Police in America

[Rincewind]

The trouble is their rule seems to be that if they believe the suspect to be armed they have the right to shoot. As everyone has the right to carry a gun it is assumed that all suspects will carry one. A lot of the confrontations are witnessed by fellow police offices who will back up the statement, 'I asked the suspect to drop what I suspected was a weapon, they made a move towards it so I fired my weapon.' They only have to give the report to their senior officer and as it is a regular occurrence the paperwork is lost among the other reports. On rare occasions members of the public may cause a stink but if the only witnesses are fellow criminals the police word is taken over them.

[Jon the Hat]

Of course the circa 800,000 sworn US police officers must stop / talk to / search etc hundreds of thousands of people a day with out shooting them, and shoot some without killing them.  It is easy to get caught up in the hyper and forget that the USA is a vast country.

[Carl the Llama]

Of course the circa 800,000 sworn US police officers must stop / talk to / search etc hundreds of thousands of people a day with out shooting them, and shoot some without killing them.  It is easy to get caught up in the hyper and forget that the USA is a vast country.

How do you feel about per-capita comparisons?

From 2010 through 2014, there were four fatal police shootings in England, which has a population of about 52 million. By contrast, Albuquerque, N.M., with a population 1 percent the size of England’s, had 26 fatal police shootings in that same time period.

Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/american-cops-killed-people-month-march-uk-entire-20th-century/#U8P5kg1qfTu8wxCp.99

[Carl the Llama]

More food for thought:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-25190119#TWEET972719

The country had a mourning period following this incident.

[Carl the Llama]

I can keep going Jon http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/09/the-counted-police-killings-us-vs-other-countries

[Merging Cultures]

Of course the circa 800,000 sworn US police officers must stop / talk to / search etc hundreds of thousands of people a day with out shooting them, and shoot some without killing them. It is easy to get caught up in the hyper and forget that the USA is a vast country.

Sorry Jon, I think you post some good stuff, but the per capita stats are shocking.

[Merging Cultures]

The trouble is their rule seems to be that if they believe the suspect to be armed they have the right to shoot. As everyone has the right to carry a gun it is assumed that all suspects will carry one. A lot of the confrontations are witnessed by fellow police offices who will back up the statement, 'I asked the suspect to drop what I suspected was a weapon, they made a move towards it so I fired my weapon.' They only have to give the report to their senior officer and as it is a regular occurrence the paperwork is lost among the other reports. On rare occasions members of the public may cause a stink but if the only witnesses are fellow criminals the police word is taken over them.

This was the dilemma I was talking about with MPH. Someone breaks into your house, you have to assume they have a gun, they have to assume you do too, and then you both have to shoot first. Did Pistorious have the same dilemma?

[Jon the Hat]

How do you feel about per-capita comparisons?

 

I think in a society where a large proportion of the population have guns - and no doubt pretty much every criminal - the Police would be very very ineffective if they didn't have guns or didn't use them.

[Jon the Hat]

Sorry Jon, I think you post some good stuff, but the per capita stats are shocking.

 

Symptomatic of the numbers of guns overall wouldn't you think?  Rather than a police force which for no reason goes around killing people?

 

Obviously there is that too, and fear, and racism and nut jobs in there as well. 

[Merging Cultures]

Symptomatic of the numbers of guns overall wouldn't you think? Rather than a police force which for no reason goes around killing people?

Obviously there is that too, and fear, and racism and nut jobs in there as well.

Nah they are way too quick to shoot. They have zero conflict resolution and deescalation skills.

[Carl the Llama]

Symptomatic of the numbers of guns overall wouldn't you think?  Rather than a police force which for no reason goes around killing people?

 

Obviously there is that too, and fear, and racism and nut jobs in there as well. 

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2015/sep/01/samuel-dubose-killing-full-dashcam-video

Skip to 3:12 and tell me that the cop's response to a suspect attempting to drive off is a reasonable one and that I'm being misled by intimidating numbers into thinking that the police in the USA are trigger happy.

