• 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.

Video: Chicago Cops Shoot Teen and Call Him a ‘B**** A** Motherf*****’

Status
Not open for further replies.

malfcn

Member
Cop was reckless when firing at the car. He could have hit the cops that were crashed into by suspect.

He could have hit the driver and killed many people. His actions were ridiculously stupid any way you look at it.

Agreed. Hitting the suspect could have also had catastrophic consequences.
 
Did no one stop to ask LQX what he meant before he got banned? The reason high speed chases are discouraged is because police officers will tell you - they don't have a ton of control afterwards, due to the adrenaline.

Why do officers in other countries not suffer from this shooting-spree inducing adrenaline rush?

Cop was reckless when firing at the car. He could have hit the cops that were crashed into by suspect.

He could have hit the driver and killed many people. His actions were ridiculously stupid any way you look at it.
 

Reeks

Member
Did no one stop to ask LQX what he meant before he got banned? The reason high speed chases are discouraged is because police officers will tell you - they don't have a ton of control afterwards, due to the adrenaline.

Since this is known, what are the procedures / training programs in place to mitigate possible effects given that high speed car chases are bound to happen? Do other murderers get special treatment due to adrenaline? No. At the very least, a crime of passion that leads to a murder is manslaughter, plain and simple.
 

HariKari

Member
Since this is known, what are the procedures / training programs in place to mitigate possible effects given that high speed car chases are bound to happen? Do other murderers get special treatment due to adrenaline? No. At the very least, a crime of passion that leads to a murder is manslaughter, plain and simple.

I'm not apologizing for shitty policing at all. Most departments have policies that discourage pursuits because these sorts of heavy-handed outcomes are commonplace. That's the mitigation - don't put a cop in a situation where they have to make a snap judgment. That's why police are trained to take cover in instances where they can, because they need to slow down the situation in order to be able to make a good decision. Cops in groups also tend to 'speed up' the decisions being made because everyone isn't on the same page, and there's no way to double check the information being given by your fellow officers in the heat of the moment.

But things are changing. Almost all U.S. law enforcement agencies have adopted a restrictive pursuit policy, according to the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP). Much to the dismay of TV executives, most cops will no longer conduct long chases that start when the officer tries to pull a motorist over for a broken taillight (though cops still chase suspected felons and other serious bad guys.) Before restrictive-pursuit policies, often the worst thing that officers found at the end of a chase was a suspended license, an ashtray full of seeds and stems, or empty beer cans in the pickup bed. Now, many law enforcement agencies have decided that it's not worth the danger when such chases could cause the death of the suspect, an officer, or an innocent.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a9096/why-high-speed-police-chases-are-going-away-15532838/

Southern California-based Dr. Ron Martinelli, a use-of-force and training expert, echoes Schiavelli's concerns yet notes that law enforcement agencies all too often go to the other extreme.

"With the challenges we have in law enforcement today with funding, one of the first things that goes out the door is training," Martinelli says. "It should be exactly the opposite: When you don't have very much money to spend, you need to turn that money into training rather than technological gizmos because the training is going to reinforce the best practices with the officers. Officers will act in the manner in which they are trained to act. If they haven't been trained, they are going to go into hypervigilance. They are going to be confused, they are going to panic, freeze, or use force excessively, which means they've had an emotional response."

Training can prepare officers for the physical aspects of a chase, but it can't simulate the emotional and mental response to a chase. Officers get a rush of adrenaline during a high-speed pursuit; its effects can lead them to make dangerous decisions.

From a magazine for law enforcement.

Malcom Gladwell's talk on the shooting of Amadou Diallo is a good watch/listen.
 

Reeks

Member
I'm not apologizing for shitty policing at all. Most departments have policies that discourage pursuits because these sorts of heavy-handed outcomes are commonplace. That's the mitigation - don't put a cop in a situation where they have to make a snap judgment. That's why police are trained to take cover in instances where they can, because they need to slow down the situation in order to be able to make a good decision. Cops in groups also tend to 'speed up' the decisions being made because everyone isn't on the same page, and there's no way to double check the information being given by your fellow officers in the heat of the moment.

If the policy is against a high speed chase, then don't have a high speed chase. That's a go, no go policy... this does not address training for mitigation of circumstances once a pursuit is underway. Don't victim blame solely because there is prior knowledge of a propensity for "heavy-handed outcomes" (which I'm gathering is a poor euphemism for murder). If any profession should be equipped to make snap judgments, it should be the police.

Edit: The fact that there are policies of this kind means that the police are aware of this, which begs the argument that they should be more accountable, not less. And given that, you're saying that the onus is on a teenage boy?
 

molnizzle

Member
I have to disagree. This is exactly what repeated training does, otherwise the military wouldn't be effective at all.

Having served in the infantry for nearly 6 years (with 2 of them on the "front lines" of Afghanistan) I can assure that's exactly how training works. You repeatedly drill so that when the time comes you don't need to think, you just act. But you're still scared. Your heart still races, your legs still shake against your will. You're just able to perform because you have the muscle memory.

So I still posit that the officer who initially opened fire is solely responsible. He's the one who needs to be prosecuted.
 
I swear, it's like these cops are just "Well, the prisons are full, so let's just kill him instead and save us the trouble." sometimes...
 

Lucini

Banned
But what about really almost running over a cop with your car?
i'm not trying to defend anything, just really wondering what that "justifies"

Active, direct and imminent intent to end the life of an officer or a citizen. Not the thought that a person might threaten, not the idea that a person might be a danger to others for some heretofore unseen reason...direct, imminent intent to end life or cause significant harm.
 

Brhoom

Banned
Why can't cops have guns that only disables a person?

A gun that only sends a shock that halts a criminal, or heck even a tranqulizer gun ( this could be seen as being treated like animals) but it's better than being dead.

And I don't know the rules there, but when should a cop use his gun?
 

molnizzle

Member
And I don't know the rules there, but when should a cop use his gun?

.

Active, direct and imminent intent to end the life of an officer or a citizen. Not the thought that a person might threaten, not the idea that a person might be a danger to others for some heretofore unseen reason...direct, imminent intent to end life or cause significant harm.
 

HariKari

Member
Edit: The fact that there are policies of this kind means that the police are aware of this, which begs the argument that they should be more accountable, not less. And given that, you're saying that the onus is on a teenage boy?

Where the fuck did I say that? "This is what happens when you get in a police pursuit" is not the same as "dumbass shouldn't be stealing cars." I'm merely pointing out exactly why pursuits in general are not allowed - they're dangerous. If you watch the video, they shoot at a moving vehicle. Also not allowed. The one officer even shoots one handed at point, and they also shoot at a moving vehicle without a clean backdrop. They could have easily killed the officer(s) in the responding cruiser that got hit by the fleeing car. Then, of course, the bodycam of the officer that shoots him in the back doesn't provide footage. Nothing about this is acceptable and I never said otherwise.
 

HariKari

Member
Shooting at moving car? What kinda procedure is that?

The one officer jumps out of his vehicle and starts firing one handed at the vehicle for no reason, even sweeping another officer with the muzzle of his weapon at one point. Fucking cowboy. Believe that officer is also the one at the end lamenting being stuck to a desk for 30 days.
 
He's young, but his death is sort of the consequences of being in a high speed chase with police officers.

WOAT First post

So how do you explain murderers being taken in alive a La Dylan Roof? Shouldn't he have been shot to death as well?
 
isn't the main point is that he was unarmed and not trying to harm anyone? thats the biggest bs part. Yeah he shouldn't be driving fast and putting peoples lives in danger for sure but its still completely terrible and stupid that he is dead
 

Aselith

Member
Why can't cops have guns that only disables a person?

A gun that only sends a shock that halts a criminal, or heck even a tranqulizer gun ( this could be seen as being treated like animals) but it's better than being dead.

And I don't know the rules there, but when should a cop use his gun?

Well, it's really tough to pull off the headshots so that the tranquilizer takes effect immediately.
 

commedieu

Banned
Fist off, don't compare me to Ben Carson.

Second, I'm not saying what the police did was right at all. Their actions should have never tooken place. And yeah, if it was a white male this would have been a completely different situation. The police is clearly in the wrong here. But what I'm saying we need to look at what the fuck if going on and she shit isn't fair.

Until there is police reform stupid shit like stealing cars only puts into more interactions with the police. C'mon now man, I know you see shit all the time on social media like "Free my man _____" when the person in jail obviously did some stupid and illegal shit. We should mad at police brutality and we rightfully should. The whole system is fucked. And we should get mad when police shoot unarmed black men for no fucking reason. But we shouldn't get mad when people do stupid shit. When Action A (in this case stealing a car) always leads to either Resolution B (Get Away), C (Confrontation with police) why take the risk of performing Action A when Resolution C always leads to Resolution D (Death by police).

