Don't even know what to say about this

[Roger]

Cops gunning down a homeless guy. While armed, he may have been putting the weapons down when they started shooting. He certainly wasn't lunging at them.

 

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/01/cops-charged-after-police-body-cams-capture-them-killing-homeless-man/?comments=1&start=160

 

This just seems beyond excessive.

I'm not sure if he was killed by a regular round or the non-lethal rounds, but it seems like one or two officers could have handled this without violence, or if absolutely necessary taken him down with tasers or a baton.

[Rodney]

I almost hesitate to respond...

 

It's easy to second guess police officers.

Regardless, I would recommend that when 'reasoning' with law enforcement not to do so with a weapon in hand.

 

A few questions I would have:

1. Were any lethal rounds fired? (This isn't clear from the video and several indicators suggest live rounds were not employed)

2. What happened just prior to the video footage we are seeing? (What occurred during and prior to the 'hour long stand off')

3. What about the views from other camera (if any)?

There is also the issue of this appearing to be at night (reference the flashlights). I know this looks like daylight but I'd guess it's nightvision cameras at work.

Why is that important? Because its harder to see a threat at night. (This would also beg the question (if applicable): Why did the confrontation occur at dusk/dawn/night?)

 

Escalation of force used by law enforcement is pretty straightforward but is never going to be perfect because imperfect people are involved. Use of Force relies on:

 

- Subject Action (What is the Subject doing and what immediate threat does he pose to the officer)

- Risk Perception (Don't think that just because a Subject has a knife that he doesn't pose a lethal threat. Some are more dangerous with knives than with guns.)

- Officer Response (We see most of the officer response in the video but the primary element that is not known is whether lethal rounds of ammunition were used. There is apparent blood on a rock but is that from a gunshot or from the Subject falling on the ground?)

 

Note that I am intentionally using the term 'subject' rather than 'suspect'. I assume the 'homeless man' to be the subject of a warrant and not someone merely suspected of something. In other words, he is someone that is known. Additional questions might be is/was he known to be 'armed and dangerous' or a threat to others?

 

My first instinct would be to assume excessive force was used but given the evidence we have (and my own personal experience in similar situations) I can only conclude that we don't yet have enough to convict the officers of excessive force. If officers have indeed been 'charged' then someone at least thinks they have enough evidence against them. It'd be interesting to see who is doing the charging or if it's not more or less automatic because a death was involved.

[Roger]

I wasn't attempting to troll. I posted this in the heat of the moment after watching this video last night. If you prefer to lock/delete this thread that's fine.

 

However, there is a definite trend towards a more aggressive stance from the law enforcement community. I can't remember the last time I saw a cop in the older style blue uniform and not those black swat BDUs (which they all seem to be wearing these days). I still see state troopers wearing the khaki pants/brown shirt and smokey the bear hat, though. Some might think this is a minor point but it sends a message to the community when you show up looking like military or riot police.

 

Back to the video, quite a lot could have gone down before the footage we saw. Apparently the man had some history with local law enforcement of being aggressive. I guess without knowing all the details, I'm willing to extend the benefit of the doubt.

[John Bigboote]

This issue will continue to surface in this modern social media day. Yes, cops are more militant than ever today. I was recently pulled over in Bloomfield Township Michigan for speeding (was doing 56 in a 50 zone) . 2 officers approached my car on either side, guns drawn and in the military crouch. I displayed my hands out the window and complied 100%. There was no 'small talk' or nonsense... and the guns stayed drawn. I was a criminal in their eyes. I was issued a ticket for 5 over, $125 fine and 2 points for 2 years. I am a sober white middle aged business man driving a economy sedan to my job... I think I was treated the same as if I were a probation-breaking methhead in a hoody driving a hoopty while heading to a drug deal.

 

Be careful out there.

[Roger]

I've been fortunate in my encounters with the police, never had anything like that happen. Thay have, in general, been courteous and professional and I'm sure I've avoided a few tickets by being polite rather than showing them attitude.

 

However I do think if the above happened to me it would scare the living crap out of me and seriously color future interactions.

[Rodney]

This issue will continue to surface in this modern social media day. Yes, cops are more militant than ever today. I was recently pulled over in Bloomfield Township Michigan for speeding (was doing 56 in a 50 zone) . 2 officers approached my car on either side, guns drawn and in the military crouch. I displayed my hands out the window and complied 100%. There was no 'small talk' or nonsense... and the guns stayed drawn. I was a criminal in their eyes. I was issued a ticket for 5 over, $125 fine and 2 points for 2 years. I am a sober white middle aged business man driving a economy sedan to my job... I think I was treated the same as if I were a probation-breaking methhead in a hoody driving a hoopty while heading to a drug deal.

 

That surely must relate to your location (Detroit) although it's hard to say what information the police had prior to you being pulled over.

In my experience (lethal) guns aren't drawn unless the threat of death is posed to the officers. But times have certainly changed.

There have been so many shooting of cops on routine traffic stops that it wouldn't be surprising to see a gun drawn.

If it was me in the drivers seat t would certainly freak me out.

 

Probable cause is enough to get you pulled over (or speeding) but if they are specifically looking for a car of your make and model then that would escalate the response.

