Cont: The behaviour of US police officers - part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
SuburbanTurkey said:
It would be objectively better if every cop throwing a tantrum over the mere suggestion of accountability for police excesses quit. Like the example of the Portland riot squad that disbanded as a form of protest because one of their own was charged for brutalizing a photojournalist. That decision alone may save the city millions of dollars as the goon squad was the frequent source of expensive lawsuits and was showing no indication they intended to change their ways.

If there's any hope for police reform there must be a cultural shift in these departments, and it's hard to imagine that being possible unless there's significant purging of the most toxic elements. If these people decide to self-select and quit, that saves us a bit of work.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately they only resigned from this extra, voluntary duty not from their actual jobs. Basically a withdrawal of good will / work to rule type action....or a protest if you will.
 
Ethan Thane Athen said:
Unfortunately they only resigned from this extra, voluntary duty not from their actual jobs. Basically a withdrawal of good will / work to rule type action....or a protest if you will.
Click to expand...

Sure, they are all still cops.

It's a good thing that the current riot squad has disbanded. As a unit, they were responsible for numerous examples of illegal police violence, some of which are currently working through the court system and will almost certainly result in the city having to pay out substantial damages for civil rights violations.

Their little protest is bound to save the cities budget a serious amount of cash and probably do a lot to ease tensions between the public and police.
 
Good Samaritan who likely stopped a mass shooting was shot dead by responding cops.

DENVER – The Good Samaritan who died in Monday’s shooting in Olde Town Arvada was shot and killed by a police bullet, Denver7 Chief Investigator Tony Kovaleski has confirmed through three informed, ranking sources — including two law enforcement sources.

Arvada Police Officer Gordon Beesley, Good Samaritan John Hurley, and the man believed to be the suspect in the original shooting, 59-year-old Ronald Troyke, all died in the shooting, but Arvada police have not said who was shot by whom.
Click to expand...

https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/good-samaritan-who-died-in-arvada-shooting-was-shot-by-police-according-to-sources
 
jimbob said:
What is your view on the existence of Homan Square?

What about cops getting tattoos and gang-style initiations for killing people?

What about Chauvin's long history of complaints against him?

What about the DoJ report into policing in Baltimore?

What about the shooting of sleeping people?
Click to expand...

I'm sure someone called them a mean name, which as we all know is illegal in the US, I mean its right there in the constitution: "Congress shall make no law abridging free speach, but saying something mean to a LEO shall be punishable by death at their sole discretion." Freedom ain't free ya know :rolleyes:
 
Just as an aside, I'm finally getting around to watching the second season of The Punisher. One episode ends with Frank standing in a room containing multiple corpses, covered with blood, and holding an assault rifle, as multiple heavily armed police burst into the room. They shout "Drop the weapon and get on your knees" at least three or four times. I couldn't help but think "Damn. Frank's lucky he's white."
 
quadraginta said:
So much for the 'good guy with a gun'.
Click to expand...

A double dose of irony because the original shooter had targeted and ambushed a cop. This guy was literally out there risking his life to save cops and the pigs thanked him by gunning him down.

The lesson is clear. If you see someone murdering a cop, do not interfere.
 
Last edited:
SuburbanTurkey said:
A double dose of irony because the original shooter had targeted and ambushed a cop. This guy was literally out there risking his life to save cops and the pigs thanked him by gunning him down.

The lesson is clear. If you see someone murdering a cop, do not interfere.
Click to expand...

This also happened to a guy in Georgia a couple years ago I believe. Only the victims weren't cops. They saw "guy with gun" and started shooting.

Lesson is, don't be a hero. If you conceal carry only draw if thats YOUR best option rather than running away. Unless your OK with your reward being gunned down the split second a LEO think you might potentially maybe be a threat. I'm sure their penalty will be paid vacation and, maybe, having to talk to a shrink.
 
Last edited:
Third PPB riot squad cop under criminal investigation for assaulting protestors.

This incident was also captured on camera. The cop is seen chasing after fleeing protestors, tackling one, and repeatedly punching the helpless person in the face.

https://www.opb.org/article/2021/06/25/portland-police-possible-charges-3rd-officer-protest-enforcement/

The entire goon squad resigned in protest when one of their members was indicted by a grand jury for an on-camera assault of a photojournalist. That makes 1 indicted, 2 under criminal investigation. The message is clear, cops will resign in protest if the city dares to hold them accountable for criminal misconduct.

Like the other incidents, this example of police brutality is currently the subject of litigation and is likely to cost the city a hefty amount of damages.
 
Last edited:
SuburbanTurkey said:
A double dose of irony because the original shooter had targeted and ambushed a cop. This guy was literally out there risking his life to save cops and the pigs thanked him by gunning him down.

The lesson is clear. If you see someone murdering a cop, do not interfere.
Click to expand...

Bias showing much there?

This is the result of something that has been stated a lot over time, that when the police arrive on the scene of an active shooting and you are standing there holding a gun, they aren't going to know you aren't the shooter and you're likely to get shot yourself. The responding officers aren't going to know that the guy in front of them holding a gun was the one that shot the killer of the officer on the ground, so yeah. Something to consider before pulling out your gun and rushing off to play hero.
 