We see that police is getting away with this shit so we gotta do things differently even if that means not interacting with the police at all. His death shouldn't have happened at the hands of these police and neither should have many others. I'm not blaming the victim for running or even ramming into the police car cause he problem scared out of his fucking mind and I'm not blaming his death for not complying with the police, which shouldn't ever be a reason for death. I'm saying he shouldn't stolen a car in the first place when he knows that black men are target to the police right now. He knows there will be no justice until something changes and shit like this isn't helping the cause.

Complying with police has been getting people executed as well. This proves that behavior of the citizen is not the trigger for execution, but it is the officers piss poor training. Folks can make better decisions, yes, but those better decisions often do not matter in the United States, with its current state of remedial police training. Wagging your finger in the face of the dead to say "shoulda known better," or "we need to act right," reduces the focus on those who decided to escalate this and take a life. This includes shooting wildly at a moving vehicle. There are so many things that point to reckless behavior of the police, but its just flat out glossed over to focus on the criminal. As if this person made the police act this way.


Of course he shouldn't have stolen a car, it's against the law. No one should break a law. To prevent people from doing so, there are penalties for breaking them. Which require a court of law to dictate the penalty/punishment. His breaking a law has little to do with his death. I'd say unless aiming a gun at police, but no, I've seen white people do this and be arrested.

I get mad when stupid shit gets people killed, because a person is killed for doing something, that if they were anyone else, or in another nation, wouldn't be. Its upsetting to know how far behind our police are in dealing with crime. Its upsetting to know my taxes are going to the pay-off for the family. Justice for all doesn't just mean the educated, or the people who have never made mistakes. I'm sure they knew better, yet, still made the decision to do this. There is something to be said about that. And I doubt its just that they decided to die that day for nothing, but who knows.

There is no cause to help. Americans have decided this is perfectly acceptable. People have nothing to lose, as the nation has reinforced that attitude. BLM was met with efforts to make police a protected class, and all lives matter. Preventing neighborhoods going to shit and breeding criminals is a solution, but there are private prisons that benefit on a constant flow of criminals. The whole cause thing is a myth, until other folks start getting executed, there isn't going to be reform. This guy certainly didn't make or break the cause, as anyone in front of an officer is guilty of getting into trouble to begin with.

Everyone knows there is no justice, even when you comply and you're demanding people change their behavior. Thats a bit unrealistic.
 
Idiots. What good can come from shooting at a moving car?

Miss: Possibly hit innocent bystanders.

Hit: Driver loses control, and possibly hits innocent bystanders.
 

GK86

Homeland Security Fail
I bet if he wasn't shot to death, he would have had the shit beat out of him. Especially with all those assholes thinking he shot at them.

RIP to Paul. Another victim to the piece of shit gang we call the police.
 

bebop242

Member
He's young, but his death is sort of the consequences of being in a high speed chase with police officers.

I had a coworker pretty much tell me this exact same thing. The whole "don't do anything bad and show respect to the cops" if you want to live.

Living in Iowa at a job with mostly gun loving right wingers, I've learned to just let them talk and walk away.
 
Why can't cops have guns that only disables a person?

A gun that only sends a shock that halts a criminal, or heck even a tranqulizer gun ( this could be seen as being treated like animals) but it's better than being dead.

And I don't know the rules there, but when should a cop use his gun?

The weapons you describe only exist in video games and movies.

A thick jacket can make a taser worthless. There are also incidents where people got hit by a taser but managed to shrug it off because of adrenaline, alcohol or drugs.

Tranquilizer darts are problematic because they do not have immediate effect, sometimes needing 5+ minutes to kick in, they can also cause allergies (people have died because they were given the wrong anesthetic) and the wrong dosage will either have no effect or will kill.
 

GK86

Homeland Security Fail
Link.

Paul O’Neal, the black teen fatally shot last month by Chicago police in a controversial incident captured in part on video, suffered a single gunshot wound to the right side of his back, the Cook County medical examiner’s office determined in an autopsy made public Wednesday.

Toxicological testing found no drugs in O’Neal’s system, according to the autopsy report.

The medical examiner’s report repeated claims that an officer believed O’Neal may have fired shots during a chase.

While the body camera of the officer who fired at O'Neal in the yard was not recording as he fired the shots, it was turned on after the shooting, and it has yet to be explained how that happened. The cameras nonetheless captured potentially damning comments by at least one of the officers after the shooting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom