Jump to content


The George Floyd/Black Lives Matter protests and police conduct


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, DevoHusker said:

I agree on the bolded, from when the still shot was lifted. But, I still want to know what transpired in the 15-20 seconds minutes PRIOR to the video starting. It sure appears that they were coming up off the ground at the passenger side rear, maybe a scuffle there?

Corrected.  I want to see how this whole thing started.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

Agree. I don’t know why it matters how it started unless it’s just a curiosity. Even if he punched an officer and said he was going to kill them all then rape their daughters, it was not necessary to shoot him. Why should we treat this like a bar fight where we decide if he was asking for it? That’s not how law enforcement is supposed to work. 

  • Plus1 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
17 hours ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

So, it doesn't matter how it started...what counts is how it ended...with him being shot in the back 7 times in front of his children.  Didn't need to happen...shouldn't have happened...and was escalated by our boys in blue for whatever reason.

 

17 hours ago, Moiraine said:

Agree. I don’t know why it matters how it started unless it’s just a curiosity. 

 

Aside from curiosity, I would say there is a lot of value in knowing how it started. We all know that it shouldn't have happened the way it did, but knowing how it got to that point can potentially help us understand what went wrong along the way. It can also be valuable for training the police.

 

So much of police work is about making quick decisions. That officer made a choice to shoot Jacob Blake in the back. Before that, he made a choice to grab his shirt while he was trying to get in his car. Before that, he made a choice to follow Blake as he walked away with gun drawn. Before that (if there was indeed a scuffle where they had him on the ground), decisions were made about what to do or not to do with this man on the ground in front of them that allowed him to get up and walk away. In each of those moments, a different choice would have led to a much different and less violent outcome. So in the events that happened beforehand that we don't know about, there were many other choices made along the way. It is likely that there were a lot of f&#k-ups when those choices were made. It would be good to identify those decision-making moments, find the mistakes, and figure out how to do better.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
18 hours ago, BlitzFirst said:

So, it doesn't matter how it started...what counts is how it ended...with him being shot in the back 7 times in front of his children.  Didn't need to happen...shouldn't have happened...and was escalated by our boys in blue for whatever reason.

 

17 hours ago, Moiraine said:

Agree. I don’t know why it matters how it started unless it’s just a curiosity. Even if he punched an officer and said he was going to kill them all then rape their daughters, it was not necessary to shoot him. Why should we treat this like a bar fight where we decide if he was asking for it? That’s not how law enforcement is supposed to work. 

I disagree.  It very well could end up just like it shows in the original video.  A, supposedly, unarmed black man is shot for no reason.

 

However, there was a reason why the cops pulled their guns.  It wasn't just one cop.  It was multiple cops.  Also, wasn't there a video from a different angle that shows a couple seconds more where Blake was getting up off the ground?  The video was very shaky and it's hard to tell.  Was he getting up after wrestling with a cop?  If so, why?  What happened before that?  was he violent towards the cops when they got there?  Did he, at any time, have a weapon that the cops thought he might still have?

 

Like I said, it probably still isn't going to look good for the police because they did shoot a guy in the back in front of his kids.  But.....we need to know more.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

I disagree.  It very well could end up just like it shows in the original video.  A, supposedly, unarmed black man is shot for no reason.

 

However, there was a reason why the cops pulled their guns.  It wasn't just one cop.  It was multiple cops.  Also, wasn't there a video from a different angle that shows a couple seconds more where Blake was getting up off the ground?  The video was very shaky and it's hard to tell.  Was he getting up after wrestling with a cop?  If so, why?  What happened before that?  was he violent towards the cops when they got there?  Did he, at any time, have a weapon that the cops thought he might still have?

 

Like I said, it probably still isn't going to look good for the police because they did shoot a guy in the back in front of his kids.  But.....we need to know more.

 

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/ny-jacob-blake-officials-release-new-details-identify-two-more-cops-20200828-dhhvbg5iinb65a2vyk7ior27lu-story.html

  • Fire 1
Link to comment

18 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

 

 

Hmmmm....this adds a little more light.

 

Quote

During a struggle that preceded the broad-daylight shooting in Kenosha, police deployed their tasers twice in a failed attempt to subdue the 29-year-old father of six, the Wisconsin Department of Justice said in a news release Friday morning.

Quote

It’s still unclear why police decided to use a lethal weapon during an incident that began as a domestic situation, but authorities claim Blake had admitted he “had a knife in his possession” and that cops found one on the driver’s side floorboard of his car.

 

Quote

Police responded to the scene that day after a woman reported that “her boyfriend was present and was not supposed to be on the premises,” according to the Wisconsin DOJ. Cops then tried to take the suspect into custody, but he resisted arrest, walked away from them and tried to get back into his car, authorities said.

 

So, he had a restraining order against him to not be anywhere around his girlfriend's property.  He shows up with a knife.  Girlfriend calls the cops.  They confront him and use tasers twice and he still doesn't stop.  (remember, everyone has asked "why didn't they use non-lethal options") He tries getting in his car with the kids and the knife and they shoot him.

 

Now....let's put yourself in the policeman's position.  He's getting into a car, with a weapon, after his girlfriend called the cops on him, and the little kids are in the car.

 

This turns into a really tough situation for the cops.

 

Let's say they don't shoot him, he gets in the car, he's not supposed to have the kids, he drives off and now it turns into a kidnapping situation.  Would the cops be heavily criticized for allowing a guy to drive off with kidnapped kids? Remember, they already tried stopping him in a non-lethal manner twice.  What if he then turns violent (with the weapon they know he has) towards the kids?

 

 

 

 

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment

He could be trying to protect the children. This is his vehicle? His knife was in the car, so he was the one with the children? 

 

You could let him get in the car. Make every attempt to disable the vehicle and send out a warning. You have vehicle description and last seen headed info and you can attempt to follow. 
 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment

That's why dealing in hypotheticals with things like this is an incredibly slippery slope. Based on what we know and can see for ourselves, the end result of a man being shot in the back seven times is unacceptable. But, I think we also have to admit that we don't know as much as we'd all like to.

 

We also know (based on the video) that Jake Blake didn't do himself an abundance of favors. That is not an excuse for what happened to him, but, it is a part of the story that will be told if this goes to court. A court isn't going to deal in absolutes.

 

And I too have to push back against the notion that how this started isn't overtly relevant. It is absolutely relevant even if the end result is abhorrent. If the investigation determines that how everything unfolded was riddled with mistakes (and, right now, it feels like that will be the case) then that is incredibly valuable information. We can't be better as a society if we're not learning from our mistakes and what causes them IMO.

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment

Always fascinating how subjective these cases wind up being to the public. We have a group of people here looking at the same facts that come out the other side with different opinions on the "should haves." Honestly that's normal, but at the same time kind of a weird phenomenon.

 

So many of these deaths are similar to the Eric Garner case that was one of the first ones in the social media age that ultimately started raising the issue of police brutality in the public's eye. You have a person that is plainly told they're under arrest. They then resist arrest. Then they wind up being killed.

 

I really wish the tasers had just been effective. I also wish the officer had just tried to shoot him in his legs to render him immobile. But of course, I don't know what it's like to be a cop in that type of high pressure situation.

 

But similar to the Eric Garner case, maybe police need a different kind of tool that render someone immobile?

Link to comment

Man with restraining order against him is in the presence of police without a visible weapon after police receive a call about a domestic disturbance.

 

Man with a long gun is in the presence of police while crowds of people tell police that he has shot someone.

 

Which of these people should be contacted by the police?

 

If you didn't know anything about either of these two men, and you were told one of these two was shot when police tried to apprehend him, which would you choose?

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment

36 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

"but he had a knife"

I hesitate to even bring the following up in this conversation, but it was so whacko when I heard it that I couldn't believe it...

 

I've literally seen the narrative that Blake was getting ready to go stab his kids before he was shot. People are actually believing that garbage on social media right now AND SHARING IT.

 

Some people are absolutely whacked.

  • Plus1 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, knapplc said:

Man with restraining order against him is in the presence of police without a visible weapon after police receive a call about a domestic disturbance.

 

Man with a long gun is in the presence of police while crowds of people tell police that he has shot someone.

 

Which of these people should be contacted by the police?

 

If you didn't know anything about either of these two men, and you were told one of these two was shot when police tried to apprehend him, which would you choose?

One of them fought with 3 cops, got tazed, and was still trying to get away. The other went towards cops with his hands up to surrender. Now which one?

  • Plus1 1
  • Fire 1
Link to comment
3 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Hmmmm....this adds a little more light.

 

 

 

So, he had a restraining order against him to not be anywhere around his girlfriend's property.  He shows up with a knife.  Girlfriend calls the cops.  They confront him and use tasers twice and he still doesn't stop.  (remember, everyone has asked "why didn't they use non-lethal options") He tries getting in his car with the kids and the knife and they shoot him.

 

Now....let's put yourself in the policeman's position.  He's getting into a car, with a weapon, after his girlfriend called the cops on him, and the little kids are in the car.

 

This turns into a really tough situation for the cops.

 

Let's say they don't shoot him, he gets in the car, he's not supposed to have the kids, he drives off and now it turns into a kidnapping situation.  Would the cops be heavily criticized for allowing a guy to drive off with kidnapped kids? Remember, they already tried stopping him in a non-lethal manner twice.  What if he then turns violent (with the weapon they know he has) towards the kids?

 

 

A lot of that is not relevant. Police aren't supposed to shoot people because they get upset or pissed off or scared. Part of their job is to not let it affect them. No one is claiming it's not tough. The requirement here if you are a police officer is that you control your emotions enough to not shoot someone unless absolutely necessary. 3 police officers should be trained well enough to be able to take down 1 person with a knife (which he did not even have on him) without shooting the person. Or, you know, try shooting him in the leg.

Why are you assuming he's not supposed to have the kids? You don't think the police would have stated that already to try to make themselves look better?

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment
23 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

One of them fought with 3 cops, got tazed, and was still trying to get away. The other went towards cops with his hands up to surrender. Now which one?

The first one walked slowly towards his driver door and bent over into the car. The second had just shot 2 people within a couple hundred yards of the cops in plain view, surrender with his hands up then touched his gun several times as he walked towards them and was never arrested, had a gun pulled on him or detained in any way.

  • Plus1 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...