Any evidence he tried to steal the gun? The eyewitness said that was not what he saw.

“They were down on the floor before I started recording,” Santana told NBC Nightly News. “I remember the police had control of the situation. He had control of Scott, and Scott was trying just to get away from the Taser. You can hear the sound of the Taser ... before I started recording. I believe he just wanted to get away from the Taser.”

Bizarrely, you seem to be agreeing with me while, at the same time, accusing me of presenting a straw man.


Possibly so.

It doesn't, however, justify doing something which is likely to present a cop with an even better excuse to shoot you.

I'm certainly not suggesting that this fella was the arbiter of his own fate.
As Trollhunter previously said, regardless of what he did, none of the offences he may have been guilty of (as far as we know) justify the use of lethal force simply to gain compliance.

In the grand scheme of things, however, this vicious circle of mistrust leading to non-compliance, leading to confrontation, leading to more mistrust simply isn't tenable though.
You can't have a situation where cops simply ignore non-compliance from black people so it's up to black people to abide by the rule of law and, equally, you can't have a situation where cops use lethal force unnecessarily against anybody either so it's up to the authorities to get that under control.

Allegedly a warrant for not paying child support. Which he had been done for before. There is NO evidence he tried to steal a gun or the taser, unless by running away with it's prongs stuck in him that constitutes stealing it. What's he going to do with a discharged taser anyway? It's not like he has a taser clip on him.

I thought it was a warrant for violent offences, pardon me if thats not the case. At any rate, if he had a history for violence and is resisting arrest, that throws up the possibility of a case for self defence on the officers part. Not saying that it necessarily is self defence but it needs looking into. Personally i dont think race even comes into this. We have nothing to suggest that the colour of Scotts skin was what got him shot.

That's a strawman. We don't have that situation. We are on this thread discussing situations where the police overreacted to non-compliance and in another merely questioning with violence. Of course it makes sense for someone to therefore avoid putting themselves in the situation where they are more likely to be treated like that.

Where is the situation where they ignored non-compliance?

They had a tussle of sorts, witnesses have confirmed that.

Personally I think the officer tried to tase him but Scott resisted and got away. Hence why the taser ended up where it was. So Scott probably grabbed the taser to prevent himself being tasered. The taser ended up on the floor, Scott tried to run again, officer decided to shoot based upon the fact he was unable to taser him.

Again, doesn't justify lethal force but it makes sense as why would Scott grab the officers taser when he is just trying to get away?

If you've expecting the police then obviously you'll be inclined to answer the door, that's patently obvious and is not what is being discussed.
If you're not expecting the police and they're known to have a history of tasering innocent people then yes, not answering the door and ensuring witnesses are present is a perfectly reasonable course of action, same as not saying anything until you have a solicitor present.

He wouldn't have known if he had a history of violence. He couldn't get his id from the number plate as he was apparently buying the car. He couldn't know who was driving it. Scott had it away on his toes as Slager was going back to his car (presumably to check his id or similar). Which takes us back to square one. Why did he shoot him when he had no knowledge of who Scott was or what he had or had not done?

Black people are shot every single day in America.

So are white people.

And in the vast majority of cases it is black people doing the shooting.

Why the shock and horror at this? I could go and find many more shocking news stories about shootings in America.

There's a whole heap of justifiable reasons why Scott may have run, why he may have grabbed the taser, why there may have been a tussle, but there's no justification whatsoever for Slager to shoot him as he ran away.

The point is that there's no excuse for non-compliance so black people need to stop fleeing from cops and then moaning that it's racism when the police take action while the police, for their part, need to learn how to respond in a proportional manner.

Go on then. Find 5 videos (not news stories) of someone being shot and killed while running away from a officer and posing no immediate threat to them.

The likelihood is you won't be able to find such a thing because such a thing IS very rare, hence the 'shock and horror'.

or even as plausible:

Cop tasers suspect after threatening to kill suspect. Suspect tasered.. Taser does not have required effect.. Suspect tries to run away from cop again..Cop calmly puts a whole load of bullets into back of suspect cause he can't be arsed to arrest him later and well, no one's watching so what's another dead perp? Picks up taser, drops it near body, makes big show to other cop of taser by side of dead perp (who he has handcuffed in case he becomes a zombie). Pockets taser after making show that he shot per in the back in self defence..

Never said thete was...

However going by the dash cam there wasn't really any good reason as to why Scott ran.

Were there not taser marks on Scott? I mau be wrong but I think I read that in one of the articles. The witness also states he heard the taser go off. Now, tasers are a one shot then reload system are they not? Why would Scott want to steal a discharged taser?

AFAIK there are barbs that are supposed to go through the clothing and into the body. Perhaps the taser was defective of the clothing to thick for this to happen?

The video is indeed shocking.

And i should have stated that all the shootings of innocent people in America are shocking and terrible.

But i'm not sure why a policeman shooting a criminal should gain what could be called a cult following when thousands of innocent people are shot by criminals ever year.

Because Scott was not a criminal in the sense of warranting being shot?
Cops are meant to uphold the law, not gun down citizens.
It's gathered a lot of attention as it shows a police officer acting in a reckless and criminal manner and then moving the evidence around.

Hmm. Not exactly sure what crime he had committed? Not convinced that running away from a policeman qualifies.

What there is no excuse for is murder.

And a disproportionate response to a misdemeanor or reaction can be based on racism.

Upholding the law can sometimes mean gunning down citizens.

Reckless, possibly - that, i think is personal opinion and we're all entitled to one.

Criminal, that is for the courts to decide.

Moving evidence around - i haven't seen that yet.

But where are the thousands of threads showing the outrage at the thousands of criminal shootings?

You do realise that you can both find innocent people being killed as abhorrent AND discuss the Slage/Scott situation? It's like whenever there's an RIP thread and someone pipes up with trite nonsense about "the 1000's of soldiers who die each year who don't get an RIP thread".

Why not start your own, individual threads for each of the '1000s' of innocent people killed each year and see where that gets you.

How are you getting on finding the videos of people being shot while running away?

Yeah I can imagine the police information video:

"Dear citizen.. if you run away from us for any reason.. we will cap your ass....yeeee haaaa!!!! Judge Dredd styleeeee.... Go ahead make my day"

He didn't steal it. That was the lie Slager put out initially.

The taser prong was found by the coroner imbedded in the victims back along with the bullets. So basically you'd have to accuse him of stealing them too because he certainly ran off with that police property too...

BiB #1 - you missed an important word which I've now added. Please tell me you don't think actually agree with this statement?

BiB #2 - as I just said, why not go and start them?