This is what's wrong with police in the U.S.

Avatar image for willpayton
willpayton

22502

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

A cop murders an unarmed guy, and it's all on video, but is still found not guilty.

In this situation, the cop is constantly yelling at the scared guy, giving him contradictory orders, and generally treating him like he's the enemy... even though the guy is clearly just scared for his life and crying. And he should be scared because there's an angry and paranoid cop with an assault rifle pointed at him, yelling threats. In the end the cop gives him orders that are pretty much guaranteed to result in a shooting, and that's what happens. "if you made a mistake I'm going to shoot you both", "put your hands straight up in the air... do not put them down for any reason", "you think you're going to fall you better fall on your face", "now crawl towards me"... !

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/12/08/graphic-video-shows-daniel-shaver-sobbing-and-begging-officer-for-his-life-before-2016-shooting/?utm_term=.37879f0acdd6

Bodycam video: Watch at your discretion

I think the problem here is pretty much the same as with a lot of what's going on with police in this country. They are trained as if the public is the enemy and they always need to use extreme violence. They watch videos and listen to stories about how everything around them could kill them. So it's not surprising that they go on the streets with the mentality that they're at war and have to point a gun at anything that doesnt immediately comply with everything they say.

Here, the cop should have realized that this guy was no threat. He could simply have told him to get down and then walked over and cuffed him. Why all the screaming and threats? Any sane person facing this cop would probably not be thinking clearly and be scared out of his or her mind. Of course the person is not going to follow the instructions perfectly, and especially so when the instructions are contradictory. "put your hands up" and then "crawl towards me"? The cop was basically giving him orders to do something that he already said would result in a shooting. "If you make a mistake there's a very severe possibility that you're both going to get shot".. Really? What kind of f***ing attitude is that?

What happened to protect and to serve? This cop was there with the intent to get into a gun fight. Everything about his attitude says that he has some kind of paranoia or anger issues. And he murdered a guy and now gets away with it. What is the intensive for other cops to do any different when they know they can basically murder an unarmed, scared, crying guy, on video, and walk away free.

Avatar image for AssertingValor
AssertingValor

10952

Forum Posts

6403

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 65

Yup something is fked up here

Avatar image for boschepg
boschePG

6340

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 12

#3  Edited By boschePG

@willpayton: its a high stress job

I do agree that this incident was a bad showing for this officer. The partner should have cuffed the man instead of asking him to crawl. that's a fact

It hard to prosecute police cuz like in this video, the boy made a motion for his waist. We as outsiders assume he was picking up his pants but it is also the motion to reach for a gun, in which he got the benefit of the doubt

the scenario painted a bad scenario for the cops anyways cuz they were called cuz the man and his girlfriend were drunk and the cops were called cuz they had a bebe gun pointing out of the room - which cannot be discerned by anyone. but the cops were called for a possible gun in the situation which escalates anxiety- which turned out to be a bebe gun from a drunk couple- which also helped the cops case

the judge did throw out that the shooter in question had his own personal weapon with the engravement "You are F'd" but was thrown out to not provide bias'

I agree this cop went overboard but the reason he was there and the motion to the waist when they are called for possible gun made those triggers somewhat problematic

Avatar image for deactivated-5d2b83d5a0d79
deactivated-5d2b83d5a0d79

12104

Forum Posts

19

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

That was disgusting, and that officer seemed like he was on some kind of power trip.

Avatar image for ad-arts
ad-arts

2116

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5  Edited By ad-arts

That cop is a coward, a god damn coward.

Avatar image for willpayton
willpayton

22502

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6  Edited By willpayton

@boschepg said:

@willpayton: its a high stress job

Totally agree, and all the more reason why the training of police needs to be better. They should default to de-escalation at all times, and not head into situations with the assumption that the people they meet are automatically a threat to them, or that shooting someone is the only way to deal with a problem.

I'm reminded of the video of the man who walked into a Thai police station with a knife. In the U.S. he'd been shot immediately by half a dozen cops. In this Thai police station a cop talks him down and takes away the knife with no violence whatsoever, no one gets hurt.

Loading Video...

Avatar image for ad-arts
ad-arts

2116

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7  Edited By ad-arts

@boschepg said:

@willpayton: its a high stress job

Totally agree, and all the more reason why the training of police needs to be better. They should default to de-escalation at all times, and not head into situations with the assumption that the people they meet are automatically a threat to them, or that shooting someone is the only way to deal with a problem.

I'm reminded of the video of the man who walked into a Thai police station with a knife. In the U.S. he'd been shot immediately by half a dozen cops. In this Thai police station a cop talks him down and takes away the knife with no violence whatsoever, no one gets hurt.

Loading Video...

That's because in US usually people with no perspectives or brain join the police.

Avatar image for vts
VTS

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

That's just straight up murder. Cop needs to be locked up.

Avatar image for boschepg
boschePG

6340

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 12

@willpayton: true, but after the Las Vegas shooting and the other shooting last week, when a cop gets called cuz someone saw a gun, do you think any officer is in de-escalation mode?

just to be clear, I thought the cop was wrong, but due to his job and the two points pointed out by me, I know why he got off. An on the job shooting will never be charge with murder 1. Muder 2 maybe and they could have pushed for that here but its usually manslaughter. If prosecution asked for Muder 2 and its more manslaughter than the case would be found innocent for overcharging. I hear that California case with the immigrant where the lady got shot was prosecuted at Murder 2 but should have been manslaughter cuz of the scenario. Its just another factor in which the officer might have gotten off innocent was overcharged criminal charges

Avatar image for willpayton
willpayton

22502

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@ad-arts said:
@willpayton said:
@boschepg said:

Totally agree, and all the more reason why the training of police needs to be better. They should default to de-escalation at all times, and not head into situations with the assumption that the people they meet are automatically a threat to them, or that shooting someone is the only way to deal with a problem.

I'm reminded of the video of the man who walked into a Thai police station with a knife. In the U.S. he'd been shot immediately by half a dozen cops. In this Thai police station a cop talks him down and takes away the knife with no violence whatsoever, no one gets hurt.

That's because in US usually people with no perspectives or brain join the police.

Sometimes that's true, but there's also a whole lot of very intelligent and moral people doing that job. I have a lot of respect for them. I just think that in general the training they get makes everything worse. Then of course you have the bad apples, and this just makes them even worse. You bring up perspective... and I think that's the right word. The training needs to have the perspective that they're there to help people and insure the safety of the public, even if that means that they'll be in dangerous situations and that those situations cant be eliminated by having the mentality that they're at war. They cant approach everything by acting like violent thugs.

