Sorry – but it was the police who escalated the violence to this point

[FreakinDJ]

You can not day after day kill innocent human beings in this manner, summarily provide an escape from justice by manipulating loopholes in the laws provided by the Supreme Court of the United States, and expect people – no matter how deranged they may be, not to react.

When you go murdering 12 yr olds, 13 yr olds, just for being a kid. Fathers simply for trying to provide for their children. Men simply for the color of their skin – people are going to react. Good or Bad, they are going to react.

When you have a Officers Union instructing their members, “All you have to say is I was in fear for my life” and it is legal – you have created a moral crisis no human being is capable of welding in an ethical manner.

And now that they have created this racial divide in America. Where gun toting Radical Bigots, and Neo-nazis will cheerlead for even more violence if not commit some of their own in the name of justice. I say this to the Supreme Court of the United States

• You granted Special Powers of the State to police officers who are mere mortals. They have faults, preconceived notions, good days and bad days, all of which lives hang in the balance when coupled with the State’s Right to Kill.

• You set the bar so low as to approve of these killing as no man can escape the temptation regardless of his intentions to use it as an escuse – after the fact – and then made it illegal for “We the People” to question it, or as the Police Officer’s Union puts it – “No Second Guessing”

I don’t think the Supreme Court considered the advent of hand held personal recording devices when they made their famous decision. Nor did they they count on the Will of the People who view these unholy executions and “Know it when they see it”

Perhaps it is time the Supreme Court of the United States considered Granting the Citizens of the United States some relief. As I see it they have 2 options -

1 They immediately outlaw the recording and rebroadcasting of Police Activities. Strike Down Free Speech and forbid people from circulating these horrible videos of State sponsored executions

2 They rethink this whole thing of the State's Right to administer Summary Executions with impunity by simply muttering the words "I was in Fear"

Muttering the words "I was in Fear" is a very low bar to clear for a human life

I'll probably get banned for this and possible even a visit at my home from officer Mike. I don't care any more. I wanted to cry when they executed Andy Lopez age 13 and just become more disgusted with the police at each passing life

[malaise]

1. I disagree - not just the police but the entire judicial system

and large numbers in the legislative branches

[FreakinDJ]

30. Proof Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely

such is the power over life and death

[frazzled]

2. We should not

lump together all police officers as crazed, racist murderers any more than we should allow police officers to lump together all black males as potential dangerous murderers.

Group bias is group bias, no matter where it comes from. And violence is violence, no matter where it comes from.

That said, police departments all over this nation need to find a way to de-escalate, re-train, and to rid their forces of bad cops the moment suspect behavior occurs (in general, these bad cops have long histories of complaints before they commit the ultimate sin.)

[jonno99]

5. ^^this^^ +1000. The most reasoned response yet today. nt

[rollin74]

7. I agree

[FreakinDJ]

8. The police officers most certainly ban together

So just how does one sort this out when they entire dept from the DA down to the perpetrator is complicit

[frazzled]

9. Their unions enforce that circle, but that is not to say

that individual police officers do

Watch, or rewatch, this Cleveland police officer, who walks the line between her profession and her community, the good and bad of both. She expresses the complex realities of this mess with passion and eloquence. It's long, but don't stop watching until the end:

[FreakinDJ]

10. Sadly all of this would be moot should the SCOTUS rethink their decision

I believe it is a Moral Dilemma mere mortals can not be entrusted with

[snooper2]

16. you mean moot, not mute...

Of course in the case of this thread mute may be a better answer for some posters....

[puffy socks]

28. When are all the other good officers

going to speak out? Where's their outrage?
I'm tired of being reminded each time the cops murder another person how so many of them are good.

Are we to believe they just don't realize how many bad coworkers they deal with on a daily basis?
Where are these good cops voices? Why arent they being loud about these supposed few bad apples ruining their reputation and making their jobs more dangerous? Hmmm
Id like to know
Because 1 cop doesnt cut it.

[Blanks]

82. I watched the video on Facebook...

And she touches on the solution.

Cops need to be 'connected' to the communities that they police. We need a huge program where cops (and school teachers, but that's a different story) have the opportunity to purchase a home through a loan and grant program such that they get a huge financial relief for living in the neighborhood where they patrol. Communities that don't require their cops to live in the neighborhoods receive a penalty.

While I acknowledge there is a racial component to the shootings 'these people' are total strangers and it wouldn't be that way if the people that they pull over for a taillight are their next door neighbors and not a total stranger.

A neighborhood cannot exert pressure on an individual who just drives through to 'enforce the law'.

[arcane1]

84. Good point, it inspires the "occupying army" attitude when they live elsewhere

I think I read about San Francisco looking into that a while back, but I don't think anything ever came of it.

[NobodyHere]

113. In other words you want to get rid of cops inn bad areas

Because good luck finding cops who want to live in bad areas.

[Blanks]

114. If that's the end result, yeah...

Cops should be around to serve and protect. That's what it says on the side of the cars. If they live in the neighborhood, they're more likely to live up to it.

[AgadorSparticus]

118. That is a great point and she is definitely on to something.

[barbtries]

14. that's what i'm saying

i'm way over the "few bad apples" crap. if that were true the rogue, murderous cops would be arrested immediately and actual justice given a chance.

[KingCharlemagne]

47. They're the enforcers fot the capitalist status quo. AKA: just another

Last edited Fri Jul 8, 2016, 01:26 PM - Edit history (1)

gang with guns but one that operates under color of "law". Capitalist law, that is.

[Bettie]

11. I'm sure there are cops who are decent people

but they lose that moral high ground when they don't turn in or ostracize those who are not.

If you turn your back on bad acts, then you are part of the problem.

If you close ranks to protect cops who are abusive to the public, are racist, are just on a power trip or otherwise behave in a way that is not ethical, then you are part of the problem.

So, no, not all of them are crazed racist murderers, but a large number of them are people who, by their silence, condone such behaviors.

[frazzled]

15. I agree that the code of silence is the first thing that needs to be broken

It's been around for, well since forever, and my city has been talking about how to change that code of silence, though I don't see how that will happen in the short run. But we have to keep trying.

The video I posted above is from a police officer who has broken that code of silence. My only hope is that she encourages others to do so, if only to save themselves.

[FreakinDJ]

18. Furguson

and when it is a "Top Down" systemic problem - what then

Such is the problem with granting the power of Life or Death to mere mortals

[Bettie]

23. That woman and precious few like her

are the exceptions to the rule.

That is the problem.

Cops, from the top down, protect themselves/each other far more than they do the people they are paid to protect.

Prosecutors protect cops and ensure that they are not charged or that their trials go smoothly and that they are acquitted.

Meanwhile, those who are murdered by "bad" cops are portrayed as villains who deserved their fates.

I wish I believed that more would come to the conclusion that things would be better for everyone if good people called out the bad ones in police departments, but in the end, most who do that end up losing, so there is more of an incentive to stay silent than to step forward.

[B2G]

21. "I'm sure there are Muslims who are decent people"

"but they lose that moral high ground when they don't turn in or ostracize those who are not.

If you turn your back on bad acts, then you are part of the problem.

If you close ranks to protect Muslims who are terrorists, are radical, are just on a power trip or otherwise behave in a way that is not ethical, then you are part of the problem.

So, no, not all of them are crazed terrorists, but a large number of them are people who, by their silence, condone such behaviors".


How does that fly?

[Bettie]

24. If you know that your neighbor, coworker, relative

or whatever is planning a terrorist attack and you do nothing, you are indeed part of the problem.

If you know that someone in your life is doing things meant to cause harm to people or abusing their power and you say nothing, then, yes, you are part of the problem.

Police departments have a great deal of power over the communities they purport to serve and should be held to a higher standard than the man on the street, but yes, we all have a responsibility to the others in our society.

[leftynyc]

48. Well done (n/t)

[uponit7771]

92. Muslims, by law, don't have near impunity in regards to killing other humans cops do and we've

... seen it over and over and over again

[cwydro]

120. ...

[Bernardo de La Paz]

53. News Flash for Bettie: The Dallas murder victims were not in St. Paul or Baton Rouge police force.

Quit the blanket tarring and feathering of police officers.

What you are doing is bigotted and prejudiced: pre-judging all based on the actions of a few.

Find the better person within you and be that person.

[B2G]

58. You'd think they could lay off the cop bashing

for just one day. Just one.

[lark]

79. We'd be glad to stop bashing cops if they'd stop killing innocent people.

Neither is very likely in the current climate.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

119. All cops kill innocents? Bash all cops? Or just bash the illegal killer cops (and their leadership)?

[Statistical]

13. I do lump all the "good cop" using the blue shield to cover up and protect the bad ones.

I mean the entire vatican was at fault for the priest sex abuse scandal not just those who committed the assaults. The day the police start casting out their bad apples is the day I won't lump them all together.

The various police organizational talking heads love to spout off "a few bad apples" while forgetting the rest of the phrase ... "spoil the whole bunch". The police, ALL THE POLICE by their inaction and condoning of abuses have allowed the public image of the police to be spoiled in the eyes of the public.

[ehrnst]

20. Agreed. Painting everyone with the same brush is what got us into this problem. (nt)

[FreakinDJ]

34. How about being granted powers no man can ethically wield

Its not merely a case of good cops vs: bad cops as it is rather a system of rules that make the temptation to abuse them too great for mankind to resist

The premise is wrong

[brush]

29. Yep! Get rid of the racist sociopaths in their ranks

They know who they are yet do nothing, and in many cases, protect them from prosecution.

There should a limit to the number of excessive force complaints in their jacket.

After three such complaints, with clear warnings before hand as to what's at stake, they are dismissed.

[Act_of_Reparation]

37. We really need to stop with the "bad cops" trope.

Police violence is not a simple matter of a few bad apples spoiling the bunch. The root of the problem is a toxic, closed police culture that encourages officers to act on their basest instincts by giving them ultimate authority over the public, but little accountability to the public.

[frazzled]

46. But I hope you agree that

killing them isn't the answer either. Violence begets violence, and then counter-violence again, in a never-ending cycle. We are smarter and better than that. Join your community's citizen task force, or lobby to form one, or protest peacefully, contact your local legislators and your federal ones as well.

And if you see something, say something. I will never forget almost 30 years ago witnessing some cops brutally attacking some teenagers at a lake in Minneapolis (this time the youths were white, but they had their hands restrained behind them and were face downward on the police car--still, they were being beaten). I was enraged, and I started to go over to get badge numbers to report it. And then I remembered my 3-month-old son was in the carriage and my toddler daughter with me. I was scared to confront them. I ended by walking away in disgust. I was wrong.

Police officers are scared, too. They face sanctions and retaliation if they blab. This is what needs to change. There aren't many Serpicos out there. We have to have safe, anonymous ways for other police officers to report on colleagues who have issues with rage or racism. And then we need a transparent, public system to force those complaints to be acted upon.

But one thing we never do, whether we're cops or citizens, is gun down people vigilante-style. Which brings me to guns, the root of all evil.

[Act_of_Reparation]

50. Of course I agree.

Violence isn't the answer. What happened in Dallas will only make things worse for everyone.

But it is important to recognize that the refusal of police departments across the country to entertain even the slightest bit of critical self reflection made violence inevitable. That doesn't mean the Dallas PD is directly responsible, or those police that were killed deserved it. It means it was only a matter of time before some people would give up entirely on dialogue.

[Surya Gayatri]

40. A-friggin'-men! So spot on!

[clarice]

43. +10000% nt

[redstatebluegirl]

59. I totally agree! Lumping all Black males together is wrong and lumping all police together is wrong

The loss of life the past 3 days is terrifying. Violence breeds violence, it never ends. I am hoping for healing for all of the families involved and our country. What a mess.

[Delmette]

69. I would add drug testing all officers.

And require additional re-testing after every use of a fire arm, every instance of abusive behavior and every complaint civil or spousal. This should expose those that use steroids, and all other illegal drugs.

I'm just saying that LOE officials are just as human as the rest of us and anyone who violates the law should be treated equally. Perhaps then we would have more drug addiction services instead of puishment.

[loyalsister]

72. That fell apart for me

when police organized a demonstration to publicly celebrate the grand jury decision to not file charges on the anniversary of the shooting of Michael Brown in STL.
I was wondering why are they not having a subdued gathering in grief? Not for Michael Brown but for the fact that a police officer "had" to do something that will haunt him. Anyone who supported that callousness is either a bad apple or an enabler of bad apples. Both camps are guilty of allowing the menace of summary executions based on implicit bias to continue.

[MillennialDem]

75. He's not indicting all individual cops, he's indicting the collective system. There's a difference.

[840high]

78. .+1

[avebury]

87. I disagree. You are trying to compare apples to oranges.

Police officers are hired to protect the public. When they participate in the blue wall to protect the bad cops they become part of the problem instead of the solution. They are failing to do the very job that they are paid to perform.

Not all police officers are crazed, racist murders. What are they? Accessories to the bad cops because they do nothing to stop the bad cops. If cops are not willing to draw a line in the sand to protect the people which includes dealing with the bad cops then they lose the right to be viewed as the good guys. When the Prosecutors fail to prosecute the bad cops they are no longer the good guys.

Actions have consequences and incidents like Dallas are a consequence of the failure of police departments to hold their own accountable for their misdeeds. It is amazing that the police don't understand that.

What is amazing is that an incident like what occurred in Dallas has not already happened and it is likely that more will happen in the future.

[uponit7771]

93. +1, its the laws that allow for the blue wall... cops get near impunity related to killing folk

[Ilsa]

89. Training and integration.

IIRC, part of the problem in Ferguson was lack of color on the police force assigned to that community.

Excellent posts here, BTW, including the OP. Something like this was eventually going to happen, and five innocent cops are dead because not enough was done to change the corrupt system.

Are you listening, 1%?

[uponit7771]

91. Unnnn, the OP is not saying ALL cops are bad just they have near impunity in regards to killing folk

[emulatorloo]

3. Most every one of your posts ends with 'I will get banned for this'

And yet you are still here.

Maybe it is time to drop the gratuitous slams against admins and just post your opinions w/o comment.

[FreakinDJ]

4. Trying to grasp moral legal issues is not one of your strong points

[emulatorloo]

22. So you've been banned from DU then? I did not know that!

Your profile says you are still here. You are still posting.

I'm Perfectly good at grasping legal and moral issues.

Also good at recognizing the pointless melodramatic smears against DU and DU'ers you insert in most every OP.

As far as I'm concerned, that melodrama undercuts your OP's. You may what to drop that rhetorical tactic as it is ineffective.

[still_one]

6. LOL

[Dreamer Tatum]

12. Can you point to the specific actions undertaken by the shot/dead cops that support your premise?

Also, can you point to the special rights granted to the shooters to judge them, and issue punishment accordingly?

If not, your OP is full of shit.

[clarice]

44. [phone]%

[puffy socks]

73. Thanks for the post

of colossal irony

[uponit7771]

95. So there are NO laws that give them near impunity? Where have you been for the last 5 years?

[Dreamer Tatum]

96. Please cite for me the specific impunities on the part of these cops that the Dallas shooter(s)

were entitled to punish by death.

It appears as though you hold as a premise that injustices in MN and LA justify punishment
by unrelated people of unrelated people.

That is not part of any valid justice system in any place I know of, save perhaps an elementary school playground.

[uponit7771]

98. You asked for specific actions of the DPD but the OP is relating the near impunity LE are afforded

... nationwide to the average PD.

The DPD is a cut above because of the community involvement and the last LE dept that deserved any of this none of their impunity is punishable by death.

There's impunity afforded leos nationwide, that's not a broad brush that's fact

[Nye Bevan]

17. What is the appropriate number of police officers that should be killed,

in your opinion, in order to constitute a fair and proportional response?

[FreakinDJ]

19. Really - that is what you grasped out of the discussion

probably another good reason to take away the power to kill with impunity from our police

[liberalmuse]

27. Did you even read the OP?

Because I did, and it was well thought out and respectful. Nowhere in the post did I see the OP calling for police officers to be killed.

[Nye Bevan]

31. So why did the OP (1) apologize for the post, (2) expect that he/she would be banned from DU for it,

and (3) expect to receive a visit at home from the police because of it?

[FreakinDJ]

36. Obviously after last night it is a very sensitive subject

[lark]

81. Images and news of police killing people indiscriminately could be a factor.

People blindly supporting murderous cops could be another.

[MohRokTah]

25. Uh, no, you're wrong. The five cops killed were trying to DE-escalate violence.

Get your facts straight. Dallas is a model for the rest of the country in de-escalation being implemented by a police department.

[brush]

35. Unfortunately for the Dallas cops killed, the shooter was reacting to all the cop murders, . . .

throughout the country and vividly displayed on videos over the last couple of years.

Dallas just happened to be where the first person reached his boiling point. If the killings continue, it probably won't be the last push back against the murderous, unjustified killings.

We need to get the racist, sociopath cops off police forces throughout the country.

[melman]

55. What a bunch of excuse making bullshit

[brush]

65. Excuse at what? You disagree with getting rid of violent, sociopath cops?

The Dallas cops who were killed are innocent victims of a guy who reached his breaking point over too many murders by sociopath cops.

You kill enough innocent victims, somebody is going to push back. Not excuses, violence begets violence.

[puffy socks]

77. So then they've been standing up for all

those innocent people that have been shot and killed in the last couple years , and the demanded that these officers be removed from forces?
because I have not heard a word from the Dallas Police Department on the murder of Tamir Rice the murder of John Crawford the murder of Rekia Boyd, Corey Jones, Philando Castile, on and on.


Its gotten really old being lectured about how we should all remember "not all cops are bad "
Until they start coming out in large numbers against the unwarranted brutality by police nation wide I couldnt care less.
Its just a tactic to distract from the horrible actions and complicit silence.

The police are constantly telling everyone how they put their lives on the line for everyone every day...
if they're so brave, open their mouths and start kicking out the sociopaths amongst them otherwise your just a coward with a badge or an accomplice.

[coco77]

26. K&R..

[Lizzie Poppet]

32. Opening fire on the nearest available cops because OTHER cops murdered people...

...makes about as much sense as me heading down to the local kebab shop and opening up on the staff because OTHER Muslims committed terrorist acts. This wasn't tit-for-tat, it was a massive escalation.

[FreakinDJ]

39. If only you had actually read the Op

and expect people – no matter how deranged they may be, not to react.

[Lizzie Poppet]

41. Oh, I read it.

And you can shove your condescension...

Trashing this silly-assed thread.

[Jester Messiah]

76. Yeah, it's almost like they're being profiled...

[Democat]

33. What did the people killed do to deserve death?

Answer that question for either the police or the black men murdered this week. The answer to both is the same.

[George II]

38. It's not "the police", it's the system (as has been said elsewhere here) and SOME police...

...who have created this and/or allowed it to escalate.

As noted several times over the last day, the Dallas Police Department is one of the best in the country with respect to working with the communities, ALL communities. So it's not "the police" in Dallas that caused that horrible ambush last night.

We have to stop generalizing, on both sides. The average citizen has to stop acting like all police officers are bad, and the police have to stop acting like all citizens, most notably black citizens, are bad.

[brush]

42. Your last sentence nails it.

Police forces throughout the country need to get rid of the racist, sociopaths in their departments who are the ones who commit these horrific, unjustified murders of innocent victims, mostly black men who they target.

I say three strikes of excessive force complaints and they're off the force, maybe two strikes.

[FreakinDJ]

49. What is wrong with 1 Strike

the police officer's union needs to admit not all people are capable of wielding this power equitably

whats wrong with saying "Ok your not going to be charged with murder this time - but maybe its time you tried the Fire Dept."

As it is - The Officer's Union ensures they are not charged (in 99.999% of cases) and they get their job back - AND in many cases go back on the street and do it again

Literally there are cops out there who have killed 5 - 6 people with multiple cases being more then questionable

[brush]

52. I agree with 1 strike if it's a killing.

In other cases of excessive force where there's no killing, my thinking was to give the cop the benefit of the doubt, maybe he had a bad day, his wife left him, some personal tragedy or something.

Two strikes and they're out.

[FreakinDJ]

57. "he had a bad day" - what about the person who is dead because of it

all too often it is more then a bad day - it is a radicalization of our police depts.

They are being trained to shoot first ask questions later. Additionally they are trained Dead Victims produce lesser law suits - so most of the time pump 4 or 5 more shots into them to make sure their dead

[brush]

61. I have no problem with ousting killer cops

I meant the excessive force complaints that didn't result in deaths.

Maybe that's too lax, brutal beatings also should be cause for dismissal.

[tblue37]

86. But when any PD tries to fire a bad apple, the police union forces the PD to put him back

on the job. It is almost impossible foir a PD to get rid of a bad officer. Sure, many PDs have a pervasively toxic culture, but even those police chiefs who try to do the right thing discover that their hands are tied.

[brush]

97. There's got to be a way to get rid of the bad apples

[tblue37]

104. They need to negotiate more reasonable contracts with the cops. As it stands now,

cops are not held responsible for anything they do wrong, and that freedom from responsibility is in their contract.

[clarice]

45. What planet are you from?. nt

[X_Digger]

51. Perhaps you should research the standard more. It's not saying, "I was in fear." Derp

The standard for using deadly force (for cops, for you, for me) is generally (language varies by state), along the lines of "reasonable apprehension of immediate grave bodily injury or death".

Would a reasonable person, given the same set of circumstances, fear immediate grave bodily injury or death?

After all, you could have some strange twisted fear of bic pens-- being afraid of someone holding a bic pen isn't license to kill them, regardless of how much fear you had.

[FreakinDJ]

63. Try reading over at the Police Chief's Website

Or the Supreme court Decisions that have led us to this standard

sadly it is "I was in fear"

[X_Digger]

68. Dear, I have read all the SCOTUS decisions, I can quote them, as well as state law. Try again. n/t

[FreakinDJ]

70. Seriously spouting disinformation at DU doesn't do you cause any good

[X_Digger]

83. You want information, here have some. I expect a full apology.

Texas-
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/SOTWDocs/PE/htm/PE.9.htm

Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or

Florida-
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html

776.012 Use or threatened use of force in defense of person.—
...
(2) A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.

California-
http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/197.html

197. Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in
any of the following cases:
...
3. When committed in the lawful defense of such person, or of a
wife or husband, parent, child, master, mistress, or servant of such
person, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design to
commit a felony or to do some great bodily injury, and imminent
danger of such design being accomplished;

New York-
http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article35.htm

1. A person may, subject to the provisions of subdivision two, use
physical force upon another person when and to the extent he or she
reasonably believes such to be necessary to defend himself, herself or a
third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or
imminent use of unlawful physical force by such other person

Mullenix v Luna
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/mullenix-v-luna/

This Court has considered excessive force claims in
connection with high-speed chases on only two occasions
since Brosseau. In Scott v. Harris, 550 U. S. 372, the
Court held that an officer did not violate the Fourth
Amendment by ramming the car of a fugitive whose reckless
driving “posed an actual and imminent threat to the
lives of any pedestrians who might have been present, to
other civilian motorists, and to the officers involved in the
chase.” Id., at 384. And in Plumhoff v. Rickard, 572 U. S.
___ (2014), the Court reaffirmed Scott by holding that an
officer acted reasonably when he fatally shot a fugitive
who was “intent on resuming” a chase that “pose[d] a
deadly threat for others on the road.”

Plumhoff v Rickard
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/12-1117_1bn5.pdf

A “police
officer’s attempt to terminate a dangerous high-speed car chase
that threatens the lives of innocent bystanders does not violate the
Fourth Amendment, even when it places the fleeing motorist at risk
of serious injury or death.” Scott, supra, at 385. Rickard’s outrageously
reckless driving—which lasted more than five minutes, exceeded
100 miles per hour, and included the passing of more than two
dozen other motorists—posed a grave public safety risk, and the record
conclusively disproves that the chase was over when Rickard’s
car came to a temporary standstill and officers began shooting. Under
the circumstances when the shots were fired, all that a reasonable
officer could have concluded from Rickard’s conduct was that he
was intent on resuming his flight, which would again pose a threat to
others on the road. Pp. 9–11.

Graham v Connor

(c) The Fourth Amendment "reasonableness" inquiry is whether the officers' actions are "objectively reasonable" in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them, without regard to their underlying intent or motivation. The "reasonableness" of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene

Now.. what information do YOU have?

Cough it up, or apologize.

[FreakinDJ]

108. What a fucking joke

[X_Digger]

109. So.. you got nothing.. as expected.

It helps to do your research on a subject before you go spouting off on it.

[X_Digger]

111. Feel free to dig up something.. anything.. that backs up your assertion. So far, all I've seen is..

.. bloviating.

[Lancero]

54. Perhaps, but all this action will do is futher entrench them.

They've just been given 12 more reasons to fear for their lives.

Hate breeds hate, and this attack just set things back even further.

Stooping down to their level doesn't help anyone, but saying that the police forced this is a bit far - The choice to commit these murders was made by 4 people, none of them cops.

But please, do give your condolences to the familys of the killed officers - I'm sure saying 'I'm sorry for your loss, but they were asking for it' will go over REAL well.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

56. Pre-judging all based on a few is Prejudice & Bigotry. As bad on "police" as on Blacks or Muslims.nt

[FreakinDJ]

60. Its not the people - its the law

Pre-judging all based on a few

Makes me wonder what few officers did the Supreme Court prejudge could wield this power of Life or Death ethically to grant it to them.

People are people - they come in all shapes, colors. creeds, and "Mindsets". To think they could all wield such power properly is flawed. To believe a changing society or changing times would not abuse such power is flawed

[Bernardo de La Paz]

64. Except your OP does NOT blame the law. You blame the "police". Edit your title then. . nt

[FreakinDJ]

66. I most certainly do

Every last one of them understands just how easily the law can be abused and yet say nothing

[Bernardo de La Paz]

71. You can't have it both ways. Can't NOT BLAME the police but also BLAME the police. Edit your title.

Blaming "the police" is blaming all the police.

That is bigotry and prejudice.

Police are people too. You say "it's not people". You can't not blame people and simultaneously blanket blame a large group of people.

Find your better nature and be that person. You can make your points without the prejudice.

[FreakinDJ]

74. Not too difficult to grasp 2 realities

The Supreme Court granted the police powers that can overwhelm the most honest person

The police officers accepted these powers knowing full well the consequences

[Bernardo de La Paz]

80. Now you say "the police officers". You mean the ones killed in Dallas?

Quit the prejudicial statements, please.

When you say "the police" or "the police officers" you are making a blanket statement that is very prejudicial against large numbers of fine citizens.

It is as bad as saying "the African-Americans" or "the Hindus" or "the heating & ventilation technicians" are to blame for some event that happened in a city.

If you don't want to sound like a bigot, you'll have to be quite specific about who you mean is really to blame. Do you mean the cop who sat down on the sidewalk to talk to the homeless person? The cop who saved the woman from drowning? The cop who detected and captured the burglar who stole the pensioner's coin collection?

[uponit7771]

100. Near impunity in regards to killing other humans is NOT just a few, its afforded LEOs nationwide...

... and we've seen this near impunity being abused over and over again.

That's not broad brushing that's fact

[Bernardo de La Paz]

102. So, what's the percentage? 50? 90? 99? 100? Are 100% of cops bad guys who abuse over & over again?

Or is it more like 10% or 3%?

[uponit7771]

103. No, its .0001 and that's way too much NOT to be held accountable. The laws that give near impunity

... or the defacto laws that give near impunity are the issue.

Hold the leadership and the LEOs responsible, that's the root of the anger

[Bernardo de La Paz]

106. Prob more than .0001, but hold THEM to the fire, NOT ALL cops. Yes, hold the leadership accountable.

But blanket condemnation of law enforcement officers is destructive of society, not constructive.

Yes, we feel anger but, here at DU on the liberal progressive side, we are not reactive and don't give in to anger. We feel emotions (not hiding or suppressing them) but we are not controlled by emotions. Rationality and intelligence masters emotions. With intelligent action, society can fix problems, move forward, and improve.

Striking out and blaming all law enforcement officers will not solve the problem; it will make it worse.

[NoMoreRepugs]

62. Until the Code of Silence that exists among the great majority of

police officers in this country changes significantly and the near blanket immunity loophole allowed them by the courts - "I was in fear for my life.." - the police will continue to be viewed in a strong negative light by those groups that they target most frequently.

Elect someone like Trump and this will go to a whole new level.

[nolabels]

67. When your lies become the truth you only have yourself to blame

" I was in fear for my life " is not valid. Sworn officers have made a mockery of taking their oath. Like it or not upholding the idea of what your occupation is what contributors to society do. The rest are just leeches along for the ride

If others in your chosen field of work are making things dangerous than your duty would also be to help weed them out. If it don't happen then that is a tarnish on your reputation also. I would sure like those days back when people wanted to be professional about their work.

[Odin2005]

85. The police unions need to be cut down to size.

Politicians are afraid of offending police unions and so the cops keep getting and more out of control.

[avebury]

88. Totally agree with you. nt

[billhicks76]

90. Police Shoot Chihuahua's Claiming A Threat

Maybe the solution is to ban live ammo and equip them with rubber bullets when not involved with an actual SWAT situation. Of course now they use SWAT for simple marijuana cases. What I've noticed is 15 years ago it was uncommon for a cop to shoot a house pet dog. Then it happened more and more after they realized there was no punishment. Now it's routine. Then the same happened with minority cop killings. Once they saw no one punished them they did it more and more. Maybe there are too many shoot to kill trained Iraq war vets on the force that killed with so much impunity their morals have been erased by years of military training. I don't think many people will be copying the cop killers because they do get consequences always...death. If we do then we know people have been pushed so far to the edge in anger that they feel they have no option but to defend their families. I doubt that will occur but one never knows.

[lillypaddle]

94. I'm with you on this 100%

enough is enough is enough.

[Calculating]

99. Police have been pushing people for years

And there's been damn near zero accountability. Civil asset forfeiture and cops acting like highway robbers, Dogs shot in their own yards, people given forced cavity searches(rape), black people shot left and right for making a "suspicious move", white people shot for the same(happens less often though), SWAT raids over small drug offenses, families held at gunpoint etc, women beat up and cussed at for spitting on a cop...

It never ends. It was only a matter of time before people got fed up and something bad happened. Police were supposed to PROTECT AND SERVE US. Now many of them are functioning as jack booted thugs enforcing unjust laws, revenue collectors, or roided up thugs who just look for excuses to victimize citizens.

[pansypoo53219]

101. when are cops gonna get that they need to police themselves against bad cops? fuck the thin blue

line. my grandpa's cousin was a WW2 vet. very old school straight laced guy. beat cop, worked in vice, + a detective. but he never was changed by his work, he never treated anybody w/out humanity & respect. also worked on DARW, which was stupid, but he grew a pot plant in his yard for it. tried to kill it after he stopped DARE, it refused to die. lol.

[Cal33]

105. How is it possible for an armed policeman to be in fear for his life when he confronts an

unarmed civilian, and who is not threatening anyone in any way?

[FreakinDJ]

107. Yet 20 - 33% of ALL police shootings are Unarmed Victims

[Bonx]

112. You mean like this that happened today?

Ballwin officer shot and wounded during traffic stop; suspect held

"BALLWIN • A Ballwin Police officer is in critical condition after he was shot in the neck during a traffic stop earlier today, sources say.

Sources say without further explanation that the officer was shot at least once from behind and there were at least three shots fired at him. A suspect was captured shortly later during a foot chase, the sources say.

A weapon was recovered, according to St. Louis County Police, who are taking over the investigation."

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/ballwin-officer-shot-and-wounded/article_2def1b64-a632-5ea7-b5f0-031f4dd1bce3.html

Civilians are only 'unarmed' until they aren't.

[Cal33]

115. There have even been children as young as 12, who have been shot by policemen. I read

about one of them was carrying a toy gun. The kid was black, of course.

[Skittles]

116. stereotyping sucks, unless the subject is LEO

ugh

[Festivito]

117. But, if afraid of a camera and an unarmed man, FIND A NEW LINE OF WORK. eom