Shocking new video shows unarmed Utah man was listening to headphones when killed by police

a reply to: Bobaganoosh
Some cops join the force to do good, alot of which remain that way until retirement. Don't demonise all cops. I'd say when you get to the bottom of your next bottle use it as a cue to change your rationale.

I would go as far to say only 10% of cops are bad people from the start, the others learnt to be this way through loss of friends/colleagues who took a more empathetic approach.

a reply to: rossacus

My dad is a lineman. He has lost many friends and colleagues in his line of work. He doesn't run around killing all of the electricity.

One must go into a profession truly understanding the nature of the beast. If you are scared because it might kill you than you have made a poor decision.

I know that there are some good cops, but where the hell are they? Why do they not lend reason to the unreasonable? All I see is boot-licker rationale condoning murder in the name of personal safety.

Seems to that one of the most dangerous and murderous elements in society is the police.


As far as I know they kill more people each year than any other organization.

Is anyone else here really concerned about the discrepancy of posted opinions on the victim's side compared to the amount of stars given to those that defend the killer-cop?
Almost all of the posts against the cop get about 4 stars, yet the couple of cop-defending posts have 10 stars or more.
Is it all their coward friends who can't even explain themselves starring them?

I watched the video and it is one of the worst ones ever. So what the 'suspect' [for what reason?] was mouthy? That is everyday stuff police should ignore. He was so obviously drunk and thought it would be funny to say "Naah man".
Even if had a gun, he was far too drunk to pull it, shoot and hit anything.

The cops would have had ample time to duck, roll away or shoot the legs of this man. They should have said to the guy "We are armed, lift your hands SLOWLY". Or just ask the guy to turn around.

Nothing the victim did demanded a shooting.

Not the walking away, he is allowed to walk away if he is innocent.
Not the cheeky reply.
Not even the lifting of the t-shirt.

However the cops did everything wrong. And it hurts me to see a dying man being searched in the hope to find ANYTHING illegal.

Anybody who is so scared that movements of a drunk man with earphones makes them fear for their life is in the wrong job. The police need real men. Cops that can even drive up to people in the ghetto and have a friendly chat with the guys. Instead they are making themselves the enemy by always assuming that everyone is an armed criminal and shooting "just in case". That's not what policing is about.

For anyone who is "on the fence" or anything else, ask yourselves this: how often do you see these stories coming out about Australian, European, or Japanese police?

The only other country with stories like this is China, the human rights wizards.

We can keep calling this "the land of the free". Unfortunately, its not true. And repeating a lie doesn't make it any more true.

originally posted by: Legman

originally posted by: rockintitz

originally posted by: Legman

originally posted by: Mandroid7
I'm on the fence on this one. Does anyone know the law as far as showing your hands?

He kept his hands in his waistband the whole time.

He didn't pull a gun. Does a gun have to be visible?

Did they guy have enough time to hear him?

Could he understand and comprehend the cop?

Scary Video there!

HE yelled "NAH FOOL" when the police asked him to raise his hands... then his mistake was raising his shirt near the waistband.



RIP....... its a tough thug life...fooo

Do you mean to say that he shouldn't have removed his hands away from his pockets?

Did you see any sign of a weapon?

I didn't. But then again, if it were me, I'd most likely have my day in court.

Buddy, do your family a favor and never be a cop. When you see the "sign" of a weapon... you are dead.

Buddy, do society a favor.... the rest of us want policemen that are not willing to die. We want homes that are not home invaded because of a weak police force... we want our kids to be able to walk from school to home. Do us a favor and think about your beliefs.... because the wide portion of society appreciate cops.

Don't say "the rest of us" because you are certainly not speaking for me. We don't need police forces - the human race has lived most of it's existence without them and we got along just fine without them. The United States didn't have modern day police forces until the Pinkerton Detective Agency was founded in 1850, and they didn't become commonplace until 1890. We have only had them for about half the history of our country (starting from 1776 - though the colonies were present even earlier).

History has proven all you need to be safe is the right to bear arms and Castle Law. Castle Law was common law in most European countries throughout the dark ages and medieval times. Thieves and murderers were not treated well by the masses - there were no police, so the locals took care of them. Yes these were cruel times with lynching, eye for an eye laws, tar and feathering, stocks, gibbets, and public executions, but it worked. Personally, I would just like the right to defend our own damn homes returned to us. I live in NY and legally I can't even defend my home and family with lethal force - I am obligated to flee from my own home if someone breaks in. Of course I wouldn't do that - but I could end up in prison for not doing so. It's wrong and is just bizarre to me that as a western country we could lose a code of law that Europeans have had for over 1000 years.

Laws and police are so completely #ed up in the US right now and so few people seem to care. As long as they aren't the ones getting shot at, psychotic police aren't an issue for them. Should we get rid of them altogether? I think not, but I think they should be trained to use non-lethal force (batons, tasers, and spray) unless they can visually confirm that a suspect is armed. Shooting unarmed people on the street is wrong, I don't care the reasons or justification for it. Furthermore, I would like Castle Law added as a new amendment to the Constitution. All citizens in the US should have the right to defend their own property from invasion using lethal force.

I for one, do not want to live in a police state. I want to live in a free country. If you believe in freedom and independence, you do not rely on government agencies to do everything for you. I don't expect the police to protect my home for me - I am entirely capable of doing that myself. Too many people these days are dependent on the government for everything - food, healthcare, employment, protection? How can we say that our country is founded upon freedom and independence when we have so many citizens dependent on hand-outs?

Just for poops and giggles... Let me ask this... Do you guys ever imagine yourselves as policemen? Doing a job where you are a target every minute on duty? Can you imagine being a kind hearted person as a police man but because of that your son or daughter never grows up with a father?

If you need a lesson on courage, I suggest you question LEO's ANYWHERE IN THE WESTERN WORLD EXCEPT THE US and ISRAEL.

Bullies are true cowards.

originally posted by: Answer
Innocent people don't tend to change direction and walk away as soon as a police car pulls up.

They also don't shout "no, fool" when an officer tells them to put their hands up.

They also don't continue walking backwards with their hands in their waistband when an officer HAS A FREAKING GUN DRAWN and is yelling at them to show their hands.

Considering the idiot's behavior leading up to the moment of the shots, any reasonable person who was responding to an "armed suspect" call would have pulled the trigger. That's why the officer was cleared of wrongdoing.

It's amazing to me how people ignore all of the incredibly stupid behavior that leads up to these shootings and only focus on "was he unarmed? yes? then the cop was wrong!"

I agree with all of that - the guy obviously saw that a cop had a gun pointed at him and was yelling at him. *Anyone's* first reaction in that situation should be to put their hands up, whether he actually heard the cop or not. My question is - did the cop really need to deliver a fatal shot? He was 10ft away from the guy - is he that bad a shot that he couldn't shoot him in the leg? We're talking about someone's life here. I'm sure it's "procedure" to go for the torso, but come on..

a reply to: redtic

A belt would have probably saved this fools life.

a reply to: Bobaganoosh

Did you actually compare the 2 to justify your point. Lmao. I have seen it all now.

You don't see the good cops cos good work goes unnoticed. You only ever hear about cops doing bad stuff cos it's media worthy.

Did you even think before you posted this?

a reply to: PraetorianAZ

Sorry...It's as simple as this: If you have two officers approaching you with weapons drawn, and you walk away, then stick your hands in the waist of your pants and do so while facing them and not complying with their orders to remove your hands, you're simply asking for trouble because you are discarding all intelligence and self-preserving instincts in order to do otherwise. And then to yell what sounds like, "Stop, fool!" to the officers as they're doing so (which is an aggressive response).

I get it,maybe he shouldn't have lost his life because he didn't comply with demands by the officers, but that's not why he got shot--he was shot because we was making aggressive movements and an aggressive verbal comment to the officers that indicated that this could be a life-threatening situation for them.

There is nothing in this video that indicates the LEOs arrived there with full intent to kill this individual, nor that they were trying to do anything to ensure that his death was imminent after the shot was fired.

