Policing Is Hard Work

[Akemrelax]

36 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

In terms of police brutality and racism, there are much clearer examples than this one. 

I think this situation can tell us about how much tension there is in such situations which can escalate to police brutality, implicit racism, and unnecessary killing. Studying such situations, we can learn how many unnecessary lives guns with officers take versus the lives they save. Think about what the tension in this situation might look like without guns.

There shouldn’t be this much tension over a DUI arrest. Cops shouldn’t carry weapons that can kill you in a millisecond in such situations.

I predict reducing the number of guns from officers will save more lives than it will take. (I haven’t looked at any studies so I might be very wrong)

I also think cops who deal with DUI’s and traffic laws shouldn’t have the same equipment and policies as the cops who deal with gang members and murders. Those are two very different situations.

PS: I understand that there is a fear that someone might shoot the police officer without a gun but I would hypothesize it’s less probable than a police officer using a gun in a moment like the one above.

Edited June 16, 2020 by Akemrelax

[Forestluv]

1 hour ago, Akemrelax said:

There shouldn’t be this much tension over a DUI arrest. Cops shouldn’t carry weapons that can kill you in a millisecond in such situations.

I predict reducing the number of guns from officers will save more lives than it will take. (I haven’t looked at any studies so I might be very wrong)

I also think cops who deal with DUI’s and traffic laws shouldn’t have the same equipment and policies as the cops who deal with gang members and murders. Those are two very different situations.

PS: I understand that there is a fear that someone might shoot the police officer without a gun but I would hypothesize it’s less probable than a police officer using a gun in a moment like the one above.

Part of the problem I see with de-arming police is that there are more guns in America than people. If a cop pulls over a person for a suspected DUI, the cop has no idea if the person has a gun. There are too many guns. How can you ask a police officer to enter a situation unarmed when there is a very good chance the person has a weapon? 

You are suggesting a two-tiered police system. One for violent situations (gangs, murderers) and one for non-violent situations. We could say that someone calling in suicidal would be non-threatening. Or homeless people. Perhaps we could use more social workers for that. Yet what about a standard domestic argument? Some guy is screaming at his gf and a neighbor calls the police. Again, there are sooo many guns in the U.S. I don’t think we can ask a cop to do a domestic violence call unarmed, since there is a good chance guns are in the house. . . .Even on something trivial like a noise violation. Nearby me, there is a low income apartment complex and the people there party and blast their music late at night. On occasion, I’ve called public safety to ask them to turn it down. The folks over there have guns and I don’t feel comfortable confronting them at night when they have been drinking and there are guns around. . .  It’s just a call for a noise violation and it might seem silly to ask a police officer to bring a gun. Yet how can you ask the office to enter that situation unarmed when everyone there has been drinking and are armed? And these are not gang members. They are just regular Americans jacked up with guns. 

I think you are underestimating how prevalent guns are in America. They are all over. 

Yet with that said, I like the direction you are heading. I would very much like to see less guns and less violence in the U.S.  Unfortunately, I think many Americans have become de-sensitized to gun violence.

[remember]

„stop fighting“ is not: „stop, or i‘ll shoot“ it does not matter what exactly happened before, even by how that guy tried to escape. if i want to bring a fly out of my room, alive i know i can only use a glas, if i use a fly catch i‘ll kill the fly. by then the officer was not even involved in the fight anymore but watching from the back. the tasers were already fired. the other police did not say: „he has my gun“ or sth to assume. he killed a guy without warning or without it being nessecary because he didn’t got his tasergun and what do i use when i don’t have my taser gun on me? that’s it. there was no reason to pull a trigger.

ofc the fly catching thing is sth i thought off for a while and made a decision on in advance - but a person is not a fly and killing a person with two bullets from a gun on the fly because of drunk driving is worse than not having learned the rules about driving.

maybe in cases like that they‘d better call an ambulance. (which by the way works fine in countries with health insurance)

Edited June 16, 2020 by remember

[Preety_India]

 

Trevor Noah just an hour ago giving his opinion on this Atlanta case and I totally agree with him. Just use some common sense as a normal person and look at the situation. 

 

Also Trump's reaction to Rayshard Brooks shooting. 

Trump calls death of Brooks very disturbing. Here is the article. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-rayshard-brooks-death-very-disturbing.amp

 

You know stuff is serious if Trump calls it disturbing. You guys gotta use common sense and some basic humanity and understand that 3 shots were fired for a simple DUI arrest. That's definitely excessive and deadly policing. 

 

[remember]

1 hour ago, Preety_India said:

 

Trevor Noah just an hour ago giving his opinion on this Atlanta case and I totally agree with him. Just use some common sense as a normal person and look at the situation. 

 

Also Trump's reaction to Rayshard Brooks shooting. 

Trump calls death of Brooks very disturbing. Here is the article. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-rayshard-brooks-death-very-disturbing.amp

 

You know stuff is serious if Trump calls it disturbing. You guys gotta use common sense and some basic humanity and understand that 3 shots were fired for a simple DUI arrest. That's definitely excessive and deadly policing. 

 

seems even questionable if the arrest was justified as the guy slept in his car on a parking lot. confiscating the vehicle by taking his keys would already have been enough. so many ways this could have been deescalated.

Edited June 16, 2020 by remember

[Preety_India]

@remember  exactly. 

That cop Rolfe was on a power trip

 

It's so ridiculous. The officer Rolfe spends 45 minutes with the black guy trying to act friendly and then shoots him as he runs away. So creepy and weird. 

The black guy was only drunk. 

I actually feel very bad for his daughter. She will grow up and watch this video and in the video he tells the cop "I've a daughter" that got to me. 

He was drunk. He would have just collapsed somewhere and tried to catch sleep and they could have handcuffed him easily. He was so drunk that he couldn't even do anything with that taser. He would have just thrown it away

That's it. Bruised ego and hurt pride. Trying to trip on power. I want him to be in prison for life. He took someone's life.

Most likely he will defend himself and tell the court "he had a taser pointed at me" he was acting all tough and proud in the video. He wasn't scared for his life. He couldn't take it that he was overpowered by a black guy and so he had to shoot him. 

Also his testing was excessive. His finger test lasted more than a minute. That's a joke. A finger test is only a second. He also told him to walk on one leg. All of that was just unnecessary. If he thought he was that drunk, could have just given him breathalyzer and be done. 

 

 

[Leo Gura]

7 hours ago, Akemrelax said:

@Leo Gura Did he really need to shoot him? The black man was clearly trying to get away, not trying to harm the officers. He didn’t even go towards his car. They had no reason to believe he was going to kill someone. They could have tried instead to call backup and look for him later.

I’m not blaming the cop. This incident highlights a systemic issue in the US police. The officers are too eager to pull their triggers on petty criminals.

It wouldn’t have mattered that much if he ran of with a tazer or even a gun. So many American already own guns. 

Do you understand that if a cop gets successfully tazed, he is now immobilized and the criminal can just grab his gun?

You think criminals will not exploit this loophole?

Tazing a cop is a very serious and dangerous offense.

[Godhead]

35 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

If he thought he was that drunk, could have just given him breathalyzer and be done. 

Yeah, I don't get why one has to go through all of those awkward tests in front of other people.

 

Also, to anyone interested. Check this stat out: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_by_country 

This is ridiculous. America is doing WORSE than countries like Iraq, Sudan, Kenya, etc. 

I really can't comprehend why people justify the use of deadly force the way they do.  Yes, policing is hard. It doesn't justify pulling the trigger as soon as things get hectic or complicated. The fact that cops even consider pulling out their guns seems to be the problem.

The country I'm living in - Germany has roughly 35 times fewer killings. 35 TIMES. And this is already considering the population difference.

You can't justify this shit if countries with similar economical backgrounds are doing so much better. Saying guns are part of the culture is like saying: being stupid is part of our culture, therefore no free schooling.

 

[Nak Khid]

1 hour ago, Preety_India said:

@remember  exactly. 

 

Also his testing was excessive. His finger test lasted more than a minute. That's a joke. A finger test is only a second. He also told him to walk on one leg. All of that was just unnecessary. If he thought he was that drunk, could have just given him breathalyzer and be done. 

 

 

 

see bodycam video on page 6 of this thread, time 2:50 .  A breathalyzer is shown and Rayshard Brooks agrees to take it. (Serotoninluv Body cam video, posted lower on the page). He is not shown taking it but he did. 
Later in the video when he is running away with the cops taser he turns his arm behind him and points the taser at the Officer Rolfe who said he was firing it but did not say he got hit) . After that Officer Rolfe shoots him 3 times striking him twice in the back.  Had he not done that he might not have gotten shot although I think he should have let him run ahead further and fire a warning shot. 
Police would not have been trained for this rare situation were a taser is being pointed at them.  They are trained to shoot to kill if someone points a gun at them not to wound.  This is done to protect themselves instead of having to risk trying to shoot them in some non lethal hard to hit zone like the leg.   It was a unique situation.   The adrenaline was pumping because they had been wrestling him trying to make the arrest and situation had escalated. If it was me I would have slowed down and made two shot in the air to see if that would have stopped him but that is sitting here calmly at a computer.  This is quite different from the case of George Floyd where they had him clearly subdued on the ground and kept him pressed down unnecessarily, brutally for several minutes which disgusts me even writing it.  

wikipedia

Killing of Rayshard Brooks 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Rayshard_Brooks

 Rolfe administered a field sobriety test; a breathalyzer test measured Brooks' blood alcohol level as 0.108; Georgia's legal limit for driving is 0.080.[10]

Rolfe told Brooks that he was too impaired to operate a vehicle, and ordered him to put his hands behind his back preparatory to handcuffing him. Brooks broke away, wrestled on the ground with the two officers, and punched one of them.[13] During the struggle an officer said, "You're going to get tased! Stop fighting ... hands off the taser."[10][12] According to the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI), witnesses reported (and video shows) that Brooks wrested away one officer's taser and ran away as the officers chased him. Video footage then shows Brooks turn toward Rolfe while running, point the taser in Rolfe's direction and fire it.[13][14] (The New York Times, in an analysis of several videos of the encounter, reported that "flash of the Taser suggests that Mr. Brooks did not fire it with any real accuracy.")[13] Rolfe drew his firearm and fired three times at Brooks, striking him twice in the back. Neither officer provided medical attention to Brooks until two minutes later when Rolfe unrolled a bandage. Five minutes after the shots were fired an ambulance arrived and Brooks was taken to the hospital, where he died following surgery. One officer was treated for an injury.[12]

 

 

Edited June 16, 2020 by Nak Khid

[remember]

14 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Do you understand that if a cop gets successfully tazed, he is now immobilized and the criminal can just grab his gun?

You think criminals will not exploit this loophole?

Tazing a cop is a very serious and dangerous offense.

that’s why drunk prople have to be tazed.

[Nak Khid]

25 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Do you understand that if a cop gets successfully tazed, he is now immobilized and the criminal can just grab his gun?

You think criminals will not exploit this loophole?

Tazing a cop is a very serious and dangerous offense.

11 minutes ago, remember said:

that’s why drunk prople have to be tazed.

The officer in the body cam video, lower page 6 does not say he was tazed.  He says "he got the other officers taser and started firing at me".   

No you can't make this blanket statement "drunk prople have to be tazed"
(even though we are dealing with people not prople) 

Edited June 16, 2020 by Nak Khid

[remember]

@Nak Khid if they wouldn’t have tazed him in the first place, he wouldn’t have stolen the tazer - i don’t know if law says anything about asking a drunkard nicely to accompany one to the police. that at least could happening without coming to prope. in that sense we are at least dealing with a cluster of propel 

until 1:58 everything seems fine. except for the laugh. even though that could be out of sympathy.

 

he said the check up would only last a minute. 

„i don’t refuse anything“ but he refused to get hand cuffed like a criminal, how about telling him his rights while handcuffing him?

Edited June 16, 2020 by remember

[Nak Khid]

56 minutes ago, remember said:

that’s why drunk prople have to be tazed.

Quote

@Nak Khid if they wouldn’t have tazed him in the first place, he wouldn’t have stolen the tazer -

this is your point? 

[remember]

1 minute ago, Nak Khid said:

this is your point? 

there are several points! 

1. he was not driving but sleeping in a car

2. he was cooperative, would probably have gone with them without being handcuffed

3. he probably had the situation with floyd going up and down his spine

4. they actually handcuffed and tased him without telling him his rights

5. they shot him

[tenta]

44 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Do you understand that if a cop gets successfully tazed, he is now immobilized and the criminal can just grab his gun?

You think criminals will not exploit this loophole?

Tazing a cop is a very serious and dangerous offense.

The problem is that he was running away, if he's running away that means that he can get reported and then arrested later on for the offenses committed (the policeman's reasoning was not that he should shoot him to prevent him from becoming a fugitive). Instead of "he's running away and he deserves to get killed for resisting arrest".

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, tenta said:

"he's running away and he deserves to get killed for resisting arrest"

He's not merely running away. He's firing a taser at a cop.

Do you expect that if you go to the mall and fire a taser at a cop that he will not shoot you? If so, you're pretty naive.

[Gidiot]

Don’t really think there is a clear answer to this. I’m sure there have been cases like this were nobody ended up dead. Both sides have merit to their arguments. 
 

I liked Trevor Noah’s comments that armed men shouldn’t be sent to a confront a drunk person who was asleep at a Wendy’s drive through though. 
 

I think so much of these situations are subconscious, maybe he wouldn’t have tried to run if he wasn’t drunk. Maybe he should’ve just been given a ride home and arrested the next day.

 

definitely not a clear right and wrong in this case. But  I think 3 shots is excessive.

[apparentlynoself]

1 hour ago, remember said:

 

 

After watching this video, a couple of things need to be said:

• The police dealt reasonably well with Brooks until the moment of handcuffing. There was even some small talk about when his mom died, where he was, etc...
• When he resisted handcuffing, the police shouted out loud "you're going to get tased". This was a warning for him to stop. But he still resisted arrest. 
• While he was wrestling the police on the floor, you can see that the police guys were probably losing it. The police are pictured as people who deal with people easily and arrest them without any problems. They definitely don't want people to see them being wrestled to the floor and pushed around. That hurts their ego.
• He then runs away and the police guy fires three shots. I would not concentrate too much on how many shots were fired because they were fired so quickly. He didn't think about it

I think it is unfortunate that the guy was killed. From this video, he looked like a nice guy up until the arrest. But he did take the taser and this could be very dangerous. He could potentially do a lot of damage with it. But, in my opinion, if I was that cop and I was wrestled to the floor by some drunk person who is resisting arrest, I would definitely not be calm and relaxed. I am not saying that I would kill him but I am just saying that I would not be relaxed and peaceful. But I do think that the police man could have shot him in the leg or any other body part that would not kill him. But then again, I never handled a gun in my life. I don't know is it even easy to aim at a person while he is running. This situation is way more complex than the way the news and the protesters are showing it. Also, I do not think that he killed him because he is black. The police guy would have shot the guy even if he was white, asian, arabian,black, religious, non-religious, male, female, transgender...

[Preety_India]

 

52 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

He's not merely running away. He's firing a taser at a cop.

Do you expect that if you go to the mall and fire a taser at a cop that he will not shoot you? If so, you're pretty naive.

Do you take into account that the person is drunk? 

Drunk means he won't be able to make rational decisions. The police cannot simply dole out orders to a drunk person and expect him to follow those orders. How illogical is it to expect a drunk person to follow orders rationally? 

Why involve lethal weapons while dealing with a drunk person in the first place? Wouldn't a drunk man simply grab these weapons without understanding the consequences? 

The police should have arrested him without the use of taser or guns. He wouldn't have anything to grab and they wouldn't need to fire. 

Also how far do you think a drunk person is gonna go? He will keep running and then most likely get tired or simply collapse. He wouldn't even know where to run 

They could have easily chased him down or asked for backup when they realized they couldn't do anything. 

There is no logic in this case. No amount of logic explains why a drunk person be shot. 

He wasn't a threat to the cops even if he was showing the taser because he wasn't able to aim that taser and he had already gone far enough to be a threat to the police. He was only trying to run away. 

The police deliberately fired at him because they just couldn't have this man running after such a long time invested into getting him arrested. 

If Rolfe was really following police protocol then why would he be fired within 24 hours. That's because even the police department knows that it was an excessive use of deadly force 

 

His attorney 

 

 

Edited June 16, 2020 by Preety_India

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Preety_India said:

Drunk means he won't be able to make rational decisions.

Exactly. You can't expect a drunk person to behave in a sensible or safe manner.

But it's worse than that. The cops in this case didn't know if this guy was merely drunk or on meth or any other drug or just plain psycho. Which makes him unpredictable and more dangerous with a taser in hand.

In the end, if you are so drunk that you wrestle with cops, steal their taser, and fire it as them -- yeah -- you're playing with fire. Of course if he was sober he probably wouldn't have made such a bad decision to resist arrest.

And yet people demonize psychedelics.