Police Instantly Kill Innocent Man Over Prank Call

What's happening in your world? Discuss it here.
Forum rules
Play nice. We will be watching

Re: Police Instantly Kill Innocent Man Over Prank Call

Postby gisambards » Sun Dec 31, 2017 3:02 pm

I wasn't referring to you. I'd be happy to debate it with someone who's trying to be reasonable about it, and who does seem to have actually made an effort to know what they're talking about. But right now I don't see what the point of trying is when it's just going get me insulted by others. I completely fail to understand why you can't see what's blatantly wrong with SandTea's ridiculous approach to this debate, or Damiana's spreading of misinformation.
  • 2

User avatar
gisambards
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 2088
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:45 pm
Show rep

Re: Police Instantly Kill Innocent Man Over Prank Call

Postby Fun With Mr. Fudge » Sun Dec 31, 2017 3:41 pm

gisambards wrote:This is exactly what the sort of behaviour I'm criticising. Because I tried to give any sort of benefit of the doubt to the officers involved, this idiot continues to insist that I want random people to get murdered by the police. In a previous thread, because I tried to correct one of Damiana's exaggerated accounts of the events in question, I get accused of being petty and nasty.


Gis, I don't think it's the least bit helpful to call one of your critics an idiot. That certainly doesn't help you get your point across, which is a shame because I see a lot of validity to it. That said, I would aslo call this (elipses added):

SandTea wrote:I'm glad you don't want an innocent man murdered. You may be surprised by that but it is still a good thing. My "sickening" stance against senseless murderers might seem silly to you but to everyone else, who are reasonable people, it is a completely understandable position....Wouldn't it be nice, instead, to not have cops kill innocent people? But yeah, lets just yell some more about how it's totally OK to kill random people. If you want folk to not call people "nasty" I wold recommend said people to not be nasty.


....incredibly unhelpful. I don't think anyone here has argued or even implied that it is okay to kill innocent people. To suggest otherwise seems unfair and is arguably more insulting than calling someone an idiot. I also don't think it was fair for Damania to bring up the nurse comparison in response to Sunglasses, who was simply trying not to pass a sweeping negative judgment on the officer. I don't think that added anything useful to the conversation and I saw it as needlessly combative.

What happened in this swatting incident and too many other cases was a horrific, avoidable tragedy with multiple points of consideration. (For example, I was most enraged at the "prankster" who set all of this in motion). I agree that there seemed to be a lot of bad police work (I say "seem" because I'm not a cop and don't know the specifics of their training). But given how often unarmed people get shot in seemingly avoidable tragedies, it seems to me that maybe training is the problem in many cases. If so, that could make the officer's response in this scenario an example of "good policing" in a bad system. For me, that makes his actions harder to judge in a certain respect.

If as a cop I learned that a harmful way of handling criminals was "the right" way or at least wasn't punished for doing things the "wrong" way, I might do a lot of arguably bad things while thinking I'm the good guy. To give an example of what I mean, I'll touch on a CNN interview with law enforcement experts that was conducted after police shot an unarmed student at Georgia Tech after a 911 call suggested he might be armed and dangerous. The experts touched one of the issues mentioned here:

Maria Haberfeld, a professor of police science at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York, said that officers typically arrive at a scene in a "heightened state of mind ... they know they are going to face someone with a deadly weapon and there is fear."

.......

"Police officers have right to protect themselves and the public from undo harm," said Cedric Alexander, a nationally recognized policing expert and veteran police chief who was called in to review the Ferguson police department after the 2014 fatal shooting of Michael Brown.


It seems fair to suggest that in many situations officers are in self-defense mode, which to me seems quite different than the mentality required for diffusing a hostile situation. Again, that doesn't excuse the shooting of an innocent man. I'm explicitly saying it doesn't (and as someone already pointed out, if there had been a hostage taker or multiple, shooting could have endangered hostages). But when you have frightened, defensive people packing deadly weapons, it seems like a recipe for disaster (and sometimes is). I definitely think there is a need to emphasize greater communication (as someone mentioned earlier, a hostage negotiator probably would have made a huge difference). Who knows? Maybe some of these officers need therapy. How many have symptoms of PTSD after seeing some of the awful things cops probably encounter?

