Should Cops Be Allowed to Kill for Throwing Stones?

[blacken700]

If that's the case then this qualifies, because that's what the clip shows. 

I agree

[Dos Equis]

I agree

 

 

[blacken700]

 

[240 is Back]

In the name of full disclosure, the man had been recently released from jail for threatening cops with a gun.

doesn't matter if it's adolf hiter, or mister freakin rogers.

he's raising a rock, he can be wasted
he's running away unarmed, he cannot be wasted.

Simple as that.  The minute we start applying new standard for shooting people on their past?   lol yikes...

[Archer77]

doesn't matter if it's adolf hiter, or mister freakin rogers.

he's raising a rock, he can be wasted
he's running away unarmed, he cannot be wasted.

Simple as that.  The minute we start applying new standard for shooting people on their past?   lol yikes...

Oh boy. His history and whether the police were aware of it matters.  You used Zimmermans past against him.   

[240 is Back]

I watched the clip.  They shot him within about a second or two after he threw rocks.  I don't care if he turned to run, because he was already resisting arrest, had assaulted the cops, and it doesn't look like they knew whether or not he had more rocks to throw.

see, this is total bullshit.  you're bending over for a police state.  

There is a BIG fcking problem if we live in a society where it's okay to shoot people who are fleeing unarmed.  

the police can shoot to prevent a suspect from escaping, if the officer has probable cause and thinks the suspect has committed a serious violent felony.

NO THEY CANNOT!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleeing_felon_rule

They can only shoot if they think he's going to fuck someone else up.  

[blacken700]

doesn't matter if it's adolf hiter, or mister freakin rogers.

he's raising a rock, he can be wasted
he's running away unarmed, he cannot be wasted.

Simple as that.  The minute we start applying new standard for shooting people on their past?   lol yikes...

the police can shoot to prevent a suspect from escaping, if the officer has probable cause and thinks the suspect has committed a serious violent felony.

[polychronopolous]

If you watch the video -

It seems like a case of "okay, we're justified, shoot the fccker!" as opposed to "he's out of rocks, but I feel he's still a threat to life". 

If you or me shot this dude, we're going to jail.  Period.  Toss in the fact this man was out of rocks lol, turning back and/or surrendering...

They felt they had put up with enough, and they used bullets as PUNISHMENT, not as a means of keeping people safe.  They knew what they were doing.  Anyone here that truly believes "yeah, they were scared the unarmed man who was running after throwing rocks was a lethal danger...", well, one day reality will kick you in the fccking teeth lol. 

There are 2 kinds of shoots... those where the cops really have to do it (most of them) and some where the cops figure the bad guy has passed a threshold where they can legally shoot him as punishment.  This feels like that.

It's not like they handcuffed him and put a couple .40 calibers in the back of his head while he begged for his life.

The man already used potentially deadly force against the police. Who knows what he is capable of after being cornered?

[Dos Equis]

lol  

[blacken700]

NO THEY CANNOT!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleeing_felon_rule

They can only shoot if they think he's going to fuck someone else up.  
[/quote]


sorry but your wrong


Two Supreme Court decisions in the 1980s, Tennessee vs. Garner and Graham v. Connor, set the legal framework for determining when deadly force by cops is reasonable.

Constitutionally, "police officers are allowed to shoot under two circumstances," David Klinger, a University of Missouri-St. Louis professor who studies law enforcement officers' use of force, said in August. The first circumstance is "to protect their life or the life of another innocent party" — referred to as the "defense-of-life" standard by police departments. The second circumstance is to prevent a suspect from escaping, but only if the officer has probable cause to think the suspect has committed a serious violent felony.

The logic behind the second circumstance, Klinger explained, comes from Tennessee vs. Garner. That case involved a pair of police officers who shot a 15-year-old boy as he fled from a burglary. (He'd stolen $10 and a purse from a house.) The court ruled that cops couldn't shoot every felon who tried to escape. But, as Klinger said, "they basically say that the job of a cop is to protect people from violence, and if you've got a violent person who's fleeing, you can shoot them to stop their flight."

sorry can't find the link now

[Dos Equis]

see, this is total bullshit.  you're bending over for a police state.  

