In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
And what does this prove? That a police officer knows as much as a random smuck of the street? There is a reason they should be trained for years in how to deal with situations...
proves that people are specifically trained to be as paranoid as possible
reposting: i mean it makes sense, it's life-or-death situations in a high stress job... but leading police to err on the side of shooting at any sign of noncompliance is going to create situations where
a guy in a car, with a girlfriend and child, calmly announcing he's reaching for his wallet gets shot
because he announced properly he had a concealed carry
because the policeman forgot to follow proper procedure and firmly tell him to put his hands on the wheel so he could retrieve the gun as soon as he announced he had a concealed carry
and the policeman, seemingly not even cognizant of his own mistake, realized there was danger in allowing a man to reach for something unseen who had just announced he had a concealed carry
even though logically, there's no world in which a guy with a girlfriend and child calmly announcing he had a concealed carry and calmly announcing he was reaching for his wallet was going to shoot him
that's the kind of situation where use of force training gets underrepresented in the policeman's mind and common sense and proper procedure for announcing what the driver needed to comply with was sorely lacking
You have no evidence or really any way of knowing half of what happened. Maybe he was reaching behind his back and said that he had a gun without telling that he had a CC licence before his girlfriend shouted that he had a CC licence. Both of us have the same exact evidence to support what we're saying and can lay the blame on either person.
That's the beauty of the stream, we got to see her lay out what happened and the cop refute it real time, instead of having to wait the mandatory 24+hrs for the cop to fabricate the best story he can. His story was shit. Since he wasn't wearing a body cam and the dash cam probably had a poor view of Phil it's just going to be the killers word vs hers, considering his total panic, I doubt we can believe a word he says that's uncorroborated by video.
What we got was to see her lay out what happened from her perspective. Nothing what she said is collaborated by video either. The whole thing is the killers word vs the victims girlfriends word and neither of what they say has more credibility then the other.
And what does this prove? That a police officer knows as much as a random smuck of the street? There is a reason they should be trained for years in how to deal with situations...
proves that people are specifically trained to be as paranoid as possible
reposting: i mean it makes sense, it's life-or-death situations in a high stress job... but leading police to err on the side of shooting at any sign of noncompliance is going to create situations where
a guy in a car, with a girlfriend and child, calmly announcing he's reaching for his wallet gets shot
because he announced properly he had a concealed carry
because the policeman forgot to follow proper procedure and firmly tell him to put his hands on the wheel so he could retrieve the gun as soon as he announced he had a concealed carry
and the policeman, seemingly not even cognizant of his own mistake, realized there was danger in allowing a man to reach for something unseen who had just announced he had a concealed carry
even though logically, there's no world in which a guy with a girlfriend and child calmly announcing he had a concealed carry and calmly announcing he was reaching for his wallet was going to shoot him
that's the kind of situation where use of force training gets underrepresented in the policeman's mind and common sense and proper procedure for announcing what the driver needed to comply with was sorely lacking
You have no evidence or really any way of knowing half of what happened. Maybe he was reaching behind his back and said that he had a gun without telling that he had a CC licence before his girlfriend shouted that he had a CC licence. Both of us have the same exact evidence to support what we're saying and can lay the blame on either person.
That's the beauty of the stream, we got to see her lay out what happened and the cop refute it real time, instead of having to wait the mandatory 24+hrs for the cop to fabricate the best story he can. His story was shit. Since he wasn't wearing a body cam and the dash cam probably had a poor view of Phil it's just going to be the killers word vs hers, considering his total panic, I doubt we can believe a word he says that's uncorroborated by video.
What we got was to see her lay out what happened from her perspective. Nothing what she said is collaborated by video either. The whole thing is the killers word vs the victims girlfriends word and neither of what they say has more credibility then the other.
we're allowed to develop opinions based on our heuristic evaluations of the apparent situation
if it bothers you that i presented my narrative as fact; i wrote that knowing full well some people might dispute my perceived account. it's whatever to me.
On July 10 2016 05:52 pmh wrote: Well nvm.not gonna say anything about it. Its not my country after all.