And, as the article I linked pointed out, if cops relied on less lethal weapons and stayed farther out of harm's way when interacting with suspects, even when they do make mistakes, they'll be less likely to kill people:

"The basic triad is -- to talk to people, keep a distance and bear less lethal weapons," said David Klinger, professor of criminology and criminal justice at the University of Missouri in St. Louis. Klinger is a nationally recognized policing expert and has done extensive research in officer-involved shootings.
'''
  • 12

User avatar
Fun With Mr. Fudge
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 8:54 pm
Show rep
Title: Jackbooted Hug

Re: Police Instantly Kill Innocent Man Over Prank Call

Postby DamianaRaven » Sun Dec 31, 2017 4:27 pm

gisambards wrote:...or Damiana's spreading of misinformation.


What have I posted in this thread that isn't true?
  • 0

Every once in a while, declare peace. It confuses the hell out of your enemies. (76th Rule of Acquisition)
User avatar
DamianaRaven
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 5978
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 3:37 am
Location: Yippee-ki-yay, motherfuckers!
Show rep
Title: Crazy Cunt

Re: Police Instantly Kill Innocent Man Over Prank Call

Postby gisambards » Sun Dec 31, 2017 4:38 pm

Fun With Mr. Fudge wrote:Gis, I don't think it's the least bit helpful to call one of your critics an idiot. That certainly doesn't help you get your point across, which is a shame because I see a lot of validity to it.

I disagree. I think it's considerably more helpful, and certainly more accurate, than trying to pretend SandTea's argument is worth giving any attention to. I see absolutely no value in feigning civility towards someone who has no interest in being civil - maybe that gives us some sort of moral high ground, but it also allows them to continue to derail what is supposed to be a subforum for serious discussion with idiotic shit.

DamianaRaven wrote:What have I posted in this thread that isn't true?

The title is inaccurate. The police did not "instantly" kill anyone.
The cops show up to this completely innocent man's house (remember, he wasn't even part of the gaming spat that started this mess, just the unfortunate owner of an address someone made up) and shoot him dead as soon as he opened the door.

Not true. Directly contradicted by the report.
Yeah, no need to bother finding out whether it's even true or not, just storm in and start shooting!

This is not a remotely accurate description of what happened.
what makes cops so seemingly understandable when they summarily execute an innocent man for opening his door?

Nor is this.
There are SEVERAL hospitals within 8 minutes of that address and the story says they had "medical rescue personnel" standing by, so it seems like they very deliberately decided "fuck this guy we just shot." Surely, they wouldn't have left him lying on the ground, potentially wounded and still armed so they either just left him there without checking to see if he could still whip out a gun and shoot people, or they KNEW he was unarmed and abandoned him on the ground anyway.

A ridiculous assumption stated as if it's fact.
You made things up on the last thread about this sort of thing as well - remember, you had a tantrum when I pointed it out?
  • 3

User avatar
gisambards
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 2088
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:45 pm
Show rep

Re: Police Instantly Kill Innocent Man Over Prank Call

Postby DamianaRaven » Sun Dec 31, 2017 4:45 pm

gisambards wrote:You made things up on the last thread about this sort of thing as well - remember, you had a tantrum when I pointed it out?


Not really, so it mustn't have been a very good one. Why not block me if my posts make you so frustrated, that or just ignore the threads I post in CAAS? Of course, you don't have to, but you also don't have to read them, either. It's nice to have choices.
  • 0

Every once in a while, declare peace. It confuses the hell out of your enemies. (76th Rule of Acquisition)
User avatar
DamianaRaven
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 5978
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 3:37 am
Location: Yippee-ki-yay, motherfuckers!
Show rep
Title: Crazy Cunt

Re: Police Instantly Kill Innocent Man Over Prank Call

Postby DoglovingJim » Sun Dec 31, 2017 4:53 pm

Well what do you know, this is like the first thread in which I am in agreement with gisambards. Damiana I feel that sometimes you get a bit too hyperbolic, and in this case I find it disrespectful to the people who work day after day to make our streets a safer place.

I was never a fan of people bashing our men in blue, and especially not because they responded to a supposed hostage situation and the "innocent man" decided to be uncooperative to their commands and reached for his waist. Did they make a mistake? Yes. Are they to blame? No, that idiot who called the police is.
  • 7

Last edited by DoglovingJim on Sun Dec 31, 2017 4:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image

Edgar Cabrera wrote:HOLY SHIT GUYS, IT'S DOGLOVINGJIM!!! HE'S HERE!!!

skoobadive wrote:It's the legendary DoglovingJim! Ohboy, this must be the greatest day of my life!

Cracked.com wrote:Initially, his interest in animals was "primarily a sexual attraction," but as he grew older, he also "developed the emotional attraction." We guess we could call what Jim does ... dog-lovin'
User avatar
DoglovingJim
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 2798
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:07 am
Location: No block of land is going to tie Jim and his dogs down.
Show rep
Title: Manly Man

Re: Police Instantly Kill Innocent Man Over Prank Call

Postby gisambards » Sun Dec 31, 2017 4:55 pm

Why not block me if my posts make you so frustrated, that or just ignore the threads I post in CAAS? Of course, you don't have to, but you also don't have to read them, either. It's nice to have choices.

Because the response to someone consistently intentionally failing to meet the standards this subforum is supposed to be held to should not be for those of us who want actual debate about issues to just ignore it. CAaSS is meant to be for proper debate of issues. It is not a place for you to post sensationalist stories with the expectation of no-one disagreeing with you.
Discussion of the actual issue of police brutality is not possible on these threads, so long as this sensationalism and attacking of anyone with diverging opinions is allowed. That is the issue I have here.
  • 1

User avatar
gisambards
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 2088
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:45 pm
Show rep

Re: Police Instantly Kill Innocent Man Over Prank Call

Postby DoglovingJim » Sun Dec 31, 2017 4:59 pm

DamianaRaven wrote:
gisambards wrote:You made things up on the last thread about this sort of thing as well - remember, you had a tantrum when I pointed it out?


Not really, so it mustn't have been a very good one. Why not block me if my posts make you so frustrated, that or just ignore the threads I post in CAAS? Of course, you don't have to, but you also don't have to read them, either. It's nice to have choices.

The problem with that is that it encourages the formation of a closed "bubble of ideologies" instead of productive discussion, we shouldn't have to censor those who give different views simply because we don't agree with them. It's doing things like that which create extremist views, while it is a "choice" it's not an enlightened one.
  • 5

Image

Edgar Cabrera wrote:HOLY SHIT GUYS, IT'S DOGLOVINGJIM!!! HE'S HERE!!!

skoobadive wrote:It's the legendary DoglovingJim! Ohboy, this must be the greatest day of my life!

Cracked.com wrote:Initially, his interest in animals was "primarily a sexual attraction," but as he grew older, he also "developed the emotional attraction." We guess we could call what Jim does ... dog-lovin'
User avatar
DoglovingJim
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 2798
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:07 am
Location: No block of land is going to tie Jim and his dogs down.
Show rep
Title: Manly Man

Re: Police Instantly Kill Innocent Man Over Prank Call

Postby DamianaRaven » Sun Dec 31, 2017 5:09 pm

gisambards wrote:That is the issue I have here.


So I see. Best of luck resolving this issue to everyone's satisfaction. In the meantime, my assessment of the situation seems true enough from my perspective. They shot the guy (from across the street and behind cars) before they had any idea what was really going on, which is "instantly" as far as I'm concerned. Here's a quote directly from the police chief himself:

“A male came to the front door,” Livingston said. “As he came to the front door, one of our officers discharged his weapon.”


There's no question that the guy was unarmed and innocent of any crime, so I'm not backing down from my contention that shooting him was an act of cowardice and incompetence. At no point have I accused anyone of murderous malevolence, so there's that, at least.

Jim wrote:The problem with that is that it encourages the formation of a "bubble of ideologies" instead of productive discussion, we shouldn't have to censor those who give different views because we don't agree with them.


I'm not trying to censor anyone, just pointing out that no one has to deal with my shenanigans of they find me infuriating. The Mod Squad doesn't cut me any special favors if I'm out of line and if not, then there's really no other way of shutting me up. As I understand the policy around here, I'm required to follow the posted rules of this forum, not anyone's personal standard of journalistic integrity.
  • 3

Every once in a while, declare peace. It confuses the hell out of your enemies. (76th Rule of Acquisition)
User avatar
DamianaRaven
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 5978
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 3:37 am
Location: Yippee-ki-yay, motherfuckers!
Show rep
Title: Crazy Cunt

Re: Police Instantly Kill Innocent Man Over Prank Call

Postby DoglovingJim » Sun Dec 31, 2017 5:13 pm

DamianaRaven wrote:
Jim wrote:The problem with that is that it encourages the formation of a "bubble of ideologies" instead of productive discussion, we shouldn't have to censor those who give different views because we don't agree with them.


I'm not trying to censor anyone, just pointing out that no one has to deal with my shenanigans of they find me infuriating. The Mod Squad doesn't cut me any special favors if I'm out of line and if not, then there's really no other way of shutting me up. As I understand the policy around here, I'm required to follow the posted rules of this forum, not anyone's personal standard of journalistic integrity.


And certainly you are following the posted rules, however don't expect that people wouldn't call you out on your journalistic integrity whenever they feel that it is wrong.

And for your information, one can be "innocent" of any crimes however if the police feel that they are a threat then of course they will act on it (and he was uncooperative and reaching for his waist, potentially carrying a firearm). With all these recent cases of terrorism and shootings it's understandable that they wouldn't take the risk, even though they did make a mistake. The police did their job and are not to blame for this, it is the idiot who called them.

EDIT:
In regards to your "shooting him was an act of cowardice and incompetence", so if that man did have a gun and killed one of them would you then have the balls to go to their family, their wife and kids and tell them "oh, well at least he wasn't a coward".

How dare you say things like that, you wouldn't live for a second in their shoes and this disrespect burns me to my core. The things they do day and night, underpaid and commonly missing out on special events. Putting first their duty to protect and serve everyone, even people like you who pray for a chance for a mistake so you can spout this crap. I feel sorry for the father of two but I will never dream of blaming it on those who protect us, they did what they thought was necessary in the situation they were in (they did not have the luxury of sitting in a comfy armchair with a glass of warm coco and good internet connection). The only one to blame for this is the scum that decided to call the police bearing false witness, which ended up leaving those kids fatherless.

I will not stand by silently and let you say this crap about the police, shame on you.
  • 3

Last edited by DoglovingJim on Sun Dec 31, 2017 5:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image

Edgar Cabrera wrote:HOLY SHIT GUYS, IT'S DOGLOVINGJIM!!! HE'S HERE!!!

skoobadive wrote:It's the legendary DoglovingJim! Ohboy, this must be the greatest day of my life!

Cracked.com wrote:Initially, his interest in animals was "primarily a sexual attraction," but as he grew older, he also "developed the emotional attraction." We guess we could call what Jim does ... dog-lovin'
User avatar
DoglovingJim
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 2798
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:07 am
Location: No block of land is going to tie Jim and his dogs down.
Show rep
Title: Manly Man

Re: Police Instantly Kill Innocent Man Over Prank Call

Postby gisambards » Sun Dec 31, 2017 5:30 pm

Best of luck resolving this issue to everyone's satisfaction. In the meantime, my assessment of the situation seems true enough from my perspective.

It's factually inaccurate - all you're doing here is admitting that the actual facts have no bearing on what you're going to post. On top of this, the fact you seem proud of the fact that your behaviour so resolutely falls short of the expected standard just makes clear how much your attitude is resulting in this issue. This should not be somewhere where sensationalism, misinformation and ignorance are celebrated.
DamianaRaven wrote:At no point have I accused anyone of murderous malevolence, so there's that, at least.

DamianaRaven wrote:what makes cops so seemingly understandable when they summarily execute an innocent man for opening his door?
  • 1

User avatar
gisambards
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 2088
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:45 pm
Show rep

Re: Police Instantly Kill Innocent Man Over Prank Call

Postby DamianaRaven » Sun Dec 31, 2017 5:39 pm

Jim wrote:(and he was uncooperative and reaching for his waist, potentially carrying a firearm)


Have you seen the video? The cops who were screaming these orders at him were across the street, taking cover behind a vehicle. They weren't exactly in anyone's "line of fire." From the way the video is shot, it doesn't seem at all unlikely that he couldn't actually see anybody. How was this guy even supposed to know they were addressing him and not one of his neighbors, much less that they were about to shoot him?
  • 1

Every once in a while, declare peace. It confuses the hell out of your enemies. (76th Rule of Acquisition)
User avatar
DamianaRaven
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 5978
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 3:37 am
Location: Yippee-ki-yay, motherfuckers!
Show rep
Title: Crazy Cunt

Re: Police Instantly Kill Innocent Man Over Prank Call

Postby DoglovingJim » Sun Dec 31, 2017 5:51 pm

DamianaRaven wrote:
Jim wrote:(and he was uncooperative and reaching for his waist, potentially carrying a firearm)


Have you seen the video? The cops who were screaming these orders at him were across the street, taking cover behind a vehicle. From the way the video is shot, it doesn't seem at all unlikely that he couldn't actually see anybody. How was this guy even supposed to know they were addressing him and not one of his neighbors, much less that they were about to shoot him?


You mean the uncensored video that was given to you by the police themselves? Yes I did. What I saw was a light-lit street, visible flashing sirens and a guy facing them across the street by the doorway, not listening to commands and then suddenly lifting his hand up fast. We also have police testimony that he reached for his waistline and we have the prank call transcripts stating that he was carrying a gun and shot his father (and unwillingly to disarm himself), locked his family in the closet and was considering setting the house on fire.

With this information the police saw a perceived threat and they neutralized it. They did what was best with the information they had, and they are not to be blamed for the intel being wrong. I sense a sort of resentment towards the police in general with you and it's just making me go crazy, because you seem like the sort of person who would look for any excuse to hate them.
  • 2

Image

Edgar Cabrera wrote:HOLY SHIT GUYS, IT'S DOGLOVINGJIM!!! HE'S HERE!!!

skoobadive wrote:It's the legendary DoglovingJim! Ohboy, this must be the greatest day of my life!

Cracked.com wrote:Initially, his interest in animals was "primarily a sexual attraction," but as he grew older, he also "developed the emotional attraction." We guess we could call what Jim does ... dog-lovin'
User avatar
DoglovingJim
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 2798
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:07 am
Location: No block of land is going to tie Jim and his dogs down.
Show rep
Title: Manly Man

Re: Police Instantly Kill Innocent Man Over Prank Call

Postby SandTea » Sun Dec 31, 2017 6:17 pm

DoglovingJim wrote:With this information the police saw a perceived threat and they neutralized it. They did what was best with the information they had, and they are not to be blamed for the intel being wrong.


That's the issue though. They are to be blamed for not confirming said intel. If we are OK with Police just acting on whatever they think could be true, we cannot complain about any actions they take as they can just throw out a few "what if"s and "maybe"s. They could 'neutralize' any 'threat' they want to.

That would be a horrible future and one I would hope no one wants. But I'm just some idiot so maybe that is the world some folk wish for.
  • 6

"Draw me not without reason; sheath me not without honor."
User avatar
SandTea
Time Waster
Time Waster
 
Posts: 1257
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 5:01 pm
Show rep
Title: 3rdAeolus

Re: Police Instantly Kill Innocent Man Over Prank Call

Postby DamianaRaven » Sun Dec 31, 2017 6:32 pm

SandTea wrote:That would be a horrible future and one I would hope no one wants.


That's kind of why I raise such hell when I see police acting in a horrifying manner. It's not that I hate cops, it's just that it's terrifying to see that they kill so many unarmed people with so little accountability. I don't hold police to any standard of infallibility, but I don't think it's unfair to hold them to a higher standard than the general public, considering they have MUCH more power, authority, and tactical advantage.

It bothers me that "tactical advantage" is not enough. These guys were (ostensibly) PREPARED for this showdown, loaded down with weapons, covered in body armor, and taking cover across the street behind a vehicle. If all of that is STILL not enough to make an officer feel like he can afford to let some guy live for moving his hands the wrong direction, then that officer is a coward by my standards and no amount of "shame on you" can make me feel ashamed of saying that.

It also bothers me that some people expect a cop's job to be absolutely, 100% safe, without ANY degree of personal risk - to the point of being willing to write off the lives of men like Andrew Finch as an acceptable price to pay to keep cops from feeling afraid of their jobs. It frustrates me that in the same conversation (not this one or anyone in it, just a general example) people will turn around and claim that they DESERVE to be able to summarily execute any threat that comes their way simply because they're such "brave heroes who risk their lives for us." Isn't that ironic... don't you think?
  • 2

Every once in a while, declare peace. It confuses the hell out of your enemies. (76th Rule of Acquisition)
User avatar
DamianaRaven
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 5978
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 3:37 am
Location: Yippee-ki-yay, motherfuckers!
Show rep
Title: Crazy Cunt

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 15 guests