|
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-PsnQUvThWKaU1wVkRSWGlyY3c/edit
The closing documents of the case/investigation, if anyone is interested.
On February 17 2013 01:21 shivver wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2013 00:57 Xpace wrote:On February 17 2013 00:51 shivver wrote:
That is what you call an execution execution [ˌɛksɪˈkjuːʃən] n 1. the act or process of executing 2. (Law) the carrying out or undergoing of a sentence of death 3. the style or manner in which something is accomplished or performed; technique as a pianist his execution is poor 4. (Law) a. the enforcement of the judgment of a court of law b. the writ ordering such enforcement mur·der (mûrdr) n. 1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice. 2. Slang Something that is very uncomfortable, difficult, or hazardous: The rush hour traffic is murder. 3. A flock of crows. v. mur·dered, mur·der·ing, mur·ders v.tr. 1. To kill (another human) unlawfully. 2. To kill brutally or inhumanly. 3. To put an end to; destroy: murdered their chances. 4. To spoil by ineptness; mutilate: a speech that murdered the English language. 5. Slang To defeat decisively; trounce. If we're going to be all morally and ethically correct like we're in the court of law on mount olympus in greece... then cite your sources because for all I know you dug this out of urbandictionary.com see what I did there?
No, actually, I don't see. You called it an execution. It was not an execution. I opened a new tab. Googled "Execution" and a dictionary definition box popped at the top. Did the same for "Murder". Copy and pasted. That's about it.
|
On February 17 2013 00:29 derpface wrote:
This is so fucking disgusting. But it happend in the USA so Im not surprised.
User was temp banned for this post.
Why is he temp banned? Is it wrong to state that you're not surprised that it happened in the USA? Do we see news like this often in Europe? No. He's simply stating what is fact.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
United States44241 Posts
One thing that troubles me about these incidents when it turned out the guy was no threat but the policeman decided he needed to take action to prevent a possible danger to himself is that that seems like a really shitty tradeoff. Clearly someone has taught police officers that if they feel there is a genuine danger to themselves then they can take whatever action they deem necessary to neutralise the threat. But when you look at it in terms of the possible negative outcome from getting it wrong, either a police officer getting killed by some criminal or an innocent member of the public getting killed by a police officer, the latter seems far worse to me. I'm not in favour of policemen dying, I think that's bad, but I also think it's a risk of their job, it's a risk they and their families get compensated for and it's an unfortunate aspect of public service. Whereas the latter, an agent of the state killing a member of the public who had done nothing wrong, is a far more serious issue. The mentality in which the police officer first defends himself against any perceived threat from a member of the public and marginalises the rights of the individual seems backwards and is indicative of a wider problem with police and their relationship with the public.
|
Wow this stuff with the LAPD....so when is something going to be done ? Does the goverment not care its inforcing organ is murdering their citizens ?
|
The OP contradicts the story it links to. The story says a gun was found, but the deceased fingerprints were not found on the gun.
|
On February 17 2013 01:39 KwarK wrote:
One thing that troubles me about these incidents when it turned out the guy was no threat but the policeman decided he needed to take action to prevent a possible danger to himself is that that seems like a really shitty tradeoff. Clearly someone has taught police officers that if they feel there is a genuine danger to themselves then they can take whatever action they deem necessary to neutralise the threat. But when you look at it in terms of the possible negative outcome from getting it wrong, either a police officer getting killed by some criminal or an innocent member of the public getting killed by a police officer, the latter seems far worse to me. I'm not in favour of policemen dying, I think that's bad, but I also think it's a risk of their job, it's a risk they and their families get compensated for and it's an unfortunate aspect of public service. Whereas the latter, an agent of the state killing a member of the public who had done nothing wrong, is a far more serious issue. The mentality in which the police officer first defends himself against any perceived threat from a member of the public and marginalises the rights of the individual seems backwards and is indicative of a wider problem with police and their relationship with the public.
I agree with this. I do not trust the LAPD at all, but if the deceased was pointing a gun at the police officer that does change things considerably.
|
On February 17 2013 01:35 Shival wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2013 00:29 derpface wrote:
This is so fucking disgusting. But it happend in the USA so Im not surprised.
User was temp banned for this post. Why is he temp banned? Is it wrong to state that you're not surprised that it happened in the USA? Do we see news like this often in Europe? No. He's simply stating what is fact. User was temp banned for this post.
Because only "Only in Russia" is legal here. Don't you know? There are some patriot mods around here.
The one releasing the video now, was clearly waiting for the right moment. After Chris Dorners drama around the LAPD. This doesn't really shine a good light on them now.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On February 17 2013 01:39 KwarK wrote:
One thing that troubles me about these incidents when it turned out the guy was no threat but the policeman decided he needed to take action to prevent a possible danger to himself is that that seems like a really shitty tradeoff. Clearly someone has taught police officers that if they feel there is a genuine danger to themselves then they can take whatever action they deem necessary to neutralise the threat. But when you look at it in terms of the possible negative outcome from getting it wrong, either a police officer getting killed by some criminal or an innocent member of the public getting killed by a police officer, the latter seems far worse to me. I'm not in favour of policemen dying, I think that's bad, but I also think it's a risk of their job, it's a risk they and their families get compensated for and it's an unfortunate aspect of public service. Whereas the latter, an agent of the state killing a member of the public who had done nothing wrong, is a far more serious issue. The mentality in which the police officer first defends himself against any perceived threat from a member of the public and marginalises the rights of the individual seems backwards and is indicative of a wider problem with police and their relationship with the public.
I usually avoid these threads but this is such a good choice of words. I completely agree with your view of this.
|
On February 17 2013 01:40 cilinder007 wrote:
Wow this stuff with the LAPD....so when is something going to be done ? Does the goverment not care its inforcing organ is murdering their citizens ?
The LAPD by name is not an organ of the federal government its the organ of the city government of Los Angeles. The enforcing organ of the government is called the FBI.
|
get compensated? don't know about cops in britain but they sure as hell aren't compensated enough for risking their lives in the netherlands brosan  the killshot was over the top but this shooting is more than justified in my opinion.
|
Even though I love the police, I'm still absolutely disgusted by this. There's no way to spin this so that you can call what the officer did "just."
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but if you're a civilian and you hit someone while they're on the ground isn't that a felony? Which would make this an ultra felony.
|
On February 17 2013 01:24 Verzweiflung wrote:
To give u guys an idea why we europeans can't wrap our head around this.
In my country after every shot is fired by a cop an investigation is launched by a DIFFERENT police station eg from another state to prevent bias.
I feel perfectly safe and i know of only 1 case of police brutally
There were ca. 80 shots fired from police officers in 2011 i think.
How can a country that is so proud on their 2nd amendment not demand change?
Some parts of the US have / had serious crime problems. The situation's been improving since the early 90's but until violence - in general - goes down to W. European levels don't be surprised to see violence from cops at elevated levels too.
Also keep in mind the US is a big place - just because things happen frequently in some parts doesn't make it the case throughout the whole country.
|
On February 17 2013 01:39 KwarK wrote:
One thing that troubles me about these incidents when it turned out the guy was no threat but the policeman decided he needed to take action to prevent a possible danger to himself is that that seems like a really shitty tradeoff. Clearly someone has taught police officers that if they feel there is a genuine danger to themselves then they can take whatever action they deem necessary to neutralise the threat. But when you look at it in terms of the possible negative outcome from getting it wrong, either a police officer getting killed by some criminal or an innocent member of the public getting killed by a police officer, the latter seems far worse to me. I'm not in favour of policemen dying, I think that's bad, but I also think it's a risk of their job, it's a risk they and their families get compensated for and it's an unfortunate aspect of public service. Whereas the latter, an agent of the state killing a member of the public who had done nothing wrong, is a far more serious issue. The mentality in which the police officer first defends himself against any perceived threat from a member of the public and marginalises the rights of the individual seems backwards and is indicative of a wider problem with police and their relationship with the public.
