Jury Acquits Tulsa Officer

[Berengil]

She's negligent and incompetent at least, or actively biased and dangerous at worst.

I think the underlined, and I don't think she was biased/dangerous. Just not good at her job.

[BreakerOfWills]

So you're saying the only acceptable outcome was that the cop be found guilty.

I just said that, what are you asking again for?

[Dextroden]

Problem is everything gets defined as "suspicious" post murder.

And everything gets defined as "murder" post shooting.

[Exeris]

I remember watching the video, why people refuse to comply with police I'll never know.

Yes he was scaring the hell out of the cops with his actions, the cops had guns.

Not long ago we had a crazy person(one drugs I think) wielding an axe close to civilians, when the police showed up and he turned on them they shot him in the leg(they know how aim/hit their mark) and detained him, they were scared to.

They try a non lethal attempt first, if that shot had missed then bye bye axe wielding guy.

Our police are expected to at least try once before killing someone, can't remember a case where this approach has failed.

But I do understand that with our gun culture as a police officer you have to assume everyone is armed and can kill you in a heartbeat and this is regretfully something you have to live with.

[Endus]

I'll remember that the next time people don't hide knives.

You're literally making a "they're comin' right for us" argument that would justify a cop shooting literally anyone who didn't follow their immediate orders.

That's insane, you realize that, right? All we're suggesting is that an officer should have to positively identify a threat before using lethal force. There's plenty of less-than-lethal options for other circumstances. Sure, they're not as effective as killing them would be, but you don't become a cop because you want to take the "easy road" of killing everyone who doesn't comply.

So basically what you're saying is, the word "unarmed" is a trigger word used by the media to get minority groups up in arms about the death of someone by an officer, knowing that the audience doesn't understand that "unarmed" doesn't necessarily mean "non-life-threatening". You actually helped me understand very well how shady the media is in their use of this term. Thank you!

Someone's using words inappropriately here, to manipulate emotions, and it ain't me.

- - - Updated - - -

So you're saying the only acceptable outcome was that the cop be found guilty.

In this particular case, where they shot an unarmed man for not being compliant enough? Absolutely. Let's be clear; by Shelby's own account, he wasn't obeying her orders, and she thought he was on drugs, and that's it. He had no visible weapons, he wasn't aggressive to the officers.

In general? Nobody here is anti-cop.

[BreakerOfWills]

I think the underlined, and I don't think she was biased/dangerous. Just not good at her job.

I think that's grounds for some major form of punishment. Negligent and incompetent when you're empowered by the state to kill people is dangerous.

[Exeris]

Good luck finding anyone to take the job then. Were willing to take risks to protect the innocent but if you think were willing to get shot to minimize the danger to the suspect, you're mistaken. Its pretty simple, follow commands and no one gets hurt. Id wager 95% of encounters and arrests end that way (without force or violence).

There are far more dangerous places in the world than U.S.A and they can recruit police officers, far more dangerous jobs to but people still apply for them.

[BreakerOfWills]

And everything gets defined as "murder" post shooting.

Post shooting of unarmed person that wasnt attacking officer then yeah.

[The One Percent]

Live in a firearm culture and you get jumpy police. Deal with it; you don't get one without the other.

It would also help if certain demographics weren't well known for being uncooperative and escalating already tense situations.

[Runenwächter]

So I suppose here that edgelords think that drunk people or people to stoned to comply with police are an exclusivity to (insert dog whistle of your choice to mean ''Black'') communities in the USA ?

You really think that French or Canadian cops don't deal with intoxicated people ? (Hint : without shooting them)

PCP isnt "stoned". PCP is a chemically induced superman complex frothing from your mouth with an unhealthy dose of aggression included. PCP is drugged out of ones mind and given the situation quite possibly armed and dangerous, because guess what?
That's the thing people who do PCP like to go for. That's who they want to be.

- - - Updated - - -

What about the innocent civilians they shoot? Are they allowed to go home and see their families instead of ending up dead over a panicking cop?

What are you talking about. The person in this case was anything but an innocent civilian.

[triplesdsu]

There are far more dangerous places in the world than U.S.A and they can recruit police officers, far more dangerous jobs to but people still apply for them.

Its not the danger that would be discouraging but this idea that your placing your own safety below that of the bad guy. Even in these more dangerous places they dont have that mentality. Nevermind the corruption in these dangerous third world countries.

[BreakerOfWills]

Live in a firearm culture and you get jumpy police. Deal with it; you don't get one without the other.

It would also help if certain demographics weren't well known for being uncooperative and escalating already tense situations.

The demographic doesnt determine who makes situations tense, the demographic determines who gets shot in tense situations.

http://www.alternet.org/civil-libert...not-get-killed

If you can shoot unarmed black people but not shoot people actively pointing weapons at you then maybe what you fear is black people, not weapons.

[BreakerOfWills]

Any source? Cause this is a really retarded statement. Not only are there arteries in the leg. Police aren't that proficient with a handgun in any country. You try shooting a moving target the size of a leg.

This is what's wrong with you guys. Not only do you believe complete nonsense (this story), but you think life is a video game or everyone should be Roland Deschain.

- - - Updated - - -



What a load of shit. Alternet, the bastion of informed, objective journalism. It's not as if 6% of America's population (black men) commit 50% of murders. It's not relevant that more white people are shot by cops despite being many times less likely to commit a violent crime. Black Lives Matter and all their propaganda are a farce.

Don't assault cops. Don't drive high on PCP. Don't resist arrest. How many "dindu nuffins" would be alive if they weren't pieces of shit. You guys demand execution for drunk driving, but this ass hat driving on PCP is a victim. Who's the real racist here?


[Infracted]

Well you certainly took a leap didnt you.

YOu havent disproved the cases I've linked indicating that presence of weapons and dangerous behavior clearly dont always result in police shooting people, instead choosing to talk about assaulting cops - which has nothing to do with this case, or nearly any case BLM brings up - although again, assaulting a police officer isnt grounds for killing people either.

But good to know where your true feelings lie.

[Polyxo]

Well, the victim was black and the perpetrator is white, and this was Tulsa...

[Deus Mortis]

There is video of this incident online, it is hard to see if he was reaching into the car at the moment it happened(the helicopter view just happens to be on the other side of the car when it happened).

Trump saying he was troubled by the shooting and saying that the guy who got killed looked like he was doing everything right.

[triplesdsu]

You're literally making a "they're comin' right for us" argument that would justify a cop shooting literally anyone who didn't follow their immediate orders.

That's insane, you realize that, right? All we're suggesting is that an officer should have to positively identify a threat before using lethal force. There's plenty of less-than-lethal options for other circumstances. Sure, they're not as effective as killing them would be, but you don't become a cop because you want to take the "easy road" of killing everyone who doesn't comply.



Someone's using words inappropriately here, to manipulate emotions, and it ain't me.

- - - Updated - - -



In this particular case, where they shot an unarmed man for not being compliant enough? Absolutely. Let's be clear; by Shelby's own account, he wasn't obeying her orders, and she thought he was on drugs, and that's it. He had no visible weapons, he wasn't aggressive to the officers.

In general? Nobody here is anti-cop.

Thats not it. Him walking back to his car and reaching inside for unknown reasons is was lead to her deciding to shoot. Saying it was just for the reasons you mentioned are false. She would have been convicted if he was simply standing there not listening and she shot him.

[Endus]

Thats not it. Him walking back to his car and reaching inside for unknown reasons is was lead to her deciding to shoot. Saying it was just for the reasons you mentioned are false. She would have been convicted if he was simply standing there not listening and she shot him.

You literally described how he was noncompliant.

There's nothing about "reaching into your car" that constitutes a deadly threat that justifies the use of lethal force. Draw your weapon and keep it trained on him, in case he's going for a weapon, fine, but firing unless you see that weapon? That's murderous intent.

You don't get to make up stuff in your head and then shoot them over those imaginary threats, and unless she saw him pulling out a weapon, that's all she had; fantasies.

[PACOX]

A symptom of white privilege is mistaking acquittals for the absence of wrongdoings.

[Deus Mortis]

You literally described how he was noncompliant.

There's nothing about "reaching into your car" that constitutes a deadly threat that justifies the use of lethal force. Draw your weapon and keep it trained on him, in case he's going for a weapon, fine, but firing unless you see that weapon? That's murderous intent.

You don't get to make up stuff in your head and then shoot them over those imaginary threats, and unless she saw him pulling out a weapon, that's all she had; fantasies.

See the problem with what you said is that there have been plenty of officers killed after the person reaches back into their car. The worst of these is the one that was filmed and is now shown as training videos, it is the one with the Vietnam Vet Andrew Brannan killing the police officer Kyle Dinkheller slowly. The officer told Andrew stop moving he didn't he walked back to his car and got out his carbine. Andrew shot Dinkheller 9 times. So yes reaching back into your car in the US can result in you getting blown away and justifiably so.

There is still an issue that can happen from this and it is when the cop fucks up and asks for a license and the guy goes back into the car and the cop shoots like in the case of Sean Groubert shooting Levar Jones.

[Endus]

See the problem with what you said is that there have been plenty of officers killed after the person reaches back into their car. The worst of these is the one that was filmed and is now shown as training videos, it is the one with the Vietnam Vet Andrew Brannan killing the police officer Kyle Dinkheller slowly. The officer told Andrew stop moving he didn't he walked back to his car and got out his carbine. Andrew shot Dinkheller 9 times. So yes reaching back into your car in the US can result in you getting blown away and justifiably so.

There is still an issue that can happen from this and it is when the cop fucks up and asks for a license and the guy goes back into the car and the cop shoots like in the case of Sean Groubert shooting Levar Jones.

While I agree that those events are tragic, letting cops murder unarmed and peaceful civilians for noncompliance isn't the answer, either.