Take this situation where the cop is yelling orders... what if the person has a mental handicap? What if they dont speak English? What if they're drunk or on drugs? What if, what if? The cop created a situation where it's very likely that he will shoot someone, and not because of any actual danger, but because he has created the danger in his mind and escalated things by his own actions.

Avatar image for stellatedcolt
StellatedColt

1132

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Truly disheartening, I'll say. It's a shame but I can see how the lawyer's got the cop off. Sucks that this man was killed because the cops were afraid to handcuff the man. The dude was literally on the floor with his arms stretched out. That was the perfect opportunity to cuff him. However, since the man reached near his waist, there was no doubt in my mind that this action would "justify" the cop's reckless behavior. Tis' a shame I say.

Avatar image for willpayton
willpayton

22502

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@boschepg said:

@willpayton: true, but after the Las Vegas shooting and the other shooting last week, when a cop gets called cuz someone saw a gun, do you think any officer is in de-escalation mode?

Yeah, I get that and I can understand it. But that's where the training has to kick in. Having that much power and authority must come with much higher restraint and expectations. The training has to be there to overcome the normal psychological reactions, just like they practice with their weapons so that in chaotic situations they dont have to think, they just do what they trained for. But what happens now is that they train the cops to always see the danger and threat in any situation... so it's not surprising that many situations become dangerous and threatening, even if there's no real danger there. Like you said, this could have ended with one cop telling the guy to lie down, and the other cop walking over and cuffing him.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a84a212043e5
deactivated-5a84a212043e5

2790

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

US policing is a joke. Ask anyone in the armed forces, THEY'RE actually prepared to give their lives for their country, they don't shoot unless shot at, they don't even raise their weapons until ready to shoot. They're the real patriots. Cops are jokes, just sad individuals furious with their mediocrity, and power tripping with a god complex to compensate. "Some of them, I assume, are good people."

Avatar image for deactivated-5faef67d08995
deactivated-5faef67d08995

5578

Forum Posts

68

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 9

@sergeant-rl3: Yeah the military never murders civilians.

Avatar image for wut
Wut

8212

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17  Edited By Wut

@sergeant-rl3 said:

US policing is a joke. Ask anyone in the armed forces, THEY'RE actually prepared to give their lives for their country, they don't shoot unless shot at, they don't even raise their weapons until ready to shoot. They're the real patriots. Cops are jokes, just sad individuals furious with their mediocrity, and power tripping with a god complex to compensate. "Some of them, I assume, are good people."

Loading Video...

You're right. All those young men and women who joined the military because they were scouted with a certain predatory action by military recruiters in their bloody high schools thinking it is going to be some great or noble adventure or that they will be gun toting tough guys or anything, or joined the military to help pay for college, all totally go to war prepared to die. Yep, totally.

They never. ever. ever. ever. ever do anything wrong.

Wait, what is this? Murdered 16 Afghan civilians? Fake news.

Bah, they would never, ever, beat on prisoners for no reason including holding their legs open and urging their friends to kick them in the balls as they stand around laughing.

Of course, that is only in war zones, they hardly ever do anything bad in other nations that are peaceful. Its not like the US had to recently ban their soldiers from drinking in Okinawa because they decided to drink and drive and kill a Japanese citizen. If you heard anything else, its fake news.

Its not like you can spend five minutes on google or something or realize soldiers have been committing atrocities and warcrimes since humanity learned how rocks and sticks could kill or anything.

But, hey, "Some of them, I assume, are good people."

Avatar image for tj849
tj849

8569

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

@ad-arts said:

That cop is a coward, a god damn coward.

@farkam said:

That was disgusting, and that officer seemed like he was on some kind of power trip.

Avatar image for thewatcherking
TheWatcherKing

23429

Forum Posts

31

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@farkam said:

That was disgusting, and that officer seemed like he was on some kind of power trip.

Avatar image for black_arrow
Black_Arrow

10321

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

That cop should be in jail.

Avatar image for deactivated-60fae469e992f
deactivated-60fae469e992f

18027

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

any kind of context as to why he was there in the first place?

Avatar image for silent_bomber
silent_bomber

4974

Forum Posts

96141

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

This guy is a nutter, and its obvious from the first words he shouts that he's a nutter. Whoever thought it was acceptable to have a man like this doing the job he's doing should also be fired, this man posed an obvious risk to the general public.

Negligence through and through, just about anyone would've been killed in this situation.

Avatar image for thorthunder98
Thorthunder98

7111

Forum Posts

1578

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

This shit pisses me off and pisses me off even more that there is hardly ever any consequences for the cops

Avatar image for deactivated-5c531df1eeb1f
deactivated-5c531df1eeb1f

1804

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

it's way too easy becoming a cop.

The training should increase as should the vetting processes when selecting new people, we have too many cowards and not enough clear headed thinkers.

Avatar image for zemoftw
Zemoftw

1486

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I agree man. Way too many people are needlessly killed by cops.

Avatar image for silent_bomber
silent_bomber

4974

Forum Posts

96141

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

#26  Edited By silent_bomber

After calming down about this I looked into it a bit further.

I don't think the person who is shouting is the person who shot him. I believe the hysterical man in charge is the now retired Charles Langley, the man who shot him is 26 year old Philip Brailsford. Langley made a complete mess of the situation, shouting a bunch of pointlessly complicated instructions to a drunk man and then further escalated tensions through his emotional outbursts, then Brailsford (who seems to have been thought of as trigger happy anyway) shot him.

Complete mess all round, and both of them were already seen as a problem prior to the incident.

Avatar image for marvelanddcfan24
MarvelandDCfan24

9080

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Poor training and guys with connections get in faster than qualified guys if you have a family member or friend that's high in the police force you can get a job pretty quickly

Avatar image for deactivated-5a39421825b35
deactivated-5a39421825b35

2981

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Statistically most cops are psycho killers or just some asshole with something to prove.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a39421825b35
deactivated-5a39421825b35

2981

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@willpayton said:

What happened to protect and to serve?

They stopped using that as their motto after they passed a law basically saying it's not the polices job to prevent crime from happening, it's just to shoot people after the fact.

Avatar image for deactivated-5b2121a0a9a00
deactivated-5b2121a0a9a00

10000

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

He was mentally ill

Avatar image for pyrogram
Pyrogram

46168

Forum Posts

13113

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 1

Statistically most cops are psycho killers or just some asshole with something to prove.

Come on now that's just a blatant lie. There's zero evidence to support that "statistically" LOL

Avatar image for sag3
sag3

7

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

And in other news, 900,000 other police officers did their job that day without making the news.

I’m stepping in here because this thread is clearly in need of a little expertise. It’s nobody’s fault. Most people don’t have police officers in their daily lives, and are only able to form their opinions based on third hand accounts from media outlets that enjoy casting aspersions on police officers. If you’re interested in a law enforcement perspective, I’ll break down what you saw in this video, and explain what the officers were thinking.