PhantomWolf said:
Bias showing much there?

This is the result of something that has been stated a lot over time, that when the police arrive on the scene of an active shooting and you are standing there holding a gun, they aren't going to know you aren't the shooter and you're likely to get shot yourself. The responding officers aren't going to know that the guy in front of them holding a gun was the one that shot the killer of the officer on the ground, so yeah. Something to consider before pulling out your gun and rushing off to play hero.
Click to expand...

So there's no lesson about trying to get a suspect to drop their gun? To surrender and submit to arrest? You do get that, unless they saw him shoot someone, the responding cops had a duty to identify themselves and attempt arrest before opening fire, right?

But what the hell. I guess they've got to get their rocks off while they can in the two ******* years before they put on body cameras.
 
Last edited:
Babbylonian said:
So there's no lesson about trying to get a suspect to drop their gun? To surrender and submit to arrest? You do get that, unless they saw him shoot someone, the responding cops had a duty to identify themselves and attempt arrest before opening fire, right?

But what the hell. I guess they've got to get their rocks off while they can in the two ******* years before they put on body cameras.
Click to expand...

Considering that there is currently no information about what actually happened, you don't know that he wasn't told to drop the weapon and then argued about it. I mean for normal people the whole sirens and lights thing might be an indication that not having a gun in your hand while standing over the body of a police officer would probably be a good idea, but hey, you do you.
 
PhantomWolf said:
I mean for normal people the whole sirens and lights thing might be an indication that not having a gun in your hand while standing over the body of a police officer would probably be a good idea, but hey, you do you.
Click to expand...

Is this a recognition that the police shoot first then ask questions later?
 
PhantomWolf said:
Bias showing much there?

This is the result of something that has been stated a lot over time, that when the police arrive on the scene of an active shooting and you are standing there holding a gun, they aren't going to know you aren't the shooter and you're likely to get shot yourself. The responding officers aren't going to know that the guy in front of them holding a gun was the one that shot the killer of the officer on the ground, so yeah. Something to consider before pulling out your gun and rushing off to play hero.
Click to expand...


Like I said. So much for the 'good guy with a gun'.
 
PhantomWolf said:
Considering that there is currently no information about what actually happened, you don't know that he wasn't told to drop the weapon and then argued about it. I mean for normal people the whole sirens and lights thing might be an indication that not having a gun in your hand while standing over the body of a police officer would probably be a good idea, but hey, you do you.
Click to expand...
We know that he wasn't the criminal and the cops shot him. We therefore know that the cops ****** up. We also know that, because they're cops, they are likely to lie in order to cover up their fatal mistake. So, it might be a good idea for cops to avoid shooting people until they've assessed the situation.
 
Another shooting in recent months in Times Square, in NYC, a heavily visited tourist hotspot.

What's interesting about this is that Times Square is probably one of the most heavily policed public places in all the country, and this is the second time that a heavy police present hasn't stopped a broad daylight shooting nor even prevented the shooter from escaping the scene.

Whenever there's a public concern over crime rates, the kneejerk response always seems to be to throw more money at police departments to put more cops on the streets. Does this actually accomplish anything? How many more cops does Times Square need before people can't commit daylight shootings?

https://abcnews.go.com/US/21-year-marine-injured-times-square-shooting-cd/story?id=78531576&cid=social_twitter_abcn

An article exploring this from the first shooting back in June:

Times Square is one of the most heavily surveilled and policed places in New York City. And yet the NYPD did not prevent, let alone apprehend the shooter. If all of Times Square’s surveillance cameras, armed police officers, and an actual NYPD station were not enough to prevent a shooting, what would do it? Another few hundred cameras? A few dozen more cops with even bigger guns? A robot dog?

At a certain point, we must ask ourselves why, if our primary solution to a problem proves inadequate over and over again, we continue to invest in it. If all the police and surveillance cameras in Times Square were not enough to stop a shooting, why are we to believe more police will prevent violence in already over-policed neighborhoods — ones that are far more frequent sites of shootings than Times Square? In fact, a comprehensive meta-analysis of crime data conducted by the University of Alaska showed that “...crime rates are rarely associated with increases in police force size, and when changes are found they are small.” This study confirms what we already know — that there is no specific relationship between police force size and crime.
Click to expand...

https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-the-real-lesson-of-the-times-square-shootings-20210514-goperjkexvdrrfltj2y22o4bk4-story.html
 
Last edited:
Fifth Circuit Grants Qualified Immunity To Officers Who Tased Man Soaked in Gasoline, Knowing it Would Light Him on Fire

[T]wo police officers tased the suicidal [Gabriel] Olivas, despite:

1. knowing that he was soaked in gasoline,

2. knowing from recent training that tasers ignite gasoline, and

3. knowing from a fellow officer’s explicit warning in that instant, “If we tase him, he’s going to light on fire!”

They fired their tasers anyway, knowing full well that using a taser was tantamount to using a flamethrower. Olivas burst into flames and later died.
Click to expand...

https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/2021/06/the-qualified-immunity-doctrine-insulates-governmental-agents-from-liability-for-unconstitutional-acts-as-long-as-their-co.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom