Lets not go crazy. As a bald out of shape guy with anger management issues and no meaningful skills or training, I feel like it might be a good fallback career.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Texas cop fatally shoots 15-year-old boy outside party
- Thread starter Beefy
- Start date
Lets not go crazy. As a bald out of shape guy with anger management issues and no meaningful skills or training, I feel like it might be a good fallback career.
Straight Edge
Member
The culture molds recruits into scumbags and is supported from within. This is what they want.
The vehicle was backing towards them, but the shots went through the driver side window? Does not compute. The officer shooting would not be in danger if this is the case.
Officer needs to go to jail. Hard to say if this was motivated by racism, since we don't know if the officer even knew who he was shooting. It doesn't matter though; if the shots came through the driver side window like the driver claimed it's gonna be a tough sell for the officer's defense. Maybe they can suppress the body cams, but not the forensics of where that bullet came from.
Officer needs to go to jail. Hard to say if this was motivated by racism, since we don't know if the officer even knew who he was shooting. It doesn't matter though; if the shots came through the driver side window like the driver claimed it's gonna be a tough sell for the officer's defense. Maybe they can suppress the body cams, but not the forensics of where that bullet came from.
HawksWinStanley
Member
Well you pretty much answered your own question.
The kind of people that are actually willing to take these jobs in law enforcement are (for the most part) not the kind of people you want taking jobs in law enforcement.
But what can you do? From what I understand police forces are already understaffed and underfunded. You're not going to draw in many ideal candidates volunteering for a dangerous job with mediocre pay. So you're stuck with a bunch of these frustrated nutjobs that are likely rocking a GED as their highest level of education, then you hand them a gun and essentially a license to kill after 3 months of training.
And if the stories you hear are true then even the good cops are powerless because when something shady happens and they actually speak out against their colleagues then they have threats against them and their families to look forward to. If I'm being completely honest I'd keep my trap shut if I saw something like that because my family > everyone else.
The whole thing needs to get set ablaze and rebuilt from the bottom up but that's not going to happen. Especially not with out current "leaders".
So if there is insufficient evidence to chalk this up to racial prejudice, what is the point of blaming racial prejudice for this incident? There being a slim, possibly unverifiable possibility of this being a case of racial prejudice doesn't mean we should treat it like an absolute certainty like many are doing. If your aim is to use this as a springboard for a broad dialogue on racial profiling by police, that's great, but it's not worth trying to tie that discussion irreparably to this incident without more sufficient evidence. Doing so undermines the legitimacy of actual cases of clear racial prejudice and further damages relationships with law enforcement.
hell, you'd be made sergeant day one with that shining resume
Stereotypes are funny... but only when they're right. So no funny to be had here. : /
Spring-Loaded
Member
The exact opposite of everything you say is relevant too. What is the point of championing the possibility this has nothing to do with race if there's no proof it's all pure coincidence? Just because the officer wasn't wearing a klan hood doesn't mean give them, their police department or American law enforcement in general the benefit of the doubt, right? What good comes from ignoring and staying silent about police forces in the U.S. allowing disproportionate systemic subjugation of minorities on a functional level just because there's no concrete evidence this one individual shot at these kids because they were black? Why champion the possibility this one cop isn't racist deep down when "being racist at heart" has little to do with the systemic, functional racism of American police?
And police killing unarmed people and showing little to no effort of making changes is what damaged relationships with law enforcement; those killings and the lack of concern from the blue line are what undermines the legitimacy of all life, not just those of minorities (since unarmed people of all creeds, ages and races get executed by police each year). People bringing up race are acknowledging reality, the full context this incident occurred in. If it sounds to you like they're asserting the police shooting occurred because these children were black, rather than engage in the frivolous activity of defending the off-chance this had nothing to do with race, remember that these forum goers are not on a jury, are not judges or prosecutors, and instead consider why they come to that conclusion instead. Perhaps direct your efforts toward convincing police (an institution with specific practices and incentives) that they need to change, rather than direct all your effort toward reminding people (individuals who are voicing personal concerns of the aforementioned institution) who are sickened by these killings by police that they can't prove the existence of racism in an individual's mind.
Once you can prove people have no reason to expect racism and unnecessary violence from police, then you can chastise people for "making it about race" without being ridiculously myopic.It's a waste of everyone's time to criticize the oppressed without first providing an established record of critique of the oppression.
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
Add "being outside while black" to the list, I guess.
Have racists started the "He was no angel!" shit yet?
Have racists started the "He was no angel!" shit yet?
Update: https://twitter.com/BLBlackburn/status/859155838346330112
Bradley Blackburn‏ @BLBlackburn (reporter for local ABC station)
Stunning about face from Balch Springs Police Chief, no longer says car was moving aggressively. Moving away from officer when he shot.
Bradley Blackburn‏ @BLBlackburn (reporter for local ABC station)
Stunning about face from Balch Springs Police Chief, no longer says car was moving aggressively. Moving away from officer when he shot.
WeAreStarStuff
Member
Welp.
That bodycam must have revealed a lot.
Also to the long list of things we've said before yall.
Cops have and will lie in these situations.
This sounds like an easy fix, but not really. The background and mental health check is thorough. Problem is that a lot of people know how to bullshit.
Exactly. It's not even so much the recruiting process. This is a culture that been fostered for year.
Violence Jack
Member
I think the last cop who fired into a car moving away from him was brought up on manslaughter charges. Hopefully, the same thing happens here and he spends the rest of his life behind bars.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
dang, that footage must've been open and shut if they backpedaled that fast with no spin.
Apocryphon
Member
I thought I'd read somewhere that the cop is ex military and used a rifle as opposed to a sidearm but I can't find it now.
:-(
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
Claim the car was moving aggressively and there being no charges was the first sing it was a bullshit claim.
Ziltoidia 9
Member
I honestly though officers can't shoot at moving cars. And if this one was moving away from the officer...then...
Dude, it's not that there's not any proof, there's so far no evidence! A history of dysfunctional police is not a good reason to assume all actions of police are racially motivated. You talk about the system being broken and you're right, it is, but that's not a good reason to assume all cops are dysfunctional for the exact same reason. That's incredibly inefficient and can be counterproductive. While cops may benefit from additional training to better overcome their racial prejudices, that may have nothing to do with this case! In this instance, it may be that the officer needed better firearm training. You can't assume every problem has race at the heart of it because the solutions you draw up could very well be targeting the wrong deficiency. You're missing the forest for the trees here and completely misconstruing what I'm saying. Racism is not a one-size-fits-all scapegoat for all of society's ills, and it's mind boggling that you seem to be arguing that it should be. And then you have the gall to call me myopic? Systemic problems need to be addressed on a systems wide scale but actual individual incidents must be approached on a case by case basis. If there's no obvious racial component here, the officer does not need to be raked over the coals for being a presumed racist, he needs to be raked over the coals for being an incompetent, trigger happy idiot.
Holy shit, they used a rifle?
Forerunner
Member
You can shoot at a vehicle. However it has to pose a threat, like it's trying to run you or someone else over.
What does assuming this cop is a racist do? How does it contribute to the problem when the police don't admit there is a problem in the first place? You admit there is a race problem with the police yet you keep harping on the importance of not mislabeling officers as racists. Why is that so important to you? Also obvious racial components are rarely found. Unless you can get the officer on tape admitting it. It seems like you are saying, if a black teen or man dies at the hand of an officer never assume it is racially motivated unless there is proof. There is a systematic problem though that needs to be addressed but never assume it happens unless proven which would be rare? No offense but I really don't care if this man gets labeled as a racist by some people on the internet. He'll live, the man he killed won't.
I remember some places actually don't let you, because it doesn't stop the car, and can cause other injuries (and can let police make shit up).
I tried looking into where that was the case, I think Chicago, anyway came across this:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...police-shooting-video-met-20150618-story.html
2013 police officer shoots at car with teens, injures but not kills. They stole the car. Guy gets put on a desk job and they pay out 360K to the families.
This may be one of those rare times the cop actually has a consequence, judging by how quickly the tone changed from the police.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
Eric Garner's death was ruled a homicide...