First, a little about myself. If you aren’t interested in who I am, but want to know what I have to say about the incident, skip this paragraph and move on. But I feel I should justify my use of the word “expertise.” I am an active police detective for a large police agency in the US. Since I am not a spokesperson for my agency, I’ll only describe it as one of the largest in the country, yet one of the smallest per capita. I have been with this agency since I began as a jailer in 2000. I went into the police academy in 2001. I stayed in patrol until 2009, at which point I took on a more investigative position, eventually making detective in 2016. I have a martial arts background, and am certified as an instructor for self defense, x26 taser, and slow speed driving, and I used to be part of our department’s rifle (AR-15) cadre. I’m also a proud geek, who owes a large part of where I am in life to my devotion to comics. That’s how I found comicvine. I thought I would participate in many of the discussions, but, as I can be very wordy, I don’t have as much time as I’d like to argue every topic that interests me. (By the way, Wolverine wins the first fight against Batman, but Batman wins every subsequent encounter. And yes, Thor clearly held back in his Helicarrier fight against the Hulk).

To the situation at hand, I’ll start by addressing some of the concerns that are being brought up. Then, I’ll explain what’s going on in the video. I’ll wrap things up by offering my critique of the officers’ performance, as well as how I believe I’d have handled the same situation. Yes, I would have done a few things differently.

A cop murders an unarmed guy, and it's all on video, but is still found not guilty.

In this situation, the cop is constantly yelling at the scared guy, giving him contradictory orders, and generally treating him like he's the enemy... even though the guy is clearly just scared for his life and crying. And he should be scared because there's an angry and paranoid cop with an assault rifle pointed at him, yelling threats. In the end the cop gives him orders that are pretty much guaranteed to result in a shooting, and that's what happens. "if you made a mistake I'm going to shoot you both", "put your hands straight up in the air... do not put them down for any reason", "you think you're going to fall you better fall on your face", "now crawl towards me"... !

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/12/08/graphic-video-shows-daniel-shaver-sobbing-and-begging-officer-for-his-life-before-2016-shooting/?utm_term=.37879f0acdd6

Bodycam video: Watch at your discretion

Loading Video...

I think the problem here is pretty much the same as with a lot of what's going on with police in this country. They are trained as if the public is the enemy and they always need to use extreme violence. They watch videos and listen to stories about how everything around them could kill them. So it's not surprising that they go on the streets with the mentality that they're at war and have to point a gun at anything that doesnt immediately comply with everything they say.

Here, the cop should have realized that this guy was no threat. He could simply have told him to get down and then walked over and cuffed him. Why all the screaming and threats? Any sane person facing this cop would probably not be thinking clearly and be scared out of his or her mind. Of course the person is not going to follow the instructions perfectly, and especially so when the instructions are contradictory. "put your hands up" and then "crawl towards me"? The cop was basically giving him orders to do something that he already said would result in a shooting. "If you make a mistake there's a very severe possibility that you're both going to get shot".. Really? What kind of f***ing attitude is that?

What happened to protect and to serve? This cop was there with the intent to get into a gun fight. Everything about his attitude says that he has some kind of paranoia or anger issues. And he murdered a guy and now gets away with it. What is the intensive for other cops to do any different when they know they can basically murder an unarmed, scared, crying guy, on video, and walk away free.

You seem to be concerned about his tone, leading you to describe him as “angry and paranoid.” So I ask you, how should someone who may or may not have a gun, and may or may not be willing to use it against you, be addressed? It seems that you might be more appreciative of a soft-spoken, tactful approach. It’s possible that if you were the one the officer was addressing, you might respond better to that, but that’s not the case for everybody. Some people will only respond to someone that is clearly in charge. That’s why officers are trained to project command presence. Generally speaking, if an officer doubts that he’s in charge, so will a suspect. It’s absolutely possible that this guy could have responded better with a different approach, but some people choose not to fight, or kill, officers only if they respect, or fear, the officer’s capabilities enough. And remember, these officers were responding to a gun call. You will never hear an officer politely asking a suspect to hand over the gun. We want them to keep their hands as far away, from any gun, as they possibly can. We will secure the suspect, and reach for the gun ourselves. What you’ll get, is something like you see in this video, commands being given that are intended to keep his hands away from any place a gun might be.

As to your comments about training, you are right about the fact that we watch videos and hear stories about what has killed cops in the past. Do you suggest that officers should not be apprised of the dangerous possibilities out there? There are guns out there that look like cell phones, and others that are painted to look like toys. Would you suggest that officers be kept ignorant of them? Is it your position that the officer that you would call if someone broke into your house, be the most likely to die in every tense situation? Even though the job description involves deliberately walking into tense situations? Why in the world would anyone sign up for a job like that? You’re comments about being trained to always use extreme violence are completely unwarranted. Officers are more likely to wait too long, and use too little force, when force is necessary. Why? Because of the ramifications. Check this story out, about a cop who was beaten into unconsciousness, by an unarmed suspect no less, because she was afraid of the backlash if she shot him.

How, exactly, could he be certain that Shaver was no threat? He’d never met the man, didn’t know what his intentions were, and had information suggesting he had a gun. Next time you’re at the mall, look around and tell me how many people you would literally bet your life are unarmed. If the answer is anything more than “0”, then I envy the comfortable life you’ve lived that allows you to have so much faith in complete strangers.

He couldn’t walk up and handcuff him because the room hadn’t been cleared. We know this for a fact because he kept asking if anybody else was in there. At the very end of the video, he orders somebody to watch Shaver, as he calls for someone to clear the room with him. You can’t have an officer go into an unsecured location, particularly when a gun has been mentioned, and ask him to occupy both hands with cuffing a suspect.

When you question the commands that he gave, did you notice that the female companion followed them perfectly? I’ll admit, I would have used a different word if I wanted them to approach me on their knees. “Crawl” sounds like “drop to all fours” which doesn’t seem to be what they wanted him to do, but the woman managed to do what the officer intended. And remember, the shooting didn’t happen when Shaver began crawling. It happened when he reached his right arm toward his waistband. As for explaining that we might shoot, that’s called the admonition. We do that, when time allows, because the public gets upset if we don’t communicate what we want suspects to do, and what the possible repercussions could be if they don’t. Had he not said those things, somebody would have complained that the poor guy didn’t know he might get shot.

And no, he didn't go in intending to get into a gun fight. He was there with the intent to go home to his family. That’s every single cop’s intent, every single time.

@ad-arts said:
@willpayton said:
@boschepg said:

Totally agree, and all the more reason why the training of police needs to be better. They should default to de-escalation at all times, and not head into situations with the assumption that the people they meet are automatically a threat to them, or that shooting someone is the only way to deal with a problem.

