Deaf Mute shot by Dumb cop

William Parcher said:
Look what we have here. The guy has major damage to the front of his car and it's missing the left front tire (riding on the rim). In that condition it's difficult to drive and exceed a highway speed limit. This suggests to me that the damage occurred after the speeding and during the police pursuit. Reports say the pursuit was about 7.2 miles and he stopped on his own street (but not in his driveway). Deafness doesn't prevent a person from feeling and seeing what is going on. It seems as if he was intentionally fleeing from the state trooper.
Click to expand...

Definitely deserving a death sentence. :rolleyes:
 
William Parcher said:
You made a strawman when you put the word deserving in there.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's a strawman. It's what the rest of the world actually expects implicitly from the police: a proportionate response, and use of deadly force when it's truly warranted.

In fact, that there are people thinking that bringing that up is some sort of fallacy -- strawman or otherwise -- is more like what makes it worrying. I can honestly say that I've never even heard of any other country than the USA where so many people are so... laissez faire about cops shooting or tazing at the drop of a hat. I mean, true, there are countries where the police was or is more brutal and deadly (the whole communist block, for example), but most people didn't think it was a GOOD thing. More like just something they can't change.

The rest of us expect the police more like to keep everyone safe. INCLUDING the criminals, actually, unless they're an immediate danger to someone else's life. And frankly, if you have a system where an innocent person's just being deaf is a reason to be shot by some cop, you've utterly failed already.

Mind you, I'm not saying that the broken system is just the police. Maybe the wide availability of guns and the culture of glorifying guns does make it scary enough for the cops. Or whatever. But taken as a whole, IF indeed it's gotten to the point where the safest course of action is to shoot some guy and think later, the system looks bloody broken from where most of the rest of the world stands.
 
I would understand the cop not shooting in Europe. Few firearms there. Cops dont go to work knowing there is a high chance of being killed.

So yeah, USA and Brazilian cops kill lots of civilians.

Now, go check the death rates of Brazilian and US cops and compare to those of Europe.

The ratio of civilian deaths/cop deaths are probably similar in US and Europe. Who knows, maybe even larger in Europe?
 
HansMustermann said:
I don't think it's a strawman.

if you have a system where an innocent person's just being deaf is a reason to be shot by some cop
Click to expand...


it IS a strawman to say he deserved to be shot, and you used the same strawman, saying being deaf was the reason for him being shot.


ok, let's try to forget he escape police for 12 km. He is not only deaf, probably blind too!!! Only that way he would not notice cop cars chasing him for such a long distance.

Are we supposing also that he did stop at traffic lights and everything? Or that he respected all stop signs, traffic lights, etc, and yet the cops were all behind "chasing him"?


Come on, he knew there were cops after him, and after he tried to evade them for 12 km, he should had left the car arms up and lied on the ground. That was sensible to do, being deaf.
 
AcesHigh said:
I would understand the cop not shooting in Europe. Few firearms there. Cops dont go to work knowing there is a high chance of being killed.
Click to expand...

But there really isn't a high chance of police in the US being killed, it is the few freak incidents like the one you referenced earlier that is why the police kill so many unarmed people. The perceived risk is out of all proportion to the real risk and they kill based on that perception.
 
At the end of the day the dude wasn't armed and was waving his arms around. Unless I've missed something.

How does this justify shooting?

If the cop is that scared why not call for back-up?

Dogs?
 
Imagine that the first thing police did when stopping you was to stuff a gag in your mouth. Imagine trying to say anything meant you were resisting arrest or trying to kill the cop.

News reports have mentioned that his brother is deaf too, which means it's more likely inherited, which means he's probably been deaf from birth. A deaf person's ability to speak aloud intelligibly is very dependent on having had hearing (even residual hearing) at some point. It's like learning a foreign language from a silent movie. Some people work at it, some don't, especially if they're part of Deaf culture (which is a whole digression of its own).

So I can see why he was terrified of the police, and to some degree why he tried to go home, where there were presumably people who could speak for him while he was prevented from speaking.

The whole chase story seems a bit fishy, honestly. In many, if not most areas, cops aren't allowed to give high-speed chase because of the potential for serious accidents involving other civilians. They're also not generally allowed to ram vehicles or try to bodily force them off the road, especially for a speeding violation. And if they/he had called "in pursuit" on the radio, backup should have been joining.

It seems to me it could have been easier solved by 1) following him with lights off and having a conversation when he stopped. or 2) Contacting him after the fact.