Forerunner
Member
When it comes down to it; as long as the officer can explain in a court of law what he did was a reasonable action then hell get off. A vehicle can cause serious bodily harm or dead. So the officer is allowed to match that, which is deadly force. Personally, I dont agree with his decisions especially since it was with a rifle.
I mean I always want to be hopeful, and this could be one of the rare times a cop gets charged.
They went back on their story quick and if that body cam shows he shot a car that was moving away. He should get whatever unholy hell comes at him.
But who knows. I hope the family at least sues.
That's what I was thinking about, I knew there was a recent case that just because it's a homicide doesn't mean anything ill happen to the officer. Garner's killer, who smiled and waved at the camera after choking the man to his death, walked.
Vincent Alexander
Member
I really shouldn't be the interviewer, because I would ask what they think of black lives matter. I have a feeling the response would tell me all I need to know.
Thank God. We might get some justice this time.
It's not a reasonable action. That's why they tell them not to do it in some places.
If you kill a driver of a moving vehicle, his foot doesn't switch to the brakes, it drops fully on the accelerator. So now you're responsible for a death AND a vehicle that can really 'cause some serious bodily harm or dead'
Mr. Giggles
Member
awful, the fuck is wrong with the states....you guys go nuts buying all this military shit for the police but ya'll cant pay for better trained cops?
Vincent Alexander
Member
I agree, but what Forefunner is saying is that a piece of shite cop might argue that deadly force (a car) can be responded to by deadly force (gunshot).
Forerunner
Member
Given the facts so far I'd say it was an unreasonable action. For instance, I work in downtown San Diego. Legally we are allowed to. However, it's highly discouraged to do so since the chance of collateral damage is too high.
Pretty much.
I wouldn't bet on it. He'll prpbably at least be indicted, which is more than can be said for most cases of police killing people.
I'd rather not dishonor the child killed by trying to co-opt his death for my own personal crusades. I already pointed out how mislabeling can be harmful. It can divert attention from the pertinent problems with training and screening. It can be used by opposition groups to discredit actual instances of racism. People keep bringing up a lack of proof when that's not even what I'm asking for. I'm asking for any kind of evidence, circumstantial or otherwise. A gut feeling that this cop was racist is not enough to start assuming that that was the cause of this accident. Maybe the lesson here shouldn't be "be less quick to shoot at black kids" and instead be "don't shoot at fleeing vehicles, you fucking idiots," because one could have potentially been far, FAR more beneficial to the public than the other in this specific instance. Obviously racial prejudice needs to be addressed as well but that problem shouldn't blind people from other very real, very dangerous problems with the police.
old manatee
Banned
Shooting into a car full of teenagers with a rifle wtf
Apocryphon
Member
The militarization of the police is a huge issue yes. I mean, they gave surplus grenade launchers and fucking bayonets to Michigan police departments. I can almost accept the vehicles, but fucking bayonets?
For what?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt6kKhlX8vU
I mean, at least there's dash cameras and there has to be a reason to think the car was to be headed towards you right?
Stop or I'll shoot isn't legal unless there is a reason to think they're going to kill or seriously harm someone else.
There must have been footage for this case to prove that the car was moving away, thankfully.
Really? All of your posts in this thread have been just that.
Is this really the appropriate thread to vent your frustrations about "everything being about race?"
A fucking kid was killed.
Police in the US have killed 330 people so far this year...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-boy-in-dallas-suburb/?utm_term=.f4561c7c0ce0
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-boy-in-dallas-suburb/?utm_term=.f4561c7c0ce0
What the hell are you talking about. I'm not venting anything about "everything being about race." I never even used those words. I never complained everyone makes everything about race. Are you venting here about those people and taking it out on me?
Me saying, hey, maybe we shouldn't jump to conclusions about this being about race when the evidence points to something else has nothing to do with trying to downplay problems with racial profiling and everything to do with attributing this accident to what actually caused it to happen. Police violence and brutality is an issue that's pertinent to problems with racism but not exclusive to them!
it has nothing to do with the amount/quality of training.
This must've been the additional information '77 Shortbox was waiting for.