How not to get shot by the police

[Samhain]

What nonsense. First off, there is no "anti-cop" crowd. Second, it doesn't matter which of these events gets coverage and which do not. Those of us critical of how policing works in this country are focused upon a culture which seems to systematically target minorities (especially African Americans) and pile abuse after abuse upon them. This issue is much larger than any single incident, which is something that the anti-accountability crowd seems to ignore.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

And there's the agenda. It's the narrative über alles.

There is no "narrative," only statistics and studies that reveal that the criminal justice system, as a whole, is racially biased time and time again. Providing one or two exceptions to this rule does not disprove the rule.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

That is not cooperating and deserves a misdemeanor. Which means the officer can drag him out of the car. If the victim's gun falls out of his back pocket when that happens then the officer can fear for his life. Some people in the forum think that an officer's fear for his life is justification for shooting the victim.

I think if I were reading what I wrote above, I might think it is a bit cartoonish and unreal, but if you look at real incidents of police stops, escalations and fear, they are also unreal.

A falling gun will likely get guns pointed at you but won't get you shot. Now, grabbing for that falling gun is another matter. (However, one should never grab a falling gun anyway--when people do that once in a while they go bang.)

Since in the scenario I described the victim is leaving the vehicle while the gun falls, that can easily be misinterpreted as moving near or toward the gun in many likely cases. Unfortunately.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Some people in the forum think that an officer's fear for his life is justification for shooting the victim.

First, it's "reasonable" fear.

No, it isn't always reasonable. For example, Sgt Frost assumed unreasonably that Deven Guilford was part of a right-wing militia.

Second, it's not "some people on the forum" it's the law.

So, yes or no, do you think it was reasonable for Sgt Frost to assume that Deven Guilford was part of a dangerous right-wing militia?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

(However, one should never grab a falling gun anyway--when people do that once in a while they go bang.)

And when they don't grab them they can also go bang once in a while.

Much less likely and only if you have a piece of junk in the first place.

- - - Updated - - -

How the hell can a gun just discharge if the safety is on?

I'm pretty sure that carrying with the safety off is not taught in most concealed carry courses.

A gun with a piece of shit safety that doesn't actually block the firing pin and thus allows a blow to be transmitted to the cartridge.

- - - Updated - - -

How the hell can a gun just discharge if the safety is on?

I'm pretty sure that carrying with the safety off is not taught in most concealed carry courses.

Some guns do not have safeties as such. Glocks for example. use widely by police. A shirt tail caught in the trigger guard during reholstering can cause an accidental discharge.. A few cops have as a result done just that and shot themselves in the leg. Adrenaline during a confrontation can cause a discharge when one's finger squeezes the trigger. Saftey in a Glock is not having a finger on the trigger unless you mean to shoot. Glocks come with a 5 lb trigger pull which really is not much. As a result some localities order police service Glocks with an 8 pound trigger assembly. Some gun nuts order 3 pound triggers, an invitation to disaster. In very tense, fast moving confrontations, police have been known to accidentally discharge guns because they had a finger on the trigger when they drew their guns. Other DOA automatics rely on long trigger pulls and comparatively heavy trigger actions. And yes, I have owned a Glock and know that the triggers on Glocks are not that hard to pull. I can see how easily it would be to shoot somebody accidentally in a confrontation.

No--this doesn't matter if you don't violate basic gun safety in the first place. You don't put your finger on the trigger until the gun is pointed at the target. Going to an 8# trigger pull is not the right answer, proper training is.

- - - Updated - - -

First, it's "reasonable" fear.

No, it isn't always reasonable. For example, Sgt Frost assumed unreasonably that Deven Guilford was part of a right-wing militia.

Second, it's not "some people on the forum" it's the law.

So, yes or no, do you think it was reasonable for Sgt Frost to assume that Deven Guilford was part of a dangerous right-wing militia?

He was acting like one of these sovereign citizen loons.

 

[Toni]

And when they don't grab them they can also go bang once in a while.

Much less likely and only if you have a piece of junk in the first place.

- - - Updated - - -

How the hell can a gun just discharge if the safety is on?

I'm pretty sure that carrying with the safety off is not taught in most concealed carry courses.

A gun with a piece of shit safety that doesn't actually block the firing pin and thus allows a blow to be transmitted to the cartridge.

- - - Updated - - -

How the hell can a gun just discharge if the safety is on?

I'm pretty sure that carrying with the safety off is not taught in most concealed carry courses.

Some guns do not have safeties as such. Glocks for example. use widely by police. A shirt tail caught in the trigger guard during reholstering can cause an accidental discharge.. A few cops have as a result done just that and shot themselves in the leg. Adrenaline during a confrontation can cause a discharge when one's finger squeezes the trigger. Saftey in a Glock is not having a finger on the trigger unless you mean to shoot. Glocks come with a 5 lb trigger pull which really is not much. As a result some localities order police service Glocks with an 8 pound trigger assembly. Some gun nuts order 3 pound triggers, an invitation to disaster. In very tense, fast moving confrontations, police have been known to accidentally discharge guns because they had a finger on the trigger when they drew their guns. Other DOA automatics rely on long trigger pulls and comparatively heavy trigger actions. And yes, I have owned a Glock and know that the triggers on Glocks are not that hard to pull. I can see how easily it would be to shoot somebody accidentally in a confrontation.

No--this doesn't matter if you don't violate basic gun safety in the first place. You don't put your finger on the trigger until the gun is pointed at the target. Going to an 8# trigger pull is not the right answer, proper training is.

- - - Updated - - -

First, it's "reasonable" fear.

No, it isn't always reasonable. For example, Sgt Frost assumed unreasonably that Deven Guilford was part of a right-wing militia.

Second, it's not "some people on the forum" it's the law.

So, yes or no, do you think it was reasonable for Sgt Frost to assume that Deven Guilford was part of a dangerous right-wing militia?

He was acting like one of these sovereign citizen loons.

No, he wasn't. He was acting like a typical teenager. He had zero ill intentions. He flashed his lights to alert another driver to an unsafe practice and then pulled over immediately.

Sadly, it is no longer a mark of paranoia to record interactions with police officers.

 

[dismal]

First, it's "reasonable" fear.

No, it isn't always reasonable. For example, Sgt Frost assumed unreasonably that Deven Guilford was part of a right-wing militia.

What?

It must be a reasonable fear for a shooting to be legally justified. This is how the law works. You can't say "no, it wasn't a reasonable fear in this case" and invalidate my point. It's a point that stands above whether you personally think the officer acted reasonably in a given case.

If this particular case was taken to a jury and the jury found the officer's fear to be unreasonable the officer could be convicted.

However, it's also possible in this particular case that a jury would not bend and twist reality to suit their preconceptions as much as people on this forum do and a conviction would be nearly impossible.

 

[laughing dog]

He was acting like one of these sovereign citizen loons.

You cannot be serious. Really, you cannot be serious.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

He was acting like one of these sovereign citizen loons.

No, he wasn't. He was acting like a typical teenager. He had zero ill intentions. He flashed his lights to alert another driver to an unsafe practice and then pulled over immediately.

Sadly, it is no longer a mark of paranoia to record interactions with police officers.

Talk about blindness!

It wasn't his recording the stop that was the issue.

It was his spouting legal bullshit rather than hand over his license that smelled like a sovereign citizen.

- - - Updated - - -

He was acting like one of these sovereign citizen loons.

You cannot be serious. Really, you cannot be serious.

Listen to the crap he's spouting on the video. Sovereign citizen crap.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Listen to the crap he's spouting on the video. Sovereign citizen crap.

No, he didn't say anything about guns, taxes, or how he loves local government and hates federal government.

 

[laughing dog]

Listen to the crap he's spouting on the video. Sovereign citizen crap.

If was the line of "thinking" that police officer took, he simply should not be allowed anywhere near any weaponry at all or given a position of authority over any living being.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

No, it isn't always reasonable. For example, Sgt Frost assumed unreasonably that Deven Guilford was part of a right-wing militia.

What?

It must be a reasonable fear for a shooting to be legally justified. This is how the law works. You can't say "no, it wasn't a reasonable fear in this case" and invalidate my point. It's a point that stands above whether you personally think the officer acted reasonably in a given case.

If this particular case was taken to a jury and the jury found the officer's fear to be unreasonable the officer could be convicted.

However, it's also possible in this particular case that a jury would not bend and twist reality to suit their preconceptions as much as people on this forum do and a conviction would be nearly impossible.

I notice that you snipped the question and did not answer it. So I will ask again.

So, yes or no, do you think it was reasonable for Sgt Frost to assume that Deven Guilford was part of a dangerous right-wing militia?

 

[dismal]

What?

It must be a reasonable fear for a shooting to be legally justified. This is how the law works. You can't say "no, it wasn't a reasonable fear in this case" and invalidate my point. It's a point that stands above whether you personally think the officer acted reasonably in a given case.

If this particular case was taken to a jury and the jury found the officer's fear to be unreasonable the officer could be convicted.

However, it's also possible in this particular case that a jury would not bend and twist reality to suit their preconceptions as much as people on this forum do and a conviction would be nearly impossible.

I notice that you snipped the question and did not answer it. So I will ask again.

So, yes or no, do you think it was reasonable for Sgt Frost to assume that Deven Guilford was part of a dangerous right-wing militia?

I didn't answer it because it has absofuckinglutely nothing to do with the point I made.

Instead I answered with a clarifying post that clarified it has absofuckinglutely nothing to do with the point I made.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I notice that you snipped the question and did not answer it. So I will ask again.

So, yes or no, do you think it was reasonable for Sgt Frost to assume that Deven Guilford was part of a dangerous right-wing militia?

I didn't answer it because it has absofuckinglutely nothing to do with the point I made.

Instead I answered with a clarifying post that clarified it has absofuckinglutely nothing to do with the point I made.

