Minneapolis PD Suffocate Unarmed Black Man Who Later Dies in Hospital

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

I think a lot of people up until now accepted the ethos of, I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6. That gave police a lot of latitude to use deadly force when it probably wasn't necessary.

That and the previous lack of video evidence. Most of these would have been a no brainer for investigators if there weren't videos.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It always is.

I'm also not leaving it out:


My comment was around the fact that people thought it was important to mention that he punched a cop, as though that (in any way) matters when you shoot someone in the back. Reaching for a gun would matter. Punching a cop does not.

The official police statement is that the offender was reaching towards a handgun that dropped to the floor (and after showing intent punching / assaulting a cop).

You seem to be deliberately avoiding that part of the story. Whether true or not, this is the official statement of events, and one that body cams should corroborate if true.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It always is.

I'm also not leaving it out:


My comment was around the fact that people thought it was important to mention that he punched a cop, as though that (in any way) matters when you shoot someone in the back. Reaching for a gun would matter. Punching a cop does not.

You don't think someone violently resisting arrest before they reach for a gun adds important context?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Ark2

You don't think someone violently resisting arrest before they reach for a gun adds important context?

I don't think punching a cop adds important context, but reaching for a gun does, and I've stated at much.

One we can see, the other is a side of the story which is not yet proven or corroborated. Assuming he was reaching for a gun, the shooting was justified. Assuming he wasn't and was just running away, it wasn't. Punching a cop doesn't change the validity of shooting him, unless you believe punching should carry a death sentence.

Originally Posted by Firebot

You seem to be deliberately avoiding that part of the story. Whether true or not, this is the official statement of events, and one that body cams should corroborate if true.

It was in the article I read, which I shared for everyone to read, I mentioned it in a response post, and then quoted that post again when someone said I left it out. So I'm not sure how many times I need to mention it or to point to a source that mentions it that will be enough to avoid accusations of "leaving it out" or "avoiding it." As explained (again) in my post above, the alleged gun if he went for it, is the only thing that justifies this. Not his record (if he has one), not running away, not punching a cop, and not even a gun falling out of his jacket. If he went for the gun, that's it, and unfortunately there's no video that supports that statement, one made by police again and again to justify lethal force.

If you're holding out hope for body cam footage to confirm or deny it, good luck, LA County officers are not currently equipped with them.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

The punching a cop on its own likely doesn't warrant a shooting, unless the guy's being shot while actively punching the cop. That is, if you punch a cop and run away, and there's no indication that you're going to come back and continue punching the cop, you don't get shot. But it's relevant in that if you punch a cop, and then go to pick up a gun, there would seem to be a much greater risk that the reason you're going for the gun is that you're going to shoot the cop you just punched.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

The punching a cop on its own likely doesn't warrant a shooting, unless the guy's being shot while actively punching the cop. That is, if you punch a cop and run away, and there's no indication that you're going to come back and continue punching the cop, you don't get shot. But it's relevant in that if you punch a cop, and then go to pick up a gun, there would seem to be a much greater risk that the reason you're going for the gun is that you're going to shoot the cop you just punched.

I would argue that any interaction with police where you go for a gun that the expectation is likely you're going to use that gun. I doubt punching or not punching increases or decreases the likelihood.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Whether true or not, this is the official statement of events, and one that body cams should corroborate if true.

#releasethebodycamfootage

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I would argue that any interaction with police where you go for a gun that the expectation is likely you're going to use that gun. I doubt punching or not punching increases or decreases the likelihood.

Punching a cop is a great way to get shot. My advice, never punch a cop.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I would argue that any interaction with police where you go for a gun that the expectation is likely you're going to use that gun. I doubt punching or not punching increases or decreases the likelihood.

I'd like to be clear he was actually going for his gun as opposed to stumbling as he tried to get away and him putting his hands out as one does and that was just a decent excuse to unload on him, there is the infamous shooting of the drunk white guy a few years ago who's sweat pants fell down and they shot him as he reached to pull his trousers up or the guy who was shot in his car as he went to pull out his drivers license that the cop had asked him to pull out.

I have little faith in the US cops stories at this point after they have killed yet another person

[Wastedyouth]

Jesus, take these idiots guns away. My goodness this is ridiculous.

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I don't think punching a cop adds important context, but reaching for a gun does, and I've stated at much.

One we can see, the other is a side of the story which is not yet proven or corroborated. Assuming he was reaching for a gun, the shooting was justified. Assuming he wasn't and was just running away, it wasn't. Punching a cop doesn't change the validity of shooting him, unless you believe punching should carry a death sentence.



It was in the article I read, which I shared for everyone to read, I mentioned it in a response post, and then quoted that post again when someone said I left it out. So I'm not sure how many times I need to mention it or to point to a source that mentions it that will be enough to avoid accusations of "leaving it out" or "avoiding it." As explained (again) in my post above, the alleged gun if he went for it, is the only thing that justifies this. Not his record (if he has one), not running away, not punching a cop, and not even a gun falling out of his jacket. If he went for the gun, that's it, and unfortunately there's no video that supports that statement, one made by police again and again to justify lethal force.

If you're holding out hope for body cam footage to confirm or deny it, good luck, LA County officers are not currently equipped with them.

The assaultive bit DOES provide important context to the guys state of mind and would definitely be considered in the investigation. But agreed, does not give rise to lethal force IMO (unless there's circumstances that we are unaware of).

I think what people are drawing issue with is your original post stated merely that he was shot because of a traffic violation.

He was stopped because of... *checks notes* Ah yes, the dangerous felony of ‘riding a bicycle in violation of vehicle code.’ Better execute him.

You did post the link, but if the roles were reversed, you would be all over the poster for being "purposely obtuse" and not pointing out that the while the initial reason for police interaction was a vehicle code violation, the actual reason for the "execution" was him going for a gun (alleged).

If no one would have responded to it giving you an opportunity to bring up those facts, I am sure there would have been no further follow-up regarding a gun.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

The assaultive bit DOES provide important context to the guys state of mind and would definitely be considered in the investigation. But agreed, does not give rise to lethal force IMO (unless there's circumstances that we are unaware of).

I think what people are drawing issue with is your original post stated merely that he was shot because of a traffic violation.



You did post the link, but if the roles were reversed, you would be all over the poster for being "purposely obtuse" and not pointing out that the while the initial reason for police interaction was a vehicle code violation, the actual reason for the "execution" was him going for a gun (alleged).

If no one would have responded to it giving you an opportunity to bring up those facts, I am sure there would have been no further follow-up regarding a gun.

Listen, man. I appreciate having a fan who thinks they know my work, but my real fans know:
1. I save "purposely obtuse" for at least a handful of posts in, that's not something you hit people with right away, you give them a chance to respond and clarify first. Only rookies hit people with that right off the bat. In fact, I've only used it once since you joined, and that was when (you guessed it) someone missed the point, had it explained to them, and continued to miss the point. Case closed.

2. There would always be closer to 100 follow up posts than no posts. Real fans know I hate my job so I basically live in this thread and threads like it. Got a social justice issue? 100 posts for you. Need a PC police? Send the Pepsi signal.

No follow up posts? Pfft, and you want to pretend like you know me? Dude... there's work to do.

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Listen, man. I appreciate having a fan who thinks they know my work, but my real fans know:
1. I save "purposely obtuse" for at least a handful of posts in, that's not something you hit people with right away, you give them a chance to respond and clarify first. Only rookies hit people with that right off the bat. In fact, I've only used it once since you joined, and that was when (you guessed it) someone missed the point, had it explained to them, and continued to miss the point. Case closed.

2. There would always be closer to 100 follow up posts than no posts. Real fans know I hate my job so I basically live in this thread and threads like it. Got a social justice issue? 100 posts for you. Need a PC police? Send the Pepsi signal.

No follow up posts? Pfft, and you want to pretend like you know me? Dude... there's work to do.

I thoroughly enjoyed this response.

[Captain Otto]

Lol. I did too actually.

Best of both worlds - obtuse when I need to be but also pedantic when I need to be.


Sent from my HD1905 using Tapatalk

[SebC]

Apparently cops have cards to give to friends and family that tell other cops to give their friends a family leniency.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/v...courtesy-cards

[DownInFlames]

Originally Posted by SebC

Apparently cops have cards to give to friends and family that tell other cops to give their friends a family leniency.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/v...courtesy-cards

That's nothing new. Remember those "Back The Blue" bumper stickers you used to see? Same sorta thing.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by DownInFlames

That's nothing new. Remember those "Back The Blue" bumper stickers you used to see? Same sorta thing.

It was news to me.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

I thoroughly enjoyed this response.

Agreed. It was a solid deflection. Masterfully done.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Agreed. It was a solid deflection. Masterfully done.

Man, I just looked it up:

Psychological deflection is seen as a narcissistic abuse tactic used to control the mind and emotions of others.

I can’t decide if that’s a great compliment or really harsh. But thanks either way.

[TherapyforGlencross]

Sorry, I don’t know how to embed tweets. But this was tweeted by trump at 11:40PM.

Why aren’t the Portland Police ARRESTING the cold blooded killer of Aaron “Jay” Danielson. Do your job, and do it fast. Everybody knows who this thug is. No wonder Portland is going to hell!
@TheJusticeDept

@FBI
http://https://twitter.com/realDonal...298385921?s=20

Followed by this morning.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-54023227

Police in the US have shot dead a man suspected of fatally shooting a right-wing activist during protests in Portland, Oregon, officials say.

Michael Reinoehl, 48, was being investigated for the killing of a supporter of President Trump during last weekend's tension.

Reinoehl earlier said he acted in self-defence when he shot Aaron Danielson, a supporter of the Patriot Prayer group.

Police said he was armed and was shot during a confrontation with officers.

[Looch City]

So is this turning into a NIMBY issue now?

https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/mobile/ch...nity-1.5091675

As the first strokes of paint are laid against the bricks of a private apartment building in Chinatown, some Chinese Calgarians say there was little time to provide input about the art that will celebrate Black voices.

Calgary artist Jae Sterling has begun work on the multi-story mural titled The Guide & Protector, which faces the Calgary Chinese Cultural Centre