Unnarmed man lying on ground with arms up shot by police

[Dug]

I don't know, very rarely have I seen a story of an accidental discharge in a home resulting in criminal charges, usually only when a child is involved due to some states having safe storage laws. Should the cops be better at such things? Certainly so, no doubt.

But it's still a training issue, at worst fire the guy. If a cop is in a traffic accident you don't throw them in jail.

Well that would depend on the circumstances that lead to the accident.

[Reeve]

waaaaah waaaaaah 'victim blaming'.

Don't want to get accused of victim blaming? Stop blaming the victim.

Seriously, in what world is it OK to shoot someone lying on their back with their empty hands in the air?

- - - Updated - - -

I'm saying don't interact with the police until the situation de-escalates from 'guns are drawn', yes.

Letting the police approach the autistic guy aggressively without knowing that the guy is autistic is a great way to ensure that the situation escalates, since low functioning autistic people aren't exactly known for handling aggression or manhandling well.

[GrinningMan]

Don't want to get accused of victim blaming? Stop blaming the victim.

Seriously, in what world is it OK to shoot someone lying on their back with their empty hands in the air?

Why would I stop blaming the victim when he was behaving in a manner that breaks concentration?

The officers have guns drawn, they are trying to figure out a situation and you have some jag-off flapping his lips while the police are trying to figure out:

A) Is the subject a threat?

B) Does he have a weapon?

C) How are people behaving around him?

D) Who all is connected to him?

E) Could a bystander be armed?

F) Is the subject disoriented?

He was not helping himself in this situation. Stay quiet, wait for officers to de-escalate situation, then explain why you are there.

[Reeve]

Why would I stop blaming the victim when he was behaving in a manner that breaks concentration?

The officers have guns drawn, they are trying to figure out a situation and you have some jag-off flapping his lips while the police are trying to figure out:

A) Is the subject a threat?

B) Does he have a weapon?

C) How are people behaving around him?

D) Who all is connected to him?

E) Could a bystander be armed?

F) Is the subject disoriented?

He was not helping himself in this situation. Stay quiet, wait for officers to de-escalate situation, then explain why you are there.

He's answering all those questions for the police, while doing so in as non-threatening a manner possible. And they shot him.

[Svifnymr]

Don't want to get accused of victim blaming? Stop blaming the victim.

Seriously, in what world is it OK to shoot someone lying on their back with their empty hands in the air?

Did you ever play the old arcade games with the light guns, where you'd be shooting bad guys then suddenly some innocent passers-by would pop up from nowhere and run for it? Sure you lose if you shoot them, but come on! Why don't they stay the fuck out of the way!

Sure this wasn't an active shooting, but that's the situation that is being discussed. If it's a tense situation, try to reduce variables. Putting yourself into the dangerous situation puts you in danger.

Letting the police approach the autistic guy aggressively without knowing that the guy is autistic is a great way to ensure that the situation escalates, since low functioning autistic people aren't exactly known for handling aggression or manhandling well.

It would have been challenging, certainly, but we can't really say how it would have gone in this alternate timeline. There are plenty of times that the police DO handle such a situation. I'm not sure the guy would have recognized that he was in danger/ at gunpoint.

Of course, I guess this does avoid the question of how the autistic guy wandered away from the councillor and he had to wander the streets to find him.

[Reeve]

Did you ever play the old arcade games with the light guns, where you'd be shooting bad guys then suddenly some innocent passers-by would pop up from nowhere and run for it? Sure you lose if you shoot them, but come on! Why don't they stay the fuck out of the way!

Sure this wasn't an active shooting, but that's the situation that is being discussed. If it's a tense situation, try to reduce variables. Putting yourself into the dangerous situation puts you in danger.

As the carer for the autistic guy, he IS a part of the situation. And he's doing his best to de-escalate it, but the police decided to shoot him anyway.

Even if the carer were the ONLY person in that situation, the police would have had no reason to shoot him.

[Svifnymr]

He's answering all those questions for the police, while doing so in as non-threatening a manner possible. And they shot him.

"They shot him" is biased speak though. He was hit by a bullet, but were they aiming at him? Intent does matter. Why attribute to malice what can easily be explained by incompetence.

Last week (or week before), a teenager drowned in a lake down here, family was saying the EMS/Cops didn't do enough, even though by the time they were called the kid had been underwater for 15 minutes already. Sometimes accidents happen.

[Reeve]

"They shot him" is biased speak though. He was hit by a bullet, but were they aiming at him? Intent does matter. Why attribute to malice what can easily be explained by incompetence.

Last week (or week before), a teenager drowned in a lake down here, family was saying the EMS/Cops didn't do enough, even though by the time they were called the kid had been underwater for 15 minutes already. Sometimes accidents happen.

They fired 3 bullets at a scenario where there was no threat. How can this be anything but the fault of the officer?

[Tinykong]

Seriously, in what world is it OK to shoot someone lying on their back with their empty hands in the air?

The militarized police world we live in now where the possible loss of life of a police officer outweighs the almost certain loss of life of a civilian.

[Kathandira]

They fired 3 bullets at a scenario where there was no threat. How can this be anything but the fault of the officer?

I give you credit for trying. But I feel your rational comments will fall of deaf ears. All the same, I applaud your diligence.

[Ivanstone]

Police here don't get much training in the first place.

Congratulations, welcome to the Black Lives Matter movement. Hope you enjoy your stay.

The militarized police world we live in now where the possible loss of life of a police officer outweighs the almost certain loss of life of a civilian.

Congratulations, welcome to the Black Lives Matter movement. Hope you enjoy your stay.

[Svifnymr]

They fired 3 bullets at a scenario where there was no threat. How can this be anything but the fault of the officer?

I've only heard the 3 bullet count from the guy's account, so not sure. Same way Dallas had multiple shooters and whatnot, until they finished investigating.

In either case, that's what I referred to as "reactive fire". One guy fires a round, someone else hears gunfire and also shoots. I don't know if that's what happened, or if they were trying to shoot the autistic guy and missed with 3 rounds, one of which hit the victim laying on the ground (in the leg). I certainly don't see any situation where they were TRYING to shoot the victim laying on the ground and managed to only hit him once in the leg, though obviously anything is possible.

For example, years ago SWAT had a house surrounded, one of the officers accidentally fired off a round. The guys on the other side thought they were being shot at and just unleashed, which prompted the guys on the first side to also open fire. They riddled the house with bullets before stoping to assess the situation and figured out what had happened. Luckily no one was hurt, since... no one was home at the time...

[Reeve]

I've only heard the 3 bullet count from the guy's account, so not sure. Same way Dallas had multiple shooters and whatnot, until they finished investigating.

In either case, that's what I referred to as "reactive fire". One guy fires a round, someone else hears gunfire and also shoots. I don't know if that's what happened, or if they were trying to shoot the autistic guy and missed with 3 rounds, one of which hit the victim laying on the ground (in the leg). I certainly don't see any situation where they were TRYING to shoot the victim laying on the ground and managed to only hit him once in the leg, though obviously anything is possible.

For example, years ago SWAT had a house surrounded, one of the officers accidentally fired off a round. The guys on the other side thought they were being shot at and just unleashed, which prompted the guys on the first side to also open fire. They riddled the house with bullets before stoping to assess the situation and figured out what had happened. Luckily no one was hurt, since... no one was home at the time...

Even if they were trying to shoot the autistic guy, they had no reason to do that either. The object in his hands was pretty clearly not a gun, obviously visible.

[Kathandira]

Even if they were trying to shoot the autistic guy, they had no reason to do that either. The object in his hands was pretty clearly not a gun, obviously visible.

Even in the shitty video where it is blurry, you can clearly tell it is not a gun.

[PACOX]

I'm saying don't interact with the police until the situation de-escalates from 'guns are drawn', yes.

I work in the same field as the guy who got shot. Who was trying to demonstrate to the police that they were dealing with a special needs person while trying to get his client to comply. In a city where officers are properly trained they would at least be aware of such situations and allowed the caretakers to calm the man (the man with autism) down before doing what they had to do.

The man (the caretaker) was clearly taken precautions to show the police that he nor his client was a threat since his client might not have been in the mental state to understand the seriousness of the situation.

I've been threatened with tasers and physical force in similar situations. A colleague had SWAT (not quite SWAT but no ordinary police response) surround him at gunpoint when he was trying to descalate a situation where a client was have a violent episode and a neighbor called the police. Sad thing is that the neighbor knew the client and knew of the clients behavior, the neighbor called because they were refused a job with the agency we worked for.

Scariest situations are when you have to call the police for assistance because it means it's a violent situation and too many officers are trigger happy I had a client bite an officer and at the hospital he said thank God (something along those lines) that he got the call and that he had history with us because another officer probably would have shot the man who was going through a chemical imbalance after his mother had his meds changed because she felt "they weren't doing anything for him".

Long story short, cop needs to get fired. The PD needs to be under investigation and have their training programs reevaluated, and it's never okay for a cop to say "I don't know" after discharging their weapon.

[Svifnymr]

They fired 3 bullets at a scenario where there was no threat. How can this be anything but the fault of the officer?

I'm not sure if you're debating some specific point of what I'm saying or... what?
I'm saying I think at least one officer accidentally discharged his weapon. The victim will be awarded a nice cash bonus, hopefully getting a public explanation and apology. The officer should be relegated to desk duty and/or be trained until he learns not to fuck up with a gun. Worst case he should be fired. It IS his fault that the shooting occurred.

Nothing criminal occurred, so I do not believe criminal charges should be filed against anyone involved.

By saying "the officer shot the victim", you portray it as a willful act of a police officer targeting an unarmed man lying on the ground, which seems unlikely to me.

[Tinykong]

Congratulations, welcome to the Black Lives Matter movement. Hope you enjoy your stay.

I'm not a racist or a terrorist, but, thanks for the invite.

[Polyxo]

? How was he shit by doing what he was doing?

It stems from the 'the cop always knows best' argument.

Therapist and cop dealing with the mentally handicapped/ill in some kind of crisis? The cop knows best.

Open heart surgery with a cop present and a chief of cardiology? The cop knows best.

An irregularity at a fission plant with a nuclear engineer and a cop? The cop knows best.

To many, even when the cop has no idea what the fuck to do, he knows best.

[Knolan]

Police being overly aggressive with a black person after the events of the last week? Gosh, who would see that coming?

The militarized police world we live in now where the possible loss of life of a police officer outweighs the almost certain loss of life of a civilian.

I would love to see how well an unarmed police would work in a drug war zone.

[GrinningMan]

It stems from the 'the cop always knows best' argument.

Therapist and cop dealing with the mentally handicapped/ill in some kind of crisis? The cop knows best.

Open heart surgery with a cop present and a chief of cardiology? The cop knows best.

An irregularity at a fission plant with a nuclear engineer and a cop? The cop knows best.

To many, even when the cop has no idea what the fuck to do, he knows best.

lmfao, really dude

Argument from absurdity is by far my favorite.