Here we love the police Once I was stopped and didn't have seatbelt on nor license and registration with me. Told the cops I would get it at home, 10 minutes drive. They where fine with it. When I came back I asked them friendly if they couldn.t let it go, and to my surprise they did lol.
you live in a ethnically homogeneous society, to which im jealous and happy for
And what does this prove? That a police officer knows as much as a random smuck of the street? There is a reason they should be trained for years in how to deal with situations...
proves that people are specifically trained to be as paranoid as possible
reposting: i mean it makes sense, it's life-or-death situations in a high stress job... but leading police to err on the side of shooting at any sign of noncompliance is going to create situations where
a guy in a car, with a girlfriend and child, calmly announcing he's reaching for his wallet gets shot
because he announced properly he had a concealed carry
because the policeman forgot to follow proper procedure and firmly tell him to put his hands on the wheel so he could retrieve the gun as soon as he announced he had a concealed carry
and the policeman, seemingly not even cognizant of his own mistake, realized there was danger in allowing a man to reach for something unseen who had just announced he had a concealed carry
even though logically, there's no world in which a guy with a girlfriend and child calmly announcing he had a concealed carry and calmly announcing he was reaching for his wallet was going to shoot him
that's the kind of situation where use of force training gets underrepresented in the policeman's mind and common sense and proper procedure for announcing what the driver needed to comply with was sorely lacking
You have no evidence or really any way of knowing half of what happened. Maybe he was reaching behind his back and said that he had a gun without telling that he had a CC licence before his girlfriend shouted that he had a CC licence. Both of us have the same exact evidence to support what we're saying and can lay the blame on either person.
That's the beauty of the stream, we got to see her lay out what happened and the cop refute it real time, instead of having to wait the mandatory 24+hrs for the cop to fabricate the best story he can. His story was shit. Since he wasn't wearing a body cam and the dash cam probably had a poor view of Phil it's just going to be the killers word vs hers, considering his total panic, I doubt we can believe a word he says that's uncorroborated by video.
What we got was to see her lay out what happened from her perspective. Nothing what she said is collaborated by video either. The whole thing is the killers word vs the victims girlfriends word and neither of what they say has more credibility then the other.
we're allowed to develop opinions based on our heuristic evaluations of the apparent situation
if it bothers you that i presented my narrative as fact; i wrote that knowing full well some people might dispute my perceived account. it's whatever to me.
Yes you posted your perceived account and I disputed it. you are allowed to develop your opinion and construct a narrative that you believe happened as much as I am to dispute it. This is what just happened.
And what does this prove? That a police officer knows as much as a random smuck of the street? There is a reason they should be trained for years in how to deal with situations...
proves that people are specifically trained to be as paranoid as possible
reposting: i mean it makes sense, it's life-or-death situations in a high stress job... but leading police to err on the side of shooting at any sign of noncompliance is going to create situations where
a guy in a car, with a girlfriend and child, calmly announcing he's reaching for his wallet gets shot
because he announced properly he had a concealed carry
because the policeman forgot to follow proper procedure and firmly tell him to put his hands on the wheel so he could retrieve the gun as soon as he announced he had a concealed carry
and the policeman, seemingly not even cognizant of his own mistake, realized there was danger in allowing a man to reach for something unseen who had just announced he had a concealed carry
even though logically, there's no world in which a guy with a girlfriend and child calmly announcing he had a concealed carry and calmly announcing he was reaching for his wallet was going to shoot him
that's the kind of situation where use of force training gets underrepresented in the policeman's mind and common sense and proper procedure for announcing what the driver needed to comply with was sorely lacking
You have no evidence or really any way of knowing half of what happened. Maybe he was reaching behind his back and said that he had a gun without telling that he had a CC licence before his girlfriend shouted that he had a CC licence. Both of us have the same exact evidence to support what we're saying and can lay the blame on either person.
That's the beauty of the stream, we got to see her lay out what happened and the cop refute it real time, instead of having to wait the mandatory 24+hrs for the cop to fabricate the best story he can. His story was shit. Since he wasn't wearing a body cam and the dash cam probably had a poor view of Phil it's just going to be the killers word vs hers, considering his total panic, I doubt we can believe a word he says that's uncorroborated by video.
