CCW holder killed reaching for ID.

[Caper]

This is the situation now, unfortunately. I don't think Americans are aware of how much the world sees the USA as a downward spiralling nation of armed bigots at war with their brown population. My wife is a member of an organization that has annual meetings rotating among different cities around the USA, and this year it was in Atlanta.

So... this is the year she stayed home. "I'm a black woman with a medical degree. Pretty much the definition of uppity negro who needs to be put in her place. It's not worth the risk." Her Muslim and Jewish coworkers all made the same decision. I think only two of the 40 people in her department went this year, versus 30 who went to the one in Honolulu.

What? Atlanta is like the blackest city in US. I think she would have been ok.

 

[blutoski]

What? Atlanta is like the blackest city in US. I think she would have been ok.

From where she stands as a black woman, the danger zone is the entire USA at this point.

ETA: and it's not the population she's worried about: it's the police.

 

[332nd]

Has the NRA gotten involved?

 

[HenryLee]

Good. More sworn law enforcement officers need to start wasting these pistol packing vigilantes.

 

[AdamSK]

This is the situation now, unfortunately. I don't think Americans are aware of how much the world sees the USA as a downward spiralling nation of armed bigots at war with their brown population. My wife is a member of an organization that has annual meetings rotating among different cities around the USA, and this year it was in Atlanta.

Nice to know that the media narrative has completely overridden the actual facts in peoples' minds.

 

[blutoski]

Has the NRA gotten involved?

My prediction is that they will, but they will blame the victim, and say that owning a gun is a responsibility, and irresponsible gun owners put themselves and their families and our heroes in law enforcement at risk. "Fortunately" they will emphasize, "99.999% of gun owners are responsible, and gun ownership makes all of us safer."

 

[blutoski]

Nice to know that the media narrative has completely overridden the actual facts in peoples' minds.

I disagree. I think there's a massive problem in the USA and progress will be difficult as long as so much of the population chooses to live in denial about it.

 

[AdamSK]

I disagree. I think there's a massive problem in the USA and progress will be difficult as long as so much of the population chooses to live in denial about it.

And is this "massive problem" backed with facts? How much worse do "uppity Negroes" in Atlanta have it in 2016 than they did in 2006, 1996, or 1986?

Or are these inconvenient questions because you can't pull out a handful of anecdotes to answer them?

 

[Beelzebuddy]

I think the extension of 'bad cop' was to what skeptics have come to call 'fellow travelers' in other contexts. "All Muslims share responsibility for every terrorist attack, if they do not immediately and publicly renounce their religion."

The cops who do not quit in disgust, by the same reasoning, are signalling their complicity.

Sure, because Hicktown PD and a global set of interconflicting religious sects have so much in common.

Actually, I'll make you a deal. If we can start pursuing abusive cops and those who support them with the same fervor that we pursue Islamic terrorists and those who support them, you can make that comparison all you want. Hell, even sync up the rhetoric used in the two cases.

Who are these "skeptics," anyway? Aside from a few blatant racists I haven't heard anyone calling for that.

[ETA] I'm assuming you're being sarcastic with your post. Are you being sarcastic with your post? If you're being earnest, that needs a whole different response (but it's still wrong).

 

[blutoski]

Sure, because Hicktown PD and a global set of interconflicting religious sects have so much in common.

Yep. That's why I like the analogy. Neither has central leadership, they disagree among themselves on practically everything &c. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, is what I'm saying. But only if people want to be consistent.

Actually, I'll make you a deal. If we can start pursuing abusive cops and those who support them with the same fervor that we pursue Islamic terrorists and those who support them, you can make that comparison all you want. Hell, even sync up the rhetoric used in the two cases.

Not sure what you mean.

Who are these "skeptics," anyway? Aside from a few blatant racists I haven't heard anyone calling for that. Why has it become popular lately to use "skeptic" as a sarcastic pejorative?

Well, yes, there's risk of "no true skeptic" on this one, but pretty much all the New Atheists, for example, use the 'fellow travellers' argument to extend accountability for religious violence to all religious people. I believe Dawkins popularized the term in through several of his books, and Shermer uses it in some of his op/ed publications as well, and he's in charge of the Skeptics Society, so hard to argue he's not a skeptic. Hitchens and Sam Harris, too, but it's not clear if they would qualify as a skeptic in the traditional sense, but I feel there's a valid argument for it.

Heck: Harris extends the 'fellow travellers' umbrella to include atheist Liberals in his writings, since Liberals generally support religious pluralism as a feature of democracies.

 

[blutoski]

[ETA] I'm assuming you're being sarcastic with your post. Are you being sarcastic with your post? If you're being earnest, that needs a whole different response (but it's still wrong).

Oops. I posted my immediately previous post before you had a chance to finish this edit.

I'm not being sarcastic, but rather, saying that I observe a lot of inconsistency among some of the more conservative skeptics. All X should be responsible for something an X does (and coincidentally, I'm not an X). But if a fellow Y does something bad, I shouldn't be held accountable just because I'm also a Y.

This reasoning is inconsistent, and may actually be hypocrisy.

 

[Ron Swanson]

I'm middle aged white and have a short hair cut, I live in Ontario Canada.

When I get pulled over for a bad light or speeding or whatever, I put the window down all the way, I pull over asap, shut off my car, and place my arms on the top of the steering wheel with my hands RIGHT UP by the WINDSHIELD.

When the officer asked for my ID I tell him were it is and ask if it's OK to retrieve it now, and I do so slowly with one hand.

If I can do that here ... everyone can do that everywhere.

 

[lobosrul]

I'm middle aged white and have a short hair cut, I live in Ontario Canada.

When I get pulled over for a bad light or speeding or whatever, I put the window down all the way, I pull over asap, shut off my car, and place my arms on the top of the steering wheel with my hands RIGHT UP by the WINDSHIELD.

When the officer asked for my ID I tell him were it is and ask if it's OK to retrieve it now, and I do so slowly with one hand.

If I can do that here ... everyone can do that everywhere.

Good for you. Do you think its acceptable to be shot if you reach for your ID too quickly? I've been pulled over exactly once; I was nervous and jumpy as hell and couldn't find my insurance in my wallet. Glad the cop didn't assume I had a gun in the center console when I opened it fishing for it (ETA: which is actually perfectly legal here without a license) . I recall him looking a bit nervous when I did though.

 

[blutoski]

I'm middle aged white and have a short hair cut, I live in Ontario Canada.

When I get pulled over for a bad light or speeding or whatever, I put the window down all the way, I pull over asap, shut off my car, and place my arms on the top of the steering wheel with my hands RIGHT UP by the WINDSHIELD.

When the officer asked for my ID I tell him were it is and ask if it's OK to retrieve it now, and I do so slowly with one hand.

If I can do that here ... everyone can do that everywhere.

Yep. And that's what the victim did. The officer in fact instructed him to fetch his ID, and he was complying.

The problem was that he had a 2nd mandatory requirement, which is to tell officers that he has a permit for a CCW - he's required to do this by law. The LEO appears to have conflated that in his head with the hand motion he just ordered the victim to undertake ("fetch your ID") and shot him. The LEO appears to have momentarily forgotten that the victim's hand motion was actually complying with his own order.

 

[Ron Swanson]

Good for you. Do you think its acceptable to be shot if you reach for your ID too quickly? I've been pulled over exactly once; I was nervous and jumpy as hell and couldn't find my insurance in my wallet. Glad the cop didn't assume I had a gun in the center console when I opened it fishing for it. I recall him looking a bit nervous when I did though.

It doesn't matter if we think its acceptable or not (obviously it's not) ... the issue is its POSSIBLE, and that makes it wise to do everything to mitigate the possibility.

My suggestion is just one way, I'm not saying the poor kid should have been shot because he should not have ... but he did not follow proper protocol for a CCW permit holder.

You don't say "I have a gun" and reach for you wallet unless you want to be shot ...

You do NOT even use the word "gun" you say, something like ...

“Officer, I want to let you know that I have a concealed carry permit, I currently have one on my person. How would you like me to proceed?”

If he asks for ID you say ... "I am Carrying in a waistband holster located about 5 o’clock which is the same general location as my wallet wallet ... do you want me to go ahead?"


Often they'll say NO and tell you to slowly get out of the vehicle.

 

[blutoski]

You do NOT even use the word "gun" you say, something like ...

“Officer, I want to let you know that I have a concealed carry permit, I currently have one on my person. How would you like me to proceed?”

Yes, but notice, at this instant, you have stopped obeying his last order (fetch the ID) so you have given him reason to regard you as a threat, visually.

 

[Ron Swanson]

The problem was that he had a 2nd mandatory requirement, which is to tell officers that he has a permit for a CCW

Actually I just checked and this incident occurred in Minesota ... in that sate there is no requirement to inform unless specifically asked.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

Oops. I posted my immediately previous post before you had a chance to finish this edit.

I'm not being sarcastic, but rather, saying that I observe a lot of inconsistency among some of the more conservative skeptics. All X should be responsible for something an X does (and coincidentally, I'm not an X). But if a fellow Y does something bad, I shouldn't be held accountable just because I'm also a Y.

This reasoning is inconsistent, and may actually be hypocrisy.

Oh, okay, you were making an unrelated dig. I've never had much interest in identity politics, so I don't know what skeptics are supposed to think.

I don't think all cops are bad. But I do think a lot more cops are bad than cops like to think, and much of the time that manifests when they shelter the cops that get labeled as "bad apples." It may have been the bad apple that shot the innocent civilian, but it was someone else who covered for him. Who destroyed the evidence. Who stonewalled the investigation. Probably lots of someones.

 

[marplots]

Yep. And that's what the victim did. The officer in fact instructed him to fetch his ID, and he was complying.

The problem was that he had a 2nd mandatory requirement, which is to tell officers that he has a permit for a CCW - he's required to do this by law. The LEO appears to have conflated that in his head with the hand motion he just ordered the victim to undertake ("fetch your ID") and shot him. The LEO appears to have momentarily forgotten that the victim's hand motion was actually complying with his own order.

I didn't see any of that on the video I saw, just the lady's narrative about it. Is it a given that her description is correct? Is there another video showing that part?

 

[ponderingturtle]

I think the extension of 'bad cop' was to what skeptics have come to call 'fellow travelers' in other contexts. "All Muslims share responsibility for every terrorist attack, if they do not immediately and publicly renounce their religion."

The cops who do not quit in disgust, by the same reasoning, are signalling their complicity.

Are say the cops who were covering up the murder of Laquan McDonald good cops or bad cops? It seems that none of the rather many cops who were covering up the evidence had an issue with it.

So if most cops are good cops, and most cops cover up felonies committed by fellow cops, then covering up felonies of fellow cops is an acceptable activity for good cops.