Here we go again
- Thread starter Crazyhole
- Start date
Bro! He was just walking home. Leave him alone. Leave everybody alone if you do not seeing them breaking the law. Leave people TF ALONE!
But it's not the complete story. Police were responding to a call for service. In many jurisdictions, they have a legal responsibility to stop and talk to the person in that situation. The police gave a lawful order that he disobeyed. They attempted to place him in restraints, ostensibly for officer safety which is legal and probably appropriate given that the restraints would've removed any threat to the officers. At that point, he started resisting physically and it went downhill from there. They weren't arresting him, simply detaining while they figured things out, they were doing their duty, and he escalated the encounter by being combative. Had he just let them put the cuffs on and answered the questions, it is almost certain they'd have let him go because there was nothing to hold him on.
But you ignore all of that when you make your ignorant statement.
Again. He is dead because some idiot escalated a situation that didn't need to happen, he was doing nothing wrong. Cops got closer to Elijah and the risk of him dying increased exponentially. This is what you are not comprehending and why cities are on fire. People are tired of being harassed and dying for doing normal shit. Unless you witness someone committing a crime, leave people alone. I don't care how "suspicious" someone is looking.
Again, he escalated the encounter. You're right, before the police were called to service and initiated the encounter, he was doing nothing wrong. The moment that he disobeyed a lawful order from a police officer, he did something wrong. How is it that you can't understand that?
Emerging from a domestic violence dispute armed with a knife and threatening officers responding is "doing normal shit"?
As for the second part of your statement, fine, defund the police or change their policies so that they don't have to stop and identify people who are the reason of 911 calls as suspicious. Stop telling people to call 911 if they see something suspicious. Decriminalize all but violent crimes. Keep the police from talking to people that match the description of suspects. Anything else that you think is the police's duty today that constitutes your definition of harassment.
This is America, vote for it in your city and vote for politicians that will write that legislation. I'm not sure that makes black people, or poor people, or any other grouping of people any safer. I'm guessing it would make them much less safe.
Also, for heaven's sake, don't couch violent criminal acts and destruction as civilized protest.
Why did the encounter need to happen if they didn't see him breaking the law? That only increases the risk to the citizen's life.
This is a different guy. DaShuckster googled somebody from Colorado last year because he thought it proved the point that police hunt black people for sport or something. He was as wrong as he usually is, but I'm sure he thinks that he was right.
So you're saying that police can only approach someone if they actively witnessed them committing a crime?
Oh yes, arrest or fine people who needlessly call the police on black people for being black or looking suspicious or whatever.
They don't hunt black people. They encounter black people. Then the ego and machismo happens usually between 2 men with type A personalities. It's a recipe for disaster.
We are now getting 3 different cases confused.
The guy with the knife was threatening people in a convenience store. He left, the cops followed him for half a mile, tried tazing him, then shot him when he tried to go into another gas station.
Different black man. I know, it is happening so much that it all seems to run together.
Again, I'll agree with you on the point that this happens. I'm also quite willing to discuss the reason for police policies, such as the police having a legal duty to respond to suspicious persons calls. But I can't stand the constant misrepresentation of situations in order to demonize police.
Police are just pawns to make "Karen's" feel secure. You almost need a type A personality for the job and most are men.
So is your opinion that police serve no purpose for poor and elderly in disadvantaged communities? That you would rather people with little to no resources be responsible for their own security from criminal activities? That the handful of incidences like these among 250+ million police interactions yearly justifies removing them and telling citizens to go it alone?
If you want to debate me, fine. But accusing me of deliberate dishonesty? Really?
Man, that is pretty low.
From Wikipedia, (link below)
The three police officers who were involved in the incident, Nathan Woodyard, Jason Rosenblatt and Randy Roedema,[2] said that their body cameras were knocked off during a struggle with McClain. McClain was forcibly held to the ground with his hands cuffed behind his back, after which an officer applied a chokehold and paramedics administered ketamine to McClain to sedate him.[3] While being transported to the hospital McClain went into cardiac arrest. Three days after arriving at the hospital he was declared brain dead,
Death of Elijah McClain
So the guy that was shot after the domestic dispute had a warrant out for his arrest, was a registered sex offender, had pulled a gun on a cop previously, and was currently resisting arrest. Reaching into his car for something pretty much justified him getting shot, all things considered.
Nope. None of that matters. All that matters is he was a black man that got shot by a cop. Nothing else matters.
Because I'd bet my house that someone who is resisting arrest didnt stop and identify himself wait for the cops to do a background check and then decide to load his kids in the car and drive off.
Hey I get it though. If you've ever commited a crime its cool if the cops blast you 8 times in the back in front of your 8 5 and 3 year old kids.
But you don’t know if he was a frequent flyer with that agency, if the police respond to that address often, etc. You’d be surprised at how many people in their community that police know, especially the ones that have a record of assault against LEOs.
You right, better blast him 8 times in the back just to be sure.
The police are there to protect and serve the public in order for them to move, transport and sell good/services without infringement of other citizens. If a citizen isn't infringing upon the liberties of another citizen, then the police should not detain or create conflict with that citizen.
They were called to a fight. He wasnt a participant in said fight. Why would they run his plates?
Who knows. Lots of details that are yet unknown so just blasting cops in general as being trigger happy is unwise.
So police are only for protection of property. Not for any other infringement of rights? Police aren’t there to respond to active shooters in schools, to investigate criminal gang activity, to investigate sexual offenses against minors, or any of a hundred other criminal violations that have nothing to do with your conditions above?
If they don't see criminal activity or the rights of another citizen being violated (see or told), keep it moving.
They were called by others to criminal activity and when they arrived they found a man armed with a knife who threateNed them then resisted arrest
Threatened them?
At what point during the bystander's video did the three cops trailing the victim as he walked around his car and bent down to get into the driver's seat did the cops feel their lives were being threatened?
Was that what they said? I guess we'll have to wait and watch their body cams videos, right? Oops, wait. Guess not.
