DS Forums

 
 

Another black man shot dead in USA by police officer


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-04-2015, 17:33
Si_Crewe
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dumfries
Posts: 38,495
I cant see any justification here. Even if he'd got the taser, he was running away, and was not an immediate threat to anyones life.
That's a bit of a simplistic view.

I mean, even in a case like that of Duggan, a big part of the reason for taking such decisive action is because if the target escapes they are likely to go on to do bad things using the gun thought to be in their possession.

That being the case, I don't really have any fundamental issue with the idea of shooting somebody in the back if the circumstances warrant it.

But that, of course, is where we have to start thinking about the real issue here; the idea that (as in the example I gave earlier) cops need to consider whether or not the suspect is involved in an offence that warrants the use of deadly force.
It seems quite common, in these cases, for the cops to get drawn into a spiral of escalation which leads to a death rather than ever actually stopping to think "Y'know, this just isn't worth taking a life for".

Course, it might turn out that this guy was actually Public Enemy #1 and shooting him before he could escape and commit more horrible crimes was completely justified, in which case I guess a lot of people are going to have egg on their faces.
Si_Crewe is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 08-04-2015, 17:37
TrollHunter
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,703
Regardless of whether he had a charge sheet as long as his arm.
Regardless of whether he made a grab for the officer's tazer.
Regardless of whether he was known to the officer.

He was running away. He posed no threat to the officer's life. There is no reason for the officer to shoot him dead.
TrollHunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 17:46
Si_Crewe
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dumfries
Posts: 38,495
Regardless of whether he had a charge sheet as long as his arm.
Regardless of whether he made a grab for the officer's tazer.
Regardless of whether he was known to the officer.

He was running away. He posed no threat to the officer's life. There is no reason for the officer to shoot him dead.
The police have a responsibility to defend the safety of the public in general as well as themselves.

Not saying it was justified in this case but it'd be daft to suggest that, for example, an armed rapist or murderer might be allowed to escape simply because it's "unsporting" to shoot them in the back.
Si_Crewe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 17:50
MC_Satan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Hell.
Posts: 9,697
The police have a responsibility to defend the safety of the public in general as well as themselves.

Not saying it was justified in this case but it'd be daft to suggest that, for example, an armed rapist or murderer might be allowed to escape simply because it's "unsporting" to shoot them in the back.
They are supposed to be police officers not judge, jury and executioner.
MC_Satan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 17:59
TrollHunter
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,703
The police have a responsibility to defend the safety of the public in general as well as themselves.

Not saying it was justified in this case but it'd be daft to suggest that, for example, an armed rapist or murderer might be allowed to escape simply because it's "unsporting" to shoot them in the back.
I'm talking about this incident, not police policy in general, so when the hypothetical rapist or murderer is shot and killed, I'll discuss that situation then.

What could Scott have done to justify Office Slager opening fire on him? The park is empty. Scott's running away from the officer. The video is poorly filmed, granted, and doesn't start until mid-way through the action, but really, what other scenario can there be that justifies Scott being shot, other than him perhaps actually having a weapon and drawing it?
TrollHunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 18:13
idlewilde
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 8,502
I'm talking about this incident, not police policy in general, so when the hypothetical rapist or murderer is shot and killed, I'll discuss that situation then.

What could Scott have done to justify Office Slager opening fire on him? The park is empty. Scott's running away from the officer. The video is poorly filmed, granted, and doesn't start until mid-way through the action, but really, what other scenario can there be that justifies Scott being shot, other than him perhaps actually having a weapon and drawing it?
I think the US has a kind of "fleeing felon" law in which deadly force can be used by an officer to stop a running suspect if the officer has probable cause to believe there is a serious risk of harm to himself or others. It will now be up to a jury to determine whether the officer's belief was reasonable if that is what he argues in his defence.
idlewilde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 18:20
valkay
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 15,280
When will the rioting and looting start.?
valkay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 18:22
Amica
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,404
After shooting him in the back as he runs away, the officer then plants the stun gun next to him. So he must be in no state to use it. Yet he remains handcuffed and face down in the dirt. Walter Scott was a human being, not an animal. What does that make the officer?

The whole thing is horrific and incredibly sad.
Amica is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 18:29
Deep Purple
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Deep Within The Chain Of Evil
Posts: 51,280
That's a bit of a simplistic view.

I mean, even in a case like that of Duggan, a big part of the reason for taking such decisive action is because if the target escapes they are likely to go on to do bad things using the gun thought to be in their possession.

That being the case, I don't really have any fundamental issue with the idea of shooting somebody in the back if the circumstances warrant it.

But that, of course, is where we have to start thinking about the real issue here; the idea that (as in the example I gave earlier) cops need to consider whether or not the suspect is involved in an offence that warrants the use of deadly force.
It seems quite common, in these cases, for the cops to get drawn into a spiral of escalation which leads to a death rather than ever actually stopping to think "Y'know, this just isn't worth taking a life for".

Course, it might turn out that this guy was actually Public Enemy #1 and shooting him before he could escape and commit more horrible crimes was completely justified, in which case I guess a lot of people are going to have egg on their faces.
Very different. To use force such as this, there has to be an immediate threat to life. The Officer in the Duggan case believed that.

With what we know, and see here, that threat is not there.
Deep Purple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 18:58
jzee
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,460
Very different. To use force such as this, there has to be an immediate threat to life. The Officer in the Duggan case believed that.

With what we know, and see here, that threat is not there.
Do we know the police officer knew the suspect had not taken the taser?
jzee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 19:05
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,216
When will the rioting and looting start.?
When the guy is found innocent.
blueblade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 19:06
Si_Crewe
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dumfries
Posts: 38,495
I'm talking about this incident, not police policy in general...
That's odd because in the post I quoted you went to great lengths to suggest that the specifics of the incident don't matter.
Si_Crewe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 19:08
ustarion
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,483
https://vimeo.com/124336782

Something tells me that justice might not be done in this case. Anything other than a guilty murder verdict will not be justice.
ustarion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 19:16
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,216
It's not a bad thing, the policeman is a murderer, no doubt about it.

As I said earlier, and maybe not very eloquently I think that Blueblade has a fundamental issue with the police and will seek out any story to belittle and / or discredit them.
Whether I do or not, is utterly irrelevant to this thread. You never even commented on what I actually said. Pathetic.

Not once have I seen a positive view put forward.
To me that is an insult to a service he'd be buggered without.
I don't mean any offence.
Well then you don't look very hard do you?

and yes, you absolutely do mean offence otherwise you'd have commented on my post and not on me.
blueblade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 19:17
Deep Purple
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Deep Within The Chain Of Evil
Posts: 51,280
Whether I do or not, is utterly irrelevant to this thread. You never even commented on what I actually said. Pathetic.



Well then you don't look very hard do you?
Well done, keep it bookmarked.
Deep Purple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 19:19
Deep Purple
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Deep Within The Chain Of Evil
Posts: 51,280
Do we know the police officer knew the suspect had not taken the taser?
I know no more than linked, but even if he had the taser, which appears not to be the case, there were no grounds to perceive an immediate threat to life.
Deep Purple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 19:21
Big Boy Barry
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Barry's Manor
Posts: 25,819
I wouldn't be surprised at all if the jury aquits him.
Big Boy Barry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 19:22
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,216
They are supposed to be police officers not judge, jury and executioner.
But he would have remained so, had he not been filmed in the act.
blueblade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 19:27
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,216
I wouldn't be surprised at all if the jury aquits him.
Nor me - there really will be trouble this time though, if they do - and rightly so.
blueblade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 19:30
idlewilde
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 8,502
When the guy is found innocent.
Because nothing says you care about the unjust death of a guy more than stealing 50 pairs of Nike Air Jordans.
idlewilde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 19:31
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,216
Because nothing says you care about the unjust death of a guy more than stealing 50 pairs of Nike Air Jordans.
You might try speaking in understandable English, instead of strangely cryptic riddles.
blueblade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 19:32
Mesostim
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 42,514
Because nothing says you care about the unjust death of a guy more than stealing 50 pairs of Nike Air Jordans.
Yeah... but nothing starts an outbreak of lawlessness better than a racist cop shooting someone in the back.
Mesostim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 19:32
mrtdg82
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,079
Because nothing says you care about the unjust death of a guy more than stealing 50 pairs of Nike Air Jordans.
Indeed...

As mention the legal system is there, if a jury finds him not guilty, what more can be done?

So if the public don't get what they want they all go looting to 'prove a point?'.

Logic
mrtdg82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 19:34
mrtdg82
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,079
Yeah... but nothing starts an outbreak of lawlessness better than a racist cop shooting someone in the back.
How do you know he is racist?
mrtdg82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 19:35
Axtol
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5,477
He was running away. He posed no threat to the officer's life. There is no reason for the officer to shoot him dead.
That's incorrect, it depends on the circumstances. Self defence doesn't just apply to you protecting yourself, it applies to protecting other people as well (So if someone tries to hit me, and you stop them, you have technically acted in self defence even though you weren't actually in any danger from the original attack)
Axtol is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:53.