Police shoot man 81 times *WARNING THIS IS GRAPHIC AND UNEDITED*

[[ n a v ]]

i apologize for the misunderstanding about the date of the event, i think my friend heresy explained where my confusion came from

but that doesn't change my statement about change from the people being necessary. if nething, it builds on that sentiment. if something like that occurred in 2003, and similar cases continue to present themselves today, that just supports my thoughts that without change from the people, nothing will improve, as nothing has improved in this case.

perhaps there hasn't been a case where a man has been shot 81 times since this incident, but police using unacceptable and illegal protocols in duty, even if it is at the cost of human life, is not something we have moved passed as a society.

i suggest instead of simply watching videos of tragedies such as these, we gather our minds and try to produce a solution to such a cultural problem, try to think of ways to prevent such things from occuring. just because it goes on in other places does not mean we should be useless bystanders of such atrocious behavior.

 

[TROLL]

i suggest instead of simply watching videos of tragedies such as these, we gather our minds and try to produce a solution to such a cultural problem, try to think of ways to prevent such things from occuring. just because it goes on in other places does not mean we should be useless bystanders of such atrocious behavior.

^^
real talk...

i think some solutions are

1)Have police only be allowed to fire at a suspect after he fires first.. i kno that some whiners on here are gonna say "but thats not faaaaiirr blah blah, they protect our streeeeets and should have the right too.." but the cops have vest's for a fuckin reason.. and more often then not, the suspects dont..

2)at least try to use and employ more, non-lethal tactics of subdueing someone in a stand-off situation, especially if it iz unclear if they are unarmed or not... ive seen stand-offs during the 80's and 90's that would last hourz on end, until they threw in a flash bang, tear gas or used a tazer.. today, they'd rather just shoot, file papers and get a paid vacation..

3)accountability!!! have any officer thats suspected of excessive force be stripped of their powers and face the penalties of such conduct.

 

[HERESY]

1)Have police only be allowed to fire at a suspect after he fires first.. i kno that some whiners on here are gonna say "but thats not faaaaiirr blah blah, they protect our streeeeets and should have the right too.." but the cops have vest's for a fuckin reason.. and more often then not, the suspects dont..

I disagree with this 100%, and the reason for this is because officers don't have enough time to think and react (in certain situations). Here is a real life scenario we had to watch in class. Lets say you are an officer and you are negotiating with a suspect to give up and not kill himself. He has a gun to his head and you are sitting four feet from him trying to talk him into giving up. How long do you think it will take him to turn the gun on you if he decides to do it? Here lets actually try it out. Put your finger to your head. Flip your wrist to a 90 degree angle. Just like that the gun is pointed at the other person.:dead:

2)at least try to use and employ more, non-lethal tactics of subdueing someone in a stand-off situation, especially if it iz unclear if they are unarmed or not... ive seen stand-offs during the 80's and 90's that would last hourz on end, until they threw in a flash bang, tear gas or used a tazer.. today, they'd rather just shoot, file papers and get a paid vacation..

I agree with this 100%

3)accountability!!! have any officer thats suspected of excessive force be stripped of their powers and face the penalties of such conduct.

I agree with this 100%. However lets talk about police accountability. Why do some of you believe the police are not/or are rarely held accountable?

 

[GTS]

If a cop feels his life is in danger your good as dead whether you have a weapon or not.

 

[2-0-NINE]

If a cop feels his life is in danger your good as dead whether you have a weapon or not.

Shouldn't this apply to everyone whose life is in danger and has a weapon. We are free to protect ourselves as well.

 

[GTS]

Shouldn't this apply to everyone whose life is in danger and has a weapon. We are free to protect ourselves as well.

To an extent, but earlier this year when the cops killed that kid from Pittsburg when he had no weapon lethal force was not necessary. If a grown ass man felt his life was threatened from a 17 yr old with no weapon he should not be in law enforcement.

 

[2-0-NINE]

To an extent, but earlier this year when the cops killed that kid from Pittsburg when he had no weapon lethal force was not necessary. If a grown ass man felt his life was threatened from a 17 yr old with no weapon he should not be in law enforcement.

90% of the men in law enforcement as of now, shouldn't be in law enforcement. I still respect the Cops though, because as Long as I do my part not to commit crime, I'm not really sweating them.

 

[BigE916WRM]

My Heart goes out to the dog. Trained warrior who is only doing what he is told, with no regard for his own life. How many people would run in to attack someone who is supposed to have a gun ? I agree that they should have tried non lethal means to apprehend him. But if they were not available thats what happens, not the first or the last time.

 

[2-0-NINE]

In the start of 2000, they had electrical wiring guns that went as far as 20 feet, I'm pretty sure the cops weren't that far, and especially in 2003. I'm pretty sure they had those disabling weapons, but they figured we should just kill another mess up of this society. So they went with lethal force, instead of a less lethal weapon. I'm not big on Tupac, just some of his positive music, but like he said, when a Cop kills a nigga, he's a hero.

 

[Ry]

Using thier gun should be a cops absolute last resort. Why didint they tazer the guy? Why didnt they let the dog apprehend him? Why didnt they try and talk him down instead of being confrontational in thier speech?

 

[TROLL]

I disagree with this 100%, and the reason for this is because officers don't have enough time to think and react (in certain situations). Here is a real life scenario we had to watch in class. Lets say you are an officer and you are negotiating with a suspect to give up and not kill himself. He has a gun to his head and you are sitting four feet from him trying to talk him into giving up. How long do you think it will take him to turn the gun on you if he decides to do it? Here lets actually try it out. Put your finger to your head. Flip your wrist to a 90 degree angle. Just like that the gun is pointed at the other person.:dead:

I see what your saying but i figured that they would have already had their guns drawn in that situation ready to fire... i was refering more to when situations arise that they are unsure the suspect was unarmed, as in this instance..but if they have a gun arleady to their head then thats a whole other ball game..

 

[D'struction]

why'd that fool say he had a gun is what im wondering....thats just askin for some shit

 

[HERESY]

For everyone so animate about this guy being in the wrong and the police being right, I want you to watch from 2 minutes and 7 seconds to 2 minutes and 24 seconds.

If the man is saying he WILL give up peacefully if he can TALK to the woman carrying his child why not fulfill that request?

 

[Ethereal]

A lot of emphasis IS placed on the suspect. In cases where death by cop/suicide by cop happen it is the victims fault because they DO place the officer in a situation where their survival instincts kick in. I also agree that people do tend to look at police officers in a preconceived manner, and blame for this lies with BOTH parties.

I am talking about people on this message board. They need to place more focus on the suspects in situations such as this one.

He may have commited a crime, but he is supposed to be INNOCENT until proven guilty, and punishment should be rendered by the judge/courts and not by officers.

He is also supposed to surrender when the cops approach him. He is not supposed to threaten them with harm. He didn't do that and so the cops reacted, beit in a wrong way.

Possibly, but if this man was out of his mind at the time all of this happened (stressed, etc) why should we expect him to go along quietly?

We should expect him to go quietly because we don't know if he is out of his mind.

A cop who resigns after killing a suspect or commits suicide after killing a suspect probably wouldn't agree with the family of a dead officer...

I disagree. Maybe the officer who resigned accidently killed someone who was not threatening his life. He might see this one in a different light.

If the man is saying he WILL give up peacefully if he can TALK to the woman carrying his child why not fulfill that request?

If we only knew of all the circumstances surrounding this, perhaps we would be better equipped to answer this question.

 

[HERESY]

I am talking about people on this message board. They need to place more focus on the suspects in situations such as this one.

The people on this message board don't dictate policy, and why should they place more emphasis on the suspect when a lot of emphasis is not placed on sharing protocol and information with the general public? Do you honestly expect a group of people, who have NO KNOWLEDGE of how things work in the CJ system, to all of a sudden look at the suspect when relations between the police and the community have been strained?

He is also supposed to surrender when the cops approach him.

So anytime a cop approaches someone they should just surrender? What part of the penal code is this?

He is not supposed to threaten them with harm. He didn't do that and so the cops reacted, beit in a wrong way.

Are officers supposed to uphold the law? A yes or no will suffice. Are officers trained to uphold the law? A yes or no will suffice. Is killing a man one of the seven points taught by departments and academies or is bringing in the suspect and having them go through the CJ system?

Police officers should be held to a higher standard because they represent "the law" and should be the first people leading by example. Why? Because police officers are the people that the general public has FIRST contact with and are the people who take most of the wrap when bad things happen or when there are problems within administration.

We should expect him to go quietly because we don't know if he is out of his mind.

This makes NO sense at all. Please read what you are replying to and read what I was replying to.

I disagree. Maybe the officer who resigned accidently killed someone who was not threatening his life. He might see this one in a different light.

Take a criminal justice course if your local JC offers one. If that is not an option call up your local police department and ask to speak with the counselors on duty. Ask if they can give you pamphlets and info about officers who shoot (and sometimes kill) and how they are affected by the course of action. I hope they give you a bunch of info pertaining to the climbing suicide rate of officers, and info about alcoholism (due to stress and tragic events while on duty.)

If we only knew of all the circumstances surrounding this, perhaps we would be better equipped to answer this question.

Judging from the video (what they actually said) they were not open to negotiations. Why not? If there is a problem with tracking down where she was why not tell him? If they had no direct line or she was not in the system yet why not tell him?

 

[BigE916WRM]

For everyone so animate about this guy being in the rong and the police being right, I want you to watch from 2 minutes and 7 seconds to 2 minutes and 24 seconds.

If the man is saying he WILL give up peacefully if he can TALK to the woman carrying his child why not fulfill that request?

Because then you set an example. Now you got every crazy ass EX-Boyfriend who wants to get back at his old boo doing this shit. I have seen in situations were other innocent peoples lives are at danger where this has happened, but a dude alone on a porch is not going to get this treatment.

 

[HERESY]

Because then you set an example.Now you got every crazy ass EX-Boyfriend who wants to get back at his old boo doing this shit.

Many departments have a NO CHASE policy, and because of the no chase policy, traffic infractions and accidents have DECREASED. What evidence do you have that supports your claim that every crazy ass EX-Boyfriend is going to do what this guy did if given the chance to negotiate?

I have seen in situations were other innocent peoples lives are at danger where this has happened

Are you a police officer?

but a dude alone on a porch is not going to get this treatment.

Get what treatment? Get shot over 20 times or get his demands met?

 

[BigE916WRM]

A no chase policy period ? Let me know a department that has that policy so I can move. Many have it set up were they will not chase misdemeanor offender who are driving recklessly and endangering the lives of others. still most of the time they will have to radio in to get the chase called off.

As for the crazy ex's, thats common sense. If some heart broken dude, who's EX wont talk to him at all and wants nothing to do with him, knows he can act dumb and get the cops to bring her down to talk to him, this shit would happen a lot more. How many people "attempt" suicide only to get to talk to the one person they want and then walk down off of whatever bridge or building they were on.

I am not a Cop, I am actually a Convicted Felon. I watch all of the Cop shows plus I took Criminal & Civil Justice.

Using threats to get his demands meet are not going to happen when the only person who is at danger is himself. If he had a hostage or two, they might find his Girl.

I think the situation could have and should have been handled differently, but the guy didnt help himself out, not many people in their right mind would act that way.

 

[HERESY]

A no chase policy period ?

Traffic infractions and high speed chases (felonious driving)

Let me know a department that has that policy so I can move. Many have it set up were they will not chase misdemeanor offender who are driving recklessly and endangering the lives of others. still most of the time they will have to radio in to get the chase called off.

In Concord it is outlined in the policy and they don't need to call it in. However, because they don't chase you doesn't mean you are getting away. Again, many departments have it outlined in policy, and no calling in is needed.

As for the crazy ex's, thats common sense. If some heart broken dude, who's EX wont talk to him at all and wants nothing to do with him, knows he can act dumb and get the cops to bring her down to talk to him, this shit would happen a lot more. How many people "attempt" suicide only to get to talk to the one person they want and then walk down off of whatever bridge or building they were on.

But, what you're doing is comparing apples to oranges. This guy did not want to see his ex girlfriend. He wanted to see the mother of his child (she was pregnant with the child at the time), and she actually filed a wrongful death suit after he died, so why are we discussing EX-boyfriends/girlfriends? It is NOT applicable to the current situation, and I'm having a hard time seeing how you're plugging it in here.

How many people "attempt" suicide only to get to talk to a certain person? Possibly many, but the fact about suicide is if the person wants to do it they WILL do it, and studies validate this (hell DEATH validates it.) However, lets say these people actually WANTED to commit suicide, if given teh chance to talk to the person eased the situation and NO LIFE WAS LOST why should it not be permitted?

I am not a Cop, I am actually a Convicted Felon. I watch all of the Cop shows plus I took Criminal & Civil Justice.

How many CJ courses did you take?

:dead: @ watching the cop shows.

I think the situation could have and should have been handled differently, but the guy didnt help himself out, not many people in their right mind would act that way.

(emphasis mine)

You just sank your entire argument. Read the words in bold. If many people in their right mind act a certain way, and this mans behavior is not the same as the general public, is it safe to say he is out of his mind? If he is out of his mind how can you expect him to help himself out? :dead:

 

[BigE916WRM]

So their are no High Speed chases in Concord ? Right.

Apples and Oranges sounds like what you are doing comparing a boyfriend to a Husband or a Father, it really doesnt matter, for the sake of debate, it does not matter to me, just that they have a relationship with the person they want to see.

It would be wonderfull if we lived in Utopia and everytime things were bad we could act up and have a loved one who cares listen to us. This is not the case. I live in a real world were I know if I act stupid I am going to get treated that way. Does he not have any responsibility for his own actions ?

I took 3 classes. I like the Cop shows especially First 48, if you dont watch it your missing out.

I didnt sink my argument at all. First I think of this more as a debate, I see we will both not change our views and thats fine. So if this guy is out of his mind you are supposed to be more kick back in your attempt to get him in to custidy ? Nope it goes the other way. He is unpredictable. So although he might not be in his right mind, HE IS STILL A THREAT. Say he has a gun, are we having this debate ?

Again I think you are thinking that I am for the cops on this. I am not. They should have used non lethal means or even waited a little longer. Cops talking shit to him is not going to help squash it and get him to come in peacefully. My main point is that if he would not have acted this way this would not have happened. Everyone always looks to pass the blame somewhere else, at some point people have to be accountable for their own actions. He did not deserve to die but he choose a path of actions that lead to his demise.