There is a BIG fcking problem if we live in a society where it's okay to shoot people who are fleeing unarmed.  

NO THEY CANNOT!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleeing_felon_rule

They can only shoot if they think he's going to fuck someone else up.  

It's a big problem if we allow idiots to throw softball sized rocks at police.  

Sounds like you support anarchy.  

[polychronopolous]

lol  

I've actually agreed with blacken quite a bit here lately which leads me to believe....

[Archer77]

I've actually agreed with blacken quite a bit here lately which leads me to believe....

Me too.  Blacken thinks about issues. I give him credit for not regurgitating stuff he reads.

[blacken700]

Me too.  Blacken thinks about issues. I give him credit for not regurgitating stuff he reads.

hey lets not get carried away 

[Dos Equis]

I've actually agreed with blacken quite a bit here lately which leads me to believe....

lol   He has been right about these use of force cases.  

[Archer77]

hey lets not get carried away 

You're not a god damn doctrinaire. I hate that shit.

[240 is Back]

I'm all for wasting him while he's raising a rock to cops.

once again, we disagree on the "it's okay for police to waste someone when they're no longer a threat.  

yall can keep on sucking LEO dick.  They wanted to shoot this fck, and you're cool with it, I get it.  


UNTIL IT IS YOU.  Until a cop loses his shit on you for stepping on his toe at Walmart, and shoots you while you're trying to get out of there.  Then, when you're bleeding out, i hope your "it's cool for cops to shoot someone not posing a deadly threat" mentality keeps you warm as you slip away.

I follow the law, constantly.  I don't even speed.  But I dont think cops should be able to shoot people who aren't a threat anymore.

[Skip8282]

Nope.   When he has a rock in his hand, it might be a tough call.  They pretty much know they might get a cut, but the chance of this twink killing/injuring them with a rock ain't all that great, and they have him tased already, just not behaving yet.  So *maybe* that's a tough call.. do we waste a guy holding a rock?

Now, once he throws this rock, he's just an unarmed crazy idiot making a run for it.  No need to shoot him.  No judtification to shoot him.  The THREAT that he showed with the rock is no longer present... he's just some punk trying to get away now, he's not raising another lethal rock at them.

This is an EASY call, actually.   They shot him because they were in "shoot this motherfvcker" mode, and didn't turn it off when the "armed assailant" suddenly became an "unarmed assailant attempting to flee".  You can't shoot the latter   And we all know it.  They had ego, emotion, anger and groupthink going on there. 

Sure, people here will defend it, because they could be sodomized with a fcking nightstick and they'd thank the cop for spitting on it first.  But seriously folks, he threw his rock, he was no longer a deadly threat.

That's not true though.  We can't tell from the video if he had rocks in his hand.  Also, the cop had about .05 sec to discern if there was actually a rock in his hand.  I'm kinda leaning towards the cops on this one, but you're right, it doesn't sit well.  Seems like they might have killed him for punishment, rather than a fear of their lives or somebody's else's life.

[240 is Back]

That's not true though.  We can't tell from the video if he had rocks in his hand.  Also, the cop had about .05 sec to discern if there was actually a rock in his hand.  I'm kinda leaning towards the cops on this one, but you're right, it doesn't sit well.  Seems like they might have killed him for punishment, rather than a fear of their lives or somebody's else's life.

he ran 15 or so feet to the street, crossed it, and then ran another ten feet AFTER THROWING his rock.  they shot at him already lol... if he would have "reloaded", we could have seen him crouch down for more rocks lol.

They wanted to kill him, he was a dick who thought he could throw rocks at them, they wanted to punish him.

It's a big problem if we allow idiots to throw softball sized rocks at police.  

Sounds like you support anarchy.  

re-read what I said.  

I support shooting this a-hole when he had the rock in his hands.

not after he dropped it.  

