General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI still can't wrap my head around why the thug that hammered Mr. Pelosi wasn't shot on the spot.
He was wielding a hammer that cops told him to drop and he didn't. There have been too many black men shot dead for holding up a wallet, going for their wallet or running away from armed police. Yet this man who actually bludgeoned a man in front of armed police is still walking around and breathing? No cop feared their own life from a crazed hammer wielding thug but they fear wallets, whistles, iPhones and such? And every damn crime pol ad put out by the Republicans shows some black somewhere smashing a window, breaking into a car to make you think that only crimes committed by blacks is rampant and there is no criminal activity anywhere in America except in big city neighborhoods. And most of the people watching those overused videos don't even live near a big city let alone in one.
milestogo
(16,829 posts)hlthe2b
(102,357 posts)Ocelot II
(115,836 posts)to his victim - sounds like the two of them were very close together and were struggling violently over the hammer. I take your point but what if they'd shot at the guy and missed, and hit Pelosi instead?
TheRealNorth
(9,500 posts)With a woman in the side seat and child in the back seat.
Ocelot II
(115,836 posts)I don't think the police acted improperly in the Pelosi situation by not shooting the perp, but I don't think the reason they decided not to shoot him was because he was white. I also don't think that even if the perp had been Black they would have shot him; the risk of accidentally shooting his victim was too great. They might have beaten him up afterwards, though.
Straw Man
(6,625 posts)... was egregious and unjustified, but the situations are in no way comparable. Castile was seated and stationary. The shooting took place at point-blank range. Castile's body was shielding his front-seat passenger, and the child in the rear seat was not in the line of fire.
Pelosi and his assailant were locked together in a struggle and most likely were not stationary. A successful shot by police in such a situation rarely happens outside the movies.
treestar
(82,383 posts)no matter how different the day, situation, location, they all shoot black people every time, and never shoot white people
Honestly these comments! They are as illogical as anything a right winger could come up with, just on the opposite side.
SallyHemmings
(1,822 posts)snowybirdie
(5,234 posts)The two men were physically very close to each other. Police must make split second decisions and didn't want to shoot the victim.
malaise
(269,157 posts)ShepKat
(383 posts)is the melanin color swatches to determine whether he should live or not.
We know how the game is played. Cant tell me there were no sharp shooters?
maxsolomon
(33,400 posts)The cops had just ordered them both to drop the hammer. They observed the assault, and simply ran over and grabbed Depape.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,036 posts)Samrob
(4,298 posts)Black men have been shot sitting in a car with their children and/or spouses. Bystanders or victims haven't been a problem before. And white mass shooters have been led away from the scene of their shootings without a scratch, even when apprehended with as weapon.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,036 posts)... but you can't generalize to every situation.
You weren't there.
It was a "wellness check" (dispatcher records). They had no reason to have their weapons drawn, by standard police protocols for wellness checks. It was a "high priority" check, but the dispatcher did not indicate any violence because there had been none by that point.
sarisataka
(18,770 posts)There would be complaints that they carelessly put Mr Pelosi at risk.
I venture there would even be speculation that they hoped to "accidentally" miss the suspect and hit Mr Pelosi.
Emile
(22,906 posts)Well they pretend we are.
Sympthsical
(9,111 posts)And you don't fire a weapon within two feet of a victim.
Kaleva
(36,341 posts)Gore1FL
(21,151 posts)Jack the Greater
(601 posts)... or stop shooting so many black suspects? How should this situation be adjusted so that equity is achieved?
Ocelot II
(115,836 posts)of arresting him. Do they want the police to shoot the white guy, too? Or maybe we should focus on getting the cops to just stop shooting black suspects and not get mad when the white ones are not killed. I think it's good that they didn't kill Depape and I don't believe for a second that they decided not to shoot him just because he was white. I don't think that under the circumstances they'd have shot him if he had been black, either.
patphil
(6,207 posts)So when the door opened, they were holstered. Then things happened so fast they only had time to rush the assailant and restrain him.
I don't think you can read anything suspicious into it.
Samrob
(4,298 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(49,036 posts)I'm not saying it never happens, but wellness checks (dispatcher's characterization, per Pelosi phone call and dispatcher records) do not require guns drawn by police protocols.
MurrayDelph
(5,301 posts)You can say
tblue37
(65,487 posts)killing Pelosi instead.
Polybius
(15,476 posts)Was the door unlocked?
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,036 posts)It was one of 1800 cameras the Capitol Police have to monitor constantly.
Also attested to by a witness on the streets at the time.
H2O Man
(73,605 posts)the news clearly showed he had broke a glass door with his hammer.
H2O Man
(73,605 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(49,036 posts)Yes, I know the statistics are biased against blacks and people of colour and visible minorities.
However,
... simplistic blanket generalizations that are based on pure speculation are useless or worse.
The reason progressives are against prejudice and bigotry is because they make people take positions based on generalizations before there are any particulars that might actually indicate what happened. It cuts both ways. Generalizations that are independent of the facts of a specific situation or a specific individual are not wise.
H2O Man
(73,605 posts)to all of the other historical hammer attacks on the spouse of the Speaker of the House, it remains valid. Note there is no "better" reason mentioned on this thread.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,036 posts)You are pitting your vague generalization against the facts.
H2O Man
(73,605 posts)entire thread. Even one of your posts where you made an error. Another error is to think you can tell what anoher person is thinking, as you have done here. (In couples' therapy, the person who first says, "You think that ...." is always more than 50% responsible for their troubles.)
The OP expressed a problem in understanding why the police, upon entering, did not shoot the thug. It was, as everyone with even the slightest degree of understand knows, because they immediately saw him assaulting Mr. Pelosi, and tackled and restrained him. That was, of course, the proper thing to do. It is so obvious that I did not think it required a rational explanation. You might have, but I didn't. Thus, we view things differently, don't we?
I did put the 100% correct response to what I considered a valid question, by a person who may not have seem the overhead film from the local news. One doesn't need to anticpate a police force from across the nation, as Frank Zappa made clear on 2,000 motels. It's local police responding to a 911 call.
I prefer when criminals are caught, their background -- including potential associates -- investigated, a trial, conviction, and incarceration. Others might ponder why there wasn't a shooting. I don't.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,036 posts)I prefer to be corrected when I make errors or hear the other side if they thought I made an error. Perhaps I'm wrong about details of wellness checks or got the number of cameras wrong, but it is probably some other detail you have caught that I'm not thinking of.
You are so much more cogent when you avoid making three word posts. I always look forward to your byline because you are a thoughtful, careful, accomplished writer. That's why I was astounded by your three word post, which gave no room for reason.
As to guessing what another person is thinking, that is one of the tests of consciousness that researchers apply to studies of dogs and dolphins. Everybody does it.
However, I hope it is clear and I will state that I did not tell you what you were thinking in my reply to you. As to guessing what officers and perps might be thinking, speculation like that is performing thought experiments and exploring scenarios to figure out what aspects of an event may have been crucial.
We are agreed 100% that
I do not understand how you think we see things differently on the timing of the police action. As to being explicit, well yes as a programmer I do like explicitness for clarity and lack of ambiguity. In this case, the OP's question indicated the need that an explicit explanation would help them. Several posters did that.
I'm guessing (now that I've read this post of yours) that given you felt no explicit explanation was needed, perhaps you were thinking your reply was sardonic. If so, I missed that. My error if that was the case. I could easily be wrong about that too. But three words typed do not carry the body language, inflections of voice and tonality that saying them in person would convey. Limited bandwidth in 13 letters. Note that in couple's therapy, the statement you quote can be couched with conditionals and posed in a way that encourages feedback which makes things better, as in "I thought you were thinking ..." or "It sure seemed to me your actions on Thursday indicated you were thinking such and such."
So, thank you for clarifying your meaning of your three words. I wrote carefully to bring up the topic of prejudice but not to tar you with it, since your three word post was so surprising to me.
Again:
... 100% agreement. I have written similar sentiments in other contexts, such as hoping tRump gets indicted, convicted, and jailed before he dies a natural death (unless he gets the death penalty for treason).
treestar
(82,383 posts)would have been shot if he were black.
Only if you think every black man is always shot. That cannot be or the jails would not have so many black men.
Showing the left is just as narrow minded as the right is not helpful.
H2O Man
(73,605 posts)how dense they are.
Samrob
(4,298 posts)usonian
(9,866 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)why make this about the cop? So every time a cop is involved, we have to declare the cops were incompetent? Or make it about race when there is no issue? There is no reason for these assumptions other than a mere reaction to every case regardless of circumstances.
You should join the force yourself if you think you would do so much better.