[samsamsam]

Watch the video, the action starts around 50 sec mark. Only about 90 seconds long from there.

Apparently, the guy who was shot was known to the first cop. The guy who was shot served 13 years for shooting at a cop and was arrested 5 or 6 times in his life. While there are other deaths that I question, mainly the one in NYC where the guy was choked to death, I for some reason, cannot fin much sympathy in this shooting. Should have stayed in the fucking car. I don't blame the cop for flipping out when he found the gun and the continued insistence by the dead guy to not listen to the cop and then forcing his way out.

He is talking to the driver and even says, "what's up man" to the passenger, the guy he shoots. So clearly, he felt threatened by the situation and it went from friendly to deadly. I think understandably so. But as usual the nutjobs are saying it was murder. I don't see it. Even when he is out of the car with hands up, the former felon could have easily lunged for the gun at that close range. Why did he feel the need to get out of the car? I bet he knew he would be going back to prison and there was no way he was going to go back. That or he was on drugs.

It was one of the more intense dashcam videos I have seen in a while.

[Goldin Boy]

There's no racial angle. Always keeps you hands where a cop can see them on a traffic stop. I keep mine on the 12 o'clock spot on the wheel and always tell them where I'm reaching when In grab by license and other stuff.

Title is misleading...the officer clearly saw a gun in the glove box. There's nothing sympathetic about this death.

i don't think is going to be too big because:

1) The officer who killed him was Black(sounds like it) and
2)They had a fucking gun in the car and the departed didn't follow the officers explicit commands.

[samsamsam]

(01-22-2015 09:01 PM)Goldin Boy Wrote:  

There's no racial angle. Always keeps you hands where a cop can see them on a traffic stop. I keep mine on the 12 o'clock spot on the wheel and always tell them where I'm reaching when In grab by license and other stuff.

Title is misleading...the officer clearly saw a gun in the glove box. There's nothing sympathetic about this death.

i don't think is going to be too big because:

1) The officer who killed him was Black(sounds like it) and
2)They had a fucking gun in the car and the departed didn't follow the officers explicit commands.

I don't feel any sympathy in this one. Didn't think there would be any racial aspect since the officer was black also. I don't think the title is misleading. He got shot 9 times according to one source. If he would have just listened.

[Brian Shima]

I find it funny that most of the people who go crazy over justice for this type of crap never even encounter cops much less get harassed by them!!

[Goldin Boy]

Quote:

I don't feel any sympathy in this one. Didn't think there would be any racial aspect since the officer was black also. I don't think the title is misleading. He got shot 9 times according to one source. If he would have just listened.

My issue with the title is that it says "unarmed". Officer saw the gun in the glove compartment which set-off the whole incident.

[RawGod]

I guess it's "lucky" that the officer was black, otherwise the media would be a step closer to their race war.

[Tuthmosis]

(01-22-2015 09:04 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

Didn't think there would be any racial aspect since the officer was black also.

I agree. This image of the arresting officer has just been released.

   

[samsamsam]

(01-22-2015 09:12 PM)Goldin Boy Wrote:  

Quote:

I don't feel any sympathy in this one. Didn't think there would be any racial aspect since the officer was black also. I don't think the title is misleading. He got shot 9 times according to one source. If he would have just listened.

My issue with the title is that it says "unarmed". Officer saw the gun in the glove compartment which set-off the whole incident.

Oh, I thought you were referring to my subject heading. I agree the gun in the glove box set if off.

[scorpion]

If the race hustlers and SJWs were actually interested in preventing the deaths of young black men instead of exploiting them for political and ideological reasons, they would advocate for a massive campaign in the black community teaching people the correct way to interact with police officers.

[DrewP]

(01-22-2015 09:37 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

If the race hustlers and SJWs were actually interested in preventing the deaths of young black men instead of exploiting them for political and ideological reasons, they would advocate for a massive campaign in the black community teaching people the correct way to interact with police officers.

I agree with the sentiment, but in this case the cop keeps repeating:

"You reach for something you're gonna be fuckin dead."

Don't know how it could possibly get any more clear than that.

[AneroidOcean]

(01-22-2015 08:54 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

It was one of the more intense dashcam videos I have seen in a while.

Yes. I wish it was a bit clearer. However, barring being able to really see the passenger who ended up shot, it's obvious that he got out of the car directly disobeying the officer's orders who had stated "if you reach for something you're dead" and "if you get out of this car I will fucking shoot you."

The other officer actually was aiming his gun at the passenger most of the interaction as he realized that the driver had no such death wish (showing his hands and basically not moving at all).

[Old Fritz]

I know Al Sharpton has his gasoline ready to light the fires again.

[Fortis]

That was the dumbest shit I've watched in a while. Why didn't he listen?

[GeroMeroHero]

   

[WanderingSoul]

Police officer didn't have much choice. Dude sprang out of that car too quickly, and he was way too close, for the cop to take the risk of shooting him in the leg or anything like that.

Stupid move. He got himself killed.