I'm reminded of the video of the man who walked into a Thai police station with a knife. In the U.S. he'd been shot immediately by half a dozen cops. In this Thai police station a cop talks him down and takes away the knife with no violence whatsoever, no one gets hurt.

That's because in US usually people with no perspectives or brain join the police.

Sometimes that's true, but there's also a whole lot of very intelligent and moral people doing that job. I have a lot of respect for them. I just think that in general the training they get makes everything worse. Then of course you have the bad apples, and this just makes them even worse. You bring up perspective... and I think that's the right word. The training needs to have the perspective that they're there to help people and insure the safety of the public, even if that means that they'll be in dangerous situations and that those situations cant be eliminated by having the mentality that they're at war. They cant approach everything by acting like violent thugs.

Take this situation where the cop is yelling orders... what if the person has a mental handicap? What if they dont speak English? What if they're drunk or on drugs? What if, what if? The cop created a situation where it's very likely that he will shoot someone, and not because of any actual danger, but because he has created the danger in his mind and escalated things by his own actions.

what if the person has a mental handicap?

We know there’s a gun, should we assume a disability? Can a disabled person press a trigger? An officer ends up no less dead if the suspect didn't understand that he was killing him.

What if they dont speak English?

You aren’t giving him credit for the calm, clear communicating he did. He actually asked if they understood him, and could follow directions. They agreed to his terms, and the woman was taken into custody without incident.

What if they're drunk or on drugs?

Can a drunk or high suspect kill a cop? Absolutely.

What if, what if? The cop created a situation where it's very likely that he will shoot someone, and not because of any actual danger, but because he has created the danger in his mind and escalated things by his own actions.

He didn’t create the 911 call about a man with a gun. You tell me if you would casually walk into a call like that, assuming everything will be fine.

@farkam said:

That was disgusting, and that officer seemed like he was on some kind of power trip.

Who, exactly? The guy you heard isn’t the guy who shot. It goes to show you’re judging this without all of the facts.

@boschepg said:

@willpayton: its a high stress job

Totally agree, and all the more reason why the training of police needs to be better. They should default to de-escalation at all times, and not head into situations with the assumption that the people they meet are automatically a threat to them, or that shooting someone is the only way to deal with a problem.

I'm reminded of the video of the man who walked into a Thai police station with a knife. In the U.S. he'd been shot immediately by half a dozen cops. In this Thai police station a cop talks him down and takes away the knife with no violence whatsoever, no one gets hurt.

Loading Video...

Your suggestion is already in play. De-escalation is the name of the game. We go through numerous classes and training scenarios designed to help us de-escalate. Unfortunately, it doesn’t work in every situation. Even more unfortunately, not every situation that de-escalation would work is readily apparent. An officer’s use of force must be judged by what is reasonably perceived at the time. When you watch the video, is it reasonable to believe that Shaver was reaching for a gun when his right hand went to his waistband? Especially when they were responding to a gun call in the first place? Put yourself in the officer’s place. Responding to a gun call, suspect keeps reaching toward his waistband despite orders not to do so, and has been admonished that lethal force is in play. He then reaches for his waist. What do you do? Can you get him before he gets you if he pulls a gun? How many bullets would it take to kill you?

I remember seeing this video. The version I saw showed the raw video, but didn’t have the interview. It’s a charming story, but I have to point something out. The outcome would likely have been the same in America. The distressed man didn’t make any aggressive moves with the knife, and rapport was already established. His threat was to kill himself, not the officers. Anirut had no information suggesting that the man would attack, so his tactic was the best for that situation. American officers face similar situations all the time, talking people off ledges and such. I've gotten people to put down knives and sticks too. You don't hear about it because it doesn't make the news. But Shaver’s situation was drastically different. The officers knew there was a gun (that it turned out to be a pellet gun is irrelevant. I'm not going to wait to see what a round does to my vest before I shoot), and had no way of knowing that it wasn’t holstered at Shaver’s waist. And Shaver wasn't listening to commands to keep his hands visible.

@pyrogram said:

As a former full time cop myself this video disgusted me, the entire policing situation in the USA is actually a travesty to justice. There’s something very wrong with policing in America.

@pyrogram said:
@boschepg said:

@willpayton: its a high stress job

I do agree that this incident was a bad showing for this officer. The partner should have cuffed the man instead of asking him to crawl. that's a fact

It hard to prosecute police cuz like in this video, the boy made a motion for his waist. We as outsiders assume he was picking up his pants but it is also the motion to reach for a gun, in which he got the benefit of the doubt

the scenario painted a bad scenario for the cops anyways cuz they were called cuz the man and his girlfriend were drunk and the cops were called cuz they had a bebe gun pointing out of the room - which cannot be discerned by anyone. but the cops were called for a possible gun in the situation which escalates anxiety- which turned out to be a bebe gun from a drunk couple- which also helped the cops case

the judge did throw out that the shooter in question had his own personal weapon with the engravement "You are F'd" but was thrown out to not provide bias'

I agree this cop went overboard but the reason he was there and the motion to the waist when they are called for possible gun made those triggers somewhat problematic

As a former Cop myself I can safely say where I live (the UK) this cop would have been charged for some type of negligence, murder, or manslaughter or a combination of the first. Why?

The entire situation would have been instantly ended if the cop had said "get on your knees, put your hands on head." But no, he did some stupid "crawl towards me" which created an impossible situation.

Furthermore, "reaching for his gun" is an overused argument always used in police shootings despite it not being a ubiquitous defense. That doesn't mean squat because in this situation the cop could have tasered this suspect. US Police shoot first but forget they have a taser so much. If you genuinely believe he has a gun? Taser him before he can reach for his belt. It isn't rocket science, it's basic policing.

Overall my point is this man should not have been given a chance to motion to his waist because the police officer was in complete control and lost control due to negligence.

If somebody dies due to your negligence and then you shoot them, that's on you. Again, saying this as a former full time cop. (Still part time).

I don’t know how UK officers are trained, so I don’t know if anything you’ve said is your fault. First of all, they couldn’t leave Shaver where he was, because, as I’ve mentioned, he was near a room that had not been cleared. That’s why they wanted him to come to them. Secondly, if you would honestly bring a taser to a gun fight, you would die, and your suspect would not. I’ll gently disagree with you if want to taser someone that may or may not have a gun, but suggesting a taser when you genuinely believe there is a gun is a recipe for disaster. I would think, in a part of the world accustomed to chilly temperatures, that an experienced officer would recognize the risk layered clothing presents to the implementation of a taser. If the prongs don’t penetrate all layers of clothing, you won’t get the neuromuscular incapacitation that you’re looking for. And while you’re playing around with the taser, your suspect, which you already knew had a gun, draws and shoots. You’ve now given yourself one more thing to do, ditching the taser, before you can then unholster, come up on target, and address the threat. Even landing direct hits, with both prongs, is no guarantee that the taser will work. Every suspect is different. You're being awfully idealistic if you're willing to bet your life that the circumstances will be perfect for the taser, despite the deadly risk to yourself. I know police in the UK aren’t routinely armed with lethal force, so maybe that accounts for your idea. But in America, or with any suspect with a gun, this tactic would get you killed.