Some facts you might never become privy of and they may in fact have been using the fact you were speeding as the probable cause to pull you over.

Once pulled over they'll look for additional probable cause that needs to be investigated; is the driver under the influence, is there a citation that can be issued on the car (i.e. lights inoperative, etc.).

An observation of the driver can hint at extreme anxiety or nervousness (well, yeah... they just got pulled over by the po po!) Lack of being nervous can be an indicator as well.

I once worked with two young officers that so frequently found evidence of drugs in routine stops that I suggested they might be planting the evidence in the cars.

I was joking of course but I was also very well aware that cops can be criminals also.

The absolute worst part of my job was putting the handcuffs on one of our own.

Cops are suppose to live to a higher standard but some don't and some won't.

It's not an easy job.

 

However I do think if the above happened to me it would scare the living crap out of me and seriously color future interactions.

 

And that is why cops need to train like nobody's business so they'll be ready to make the right calls.

Whether cop, civilian or criminal few ever consider what we might be doing wrong. We are often more intrigued by what someone else might have done or is now doing wrong.

Resisting arrest is a serious matter and IS (without a doubt) going to prompt some level of use of force but before you resist will you realize you have just let the cops make that call?

There is a reason why passive resistance has been so successful in the past (although it never kept anyone out of jail that I know of). When the responsive force is disproportionate to the subject's response it is going to be very obvious.

[robcat2075]

I'm not sure this is an appropriate A:M forum topic... but here I am jumping in with some slightly related notes...

 

- I think part of the new shoot-first agressiveness of police is a result of the push by the gun industry to relax gun ownership law so that any crazy person can have a gun and thinks he ought to have a gun and should carry it concealed everywhere. When guns were expensive and harder to get and easier to trace police could reasonably presume that if they didn't see a gun there wasn't one. Now they imagine that every pocket has a gun in it and any move you make is a reach to get it out and start shooting.

 

- Historically police have always been viewed as not beyond corruption and not always hard-working. Think of the old cartoon image of a police on the beat swiping an apple off a fruit stand or the more recent meme of them in donut shops.

 

Think of Tom Joad's speech in Grapes of Wrath... "...whenever there's a cop beating up a guy, I'll be there..."

 

I saw an old 1920s Eddie Cantor skit on film in which he has a shop and he's explaining all the things that cut into his profit and one of them is "protection money to the police." That wasn't a punch line, that was something in there that his audience would identify as a completely plausible piece of police corruption that a shop owner had to deal with.

 

-There's always been some fraction of police who work improperly but I think what really maddens the public is how the rest of them always close ranks to insist it never happened or that it was justified. Which brings me to...

 

- New poll shows the head of the NYPD Union (the guy telling police to turn their back on the mayor) is as unpopular as Al Sharpton in NYC. At least Al Sharpton isn't on the public payroll but the union head draws a full police salary in addition to a similar sum from the union even though he does no actual police work, his only activites are to speak for the union.

[Rodney]

Well, we are in the 'off topic' section.

 

A perfect world would have no guns... but we don't live in a perfect world so I would hesitate to impose too many restriction on the ownership of guns.

I do think we all share responsibility in keeping the streets free of violence.

For some it may be enough to simply support your local law enforcement.

Let them know you are a proud member of your community who will hold them accountable.

 

At various times I've worked with people who live in dangerous neighborhoods where people randomly get shot or are specifically targeted.

This guys daughter got shot... this cousin got shot... the car was demolished... the house was set on fire...

My initial thought was... if your neighborhood is that violent why don't you move someplace else?

I never really got an answer but I suppose it's not quite as easy as that.

 

I do know that if you hang out with thugs it dramatically increases the odds of thug-foolery being done to ya.

[robcat2075]

My initial thought was... if your neighborhood is that violent why don't you move someplace else?

 

But it's right next to the bus stop!

 

Moving is hard for people at the low end because it's too expensive to go somewhere better. If they rent it will have to happen at the end of their current lease or they lose their deposit and get a bad mark on their credit rating. They have to somehow come up with another deposit before that to get a lease on a new place. If they own their home it may be unsaleable because of the neighborhood and they can't take that loss and afford a new one somewhere else.

 

If anyone in the family has a previous arrest, even a kid, that will be a deal-breaker for a new apartment in many cases. Likewise with a bad credit rating.

 

And if the current home is near an otherwise adequate or difficult to replace job, moving away just doesn't make economic sense.

[Roger]

 

My initial thought was... if your neighborhood is that violent why don't you move someplace else?

 

But it's right next to the bus stop!

 

Moving is hard for people at the low end because it's too expensive to go somewhere better. If they rent it will have to happen at the end of their current lease or they lose their deposit and get a bad mark on their credit rating. They have to somehow come up with another deposit before that to get a lease on a new place. If they own their home it may be unsaleable because of the neighborhood and they can't take that loss and afford a new one somewhere else.

 

If anyone in the family has a previous arrest, even a kid, that will be a deal-breaker for a new apartment in many cases. Likewise with a bad credit rating.

 

And if the current home is near an otherwise adequate or difficult to replace job, moving away just doesn't make economic sense.

