LAPD Officers Shoot Man Five Times in Broad Daylight


Recommended Posts

No, it isn't. Reaching for a cops gun should result in a serious attempt to stop you, obviously, but that attempt doesn't have to only be shooting you.

 

It is a serious shame that so many in our nation subscribe to the notion that our rights are secondary to that of state actors. So much so, that these persons don't agree with the Constitution's mandate for due process.

 

The job of policing will result in cops killing people, but, as I said earlier, they should be made as rare as possible with proper training and equipment. Every loss of life at the hands of police should be vigorously scrutinized to ensure the officer(s) involved did the best they could do to apprehend the innocent party and abide by our Constitution. If the death could have been prevented the officer(s) should be given the additional training and/or equipment needed to help them in this regard.

 

This is the minimum standard our Constitution requires; although I understand that no one really cares about that document anymore until "gun rights"...

 

You're making an awful lot of assumptions. It's really amazing how you can gather all of that from someone saying "don't resist arrest and don't get shot", though.

 

Play stupid games win stupid prizes..

We're getting waay off topic here, there are religions older than Christianity, not to mention attrocities god fearing Christians have committed historically, ok they don't even compare to isis, I'll give you that.

The debate on this thread is something that has stirred controversy, some think (I am one of them) the actions were unprofessional, and in my case, question training methods, some would argue, don't question, or protest police actions, akin to communism, 'we're in charge, do as you're told'

Staying within the guidelines layed out by law, a citizen of any society would have nothing to worry about.

But I was concerned as if we used a different scenario, a car chase, police will at some point be given permission to contain the chase using their vehicles, in the UK, any police vehicle damaged by such a chase, the officer driving the vehicle, the has to submit to a breath test, even if the officer didn't cause the damage. And protocol is followed, that's not to say they're perfect, they're people, just like we are. But this is how they're trained. Even the officers who shot Lee Rigby's murderer faced questioning about the fact that their weapon was discharged.

I don't know about the intricate details of US police training, but was curious about it, or if there's even a protocol and inquest regarding the level of professionalism they've displayed.

(I have to go, dinner's ready)

 

I wasn't intentionally trying to get off topic. I appreciate you seeing that. That's why I inserted the comment of not getting into a faith based debate but to just put a point in there. I never meant to offend you in anyway. Just from my bible studies, that came to mind in relation to the video is all. But thanks for being kind in your reply. ;)

  • Like 1

For anyone who replied to my comment about fists, take it as hands instead. I'm not talking about beating the crap out of someone, but manhandling with force that is proportional.

I would love to not be on the police side, but this guy is clearly attacking the officer in the beginning.  He was throwing a punch.  He sealed his fate when he throw that punch.

 

ok, you admitted throwing punches which clearly isn't in line with deadly use of force. what about other non lethal methods?

Just thinning out the herd.  Justifiable homicide.  Buh Bye..... NEXT !!

 

good point

"This waste of life made his choices, and chose poorly"

 

Given his history of mental illness that's a hard line of reasoning to follow.  I've seen unarmed, small women in social services handle much more explosive situations with individuals much larger than themselves.  Its an issue of approach, and as you cheerleaders tend to reinforce, 'retreat and de-escalation' are not in most cops vocabulary.

  • 2 weeks later...

Just putting this here, someone who knows more about holsters can explain more or just call ###### on this video

 

 

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/video-dispels-reached-gun-myth-lapd-cops-killing-homeless-man/

Just putting this here, someone who knows more about holsters can explain more or just call ###### on this video

 

 

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/video-dispels-reached-gun-myth-lapd-cops-killing-homeless-man/

 

that is compelling evidence.

I don't understand what that video is suppose to prove. They're merely feeding you a perspective. You don't know if the person handling the gun in the video is avoiding movements that would unholster the gun. The "test case" isn't even done with the weapon holstered to the side of the body, secured on a belt, as it would be in the field. Further, are we now assuming that someone going for an officer's weapon doesn't know how to unholster it? Or couldn't possibly? This video is nothing but an example of how ignorance is accepted and spreads.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 27 is out.
    • My ice blue precision 3550 laptop
    • A coalition of publishers sued OpenAI and Microsoft over scraping content without consent by Hamid Ganji Image via Depositphotos.com AI companies often rely on readily available internet content to train their chatbots and provide users with instant answers. This method of AI training is fast and relatively inexpensive, but using a website’s content without permission or compensation is not something publishers like to see, and this is exactly why Microsoft and OpenAI are now being sued. As reported by Bloomberg, a group of publishers that collectively own nearly 400 newspapers has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft. The coalition argues that the two companies scraped their content to build AI chatbots like ChatGPT and Copilot without paying any compensation. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, argues that while AI products have generated billions of dollars in market value using publishers’ work, none of that value has been shared with the publishers. The plaintiffs are seeking statutory damages and injunctive relief for alleged copyright infringement and violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. “Defendants systematically and secretly crawled the Publishers’ websites—including content behind paywalls and other access restrictions—and copied the Publishers’ articles, stories, and other original works onto their own servers without authorization,” the complaint states. The publishers also described the AI boom as a “death knell for local journalism” if AI companies that scrape content for free are not held accountable. Former New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin and his law firm, Platkin LLP, are representing the publishers. “Our models empower innovation, are trained on publicly available data, and are grounded in fair use,” OpenAI spokesperson Drew Pusateri told Bloomberg. This is not the first lawsuit involving the unauthorized use of publishers’ content by AI firms, but it is one of the largest coalitions ever formed against the free use of content by AI chatbots. In 2024, OpenAI and Microsoft also faced a similar lawsuit from eight newspapers that claimed AI products were benefiting from their content without permission.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Rookie
      krychek57 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      445
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      173
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      134
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!