[polychronopolous]

I'm all for wasting him while he's raising a rock to cops.

once again, we disagree on the "it's okay for police to waste someone when they're no longer a threat.  

yall can keep on sucking LEO dick.  They wanted to shoot this fck, and you're cool with it, I get it.  


UNTIL IT IS YOU.  Until a cop loses his shit on you for stepping on his toe at Walmart, and shoots you while you're trying to get out of there.  Then, when you're bleeding out, i hope your "it's cool for cops to shoot someone not posing a deadly threat" mentality keeps you warm as you slip away.

I follow the law, constantly.  I don't even speed.  But I dont think cops should be able to shoot people who aren't a threat anymore.

Sometimes I think you would need 5 different 1080i HD definition cameras showing the red beam coming from the criminal's laser guided weapon on the forehead of a police officer for Rob to come out and actually defend Law Enforcement.  

[Skip8282]

he ran 15 or so feet to the street, crossed it, and then ran another ten feet AFTER THROWING his rock.  they shot at him already lol... if he would have "reloaded", we could have seen him crouch down for more rocks lol.

They wanted to kill him, he was a dick who thought he could throw rocks at them, they wanted to punish him.

re-read what I said.   

I support shooting this a-hole when he had the rock in his hands.

not after he dropped it.   

Reloaded?  We don't know how many he had to begin with.  Like I said, we can't discern at this point if he had rocks in his hand.  But, the video makes it look like they shot him for punishment.

On the fence with this one.  

[Skip8282]

Sometimes I think you would need 5 different 1080i HD definition cameras showing the red beam coming from the criminal's laser guided weapon on the forehead of a police officer for Rob to come out and actually defend Law Enforcement. 

As opposed to the people on here that require an open admission from a cop claiming they were trying to murder the person.  They blind cop lust around here is equally nuts.

[240 is Back]

As opposed to the people on here that require an open admission from a cop claiming they were trying to murder the person.  They blind cop lust around here is equally nuts.

THIS. 

People on getbig assume nobody they know or love will ever get into a "misunderstanding" with a member of law enforcement.  Those are the people I worry about.  I don't worry about the mike browns of the world, they'll be dead eventually because they are bad bad guys.

I worry about the college kid that has 3 beers and gets into a shoving match with an undercover cop in the bar.  The cop decides to take it to the next level and pull a gun to settle things down.  The college kid sees a gun and RUNS.  And since getbiggers have declared "anyone that assaults a cop deserves to be executed while running away unarmed", the college kid gets mowed down trying to escape.

I guess they never realize it won't always be a mike brown or this rock-hurling idiot that "assaults" a cop then flees.  Cops outright MAKE UP assault charges all the time.  How many of us have seen a cop exaggerate a charge?  Now, the MOMENT we declare it's acceptable for cops to shoot someone fleeing after an assault, is the MOMENT that a cop can fudge an assault charge and just start wasting anyone.

Won't matter to some people... until it's someone they know or love.  As long as it's some idiot in the ghetto, they laugh about it.  But grow older, and you start to grow up a bit.

[Dos Equis]

he ran 15 or so feet to the street, crossed it, and then ran another ten feet AFTER THROWING his rock.  they shot at him already lol... if he would have "reloaded", we could have seen him crouch down for more rocks lol.

They wanted to kill him, he was a dick who thought he could throw rocks at them, they wanted to punish him.

re-read what I said.  

I support shooting this a-hole when he had the rock in his hands.

not after he dropped it.  

You have no idea whether he had more rocks in his hands based on that clip.  You have no idea whether he was trying to get better footing to throw additional rocks.  

What you do know is he threw a softball sized rock at cop who was pointing a gun at him.  

[polychronopolous]

As opposed to the people on here that require an open admission from a cop claiming they were trying to murder the person.  They blind cop lust around here is equally nuts.

Evidence against these supposed "renegade cops" executing people cold blooded in the street has been a little bit weak here lately, imo.