It is indeed relevant because any one of us could be on a jury. If the vast majority of us with proper information think it's stupid and unreasonable to think Deven was in a dangerous militia and calling them up on the phone, then a jury might come to the same conclusion. But, a jury and the court process is not completely relevant anyway to having a rational discussion about what happened anyway. So once again we are back to my question to you that you continually evade.

So, yes or no, do you think it was reasonable for Sgt Frost to assume that Deven Guilford was part of a dangerous right-wing militia?

rea·son·a·ble
/ˈrēz(ə)nəb(ə)l/

adjective

1. (of a person) having sound judgment; fair and sensible.
"no reasonable person could have objected"

2. as much as is appropriate or fair; moderate.
"a police officer may use reasonable force to gain entry"

The above is what reasonable means. So clearly you can answer the question.

This is my third time asking.

 

[Malintent]

+1

Police officers should be held to a higher standard and have very thick skin. (We should also be wary of lowering standards for recruits to meet political goals.) The reason these debates go on and on, it seems, is that the anti-cop crowd is generally bad at choosing its martyrs and villain police examples. This crowd may simply be desiring to push an agenda rather than be genuinely interested in the facts surrounding a selected occurrence. After all, why do some incidents garner social media outrage while others do not? For example: http://www.surenews.com/crime/shocking-leaked-video-shows-police-chief-candidate-sadistically-tasering-non-combative-inmates/

What nonsense. First off, there is no "anti-cop" crowd. Second, it doesn't matter which of these events gets coverage and which do not. Those of us critical of how policing works in this country are focused upon a culture which seems to systematically target minorities (especially African Americans) and pile abuse after abuse upon them. This issue is much larger than any single incident, which is something that the anti-accountability crowd seems to ignore.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

there certainly is an anti-cop crowd. I have personal knowledge of this... I was generally 'anti-cop" some time ago, but my position has changed.

I don't know if it is a cultural bias, or flat out 'reverse-racism', but most black people I know are conditioned to be anti-cop by their social network right from birth. I don't deny this is likely a result of racism against black people from the 1950's to late 70's that influence this cultural bias. But, today, it is mostly anti-cop racism that fuels this deadly cycle. I grew up traveling the city on subways in the 80's and no one gave a shit about anyone else... a stray glance at a white person would return a smile, nod, or nothing. a stray glance at a black person would usually return a "what the fuck are you looking at, white boy' response. It is that 'default' response to a non-black person by black people that is getting them in trouble now-a-days.

 

[Samhain]

No one views a society with no police as a better society. Certainly, you may be socially conditioned to mistrust or even hate the police, but this is a symptom of a greater problem. There might he some people that are anti-policing all together, but they are a vanishingly small amount. All people want police that serve the community. When policing turns into a tool of oppression, that is where the problem arises. Police are intended to keep order, not dominate and subjugate.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

 

[ksen]

I don't know if it is a cultural bias, or flat out 'reverse-racism', but most black people I know are conditioned to be anti-cop by their social network right from birth.

Huh, I wonder how on earth that came about?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I don't know if it is a cultural bias, or flat out 'reverse-racism', but most black people I know are conditioned to be anti-cop by their social network right from birth.

Huh, I wonder how on earth that came about?

Facebook 'likes'.

 

[arkirk]

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/po...2221/?type=3&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&width=500#

(And in case the word wrapper breaks that abominable URL: http://tinyurl.com/pv7wysd )

Black, armed, not shot--and got off with only a warning rather than a ticket because he handled it properly.

No, the police handled it properly.

The assumption in the OP is that it was something the black guy did that kept him from being shot. It was actually only the cops' perfectly appropriate forbearance. I have known a number of good cops who I am quite sure are not headed for trouble over shooting someone.. There seems to be such a thing as a gun fixation and cops and just plain ordinary people can have it. They do make themselves dangerous. The key to limiting the number of shootings lies with those who have guns. I could not get the links to work but I know if there was some video of the event, the guy who got away was good at genuflection and keeping his hands in sight.

 

[abaddon]

No, the police handled it properly.

The assumption in the OP is that it was something the black guy did that kept him from being shot. It was actually only the cops' perfectly appropriate forbearance. I have known a number of good cops who I am quite sure are not headed for trouble over shooting someone.. There seems to be such a thing as a gun fixation and cops and just plain ordinary people can have it. They do make themselves dangerous. The key to limiting the number of shootings lies with those who have guns. I could not get the links to work but I know if there was some video of the event, the guy who got away was good at genuflection and keeping his hands in sight.

Yep. Nailed it on all counts.

-----------------------------

How not to get shot by the police?

The “here’s how reality is so just deal with it” answer: Be a good boy, don’t get sassy, don’t hesitate in the slightest in your abject obeisance to authority, and then [probably] you won’t get shot.

The right answer in the world as it could and should be: Don’t point a gun.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Listen to the crap he's spouting on the video. Sovereign citizen crap.

No, he didn't say anything about guns, taxes, or how he loves local government and hates federal government.

No, it's about not having to submit to the cop's authority. You're thinking of right wing crap, not sovereign citizen crap.