Don’t forget, the officer ordered him, several times, to keep his hands visible. Despite numerous commands, and warnings about the consequences, he reached again.

US policing is a joke. Ask anyone in the armed forces, THEY'RE actually prepared to give their lives for their country, they don't shoot unless shot at, they don't even raise their weapons until ready to shoot. They're the real patriots. Cops are jokes, just sad individuals furious with their mediocrity, and power tripping with a god complex to compensate. "Some of them, I assume, are good people."

Not sure where you’re coming from, other than cop hate, but I’ll speak to you for a minute. Your handle suggests respect for the military, though referring to them as “THEY” suggests that your aren’t military yourself. Either way you’re missing some important points here. In the military, you aren’t just dealing with your safety and that of your teammates. You’re dealing with international issues, with potentially worldwide ramifications. When shooting someone could lead to an international incident, you are going to be faced with layers of bureaucracy to get through before you can defend yourself. The powers that be will actually go so far as to determine “Acceptable Loss,” which is how many of our boys we’re willing to lose to achieve an objective. That could lead to orders not to return fire, even if fired upon. It's sad, and I don't agree with it, but it's the way it is. I’m not military myself, so if anyone here interprets this differently, please speak up. But I would imagine there aren’t many soldiers that enjoy taking rounds without returning the favor.

This guy is a nutter, and its obvious from the first words he shouts that he's a nutter. Whoever thought it was acceptable to have a man like this doing the job he's doing should also be fired, this man posed an obvious risk to the general public.

Negligence through and through, just about anyone would've been killed in this situation.

Really? What would you have done if you were Shaver? Listened to the officer’s command, and did what he told you? Then you would have survived.

Poor training and guys with connections get in faster than qualified guys if you have a family member or friend that's high in the police force you can get a job pretty quickly

Not as easy as you think. There have been at least three US presidents, in my lifetime, that wouldn’t have passed the background investigation for my department. The most interesting thing about your post is how it conflicts with the OP. You want more training to eliminate what you call cowardice, but that sounds like exposing officers to enough threats that they become comfortable under fire. The OP suggests that officers are being provided too much information about potential threats, which just makes them jumpy.

I can’t speak for other agencies, but my hiring process was over a year. And I already worked for them as a jailer. I had over a dozen prior jobs, so my background investigator had to track everything down, which took time. They also, obviously, checked the references I provided, and knocked on my neighbors’ doors to find out as much about me as they could. They probably even checked some things that I don't know about.

Statistically most cops are psycho killers or just some asshole with something to prove.

Come back when you have some facts.

What you're seeing in the video is a group of officers responding to a call involving a gun. I can't tell if they were just working on a tactical plan for the approach, or if they were waiting after a call was made to the room, ordering them out. I'm inclined to think that Shaver and his friend had not been called, because it doesn't seem that they were ordered to come out with their hands up. In any event, once they're out, and ordered to the ground, the officers needed to get them out of the line of fire so they could clear the room they came from. She complies, but he has difficulty doing so. You'll notice that they didn't handcuff her until she was in a safer area, where the cuffing officer was protected from any other potential threats in the hallway or the uncleared room. Then he, tragically, reached for his waistband.

What we can't see in the video is how much space these officers had. If that was a corner, or the top of the stairs, they didn't have much space to work with.

What I'd have done differently is to have them face away from me, rather than to face me while crawling toward me. Numbers permitting, I'd have had units any exits in the other direction, in case they ran, so I might even have left them on their feet, as long as they were faced away with their fingers laced behind their head, as I had them walk backward toward me. If I'd put them on their knees, instead of saying "crawl" I'd have said, "walk on your knees" to keep their hands from drifting near their waists. Yes I would have shouted. Initially, as they came out, and again when he failed to comply, just as this officer did.

The last thing I have to say about the criticism is that nobody here has mentioned race. Everybody's talking about all of the police shootings out there, but we ordinarily hear that cops are racist. In this instance, both the shooter and Shaver are white, so I guess it's irrelevant? But If race isn't a factor here, why would it be for somebody else. This exact shooting could happen, with somebody that looks different losing his life, and the whole argument changes. If you're honest, you'll all admit that instead of circling the wagons around too much or not enough training, you'd have been shouting about racism.

Does that strike you as consistent?

As mentioned in my opening line, there are about 900,000 active officers working in the United States. As these officers are working every day, there are millions of police contacts every year. But there were only 963 people shot and killed by officers in 2016. Assuming a one officer one shooting average, that works out to .00107 percent of officers killing someone, justified or otherwise. Now take that same number of shootings, and spread it over nearly 63 million police contacts (2011). Anybody starting to see the bigger picture?

Avatar image for marvelanddcfan24
MarvelandDCfan24

9080

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33  Edited By MarvelandDCfan24

@sag3: I'm not saying always in all cases for example I know a court officer who had 2 year degree and took the exam at 21 and got a 95 and didn't end up with a job until he was almost 26 where he knew people that had connections or family and got jobs before him with lower scores anbd this guy is now 50 and had no reason to lie or anything we were actually just talking about this topic

Also many of these shootings and killings are completely justified people have no idea how dangerous or what it is like to have a job where one mistake or slip up can cost you your own life or thge lives of others as of seen it working as an EMT in the vastly populated city seeing some of the situations cops get in

But some of them are just the result of poor training and other states training and requirements are different and better than others so it all depends I live in NY and our standards seem more strict than others states and I cops who are friends who say the academys no joke where as compared to being in some southern states where they say it's not

And the media stretches this out way to much they only like to report or headline blackman Killed by police the city i live near its very common to here about murders as it's a shithole and I know a people in the police force whenever there's a murder and the media needs information the first thing they ask is was it a Black man and was the cop white when they say no it never makes it higher than local news media make a cops out to be evil which they really aren't and it's a shame people are so simple minded yo believe everything this hear on the television

Avatar image for outside_85
Outside_85

23518

Forum Posts

18735

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 39

User Lists: 1

#34  Edited By Outside_85

The most accurate slogan the American police could put on the side of their cruisers is not 'Serve and Protect' or something like that, it's 'Shoot to kill!' and 'Back off! I'm scared!'

Avatar image for ccraft
ccraft

12437

Forum Posts

169

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 11

Was it just me or did I see him put his hands behind his back when the officer told him to to keep them up? Was it just me or did I see him crawling to the officer and then reach to his side. Would that not warrant the action the officer took? This does look pretty awful, and if he was found not guilty I would like to know why

Avatar image for kinghulk
KingHulk

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

This is why I try to avoid the police at all costs.

Avatar image for willpayton
willpayton

22502

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Thanks for your comments. I'd like to reply to a few things, but not everything since there's just too much and I dont have that much time right now. It doesnt mean I'm disregarding the rest.

@sag3 said:

And in other news, 900,000 other police officers did their job that day without making the news.

Of course, and that is certainly a problem when we focus on a negative story and dont realize the many more positive ones. Good news hardly makes the news. However, I think you might admit that we have a problem in this country with police violence. Not saying we dont also have other problems, like violence against police, etc, just saying that we have a problem with many cops acting this way. If this was just an issolated incident, I would not have posted this thread. I'm generally pro police and I respect most of them and the touch job they/you have. But the first step to dealing with a problem is accepting that there's a problem, and understanding what that problem is. I dont think the problem is that we have a lot of bad apples, I think the problem is systemic with training and with a lack of accountability. This example, to me, shows both.

BTW I'm basing my opinions on knowing someone who's gone through police training as well as seeing and reading many accounts of what that training is. So, basically, the opinion of someone looking in.

You seem to be concerned about his tone, leading you to describe him as “angry and paranoid.” So I ask you, how should someone who may or may not have a gun, and may or may not be willing to use it against you, be addressed?

In a way that doesnt escalate the situation

It seems that you might be more appreciative of a soft-spoken, tactful approach.

Tactful seems like a good word. Assertive but respectful would be another way to put it.

Some people will only respond to someone that is clearly in charge. That’s why officers are trained to project command presence.

And I think this is the beginning of the problem. Police are trained to approach situations as if they're in command, as if they have the right and the power to decide what happens, and everyone else must do whatever they command. We know from psychological experiments that when given such power, people tend to let it go to their heads and eventually start abusing that power. I think this example, just watch the video, shows this clearly. The cop doesnt approach the situation with the idea of "I dont know what's going on here, this guy might be totally innocent", he's approaching it from "this guy is dangerous and I have to subdue him as quickly and forcefully as possible".

Problem is, that's not based on facts, it's based on assumptions and it's based on an presupposition that the cop must assure his own safely at any cost, even if it means mistreating and abusing people. But I disagree with that approach. If the cop wants to be safe at all costs, then perhaps being a cop is not the right line of work for him. Being a cop means you assume certain risks above and beyond what a normal person faces. The other option is that you want to run a police state where everyone must be at all times subservient to the police, because it's the only way that the officers can be "as safe as possible"... or at least that's the logical conclusion of this thinking.

What you’ll get, is something like you see in this video, commands being given that are intended to keep his hands away from any place a gun might be.

Actually what we see in this video are commands followed by other commands that if followed would clearly violate the previous commands. "Put your arms in the air", then "crawl towards me".

As to your comments about training, you are right about the fact that we watch videos and hear stories about what has killed cops in the past. Do you suggest that officers should not be apprised of the dangerous possibilities out there?

No, I'd suggest that they are informed of everything, but having something pounded into your head over and over is a different thing. You know the saying "if you are a hammer, everything you see looks like a nail"? Well, if all your training is about how each situation can become a life and death threat and every person is a possible cop killer, then perhaps when you walk out into the world that's the way you will approach everything.

There are guns out there that look like cell phones, and others that are painted to look like toys. Would you suggest that officers be kept ignorant of them? Is it your position that the officer that you would call if someone broke into your house, be the most likely to die in every tense situation? Even though the job description involves deliberately walking into tense situations? Why in the world would anyone sign up for a job like that? You’re comments about being trained to always use extreme violence are completely unwarranted. Officers are more likely to wait too long, and use too little force, when force is necessary. Why? Because of the ramifications. Check this story out, about a cop who was beaten into unconsciousness, by an unarmed suspect no less, because she was afraid of the backlash if she shot him.

Ok sure, maybe my comment about being trained as if they always need to use extreme violence if hyperbolic. But I dont think it's that far off. Again, look at this very video and the tone and tactics this officer uses from the beginning. Are you telling me this is that rare? You actually said above that police are trained to "project command presence" which sounds a lot "being aggressive and yelling orders".

And yes I've heard of instances where the reverse happens... that an officer fails to use enough force due to being afraid of the ramifications, and as a result they are put in danger. But that doesnt negate my point since I'm speaking generally about behavior and training. I'm not saying anything about 100% of all police.

How, exactly, could he be certain that Shaver was no threat?

He cant. Having certainty of anything isnt possible, and if the training strives for that then like I said above, the logical conclusion is that we have a police state where police are in full control of everything all the time. Sorry, but some degree of danger must come with the job, because that's the inherent nature of the job... dealing with crime and criminals. But police should also be trained to deal with people as if they are innocent first, and scale their response appropriately based on facts... not based on fear.

Next time you’re at the mall, look around and tell me how many people you would literally bet your life are unarmed. If the answer is anything more than “0”, then I envy the comfortable life you’ve lived that allows you to have so much faith in complete strangers.

If I thought like that then I'd just say home all the time behind my machine guns and land mines.

Not sure why having faith in strangers is a bad thing. That's what allows us to have a working society, as opposed to something like a war zone or a totally failed state. Unless you're saying we should live as if we're in such a situation, I think going about in public without constant fear of being killed is a good way to live.

He couldn’t walk up and handcuff him because the room hadn’t been cleared. We know this for a fact because he kept asking if anybody else was in there. At the very end of the video, he orders somebody to watch Shaver, as he calls for someone to clear the room with him. You can’t have an officer go into an unsecured location, particularly when a gun has been mentioned, and ask him to occupy both hands with cuffing a suspect.

I'm sure there was something he could have done other than what he did. Maybe let your partner cover the area while you cuff him. If you're alone then call for backup. I dont know, you tell me what the options are. Certainly what he did here didnt work, did it?

And no, he didn't go in intending to get into a gun fight. He was there with the intent to go home to his family. That’s every single cop’s intent, every single time.

Maybe I'm wrong about what his intentions were, but I dont think you can know what the intentions of every cop in the entire country at all times are either.

what if the person has a mental handicap?

We know there’s a gun, should we assume a disability? Can a disabled person press a trigger? An officer ends up no less dead if the suspect didn't understand that he was killing him.

How does he "know" there's a gun? Because of the 911 call that said there was a gun? What if that caller was wrong? What if the cop got the wrong address? What if the person with the gun left before the cop got there?

How does he know?

What if they dont speak English?

You aren’t giving him credit for the calm, clear communicating he did. He actually asked if they understood him, and could follow directions. They agreed to his terms, and the woman was taken into custody without incident.

So the cop asked a question and the guy said "yes". Does that mean they understood him? Actually it doesnt. If this was a person who didnt speak English he might well have nodded or said yes just to comply with what he thought was going on, and to not anger the clearly hostile guy pointing a gun at him. I know I've been in foreign countries and replied in the affirmative when asked questions that I didnt understand at all.

What if they're drunk or on drugs?

Can a drunk or high suspect kill a cop? Absolutely.

True. Can a drunk person possibly not understand things being shouted at him? Also yes. Point is, just because a person replies "yes" doesnt mean they understand. The cop still has the responsibility because he's the one holding and pointing the high-powered semi-automatic weapon. Also, having the authority and legal privileges that police have means they should also be held to a higher standard.

What if, what if? The cop created a situation where it's very likely that he will shoot someone, and not because of any actual danger, but because he has created the danger in his mind and escalated things by his own actions.

He didn’t create the 911 call about a man with a gun. You tell me if you would casually walk into a call like that, assuming everything will be fine.

No, I would certainly not go in assuming... anything. But I think going in with caution and with an intent to de-escalate is a wise move. I'm not saying dont have your weapon ready. But you also have to realize that things might not be entirely what you believe they are, and that you cant control the situation by just being louder and more aggressive than the other guy.

Avatar image for willpayton
willpayton

22502

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@ccraft said:

Was it just me or did I see him put his hands behind his back when the officer told him to to keep them up? Was it just me or did I see him crawling to the officer and then reach to his side. Would that not warrant the action the officer took? This does look pretty awful, and if he was found not guilty I would like to know why

I think the guy was reaching to pull up his pants that were falling down. And while I'm sure that's why the cop thought he was justified in shooting and why he got off, I think that's exactly the problem. The entire situation was made more tense and was escalated to the point where a guy trying to pull up his pants was justification for shooting him repeatedly with an assault rifle.

It's pretty clear from the video that this guy was not a threat and was not thinking clearly and very emotional (crying, etc) and not without reason. In that situation barking out orders and expecting the guy to follow them exactly is just stupid. The cop should have made things as simple as possible so that less could go wrong. Tell the guy to lie down and spread out his arms... done. Then you or your partner can cuff him whenever you want and you're not relying on whether some drunk guy can properly interpret your contradictory orders or not.

Avatar image for methoki
MethoKi

12605

Forum Posts

14

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#41  Edited By MethoKi

@pyrogram said:

@sag3:

I don’t know how UK officers are trained, so I don’t know if anything you’ve said is your fault.

Armed UK Police Officers are objectively better trained than their U.S.A counterparts in consideration to shooting unarmed civilians and not being shot themselves. That is a statistical fact so don't get high-and-mighty with me, objectively, the US has more to learn than British Police. And that's an objective statement. Don't make me bring up statistics to evidence this because we both know I will win, it's not even worth debating. So back down with the attitude.

First of all, they couldn’t leave Shaver where he was, because, as I’ve mentioned, he was near a room that had not been cleared.

Then they should have waited for backup to arrive? That's also basic policing. If you are in a situation and feel unable to proceed safely and it's not imminently a threat, as such was this, simply wait for backup. Basic policing. Instead the officers here assumed wrongly this man had a firearm and somebody died. They endangered their own lives as well as this mans. The argument stating "the room wasn't cleared" makes no sense when they fired their gun. Firing a gun increases the chance of an offender firing their gun so if somebody else was in the room that wasn't cleared with a gun you increase the chance of them shooting in response. Common sense let alone basic policing. You don't escalate a situation and then hope it resolves itself...

That’s why they wanted him to come to them.

Which you and I both know was negligent because you don't tell a man you think has a firearm to crawl towards you. Literally absurd.

Secondly, if you would honestly bring a taser to a gun fight, you would die, and your suspect would not.

Nobody is meant to die - least of all the suspect. And actually you're wrong - why? because in the UK tasering people who aren't holding a gun happens often. This man was not holding a firearm. Soooo.... How would he have shot them? See? Your line of reasoning and logic isn't actually rational. A man who isn't holding a gun can't shoot you if you taser them because they aren't holding a gun. But you can legally justify tasering somebody who isn't holding a gun if you believe they might have one and the room isn't cleared.

I’ll gently disagree with you if want to taser someone that may or may not have a gun, but suggesting a taser when you genuinely believe there is a gun is a recipe for disaster.

That's why it regularly happens in the UK and neither officers nor suspects are routinely killed ;) Again, need I bring in facts? Objectively UK armed police fare better in situations where firearms are present because they know how to handle situations.

I would think, in a part of the world accustomed to chilly temperatures, that an experienced officer would recognize the risk layered clothing presents to the implementation of a taser. If the prongs don’t penetrate all layers of clothing, you won’t get the neuromuscular incapacitation that you’re looking for.

When was the last time you fired a taser into somebody? Tasers work through conductivity and they work through clothing because it still offers the path of least resistance, you don't need the prongs to penetrate flesh. You're just using the clothing excuse to rationalize a shooting. Furthermore, even if the barbs DON'T work - let me let you into a basic policing concept - Contact and cover?! Literally that's policing 101 and if you are using this excuse not to taser somebody I have no idea what they teach in cops school in the USA.

Do you know what the contingency is for a taser failure?

A gun (or another taser)! It's literally what you do. If the taser fails and you still need to incapacitate the suspect, you A) taser them again or B) shoot them. What is contact and cover? Well the basic policing principle is one officer engages and the other covers. In this case, the officer engages with a taser, and the other officer covers with a secondary taser in case the 1st fails. The chances of 2 tasers failing are like one in a million so don't try and say "if one fails both will". They won't. Electrical tasers which focus on pain might fail - But not neuromuscular incapacitation which override your nervous system.

And again - if tasers fail... Shoot them? Or better yet.... Wait for backup. There are so many options these officers failed to utilize. That is called negligence.

And while you’re playing around with the taser, your suspect, which you already knew had a gun, draws and shoots.

This is if you don't employ the basic policing principle of contact and cover ;) Clearly you should go back to detective school because that's policing 101.

You’ve now given yourself one more thing to do, ditching the taser, before you can then unholster, come up on target, and address the threat.

Not if you employ contact and cover.

Even landing direct hits, with both prongs, is no guarantee that the taser will work.

Need I say it again... Contact and cover.... Basics....

