quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

The 'Bomb Squad' is not a police force. It is a specialized emergency responding force. As such - it is dependent on the police to secure the scene so that they can work. This is the same for Fire Fighters and Paramedics, those Emergency Workertias are NOT Police - they are not trained nor equipped to detain or arrest a suspicious individuals.

True enough, but the fact they were never mentioned indicates clearly there was no serious concern of a bomb.

No, it proves they where not there during the confrontation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

Using a tazer against someone on PCP is like throwing a Hershy bar at them, at best it is a waste of time, how many times do you need to have this explained to you.

I understand that. All the more reason she should have kept a further distance between herself and Crutcher and waited for support to arrive, but no, gun in hand, facing a demented person disobeying and walking away from her with his hands up, she insists on repeatedly barking her authoritative demands instead of deescalating the situation. She could have tried to engage him in conversation. But having a gun and a badge seems to transcend all other humane strategies.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
Why did she have her gun out at all? Other than his lack of response to her commands he made no move toward her. He walked away from her. Recall that this was a traffic situation with an erratically acting individual. At no time that Crutcher moved toward his car did he threaten anyone. What is the rational for drawing a police weapon on a citizen, white or poc, if his actions are non-threatening? Suspicion? Suspicion of what?

He placed his hands in his pockets several times, despite being told by Shelby to not. Glock makes a .357 caliber compact handgun capable of fitting in one's pocket (Glock 33) this fire arm can shoot rounds which can defeat the police issued body armor. By placing his hands in his pockets with out it being confirmed that he was unarmed is a threatening action, and Shelby reacted properly by drawing her firearm.

The act of moving towards his car is against police order threatening action. Not only is it a 2 ton vehicle which has enough horsepower and torque that it could crush a human with ease, but the cabin of the vehicle is large enough to hide a weapon as large as a long rifle. Not to mention that the dispatch implied that the car was 'going to blow up' something which could be initiated by the individual if he got to the car.



Tell me - how are these actions non-threatening?
Because you're looking at this through the lens of hindsight?

I would remind you:
Graham v. Connor
490 U.S. 386 (1989)

US Supreme Court Case handling the use of deadly force by police:
The "reasonableness" of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, and its calculus must embody an allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second decisions about the amount of force necessary in a particular situation.

You must judge the use of force from the perspective of the officer during the event. meaning you cannot use facts or evidence discovered afterwords as part of your argument.

I understand and appreciate Graham v. Conner. She could have tasered him at any time he began moving toward his car while refusing her order. There was another cop next to her. He could have drawn his gun in anticipation that the taser might not be effective. The car does not become a weapon until there is a driver inside. If there was fear of a bomb the bomb squad would have been there. You are making shit up in defense of taking the life of a confused but basically non-threatening human being. Pretty shameful.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire
I forget what this one was about

what does BLM stand for?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

and everyone ignores he had no gun was not combative, and the cops should be shot, they had guns, and we see how deadly they were.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

Using a tazer against someone on PCP is like throwing a Hershy bar at them, at best it is a waste of time, how many times do you need to have this explained to you.

I understand that. All the more reason she should have kept a further distance between herself and Crutcher and waited for support to arrive, but no, gun in hand, facing a demented person disobeying and walking away from her with his hands up, she insists on repeatedly barking her authoritative demands instead of deescalating the situation. She could have tried to engage him in conversation. But having a gun and a badge seems to transcend all other humane strategies.

And she should have let him do whatever he wanted to in the meantime.
YES, AS LONG AS HE WAS NOT A DANGER TO ANYONE.

Till this moment you have stated that he was incapable of understandig and following directions but if she had just tried to have a conversation he would have suddenly become rational and co-operative.

MAYBE NOT IN THE MOMENT BUT HER QUIET VOICE MAY HAVE REDUCED HIS AGITATION LONG ENOUGH FOR MORE POLICE TO ARRIVE. BARKING ORDERS IN AUTHORITY SPEAK DOES CALM ANYONE AND ONLY HEIGHTENS FEAR ALL AROUND, HER OWN AS WELL.

