.

But on Friday, authorities said Bradford was probably not the gunman, and the actual perpetrator remained at large.

His mother, April Pipkins, said in an interview on Saturday that her son was licensed to carry a weapon, and that he may have been trying to protect shoppers, the New York Times reported.

According to the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, Alabama does not have laws against public carrying of firearms.

"He was trying to be somebody who helped save people, yet he was killed," Ms Pipkins lawyer, Benjamin Crump said.

That sucks. But carrying a gun is no joke. You constantly have to consider how police (or other legal carriers) will react if you decide to unconceal.

No idea of the details here so won't speculate. I know that the default reaction of law enforcement here is gun=shoot. So that's what you can expect.

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Mon Sep 24, 2018 12:44 pm Dallas

Dallas Officer Amber Guyger, who is facing a manslaughter charge after fatally shooting 26-year-old Botham Jean in his Cedars apartment Sept. 6, was fired Monday.

WFAA

A Dallas County grand jury has indicted fired Dallas police officer Amber Guyger on a murder charge in the shooting death of Botham Jean, the 26-year-old man killed at his apartment in September, according to online court records.

The grand jury began hearing evidence in the case on Monday. Guyger was arrested on a manslaughter charge on Sept. 9, three days after the shooting. But it was up to the grand jury this week to decide what charge she would face, or if she would be indicted at all.

Niagara, Ontario police officer shoots a fellow officer over a disagreement. Not necessarily in the same vein as the thread, but being a cop he had easy access to a gun, and being a cop likely gave him more of a sense that his actions were acceptable than if a non-cop shot another non-cop. Who knows. We also don't know details yet, or whether the victim had pulled and/or fired at the shooter. Maybe it was self defense. Maybe. Still, a cop shot another cop because they disagreed. That's behaving pretty badly in my book. If details come out showing it was warranted, I'll happily withdraw my furious internet judgment.

CBC Article