As regards policemen dying on duty in opposition to policemen misjudging and killing innocents, I most definitely agree. But let's be honest here, the most primal instinct hardwired into any creature on this Earth is the one to survive. And should you legitimately feel the threat, then you will do whatever it takes to survive. People altruistic enough to not only say that they would die for others, but actually follow through with it, are unsurprisingly rare.
But all of this is assuming the best, i.e. that policemen actually deem that guy a threat. Let's not kid ourselves, there's a lot of deranged, possibly traumatized lunatics obsessed with power in law enforcement. Position of power tends to draw this kind of people in, how surprising right? I'm not saying most cops are like that. But when you look at how many of these incidents occur, then look at how little attention they get in the mainstream media and the way in which the stories are portrayed and described, if you put two and two together you will find that a lot more of these are successfully covered up, which then leads you to make the assumption that there's a lot of sick fucks in the police force. Sadly there will never be any hard statistics from within the system that would confirm any of this, since it would delegitimize the whole shebang. But you really *have* to see that it's the case.
|
United States44241 Posts
On February 17 2013 01:50 fartosis77 wrote:get compensated? don't know about cops in britain but they sure as hell aren't compensated enough for risking their lives in the netherlands brosan the killshot was over the top but this shooting is more than justified in my opinion.
Is being a police officer a particularly dangerous job in the Netherlands? Few die in the line of duty over here.
|
On February 17 2013 00:39 Bleak wrote:
Well as much as people like to bash USA, I think policemen everywhere are pretty much the same. Most of them can be quite cruel. When you give a group of people a gun and permission to use force, you can't expect every one of them to stop and think the consequences of their actions before using that force.
Thankfully people arent like you everywhere in the world. The corruption is barely exciting in my home country, the cops here are regular peoplel. Its almost the other way around actually which makes it funny. Countries like america people fear the cops and harassment.
In denmark people here know their rights, and alot of them, uses it to verbal abuse the cops and be 'cheeky' to the point where you wanna punch them. I hate the fake gangsta NWA mentality, of fuck the police.
|
On February 17 2013 01:39 KwarK wrote:
One thing that troubles me about these incidents when it turned out the guy was no threat but the policeman decided he needed to take action to prevent a possible danger to himself is that that seems like a really shitty tradeoff. Clearly someone has taught police officers that if they feel there is a genuine danger to themselves then they can take whatever action they deem necessary to neutralise the threat. But when you look at it in terms of the possible negative outcome from getting it wrong, either a police officer getting killed by some criminal or an innocent member of the public getting killed by a police officer, the latter seems far worse to me. I'm not in favour of policemen dying, I think that's bad, but I also think it's a risk of their job, it's a risk they and their families get compensated for and it's an unfortunate aspect of public service. Whereas the latter, an agent of the state killing a member of the public who had done nothing wrong, is a far more serious issue. The mentality in which the police officer first defends himself against any perceived threat from a member of the public and marginalises the rights of the individual seems backwards and is indicative of a wider problem with police and their relationship with the public.
I had an earlier reply to you regarding judgment calls, but its a good thing you detailed out your opinion so that we can argue on specific terms.
But before that, let me make it clear that I am against use of lethal force against petty crimes and pedestrian incidents, specifically this one.
But, unlike the scenario that you picture this out to be, the law enforcement is not there to see what is the best situation that could arise from a given scenario. Crime, by definition, even "ongoing" or "perceived danger" ones, operate on time, and judgment call must be made. A police officer does not think, "Oh is it better that I let him get away so no one gets hurt". They are trained to respond to "perceived" danger. Some or most fail at this judgment, and this is another thread altogether. But it is wrong to think of the situation as the welfare of the citizen vs. the cop. Crime is crime no matter what to a cop, and he has constitutional rights to implement in the function of his duty. (But as I say, there are, as in this case obviously, wrong implementation of this.)
EDIT: And it is definitely wrong to think that dying or being in harms way is part of the police officers job. A police officer is there to ensure peace and order according to the law. Getting shot is a likely if unwanted result, but it should never be normalized. A police officer does not deserve to get such in the same manner that any law abiding citizen also doesnt.
|
On February 17 2013 01:33 Xpace wrote:https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-PsnQUvThWKaU1wVkRSWGlyY3c/editThe closing documents of the case/investigation, if anyone is interested. Show nested quote +On February 17 2013 01:21 shivver wrote:On February 17 2013 00:57 Xpace wrote:On February 17 2013 00:51 shivver wrote:
That is what you call an execution execution [ˌɛksɪˈkjuːʃən] n 1. the act or process of executing 2. (Law) the carrying out or undergoing of a sentence of death 3. the style or manner in which something is accomplished or performed; technique as a pianist his execution is poor 4. (Law) a. the enforcement of the judgment of a court of law b. the writ ordering such enforcement mur·der (mûrdr) n. 1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice. 2. Slang Something that is very uncomfortable, difficult, or hazardous: The rush hour traffic is murder. 3. A flock of crows. v. mur·dered, mur·der·ing, mur·ders v.tr. 1. To kill (another human) unlawfully. 2. To kill brutally or inhumanly. 3. To put an end to; destroy: murdered their chances. 4. To spoil by ineptness; mutilate: a speech that murdered the English language. 5. Slang To defeat decisively; trounce. If we're going to be all morally and ethically correct like we're in the court of law on mount olympus in greece... then cite your sources because for all I know you dug this out of urbandictionary.com see what I did there? No, actually, I don't see. You called it an execution. It was not an execution. I opened a new tab. Googled "Execution" and a dictionary definition box popped at the top. Did the same for "Murder". Copy and pasted. That's about it.
It's called sarcasm, I guess you're a forever aloner though and can't go along with it.
I'll help you out though, when you shoot him running away.. no that's not an execution
when he's down, the chase is over.. and then you walk up, and fire "finishing" shots, that is basically you executing the guy.
I'll assume you're from another country and english is your second language. Sorry if I missed a comma somewhere too.
User was warned for this post
|
On February 17 2013 01:35 Shival wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2013 00:29 derpface wrote:
This is so fucking disgusting. But it happend in the USA so Im not surprised.
User was temp banned for this post. Why is he temp banned? Is it wrong to state that you're not surprised that it happened in the USA? Do we see news like this often in Europe? No. He's simply stating what is fact. User was temp banned for this post.
Not surprised , still shocked at the barbarism at the other side of the Ocean though.
|
I find it incredibly ironic that you link to a website call reason.com and then everyone proceeds to use preconceived notions and a video of abysmal quality to reinforce their personal beliefs about the LAPD.
You can see almost nothing in this video except that the cop shoots. You can't really corroborate or deny the cops claim that he pulls a gun. You see that the cop shoots him in the back of course, and that the cop fires when he's down.
Here's the problem though, once you pull a gun on a cop in this country he has the right to fire whether you are running away or not. That's fair in my opinion. A gun is a lethal weapon with only one purpose (ie he probably wasn't going to use it to light his cigarette, or something equally mundane), and if you are dumb enough to pull it on someone else with a gun, and then cry when they use their gun on you, you are beyond stupid and you win the Darwin award.
I don't know if any of you have been to California, but the gangs there are absolutely brutal. They target cops all the time. They don't care about going to prison at all, it's a mark of pride. Until you have seen what the gangs here do to cops and the general public, I think it would behoove you not to compare LA to anything that exists in the Netherlands.
By the way, there was a gun found at the scene. Is it possible that it was planted? Sure.
Is it rational for you people to jump to all of these conclusions about a situation you know absolutely nothing about? No.
|
On February 17 2013 01:54 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2013 01:50 fartosis77 wrote:get compensated? don't know about cops in britain but they sure as hell aren't compensated enough for risking their lives in the netherlands brosan the killshot was over the top but this shooting is more than justified in my opinion. Is being a police officer a particularly dangerous job in the Netherlands? Few die in the line of duty over here.
Britain is a really bad comparison, since a british cop would not of been armed.
According to wikipedia 16 british cops have died in the last 10 years (on duty), or about 1.6 per year. The USA is at around 156 per year. With the US having around 5 times the population, cops are around 20 times more likely to die in the USA than in the UK. I do not think you can expected American police to risk their lives in the way ours do because American police are much more likely to die when they do so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