Every suspect is different. You're being awfully idealistic if you're willing to bet your life that the circumstances will be perfect for the taser, despite the deadly risk to yourself.

....Again.... Contact....And... Cover.... If the taser fails... Shoot them... Especially in this situation where the man didn't have a firearm in his palm.

I know police in the UK aren’t routinely armed with lethal force, so maybe that accounts for your idea.

But in America, or with any suspect with a gun, this tactic would get you killed.

Actually no - in the UK, London specifically, where officers carry guns, they don't get killed!

No Armed Response Officer has ever been shot in the UK whilst employing these tactics.

Let me reiterate.

No Armed Response Officer has ever been shot in the UK whilst employing these tactics.

So cut the BS and accept what I'm saying. Let's be real. If you are a cop, you know I'm right when I say cops try to justify other cops all the time. It's second nature. I was you once. Trying to justify everything because I was a police officer too. But sometimes you need to realize other cops can be wrong too! This man died due to negligence and in any other country the officer would be in prison now due to negligence of some type. You didn't become a police officer to justify murder.

@sag3 honestly, I'd hate to be the suspect while you're the officer that's 'apprehending' me... You or anyone that thinks like you. If you feel the need to shoot me based on the suspicion that I have a gun, then I'm dead before you even verify that.

Avatar image for methoki
MethoKi

12605

Forum Posts

14

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

@ccraft said:

Was it just me or did I see him put his hands behind his back when the officer told him to to keep them up? Was it just me or did I see him crawling to the officer and then reach to his side. Would that not warrant the action the officer took? This does look pretty awful, and if he was found not guilty I would like to know why

I think the guy was reaching to pull up his pants that were falling down. And while I'm sure that's why the cop thought he was justified in shooting and why he got off, I think that's exactly the problem. The entire situation was made more tense and was escalated to the point where a guy trying to pull up his pants was justification for shooting him repeatedly with an assault rifle.

It's pretty clear from the video that this guy was not a threat and was not thinking clearly and very emotional (crying, etc) and not without reason. In that situation barking out orders and expecting the guy to follow them exactly is just stupid. The cop should have made things as simple as possible so that less could go wrong. Tell the guy to lie down and spread out his arms... done. Then you or your partner can cuff him whenever you want and you're not relying on whether some drunk guy can properly interpret your contradictory orders or not.

This to the third degree.

At no point did they think the most rational thing to do was cuff him and have someone have him in their sights while the others proceed into the room. When you escalate a situation by pointing a rifle at a person and telling them that you will shoot, the natural thing to do is to go into a panic. I've watched videos where persons have been shot at and their reaction is mostly to panic, they're scared for their lives. Rational and coherent thought is not easily performed by someone that is under a high pressure situation with even higher risks.

You can tell just how scared and confused he was. The lady followed his instructions as he wanted and mostly because she was not the one under pressure (rifle aimed at her while being threatened with death by 5 round to the chest). He heard arms in the air and then crawl. It could've all been avoided if one person took the time to cuff him.

Cops in my country would beat your ass senseless, but at least we'll go home.... tattered and bruised, but we'll live.

Avatar image for silent_bomber
silent_bomber

4974

Forum Posts

96141

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

@sag3 said:

Really? What would you have done if you were Shaver?

Depending on how much I'd drunk likely the exact same thing, in fact possibly worse as I would've back-talked more.

This man is not "projecting authority" at all, he does not sound "in control" at all, he does not instill confidence at all.

The description I would use would be hysterical/angry/incompetent.

@sag3 said:

the woman managed to do what the officer intended.

The woman uncrossed her legs when she crawled.

The man's team-member did not restrain her in the way he wanted him to either, which also annoyed him.

Nobody is doing what this guy intends

Avatar image for ccraft
ccraft

12437

Forum Posts

169

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 11

@ccraft said:

Was it just me or did I see him put his hands behind his back when the officer told him to to keep them up? Was it just me or did I see him crawling to the officer and then reach to his side. Would that not warrant the action the officer took? This does look pretty awful, and if he was found not guilty I would like to know why

I think the guy was reaching to pull up his pants that were falling down. And while I'm sure that's why the cop thought he was justified in shooting and why he got off, I think that's exactly the problem. The entire situation was made more tense and was escalated to the point where a guy trying to pull up his pants was justification for shooting him repeatedly with an assault rifle.

It's pretty clear from the video that this guy was not a threat and was not thinking clearly and very emotional (crying, etc) and not without reason. In that situation barking out orders and expecting the guy to follow them exactly is just stupid. The cop should have made things as simple as possible so that less could go wrong. Tell the guy to lie down and spread out his arms... done. Then you or your partner can cuff him whenever you want and you're not relying on whether some drunk guy can properly interpret your contradictory orders or not.

I work for a police fundraising association in Ga. Just watching him put his hands behind his back and side made me anxious. I was under the impression if you dont follow the instructions of an officer you face a lot of risk to your life. If he had a weapon he could have whipped it out. Im not sure why the officers were raiding the place, but it looked like a serious situation.

I just dont think all officers are evil as people make them out to be.

Avatar image for kingyang
Kingyang

1452

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Some peopke take the police side no matter what. Smh. Policing is not ecen a top 10 most dangerous job, if ur so damn scared then dont be a cop.

Avatar image for deactivated-60fae469e992f
deactivated-60fae469e992f

18027

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

The most accurate slogan the American police could put on the side of their cruisers is not 'Serve and Protect' or something like that, it's 'Shoot to kill!' and 'Back off! I'm scared!'

Shooting to kill is what officers here in Canada do too. And officers practically anywhere. If a firearm is drawn it is with intent to drop the target. I have been to police academies and its basically the first thing they teach them.

Avatar image for cable_extreme
Cable_Extreme

17190

Forum Posts

324

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#47  Edited By Cable_Extreme

Doesn’t make sense to say “hands up in the air” then say “crawl towards me”. That is confusing as hell, especially to anyone with a rifle pointed at them.

However why did the guy bring one arm to his side, it looked like he was reaching for something to be honest.

Avatar image for outside_85
Outside_85

23518

Forum Posts

18735

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 39

User Lists: 1

Shooting to kill is what officers here in Canada do too. And officers practically anywhere. If a firearm is drawn it is with intent to drop the target. I have been to police academies and its basically the first thing they teach them.

Yeah... most people drop if they have been shot, you dont need to kill them to do that. But aside that part, cops in America appear to be quick to open fire at the slightest noise or provocation.

Avatar image for cable_extreme
Cable_Extreme

17190

Forum Posts

324

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@outside_85: even when “dropped” an injured person can still shoot someone. The intent is always to kill if an officer has to use thier firearm. Intentionally maiming is actual an offense in many states.