[Slim Shady]

Cops shouldn't have pulled them over in the first place...

[Sebastian]

Got pulled over. I opened glove box before he came over to get documents.
He came and asked for it. He started yelling 'what is that?' I didn't know what he was talking about so i gave him huh? look. He said what's that!? and I saw he pulled out the gun little bit from the holster. I realized he was talking about the cologne. I told him it was a perfume First and showed it to him. I wonder what would have happened if I just grabbed it without telling him first (your natural reaction is to grab it first.)
Funny thing is it was Marc Jacobs BANG cologne lol

[WanderingSoul]

(01-22-2015 11:55 PM)Slim Shady Wrote:  

Cops shouldn't have pulled them over in the first place...

He clearly rolled through that stop sign.

And it's a good thing the cops did pull them over considering they were riding around with a gun in the glove box and obviously in no mental condition to be doing that.

I probably dislike cops more than anyone on this forum, but this officer really did nothing wrong. That dude got himself killed. This is on him.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

I think that the cop over-reacted. Of course it's no white on black crime, but it's a sign of our militarized times.

That said the guy behaved badly, if you have a weapon in the glove compartment, then you better tell it in advance and say that you won't reach into it because you don't want to give the cop a bad idea. He should not have left the car like that as well.

But I still think that cops now over-react more often than not. He should have stepped back a bit, maybe fired a warning shot. The guy had his hands up - yes it's possible that he might have had a different weapon on him, but so far he did not attack the cop.

It's clear that the cop was extremely trigger-happy and if you meet such a guy you better move slow and do everything he says or get shot.

Still - this scene would not happen in Switzerland or even Canada - it's getting worse and worse as economy goes to shit, police gets militarized and deliberately set against the population, illegal economy is getting bigger as jobs are harder to come by - all of it will fuel this madness.

[Enigma]

(01-23-2015 05:17 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

I think that the cop over-reacted. Of course it's no white on black crime, but it's a sign of our militarized times.

That said the guy behaved badly, if you have a weapon in the glove compartment, then you better tell it in advance and say that you won't reach into it because you don't want to give the cop a bad idea. He should not have left the car like that as well.

But I still think that cops now over-react more often than not. He should have stepped back a bit, maybe fired a warning shot. The guy had his hands up - yes it's possible that he might have had a different weapon on him, but so far he did not attack the cop.

It's clear that the cop was extremely trigger-happy and if you meet such a guy you better move slow and do everything he says or get shot.

Still - this scene would not happen in Switzerland or even Canada - it's getting worse and worse as economy goes to shit, police gets militarized and deliberately set against the population, illegal economy is getting bigger as jobs are harder to come by - all of it will fuel this madness.

I agree entirely. 9 shots at point blank range, including at least 1 a few seconds after the suspect has already fallen, is not only unnecessary but tactically unaware. He knows the gun is still in the glove compartment. He knows his shots are connecting; he's 3 ft away.

And if the driver had shot his partner, he's sitting out in the open with a nearly depleted clip because he used an extra 5+ bullets on a guy's chest at close range.

There's been a huge shift in the amount of force deemed acceptable from police. Even 10 years ago, it was never "you don't listen, you're dead". They did what they had to to protect themselves and the public, but the goal was never to actually kill a guy unless he was a massive threat.

Obviously in this case, it went a little further than "not listening" since there was a weapon introduced, but I don't think simply ignoring instructions from police -- who often don't even have a full understanding of the law or are corrupt in some way -- is justification to be killed.

This is the same mentality that gets innocent people killed when some cop gets nervous, because they're shooting off their shooting off their whole clip directly into people's chest at the slightest agitation.

[WanderingSoul]

(01-23-2015 05:37 AM)Enigma Wrote:  

I agree entirely. 9 shots at point blank range, including at least 1 a few seconds after the suspect has already fallen, is not only unnecessary but tactically unaware. He knows the gun is still in the glove compartment. He knows his shots are connecting; he's 3 ft away.

And if the driver had shot his partner, he's sitting out in the open with a nearly depleted clip because he used an extra 5+ bullets on a guy's chest at close range.

There's been a huge shift in the amount of force deemed acceptable from police. Even 10 years ago, it was never "you don't listen, you're dead". They did what they had to to protect themselves and the public, but the goal was never to actually kill a guy unless he was a massive threat.

Obviously in this case, it went a little further than "not listening" since there was a weapon introduced, but I don't think simply ignoring instructions from police -- who often don't even have a full understanding of the law or are corrupt in some way -- is justification to be killed.

This is the same mentality that gets innocent people killed when some cop gets nervous, because they're shooting off their shooting off their whole clip directly into people's chest at the slightest agitation.

You're way over simplifying here.

Had the police officer been 15-20 feet away, I would agree he didn't need to shoot to kill. He could have aimed for the leg. The reason I think in this case he shot to kill is because when the guy sprang out of the car, he was so close he could have easily wrestled with the officer for the gun or stabbed him. The guy forced the door open quickly and jumped out.

9 shots probably wasn't necessary, but if I were the cop I would have shot to kill in this situation. The guy was just too close to take the risk.

Also, the cop obviously didn't kill the guy for "ignoring instructions from police" as you say. He killed a guy who was acting erratically, had a gun in front of him, and sprang out of a car after told repeatedly if he did he would be killed.

I think the US police was way over militarized and abuse their power on the regular. I dislike them, don't trust them, and think they need to be stripped of a LOT of the power and military grade weapons and vehicles that they posses. But in this case, I think the cop was in the right.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(01-23-2015 06:19 AM)RioNomad Wrote:  

I think the US police was way over militarized and abuse their power on the regular. I dislike them, don't trust them, and think they need to be stripped of a LOT of the power and military grade weapons and vehicles that they posses. But in this case, I think the cop was in the right.

I think that most people are already to indoctrinated into the current police state to see a problem with this.

I bet that the very same guy - if he were serving in NYC in 1980 would behave differently. Keep in mind that crime was way worse back then, but still the very same cop having gone through police training in the 1970s would have behaved differently. He may not have even pulled a gun out.

Times have changed and the population has become used to a militarized police and an Orwellian surveillance state.

The process has been done gradually so that even the police don't realize that they have transformed from peace keepers serving under the Jedi to storm troopers imposing the will of the Sith. That Star Wars analogy is fitting despite it's childishness.


"I'm off to kill some filthy rebel scum."

It's like this joke by two SS officers talking:
Says one to the other:
"Hans, you ever notice we have all those symbols of death and evil on our uniforms - we have a skull on our cap for God's sake!"
Hans: "So?"
"Do you think we are the bad guys here?"

Never underestimate the power of the state to be able to strip you away of your humanity.

[WanderingSoul]

Zelcorpion, I agree for sure.

I see police roll up to situations in their armored vehicles, full body armor, military assault rifles, etc. and it's ludicrous. That isn't what they are for.

My hometown is very, very small. It got a grant for a fully armored vehicle just like this:




It is so unnecessary, dangerous, and a huge waste of money. I can only imagine the police are looking for any opportunity possible to take it out for a spin on some call where it is not needed whatsoever.

People don't realize it, but it is a scary thing when the police of such a small town are so well armed. Imagine how well armed large cities police departments are. They take their orders from above, and who knows in 1-100 years what kind of orders those from above will be handing down, especially if the economy crashes, or there is some sort of uprising at the government abusing their power, which they most certainly do.

[weambulance]

Oookay from what I see, I'm not nearly as cool as a lot of you are with what the cop did.

First of all, he saw the gun and had the guy covered completely from that point. He reached in and clearly removed the gun from the car, you can see that plain as day in the video. So the only weapon he knows exists is out of the picture. Remember, the guy he shot was the passenger. He might not have even known the gun was there.

Then the cop continues to act like a fucking maniac, totally losing his cool while pointing his gun at the passenger, which probably was not helping the guy in the passenger seat remain calm. It's pretty obvious as soon as the cop pulled his gun, he was looking for any justification to shoot.

The passenger gets out with his hands clearly up, not displaying aggressive body language or moving toward the cop, and gets shot at least 5-6 times from what I could hear. Stupid to get out of the car, yes, but unless he had icewater in his veins I doubt he was thinking 100% clearly while the armed maniac was screaming at him that he was about to shoot him.

So, what am I to take away from this? That as soon as the cop thinks someone is armed, shooting that person is fair game as long as he screams a bunch first? The cop did nothing to keep the situation calm and everything to escalate it.

I carry a gun every day. It's on my person, in a strong side belt holster. I doubt I would survive an encounter with this cop, because as soon as he saw the gun (or was informed about it, as many places require concealed carriers to inform cops they're armed) he'd be wigging out and pointing his gun at me. He's exactly the kind of cop who would tell me to drop the gun--which is in the holster still--and then shoot me the second I touched it.

Bear in mind, I've been on both sides of the gun. I've had to deal with potentially armed and hostile people hundreds of times, and I've had police encounters while armed including one time when I was arrested by mistake while carrying a 1911. I never lost my shit or made things worse, and neither did the cops who were dealing with me. They were professionals of the highest caliber compared to the fucking clown in this video.

[weambulance]

However, to address some of the discussion about warning shots, shooting in the leg, etc:

That stuff belongs in the movies, not real life.

Warning shots have their place in war zones, sure. I fired well over 1000 warning shots during my time as lead vehicle gunner in Iraq and during countless cordons when I had to warn people away. But they do not belong in a peacetime, civilian environment, because the bullets go somewhere, and may well end up hitting an innocent person. If it's time to shoot, shoot your target and shoot to stop.

Shooting for the leg is just silly too. For one thing, leg shots can easily be fatal. For another, you're probably going to miss, and where is that bullet going to go? Hope it doesn't hit Suzie the 9 year old down the street. Nope, when it's time to shoot you shoot for center of mass until the threat stops being a threat (which is not the same as shooting to kill).