 

 

This is very true. I'm not sure how people making minimum wage do it, except for working multiple jobs.

 

 

 

Back to police stories: I was once pulled over on a 3 lane highway near an interchange, where there was no safe place to pull over (no shoulder, on and off ramps, etc) so I put my flashers on and continued at a slower pace until I could pull over safely (maybe not even a 1/4 mile? It was just enough to get past the ramps). The cop got out of his squad car and was visibly agitated: "Son, don't you know when a cop puts his lights on you need to pull over?" I replied yes, I was very aware and was concerned for his safety if I stopped in the middle of a busy expressway with no shoulder to pull onto. I was then told I should pull over immediately, regardless. <_>

 

I felt like it was one of those situations where if I had stopped immediately I would have instead gotten "Son, you got any brains in that head, stopping in the middle of the damn expressway?".

 

Sometimes you just can't win.

[robcat2075]

My major dissatisfaction with the police is when I report a crime. I've lived in Dallas about 25 years now and about every year or so i've had occassion to report some minor incident like a theft or break-in attempt or vandalism and almost every time the cop who comes out tries to tell me how it's really my fault it happened.

 

"Your house looks vacant because they can't see you in the window."

 

I've got 20+ windows around this house and I'm supposed to be visible in all of them all the time?

 

Once i caught a guy trying to steal a ladder I had on the side of the house. i got his license plate number as he was driving off and reported that.

 

Three months later the police call me and ask if I remember the license plate number.

 

"Well, I suppose i still have it written down, i could find it," I said.

 

"Oh no, you have to remember it"

 

It's like everything they do is so they have an excuse not to do anything.

 

Needless to say, no crime I've reported has ever been solved.

[pixelplucker]

I can 1 up you on bad cop experience. Many years ago my shop was broken into and about $25,000 worth of equipment was stolen. I had just moved my shop there and the insurance wasn't in effect so I took a total loss.

 

The investigating officer knew who did it and covered it up because he was buying drugs off the thief. When all this came to light they gave the crooked officer early retirement with full pension so that the out going police chief could leave with a clean record!

 

In general the rougher neighborhoods tend to have less experienced cops since they pay the least. Most of these rookies can't handle high pressure situations and tend to over react.

 

Easy solution is to have Non-Lethal weapons on the cops. There is no need for them to carry guns no matter how bad a situation is. Thats why we have SWAT!

 

12 gauge pump with bean bag rounds will drop someone just as well as a 9mm.

[robcat2075]

Dallas is a work in progress. i have noticed that there seem to be more police getting punished for serious offenses in the last few years but some of that may be proliferation of video evidence that can't be easily dismissed.

 

interesting quote from this op-ed

 

A number of older and retired police officers and police trainers I’ve interviewed over the last few years say that lethal force training has undergone a decided shift in emphasis over the last decade or two. Where the training once emphasized deescalation and conflict resolution, it now tends to be more about how to justify an use of force incident after the fact.

 

 

The Serpico guy came out recently and said something to the effect of "Before, we had to plant a gun on someone the police shot, now they just say he was resisting arrest."

 

"Who's policing the police?" is an old question.

[Rodney]

Did you know that the Pareto Principles applies to cops?

 

20 percent of the police are 80 corrupt and 80 percent are 20 percent corrupt.

The acknowledgement that all police are potentially corrupt should anger everyone but be tempered with the realization that the very same Pareto Principle applies to each and every one of us.

[robcat2075]

Did you know that the Pareto Principles applies to cops?

 

20 percent of the police are 80 corrupt and 80 percent are 20 percent corrupt.

The acknowledgement that all police are potentially corrupt should anger everyone but be tempered with the realization that the very same Pareto Principle applies to each and every one of us.

 

We wouldn't allow a member of the public to escape punishment for a crime when they cited that principle so I'm not convinced we should give police a pass with that either, particularly since being not-corrupt is part of the explicit job description and they are being paid to be not-corrupt.

[Rodney]

We wouldn't allow a member of the public to escape punishment for a crime when they cited that principle so I'm not convinced we should give police a pass with that either, particularly since being not-corrupt is part of the explicit job description and they are being paid to be not-corrupt.

 

The point is not to let anyone have a pass it's to understand human nature and the need for checks and balances.

 

Somewhat related: I've always wondered about the practice of having one person balance the books on an account as if that person is trustworthy.

Why tempt someone to steal when you can prevent it altogether?

 

Similarly, strong controls need to be put in place where lethal and non lethal force is likely to be used.

Why? Because that force WILL BE used.

 

Easy solution is to have Non-Lethal weapons on the cops. There is no need for them to carry guns no matter how bad a situation is. Thats why we have SWAT!

 

To suggest police shouldn''t have immediate access to lethal force is to deny the reality of a very dangerous world.

SWAT is an extraordinary measure used for extraordinary circumstances.

The outcome of a SWAT encounter is programmed to be lethal. They will remove the threat one way or the other.

In a hostage scenario the negotiation is the only option for a less-than-lethal outcome.

The only difference between SWAT and the negotiator being that the negotiator is trying to bring everyone out alive.