[Merging Cultures]

Have you seen the 2 videos from the Alton Sterling shooting? Disturbing.

 

In my opinion, the police should have done more to deescalate the situation. But the fact he had a gun in his pocket and his right had was free, means the police will be let off.

[Trav Le Bleu]

You don't have to be black to be shot by the police in the USA, seems it's enough just to be deaf.

 

Police Shoot Dead Deaf Driver Who Was Trying To Communicate In Sign Language

 

 

Quote

An investigation has been launched after a police officer shot dead a deaf and mute driver who witnesses say was trying to communicate using sign language.

Daniel Kevin Harris was pulled over for speeding on Thursday after cops said he led them on a brief pursuit in Charlotte, North Carolina.

As the 29-year-old stopped close to his home a state trooper pulled his gun as Harris got out of his car.

Police say there was a "brief encounter" between the two men before the gun was fired but witnesses claim the father-of-one, who was unarmed, was shot almost instantly.

He died at the scene.

Mr Harris’s neighbours are furious over his death.

“You’re pulling someone over who is deaf, they are handicapped. To me, what happened is totally unacceptable,” Mark Barringer said.

“They should have de-escalated and been trained to realise that this is an entirely different situation.”

A report by Charlotte-Mecklenburg police stated Mr Harris as being hearing and speech impaired but did not give further details about his impairments.

The state trooper was identified as Jermaine Saunders, who has now been placed on administrative leave.

Mr Harris’ family have set up a fundraising page since his death for his memorial and cremation costs.

In a post on the page, they say: ‘He was unarmed when shot and killed by a state trooper.

“His tragic death could have been prevented. Police brutality ends NOW.”

 

[Merging Cultures]

Absolutely disgusting.

[Smudge]

I agree and abhor the violence from the police but having that knowledge, why do people flee from them or brandish something at them?

It seems like a sure fire way for the cop to draw his gun. In this case the victim, led a high speed chase before he was stopped. Walter Scott also in North Carolina, decided to run and a cop shot him in the back.

 

No excuse for the cops but they were pretty stupid actions that tempted fate and got them killed. I do not understand why people take the risk for no good reason.

[leicsmac]

37 minutes ago, Smudge said:

I agree and abhor the violence from the police but having that knowledge, why do people flee from them or brandish something at them?

It seems like a sure fire way for the cop to draw his gun. In this case the victim, led a high speed chase before he was stopped. Walter Scott also in North Carolina, decided to run and a cop shot him in the back.

 

No excuse for the cops but they were pretty stupid actions that tempted fate and got them killed. I do not understand why people take the risk for no good reason.

Running from arrest is, the last time I checked, not a death-sentence worthy offence. Nor is it presenting a capital threat to an officer and so justifying lethal force in that way.

 

If a person runs, the first response of a cop shouldn't be to gun them down - or even attempt to - and if that is the prevailing attitude towards that particular area of law enforcement in the US then something is pretty broken.

[Smudge]

25 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Running from arrest is, the last time I checked, not a death-sentence worthy offence. Nor is it presenting a capital threat to an officer and so justifying lethal force in that way.

 

If a person runs, the first response of a cop shouldn't be to gun them down - or even attempt to - and if that is the prevailing attitude towards that particular area of law enforcement in the US then something is pretty broken.

As I said, I abhor the need to use guns as a first action in stopping someone.  However, if you are confronted by the police and you brandish something at them and or run away, there is a possibility that you might get shot.

Taking the moral high ground is admirable but not so much when you're dead

[DB11]

3 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Running from arrest is, the last time I checked, not a death-sentence worthy offence. Nor is it presenting a capital threat to an officer and so justifying lethal force in that way.

 

Well actually, in America, it is lawful Shooting a fleeing suspect is allowed.

 

I think it's terrible, mind.

[Smudge]

50 minutes ago, DB11 said:

Well actually, in America, it is lawful Shooting a fleeing suspect is allowed.

 

I think it's terrible, mind.

No it's isn't unless there are exigent circumstances. None of the recent spate of shootings passed this test although that is often dependent upon the the Police Chief/District Attorneys who decide whether or not to prosecute. 

[DB11]

3 minutes ago, Smudge said:

No it's isn't unless there are exigent circumstances. None of the recent spate of shootings passed this test although that is often dependent upon the the Police Chief/District Attorneys who decide whether or not to prosecute. 

Well so then it is lawful http://edition.cnn.com/2015/04/10/us/south-carolina-case-police-deadly-force/

[Smudge]

6 minutes ago, DB11 said:

Well so then it is lawful

It can be - read this

 

edit

Odd when I first read your post there was no link but the articles make the same point. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

So you're deaf and you're speeding. The cops give a blast of the siren but don't turn the lights on. No reaction, so thinking the suspect is ignoring them they give it a 'helpful nudge'. Deaf guy takes off in terror - he's seen news reports of crazy cops. Police eventually stop him and the deaf guy gets out the car and seeing a gun pointed at him signs "don't shoot" which unfortunately, if ASL is anything like BSL, would necessitate him making his right hand into the shape of gun and miming a shooting action.

 

Maybe. I think it's certainly very plausible, especially the "don't shoot" bit.

 

What people don't realise is that born deaf people don't think in the same way as hearing people. They learn from what they see (though they usually don't read well, as it is very difficult for them to break words into syllables and there is almost no use of tense, for instance a born deaf person will likely say "I go tomorrow" rather than "I will go tomorrow.") where as we learn to respond to verbal commands immediately. Often they spot things quickly, but won't respond in the reprogrammed manner we will all have heard about.

 

So often I see hearing people talking to deaf people and thinking the deaf person has understood through miraculous lip reading, but I can tell they haven't understood a word. They might be too shy or proud to admit they didn't understand (often because from their previous experience hearing people get frustrated to repeat themselves), but the truth is lip reading is very, very hard.

 

Aside from that, there's far too many jumpy cops in USA. Until one of them get sent down for at least manslaughter, they will carry on being too trigger happy. Something needs to happen to make them realise there are consequences.

[Dr The Singh]

On 23 August 2016 at 20:59, Merging Cultures said:

Absolutely disgusting.

 

Not disagreeing but this isn't just the US police, most 3rd world countries with armed police are trigger happy junkies with no respect for life.

[leicsmac]

7 hours ago, Smudge said:

As I said, I abhor the need to use guns as a first action in stopping someone.  However, if you are confronted by the police and you brandish something at them and or run away, there is a possibility that you might get shot.

Taking the moral high ground is admirable but not so much when you're dead

I think we're talking past each other a bit here. I'm saying that the response of the cops when a suspect runs is wrong and if that is what is considered normal in a supposedly world-leading country like the US, then no one should be OK with the system as it is and it urgently needs reform.

 

If you're innocent (or even if you're guilty) and you choose to run from the fuzz in non-threatening fashion for whatever reason, in a civilized country you shouldn't be gunned down. Simple as. (At the very most, you should expect to be brought down by a method guaranteed to be non-lethal.)

 

3 hours ago, DB11 said:

Well so then it is lawful http://edition.cnn.com/2015/04/10/us/south-carolina-case-police-deadly-force/

What the actual fvck.

 

Still, I guess it saves money on that troublesome 'due process' business. No need for that in a first-world country - THE first-world country, if some are to be believed - is there, eh?

[Merging Cultures]

 

Not disagreeing but this isn't just the US police, most 3rd world countries with armed police are trigger happy junkies with no respect for life.

Most is not quite accurate. Most police across Africa don't even have bullets in their guns, if they have guns, most do not. Probably in Latin America they might shoot quite quickly. Definitely in the Philippines with that lunatic in charge. Other parts of Asia, I'm not so sure it is the case either.