What we got was to see her lay out what happened from her perspective. Nothing what she said is collaborated by video either. The whole thing is the killers word vs the victims girlfriends word and neither of what they say has more credibility then the other.
we're allowed to develop opinions based on our heuristic evaluations of the apparent situation
if it bothers you that i presented my narrative as fact; i wrote that knowing full well some people might dispute my perceived account. it's whatever to me.
Yes you posted your perceived account and I disputed it. you are allowed to develop your opinion and construct a narrative that you believe happened as much as I am to dispute it. This is what just happened.
glad we're on the same page. i maintain my opinion that "Maybe he was reaching behind his back and said that he had a gun without telling that he had a CC licence before his girlfriend shouted that he had a CC licence." seems a much more unlikely scenario given my inference that philando castile was prepared to deal with such situations in not-quite-such-a-completely-suicidal-manner
And what does this prove? That a police officer knows as much as a random smuck of the street? There is a reason they should be trained for years in how to deal with situations...
proves that people are specifically trained to be as paranoid as possible
reposting: i mean it makes sense, it's life-or-death situations in a high stress job... but leading police to err on the side of shooting at any sign of noncompliance is going to create situations where
a guy in a car, with a girlfriend and child, calmly announcing he's reaching for his wallet gets shot
because he announced properly he had a concealed carry
because the policeman forgot to follow proper procedure and firmly tell him to put his hands on the wheel so he could retrieve the gun as soon as he announced he had a concealed carry
and the policeman, seemingly not even cognizant of his own mistake, realized there was danger in allowing a man to reach for something unseen who had just announced he had a concealed carry
even though logically, there's no world in which a guy with a girlfriend and child calmly announcing he had a concealed carry and calmly announcing he was reaching for his wallet was going to shoot him
that's the kind of situation where use of force training gets underrepresented in the policeman's mind and common sense and proper procedure for announcing what the driver needed to comply with was sorely lacking
You have no evidence or really any way of knowing half of what happened. Maybe he was reaching behind his back and said that he had a gun without telling that he had a CC licence before his girlfriend shouted that he had a CC licence. Both of us have the same exact evidence to support what we're saying and can lay the blame on either person.
That's the beauty of the stream, we got to see her lay out what happened and the cop refute it real time, instead of having to wait the mandatory 24+hrs for the cop to fabricate the best story he can. His story was shit. Since he wasn't wearing a body cam and the dash cam probably had a poor view of Phil it's just going to be the killers word vs hers, considering his total panic, I doubt we can believe a word he says that's uncorroborated by video.
What we got was to see her lay out what happened from her perspective. Nothing what she said is collaborated by video either. The whole thing is the killers word vs the victims girlfriends word and neither of what they say has more credibility then the other.
And this is how murderers (manslaughter) go free. Cop spends 24-48 hours coming up with the best story he can, coordinates with other witnesses, then we get some BS story from police and contrast that with the witness who without a lawyer is questioned immediately.
And what does this prove? That a police officer knows as much as a random smuck of the street? There is a reason they should be trained for years in how to deal with situations...
proves that people are specifically trained to be as paranoid as possible
reposting: i mean it makes sense, it's life-or-death situations in a high stress job... but leading police to err on the side of shooting at any sign of noncompliance is going to create situations where
a guy in a car, with a girlfriend and child, calmly announcing he's reaching for his wallet gets shot
because he announced properly he had a concealed carry
because the policeman forgot to follow proper procedure and firmly tell him to put his hands on the wheel so he could retrieve the gun as soon as he announced he had a concealed carry
and the policeman, seemingly not even cognizant of his own mistake, realized there was danger in allowing a man to reach for something unseen who had just announced he had a concealed carry
even though logically, there's no world in which a guy with a girlfriend and child calmly announcing he had a concealed carry and calmly announcing he was reaching for his wallet was going to shoot him
that's the kind of situation where use of force training gets underrepresented in the policeman's mind and common sense and proper procedure for announcing what the driver needed to comply with was sorely lacking
You have no evidence or really any way of knowing half of what happened. Maybe he was reaching behind his back and said that he had a gun without telling that he had a CC licence before his girlfriend shouted that he had a CC licence. Both of us have the same exact evidence to support what we're saying and can lay the blame on either person.
That's the beauty of the stream, we got to see her lay out what happened and the cop refute it real time, instead of having to wait the mandatory 24+hrs for the cop to fabricate the best story he can. His story was shit. Since he wasn't wearing a body cam and the dash cam probably had a poor view of Phil it's just going to be the killers word vs hers, considering his total panic, I doubt we can believe a word he says that's uncorroborated by video.
What we got was to see her lay out what happened from her perspective. Nothing what she said is collaborated by video either. The whole thing is the killers word vs the victims girlfriends word and neither of what they say has more credibility then the other.
And this is how murderers (manslaughter) go free. Cop spends 24-48 hours coming up with the best story he can, coordinates with other witnesses, then we get some BS story from police and contrast that with the witness who without a lawyer is questioned immediately.
Yes I agree but its wrong to automatically assume the story from the police is BS.
The only sensible way to solve this problem is to make body cams and dash came transmit to a third party set of servers for independent review. No one in BLM is advocating for this so nothing will change.
And what does this prove? That a police officer knows as much as a random smuck of the street? There is a reason they should be trained for years in how to deal with situations...
proves that people are specifically trained to be as paranoid as possible
reposting: i mean it makes sense, it's life-or-death situations in a high stress job... but leading police to err on the side of shooting at any sign of noncompliance is going to create situations where
a guy in a car, with a girlfriend and child, calmly announcing he's reaching for his wallet gets shot
because he announced properly he had a concealed carry
because the policeman forgot to follow proper procedure and firmly tell him to put his hands on the wheel so he could retrieve the gun as soon as he announced he had a concealed carry
and the policeman, seemingly not even cognizant of his own mistake, realized there was danger in allowing a man to reach for something unseen who had just announced he had a concealed carry
even though logically, there's no world in which a guy with a girlfriend and child calmly announcing he had a concealed carry and calmly announcing he was reaching for his wallet was going to shoot him
that's the kind of situation where use of force training gets underrepresented in the policeman's mind and common sense and proper procedure for announcing what the driver needed to comply with was sorely lacking
You have no evidence or really any way of knowing half of what happened. Maybe he was reaching behind his back and said that he had a gun without telling that he had a CC licence before his girlfriend shouted that he had a CC licence. Both of us have the same exact evidence to support what we're saying and can lay the blame on either person.
That's the beauty of the stream, we got to see her lay out what happened and the cop refute it real time, instead of having to wait the mandatory 24+hrs for the cop to fabricate the best story he can. His story was shit. Since he wasn't wearing a body cam and the dash cam probably had a poor view of Phil it's just going to be the killers word vs hers, considering his total panic, I doubt we can believe a word he says that's uncorroborated by video.
What we got was to see her lay out what happened from her perspective. Nothing what she said is collaborated by video either. The whole thing is the killers word vs the victims girlfriends word and neither of what they say has more credibility then the other.
And this is how murderers (manslaughter) go free. Cop spends 24-48 hours coming up with the best story he can, coordinates with other witnesses, then we get some BS story from police and contrast that with the witness who without a lawyer is questioned immediately.
No one in BLM is advocating for this so nothing will change.
And what does this prove? That a police officer knows as much as a random smuck of the street? There is a reason they should be trained for years in how to deal with situations...
proves that people are specifically trained to be as paranoid as possible
reposting: i mean it makes sense, it's life-or-death situations in a high stress job... but leading police to err on the side of shooting at any sign of noncompliance is going to create situations where
a guy in a car, with a girlfriend and child, calmly announcing he's reaching for his wallet gets shot
because he announced properly he had a concealed carry
because the policeman forgot to follow proper procedure and firmly tell him to put his hands on the wheel so he could retrieve the gun as soon as he announced he had a concealed carry
and the policeman, seemingly not even cognizant of his own mistake, realized there was danger in allowing a man to reach for something unseen who had just announced he had a concealed carry
even though logically, there's no world in which a guy with a girlfriend and child calmly announcing he had a concealed carry and calmly announcing he was reaching for his wallet was going to shoot him
that's the kind of situation where use of force training gets underrepresented in the policeman's mind and common sense and proper procedure for announcing what the driver needed to comply with was sorely lacking
You have no evidence or really any way of knowing half of what happened. Maybe he was reaching behind his back and said that he had a gun without telling that he had a CC licence before his girlfriend shouted that he had a CC licence. Both of us have the same exact evidence to support what we're saying and can lay the blame on either person.
That's the beauty of the stream, we got to see her lay out what happened and the cop refute it real time, instead of having to wait the mandatory 24+hrs for the cop to fabricate the best story he can. His story was shit. Since he wasn't wearing a body cam and the dash cam probably had a poor view of Phil it's just going to be the killers word vs hers, considering his total panic, I doubt we can believe a word he says that's uncorroborated by video.
What we got was to see her lay out what happened from her perspective. Nothing what she said is collaborated by video either. The whole thing is the killers word vs the victims girlfriends word and neither of what they say has more credibility then the other.
And this is how murderers (manslaughter) go free. Cop spends 24-48 hours coming up with the best story he can, coordinates with other witnesses, then we get some BS story from police and contrast that with the witness who without a lawyer is questioned immediately.
No one in BLM is advocating for this so nothing will change.
I don't see that in any of their marches or protests. I don't see any of that on their signs or coming out of the mouths of anyone who speaks at their events.
which goes back to my point some pages ago about how anybody actually caring about an issue should ignore the worst 90% of people representing that issue and go straight to the most intelligent commentators because the 90% of dumb people arent going to go away
And what does this prove? That a police officer knows as much as a random smuck of the street? There is a reason they should be trained for years in how to deal with situations...
proves that people are specifically trained to be as paranoid as possible
reposting: i mean it makes sense, it's life-or-death situations in a high stress job... but leading police to err on the side of shooting at any sign of noncompliance is going to create situations where
a guy in a car, with a girlfriend and child, calmly announcing he's reaching for his wallet gets shot
because he announced properly he had a concealed carry
because the policeman forgot to follow proper procedure and firmly tell him to put his hands on the wheel so he could retrieve the gun as soon as he announced he had a concealed carry
and the policeman, seemingly not even cognizant of his own mistake, realized there was danger in allowing a man to reach for something unseen who had just announced he had a concealed carry
even though logically, there's no world in which a guy with a girlfriend and child calmly announcing he had a concealed carry and calmly announcing he was reaching for his wallet was going to shoot him
that's the kind of situation where use of force training gets underrepresented in the policeman's mind and common sense and proper procedure for announcing what the driver needed to comply with was sorely lacking
You have no evidence or really any way of knowing half of what happened. Maybe he was reaching behind his back and said that he had a gun without telling that he had a CC licence before his girlfriend shouted that he had a CC licence. Both of us have the same exact evidence to support what we're saying and can lay the blame on either person.
That's the beauty of the stream, we got to see her lay out what happened and the cop refute it real time, instead of having to wait the mandatory 24+hrs for the cop to fabricate the best story he can. His story was shit. Since he wasn't wearing a body cam and the dash cam probably had a poor view of Phil it's just going to be the killers word vs hers, considering his total panic, I doubt we can believe a word he says that's uncorroborated by video.
What we got was to see her lay out what happened from her perspective. Nothing what she said is collaborated by video either. The whole thing is the killers word vs the victims girlfriends word and neither of what they say has more credibility then the other.
And this is how murderers (manslaughter) go free. Cop spends 24-48 hours coming up with the best story he can, coordinates with other witnesses, then we get some BS story from police and contrast that with the witness who without a lawyer is questioned immediately.
Yes I agree but its wrong to automatically assume the story from the police is BS.
The only sensible way to solve this problem is to make body cams and dash came transmit to a third party set of servers for independent review. No one in BLM is advocating for this so nothing will change.
Should probably not let the police fabricate stories 24+ hours later either. Which is a big part of the problem. That's so much time to plot out possible defenses. Would also have to hold them responsible for when the body cams "fall off" and that they don't illegally obtain evidence, and when they do, be held accountable.
Should also be nailing officers for giving false reports (almost never happens no matter the evidence). Should also be holding them accountable when they don't do their job right and it ends in someone getting killed, even if in the final moment their action becomes legal.
This is the Zimmerman situation, except these are trained professionals, they can't make a dozen mistakes they shouldn't make, putting themselves in a life or death situation, and then use that as an excuse to kill.
Also everyone in BLM is advocating for body cams and independent review, even though that's far from enough. Cops and their blind supporters are the only reason we don't already have them (with some blame for politicians as well).
This is what I'm talking about when I say "waiting for them to show up".
And what does this prove? That a police officer knows as much as a random smuck of the street? There is a reason they should be trained for years in how to deal with situations...
proves that people are specifically trained to be as paranoid as possible
reposting: i mean it makes sense, it's life-or-death situations in a high stress job... but leading police to err on the side of shooting at any sign of noncompliance is going to create situations where
a guy in a car, with a girlfriend and child, calmly announcing he's reaching for his wallet gets shot
because he announced properly he had a concealed carry
because the policeman forgot to follow proper procedure and firmly tell him to put his hands on the wheel so he could retrieve the gun as soon as he announced he had a concealed carry
and the policeman, seemingly not even cognizant of his own mistake, realized there was danger in allowing a man to reach for something unseen who had just announced he had a concealed carry
even though logically, there's no world in which a guy with a girlfriend and child calmly announcing he had a concealed carry and calmly announcing he was reaching for his wallet was going to shoot him
that's the kind of situation where use of force training gets underrepresented in the policeman's mind and common sense and proper procedure for announcing what the driver needed to comply with was sorely lacking
You have no evidence or really any way of knowing half of what happened. Maybe he was reaching behind his back and said that he had a gun without telling that he had a CC licence before his girlfriend shouted that he had a CC licence. Both of us have the same exact evidence to support what we're saying and can lay the blame on either person.
That's the beauty of the stream, we got to see her lay out what happened and the cop refute it real time, instead of having to wait the mandatory 24+hrs for the cop to fabricate the best story he can. His story was shit. Since he wasn't wearing a body cam and the dash cam probably had a poor view of Phil it's just going to be the killers word vs hers, considering his total panic, I doubt we can believe a word he says that's uncorroborated by video.
What we got was to see her lay out what happened from her perspective. Nothing what she said is collaborated by video either. The whole thing is the killers word vs the victims girlfriends word and neither of what they say has more credibility then the other.
And this is how murderers (manslaughter) go free. Cop spends 24-48 hours coming up with the best story he can, coordinates with other witnesses, then we get some BS story from police and contrast that with the witness who without a lawyer is questioned immediately.
Yes I agree but its wrong to automatically assume the story from the police is BS.
The only sensible way to solve this problem is to make body cams and dash came transmit to a third party set of servers for independent review. No one in BLM is advocating for this so nothing will change.
Should probably not let the police fabricate stories 24+ hours later either. Which is a big part of the problem. That's so much time to plot out possible defenses. Would also have to hold them responsible for when the body cams "fall off" and that they don't illegally obtain evidence, and when they do, be held accountable.
Should also be nailing officers for giving false reports (almost never happens no matter the evidence). Should also be holding them accountable when they don't do their job right and it ends in someone getting killed, even if in the final moment their action becomes legal.
This is the Zimmerman situation, except these are trained professionals, they can't make a dozen mistakes they shouldn't make, putting themselves in a life or death situation, and then use that as an excuse to kill.
Also everyone in BLM is advocating for body cams and independent review, even though that's far from enough. Cops and their blind supporters are the only reason we don't already have them (with some blame for politicians as well).
This is what I'm talking about when I say "waiting for them to show up".
You can't blame politicians when they're the only one that can actually change something. Witness testimony is notoriously terrible from any point and would be biased in the direction of the person who is testifying about it which is where we get the hands up don't shoot situation. The rest of that is independent review which really wouldn't be that hard to put on a banner or made into a chant.