Unless he was bombing through a residential neighborhood at 60mph/100kph or buzzing down the freeway at double that, it was just an infraction. It didn't need to be escalated to the point where it turned into a life or death scenario.
 
William Parcher said:
Words create mental images. Sign language and waving arms around are very different things.


The cop's story has not yet been told.
Click to expand...
True

Stupidest part is I have a profoundly deaf uncle (from birth) who I get on well with.

So that makes it an even more dim off the cuff remark
 
ponderingturtle said:
But there really isn't a high chance of police in the US being killed, it is the few freak incidents like the one you referenced earlier that is why the police kill so many unarmed people. The perceived risk is out of all proportion to the real risk and they kill based on that perception.
Click to expand...

145 US Cop deaths in 2014.

114 Cops killed in Rio de Janeiro alone in 2014.


Not worth trying to find this news in english, as all you find is Amnesty and other leftist websites which ONLY mention civilians killed by cops in Brazil or Rio.

Never the number of people killed by criminals, nor the number of Cops killed.

Rio Police killed about 563 in 2014.

1 cop died for each 4.93 criminals killed. Very high risk job.

this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...forcement_officers_in_the_United_States,_2014

shows about 640 civilian deaths by cops in the US in 2014.

1 US cop died for each 4,4 criminals killed.

Less risky than in Rio, but then US police also kills less.

It seems to me the ratio of police kills to officers killed seems stable. Officers ARE trigger happy because they fear for their lives.
 
ponderingturtle said:
But there really isn't a high chance of police in the US being killed
Click to expand...

How about attacked with a deadly weapon, or does it only count if the police officer dies?

According to the FBI figures there are ~10,000 attacks on officers with deadly weapons each year, 2,000 of those with guns. That's nearly 30 attacks on officers a day, over 5 of them with firearms! That is not rare.

it is the few freak incidents like the one you referenced earlier
Click to expand...

Except that they aren't just a few freak events, the Officers are just more likely to survive due to the bad guys being worse shots along with the extra protection provided by body armour and training. It seems that the way you want the figure to be read, the cop that gets shot seven times or stabbed multiple times but survives, just don't count towards why cops are on edge around people that throw up multiple red flags and refuse to obey orders.

that is why the police kill so many unarmed people.
Click to expand...

How many do they kill? Based on the reporting of them, it seems about 2 a month, so around 20-30 a year. More Cops are killed each year. The problem is that people look at the total of people shot and conflate that with the number of unarmed people shot. I'd predict that 97.5% of those shot by police are shot legitimately, but we're now beyond the crazy to a point where even when armed criminals who point guns at cops and get themselves shot result in rioting.

The perceived risk is out of all proportion to the real risk and they kill based on that perception.
Click to expand...

The perceived risk is a lot higher than you want to make it because the perceived risk is of not just in being killed, but in being attacked.
 
Last edited:
AcesHigh said:
it IS a strawman to say he deserved to be shot, and you used the same strawman, saying being deaf was the reason for him being shot.


ok, let's try to forget he escape police for 12 km. He is not only deaf, probably blind too!!! Only that way he would not notice cop cars chasing him for such a long distance.

Are we supposing also that he did stop at traffic lights and everything? Or that he respected all stop signs, traffic lights, etc, and yet the cops were all behind "chasing him"?


Come on, he knew there were cops after him, and after he tried to evade them for 12 km, he should had left the car arms up and lied on the ground. That was sensible to do, being deaf.
Click to expand...

Regardless, none of that justifies a shooting, from where I stand.

A traffic violation is not a threat to the cop's life, especially when he's out of the car. What's he gonna do, run the cop over on foot, or WTH?

Even fleeing from the cops, is only a misdemeanor. It falls under that "resisting arrest".

Not only none of that is a violent crime -- you know, to suggest a possible violent followup -- but the probability of someone escalating a misdemeanor into a capital offense is actually vedry low in the real world. The real life isn't like in idiot cop series, where people will start shooting at cops willy-nilly, even to get out of a parking ticket. A lot of Americans, especially the gun nut gang and Hollywood, seem to have a very... weird idea, in which once someone's a criminal, ANY crime goes, and only a large caliber gun stops them. The real world doesn't work that way. Even people busted for actual fellonies (e.g., drug busts) tend to rather put their hands up and take a few years in jail, than risk their life in a police shootout and turn it into a coin flip between death and a life sentence.

And gesticulating is not a threat to an armed cop either. Even if that guy was some kung fu master, he ain't gonna sign an armed cop to death.

So, yes, from where I stand across the pond, it seems to me like at some point something went horribly wrong with America and its cops, if THAT passes for a justified homicide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom