Minneapolis PD Suffocate Unarmed Black Man Who Later Dies in Hospital

[PsYcNeT]

Police forces in the US seem very redeemable and not at full of corrupt, racist #######s.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1300205715768868865

[burn_this_city]

Can anyone explain why these cops weren't fired outright? Tampering with evidence after illegally detaining this man.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montr...sion-1.5706000

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Police forces in the US seem very redeemable and not at full of corrupt, racist #######s.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1300205715768868865

Jesus ####ing Christ, try hards

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Can anyone explain why these cops weren't fired outright? Tampering with evidence after illegally detaining this man.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montr...sion-1.5706000

Absolutely has to be a zero-tolerance policy for this type of BS. This is ####ed. The officers need to be fired.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Unions (Associations in some states) make terminating cops very very difficult. They encourage bad behavior. I'm pro-union for the most part, but the police unions are down right evil in what they do, and that's from someone who worked inside of one.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by New Era

Unions (Associations in some states) make terminating cops very very difficult. They encourage bad behavior. I'm pro-union for the most part, but the police unions are down right evil in what they do, and that's from someone who worked inside of one.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the Unions can only protect members to the extent the law allows them to. If you want Unions to not be able to defend bad behaviour you need to make that behaviour illegal. If you get rid of the Unions but don’t change the laws it wouldn’t stop a cop from hiring a lawyer on their own and getting the exact same result.

[jayswin]

Ahhhhhh, who mentioned unions?!! The cardinal CP sin.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Everybody stay calm and don't talk about salad dressing or extra money given to a server after your meal as a percentage on your bill. No need to make this any worse than it already is.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the Unions can only protect members to the extent the law allows them to. If you want Unions to not be able to defend bad behaviour you need to make that behaviour illegal. If you get rid of the Unions but don’t change the laws it wouldn’t stop a cop from hiring a lawyer on their own and getting the exact same result.

Tampering with evidence is not illegal? Sorry?

What about murder? Aggravated assault?

Sorry man. Your union schtick may not work so hot with the police angle.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Tampering with evidence is not illegal? Sorry?

What about murder? Aggravated assault?

Sorry man. Your union schtick may not work so hot with the police angle.

Ok Mr. Coffee, I implore you to explain to us all how lawyers are able to get things like murder charges dropped if the law doesn’t allow it.

[Ped]

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...=pocket-newtab


How Police Unions fight reform.


Long article

In May, just days after a Minneapolis police officer killed George Floyd, Lieutenant Bob Kroll, the bellicose leader of the city’s police union, described Floyd as a violent criminal, said that the protesters who had gathered to lament his death were terrorists, and complained that they weren’t being treated more roughly by police. Kroll, who has spoken unsentimentally about being involved in three shootings himself, said that he was fighting to get the accused officers reinstated. In the following days, the Kentucky police union rallied around officers who had fatally shot an E.M.T. worker named Breonna Taylor in her home. Atlanta police staged an organized sick-out after the officers who killed Rayshard Brooks were charged. Philadelphia police sold T-shirts celebrating a fellow-cop who was caught on video clubbing a student protester with a steel baton. The list goes on.

In their interstitial safe zone, police unions can offer their members extraordinary protections. Officers accused of misconduct may be given legal representation paid for by the city, and ample time to review evidence before speaking to investigators. In many cases, suspended officers have their pay guaranteed, and disciplinary recommendations of oversight boards are ignored. Complaints submitted too late are disqualified. Records of misconduct may be kept secret, and permanently destroyed after as little as sixty days.

The N.Y.P.D. is not the most insular, lawless police department around. It is, in fact, one of the least violent police agencies in the country’s hundred largest cities. During the past seven years, according to a database built by a group called Mapping Police Violence, the police in St. Louis have killed fourteen times more civilians, per capita, than New York police have. In New York, police kill Black civilians at 7.8 times the rate of white civilians. In Chicago, the factor is 27.4.

A sense of being unthanked runs deep in the N.Y.P.D. People protesting police brutality, according to Lynch, “obviously do not appreciate the risk and sacrifice we make for them.” Mike O’Meara, who heads the transit-police union, scolded state officials at a recent rally, shouting, “Stop treating us like animals and thugs and start treating us with some respect!” In February, after Mayor Bill de Blasio expressed his sympathies to two police officers who had been shot, the Sergeants Benevolent Association tweeted, “Mayor DeBlasio, the members of the NYPD are declaring war on you! We do not respect you, DO NOT visit us in hospitals. You sold the NYPD to the vile creatures, the 1% who hate cops but vote for you.” The S.B.A. was also responsible for doxxing the Mayor’s daughter, Chiara; after she was arrested during a peaceful demonstration in late May, it published the police report, including her height, weight, and address, on Twitter. The City Council member Ritchie Torres described the S.B.A. as “a hate group masquerading as a labor union.”

Police work is indisputably difficult. Patrol officers are often confronted with people at their worst and their most trying; in a country that has more firearms in private hands than it has citizens, the threat of being shot is real. But, statistically, law enforcement does not make the list of the ten most dangerous jobs in America. Commercial fishing is worse, as are roofing and construction. Studies of patrol officers’ service calls have shown that less than five per cent are related to violent crimes.
Seth Stoughton, a former police officer who now teaches law at the University of South Carolina, argues that law enforcement’s “warrior problem” begins in the first days of training. “Would-be officers are told that their prime objective, the proverbial ‘first rule of law enforcement,’ is to go home at the end of every shift,” he wrote in the Harvard Law Review in 2015. “But they are taught that they live in an intensely hostile world. A world that is, quite literally, gunning for them. . . . As a result, officers learn to be afraid.” This message is then drummed into young cops on the job. The only way to survive is by hypervigilance, addressing civilians in a tone of “unquestioned command,” and identifying those who don’t readily accede to authority as enemies.

I was struck by a coincidence in telephone interviews with two Black N.Y.P.D. officers, one of them retired. In both conversations, we ended up discussing the latest local police scandal, in which an officer was caught on video applying a choke hold to someone on the boardwalk in the Rockaways. The officer, David Afanador, had previously been tried for felony assault—he pistol-whipped an unarmed, unresisting sixteen-year-old, breaking his teeth—but he was acquitted at trial. In the new case, he was quickly suspended and indicted for “attempted aggravated strangulation,” with no discussion of a grand jury. Both interviewees called my attention to the same detail in the Afanador video: a second officer urging him to ease up. That was what excited them. It was a complicity breach—a small but perhaps indicative case of the ninety per cent reining in the ten. “That’s what we want to see,” the retired officer said. “That guy’s an actual hero.”

[Oling_Roachinen]

The Kenosha shooting falling somewhere between "Man only their to break up fight between women, peacefully walks away from police and gets shot in back" to "Rape victim calls 911 as her assailant violates his restraining-order to intimidate and rob her, then violently fights off cops who tried to arrest him for his outstanding warrants, pulls out knife and approaches young children before getting shot" I think shows that no one cares about the facts anymore. Politicians and media using us as pawns.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

The Kenosha shooting falling somewhere between "Man only their to break up fight between women, peacefully walks away from police and gets shot in back" to "Rape victim calls 911 as her assailant violates his restraining-order to intimidate and rob her, then violently fights off cops who tried to arrest him for his outstanding warrants, pulls out knife and approaches young children before getting shot" I think shows that no one cares about the facts anymore. Politicians and media using us as pawns.

The problem is even if the absolute worst take on Jacob Blake is true, that he was a violent rapist with a knife, he still shouldn't have been shot, and when we get bogged down (intentionally by apologists for the shooting) in the minutia of Blakes character and actions it is just an attempt to avoid the real question which is what the hell is the justification for shooting him in the back 7 times when he was walking away from the cops or slowly over 7 minutes suffocating George Floyd when they had full control over him.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

The problem is even if the absolute worst take on Jacob Blake is true, that he was a violent rapist with a knife, he still shouldn't have been shot

WHAT?

How can you possibly say that a violent criminal who just got out of a violent confrontation with the cops, with a knife in hand (if that is the case) can get anywhere close to three children (especially if the cop didn't know it was his kids)?

Nah, #### that. Knife around kids, have to shoot. Best case scenario is he gets in the vehicle and leaves frantically endangering three children and all the people on the streets as he flees the cops. That's best case. Worst is that he uses the kids as hostage or shield or takes off with them never to be seen again.

This is hypothetically if he had knife in hand when shot at. Cops can't play games with criminals that endanger kids. It's almost embarrassing that only one cop shot if that is indeed the case but maybe they couldn't risk hitting the kids either. I just can't believe anyone would have issues shooting a knife wielding violent criminal who is purposely going towards children. That's the type of mental gymnastics that you are accusing the apologists of doing.

Keep in mind that this guy was there to rob and intimidate his (alleged) rape victim before the trial. And he brought his children on his fun little field trip. There's no room to have some form rationale for his actions, he was a violent crazed psychopath and if he had a knife, there's no telling what he may have done. Save the children, ask questions later.

The shooting officer, despite believing the criminal had a knife, got right up to him and tried to keep him from entering the vehicle (and thereby protecting the children) despite his own personal safety. He knows in that range a knife is a death sentence, yet he still didn't shoot until that door was open. They attenpted non-lethal methods prior, they didn’t come in guns blazing. And now a violent rapist by only his own actions will have a much difficult job attacking women now, no one else was harmed, and he is still going to have to face the justice system for his rape. Ignoring the violent peripherals (wannabe cop Kyle shooting etc.), I see this as the absolute ideal outcome - if he did have a knife in hand.

Edit: Also, while far from confirmed, it’s extremely possible that the kids of his were also the kids of the woman he is alleged to have rape. Snopes and other fact checking websites have said that they share three children in common. But because the accused has not had her name released they aren’t confirming. However, the SUV that they were in was not his. So it may be that he didn’t bring his children on the field trip after all. So again, he’s there to rob and intimidate his ex, you can’t ####ing let him near her children (if that’s the case).

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

(if that’s the case).

So he was shot 7 times because of these 4 words......

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Looch City

So he was shot 7 times because of these 4 words......

Of course not. If he was trying to get to the children of his rape victim with a knife, he deserved to be shot 70 times.

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Of course not. If he was trying to get to the children of his rape victim with a knife, he deserved to be shot 70 times.

I really can't tell if you're being overly sarcastic or not. How did this conversation turn into save the children?

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Of course not. If he was trying to get to the children of his rape victim with a knife, he deserved to be shot 70 times.

So the bullets can’t move fast enough to wait to see such an action before firing a deadly weapon? 7 times.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Looch City

I really can't tell if you're being overly sarcastic or not. How did this conversation turn into save the children?

You are aware there were children in the SUV he was trying to get into, correct?

Because if he had a knife as alleged, and was climbing/reaching into the vehicle (no less with the hand that had the knife), and those are the rape victim's children, cops need to take action.

How close do you want a violent criminal with a lethal weapon get to children before lethal force is required?

[Looch City]

Where are you getting all your conclusions from? Were there new articles recently?