And what does this prove? That a police officer knows as much as a random smuck of the street? There is a reason they should be trained for years in how to deal with situations...
proves that people are specifically trained to be as paranoid as possible
reposting: i mean it makes sense, it's life-or-death situations in a high stress job... but leading police to err on the side of shooting at any sign of noncompliance is going to create situations where
a guy in a car, with a girlfriend and child, calmly announcing he's reaching for his wallet gets shot
because he announced properly he had a concealed carry
because the policeman forgot to follow proper procedure and firmly tell him to put his hands on the wheel so he could retrieve the gun as soon as he announced he had a concealed carry
and the policeman, seemingly not even cognizant of his own mistake, realized there was danger in allowing a man to reach for something unseen who had just announced he had a concealed carry
even though logically, there's no world in which a guy with a girlfriend and child calmly announcing he had a concealed carry and calmly announcing he was reaching for his wallet was going to shoot him
that's the kind of situation where use of force training gets underrepresented in the policeman's mind and common sense and proper procedure for announcing what the driver needed to comply with was sorely lacking
You have no evidence or really any way of knowing half of what happened. Maybe he was reaching behind his back and said that he had a gun without telling that he had a CC licence before his girlfriend shouted that he had a CC licence. Both of us have the same exact evidence to support what we're saying and can lay the blame on either person.
That's the beauty of the stream, we got to see her lay out what happened and the cop refute it real time, instead of having to wait the mandatory 24+hrs for the cop to fabricate the best story he can. His story was shit. Since he wasn't wearing a body cam and the dash cam probably had a poor view of Phil it's just going to be the killers word vs hers, considering his total panic, I doubt we can believe a word he says that's uncorroborated by video.
What we got was to see her lay out what happened from her perspective. Nothing what she said is collaborated by video either. The whole thing is the killers word vs the victims girlfriends word and neither of what they say has more credibility then the other.
And this is how murderers (manslaughter) go free. Cop spends 24-48 hours coming up with the best story he can, coordinates with other witnesses, then we get some BS story from police and contrast that with the witness who without a lawyer is questioned immediately.
Yes I agree but its wrong to automatically assume the story from the police is BS.
The only sensible way to solve this problem is to make body cams and dash came transmit to a third party set of servers for independent review. No one in BLM is advocating for this so nothing will change.
Should probably not let the police fabricate stories 24+ hours later either. Which is a big part of the problem. That's so much time to plot out possible defenses. Would also have to hold them responsible for when the body cams "fall off" and that they don't illegally obtain evidence, and when they do, be held accountable.
Should also be nailing officers for giving false reports (almost never happens no matter the evidence). Should also be holding them accountable when they don't do their job right and it ends in someone getting killed, even if in the final moment their action becomes legal.
This is the Zimmerman situation, except these are trained professionals, they can't make a dozen mistakes they shouldn't make, putting themselves in a life or death situation, and then use that as an excuse to kill.
Also everyone in BLM is advocating for body cams and independent review, even though that's far from enough. Cops and their blind supporters are the only reason we don't already have them (with some blame for politicians as well).
This is what I'm talking about when I say "waiting for them to show up".
You can't blame politicians when they're the only one that can actually change something. Witness testimony is notoriously terrible from any point and would be biased in the direction of the person who is testifying about it which is where we get the hands up don't shoot situation. The rest of that is independent review which really wouldn't be that hard to put on a banner or made into a chant.
People are too lazy or stupid to do research and you want to blame protesters for not making better signs. I honestly can't believe the obliviousness that takes to say with a straight face.
On July 10 2016 07:32 Sermokala wrote: The people who are too lazy and stupid to do research arn't trying to change anything. The people in the streets with the signs and chants are.
Yeah, that they aren't trying to change anything is a deficiency in their character, not a deficiency in the protesters efforts.
On July 10 2016 07:32 Sermokala wrote: The people who are too lazy and stupid to do research arn't trying to change anything. The people in the streets with the signs and chants are.
Yeah, that they aren't trying to change anything is a deficiency in their character, not a deficiency in the protesters efforts.
This is probably leaking more into the crux of american politics but I disagree with that.
On July 10 2016 07:32 Sermokala wrote: The people who are too lazy and stupid to do research arn't trying to change anything. The people in the streets with the signs and chants are.
Yeah, that they aren't trying to change anything is a deficiency in their character, not a deficiency in the protesters efforts.
This is probably leaking more into the crux of american politics but I disagree with that.
Fair enough, I'll defer to my non-black brothers for a while, should they so choose to take up the challenge.
EPT![[image loading]](http://puu.sh/pUHFG/0048e60fd1.png)
![[image loading]](http://puu.sh/pW8H5/34660bdc96.png)