You allready locked yourself into he could follow directions and nothing the cops said would make a difference, you are stuck with that.
Again you are at the cop must be wrong even if you have to contradict yourself. NONSENSE. EVENTS ARE NEVER BINARY. THERE ARE OPTIONS. SHE SHOULD HAVE BEEN TRAINED TO REDUCE TENSIONS.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

really? they knew that? had a blood test did they? then why didnt they know he didnt have a gun?

Shoot the cops, that shot, problem solved. Carry guns and shoot cops, they are looking to kill you. Either from stupidity or pantshitting, either way you are dead, shoot them first.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

so wasting someone out of 'fear' is SOP for officer training.

I have to laugh, the vehicle was supposedly set to explode and the cops are only a couple feet from it.

this doesnt even pass the smell test ffs

I agree, RO. It is preposterous. It is amazing how citizens will defend the action of authorities even when it is stupid and accelerates the situation. The additional police could have surrounded the car and taken him out if he got into it.

Because they would be strong enough to keep the car from moving , yeah right.

quote:

The white police officer who fatally shot Terence Crutcher, an unarmed black man whose car stalled in the middle of the road in Tulsa, Oklahoma last year, was found not guilty of first-degree manslaughter on Wednesday evening.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

really? they knew that? had a blood test did they? then why didnt they know he didnt have a gun?

Shoot the cops, that shot, problem solved. Carry guns and shoot cops, they are looking to kill you. Either from stupidity or pantshitting, either way you are dead, shoot them first.

Well phrased, Ron. [:)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

and everyone ignores he had no gun was not combative, and the cops should be shot, they had guns, and we see how deadly they were.

He also had 2 ton car he was trying to get into and was under the influence of a compound which causes hallucinations, mania, and aggression.
Maybe they should of let him get into his vehicle and drive it down the road plowing into a mother and her two kids...

Maybe we should put you in a room with a person high on PCP, see how safe you feel.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

really? they knew that? had a blood test did they? then why didnt they know he didnt have a gun?

Shoot the cops, that shot, problem solved. Carry guns and shoot cops, they are looking to kill you. Either from stupidity or pantshitting, either way you are dead, shoot them first.

Well phrased, Ron. [:)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

really? they knew that? had a blood test did they? then why didnt they know he didnt have a gun?

Shoot the cops, that shot, problem solved. Carry guns and shoot cops, they are looking to kill you. Either from stupidity or pantshitting, either way you are dead, shoot them first.

Well phrased, Ron. [:)]

because you cant be a murderous bitch playing target practice and destroying our laws if they 'knew' he didnt have a gun.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

really? they knew that? had a blood test did they? then why didnt they know he didnt have a gun?

Shoot the cops, that shot, problem solved. Carry guns and shoot cops, they are looking to kill you. Either from stupidity or pantshitting, either way you are dead, shoot them first.

Well phrased, Ron. [:)]

You can't be agreing with the otter that gunning down cops is a good thing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

really? they knew that? had a blood test did they? then why didnt they know he didnt have a gun?

Shoot the cops, that shot, problem solved. Carry guns and shoot cops, they are looking to kill you. Either from stupidity or pantshitting, either way you are dead, shoot them first.

Well phrased, Ron. [:)]

You can't be agreing with the otter that gunning down cops is a good thing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

really? they knew that? had a blood test did they? then why didnt they know he didnt have a gun?

Shoot the cops, that shot, problem solved. Carry guns and shoot cops, they are looking to kill you. Either from stupidity or pantshitting, either way you are dead, shoot them first.

g point.
Well phrased, Ron. [:)]

You can't be agreing with the otter that gunning down cops is a good thing.

I think it is far more valid than to say gunning down the citizenry is a good thing like you do welfare patient. They are making war on us.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

really? they knew that? had a blood test did they? then why didnt they know he didnt have a gun?

Shoot the cops, that shot, problem solved. Carry guns and shoot cops, they are looking to kill you. Either from stupidity or pantshitting, either way you are dead, shoot them first.

g point.
Well phrased, Ron. [:)]

You can't be agreing with the otter that gunning down cops is a good thing.

I think it is far more valid than to say gunning down the citizenry is a good thing like you do welfare patient. They are making war on us.

Hmmm. . . interesting position.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird


That being the best way to blend in.