Your assessment of this video and post-shooting activity is based on apparent ideology alone and has nothing to do with objective opinion. The fact that you think that these officers joke about this shooting is a pretty good indicator of your ideology, not to mention just a pretty immature and arrogant judgment of people that you don't know. To assume the worst in people is a pretty terrible way to go through life.

a reply to: peskyhumans
Isn't the right to bare arms the reason your country is in this mess. The fact that you feel this makes you safer is crazy to the rest of the world outside the US.

If you truly believe society would function better without the police, then there is little hope for you. The reason you didn't need police when america "started" was because settlers were not criminals.

How else can you enforce the law? This is gonna be priceless

originally posted by: peskyhumans
We don't need police forces - the human race has lived most of it's existence without them and we got along just fine without them.

...

History has proven all you need to be safe is the right to bear arms and Castle Law. Castle Law was common law in most European countries throughout the dark ages and medieval times. Thieves and murderers were not treated well by the masses - there were no police, so the locals took care of them. Yes these were cruel times with lynching, eye for an eye laws, tar and feathering, stocks, gibbets, and public executions, but it worked.

What a terrible assessment of the way things were. Firstly, medieval Europe DID have police forces, or at least people who enforced law on behalf of the king--the king. You pretend like one person who had the power to send you to get beheaded was a better system? One person with the power to have you killed because you did something like speak ill of the king? Or didn't pay your taxes? Or any other reason they deemed fit?

I don't believe for one second that you speak with authoritative knowledge on this subject, but instead are just incorrectly using cherry-picked bits to try and persuade the ignorant to align with your conclusions.

I'm quite certain that none of us want to live in a police state, but sometimes you have to take personal responsibility for yourself. You don't like NY's laws, then move. That's the beauty of it--you can escape to a freer state that has castle doctrines or SYG laws, if that's what you personally deem is important. But let's not pretend that we're not better off here in America than Europeans were in the MIddle Ages--that's just asinine.

a reply to: Legman

We want homes that are not home invaded because of a weak police force...

Hate to break this to you, but the police aren't going to stop a home invasion 99% of the time. All they'll be able to do is an investigation after the fact, like most crimes.

After reading about 90% of the posts, I can tell that none of you have either had training or been in a situation where you have a fraction of a second to make a decision that will alter your life and another's. After watching the video just once, and not trying to be an armchair quarterback...my first question was, what was the call the officer received? Was he told the guy was armed? There is a reason he drew his weapon so early, and no it's not that the officer is a murdering psychopath either. After being told to show his hands, the guy reached for his waistline...right there..in a fraction of a second you have to decide what to do. Pause, look for a weapon? In that time, the guy might have gotten off a shot if he was armed. Those that say no the guy couldn't have, have not done this drill. Heck, the officer could have missed his first shot, I've seen guys miss at only a few feet when all worked up. The guy was wrong to ignore the officer, especially when the officer has his weapon pointed at him...he was wrong to reach for his waistband. The officer made a fraction of a second decision to fire, which was the wrong choice. He took an innocent man's life. Under his Rule of Use of Force, he was correct...but I can only guess how it will effect this officer later in life. I go to work armed every day, in a place that people want to do me harm. I have been lucky not to have been faced with a similar situation in real life..just at the range. And sadly, every one that I work with have made the same error the office did in training. As for ignoring his wounds. Training is to subdue the person first, clear the area of any weapons, then render aid...and with gunshot wound to the torso, there isn't much he could do anyways.

originally posted by: rossacus
a reply to: peskyhumans
Isn't the right to bare arms the reason your country is in this mess. The fact that you feel this makes you safer is crazy to the rest of the world outside the US.

Much of what the world outside of the US does seems antiquated and anti-liberty to Americans. To each their own, but your conclusion that a potential police state exists because of our second amendment is lacking all logic. Same with if you're claiming that the second amendment caused the wrong assumption in this video--most criminals conceal and obtain firearms illegally, so the second amendment doesn't apply to them because they are doing so in a criminal way.

If you truly believe society would function better without the police, then there is little hope for you. The reason you didn't need police when america "started" was because settlers were not criminals.

Tell that to the Native Americans--just saying. And the settlers did have people in security positions that would act like policemen when necessary.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Thankyou for addressing that, I wanted to but due to the ignorance I would have said some terrible things. Delusional is the best way to describe that historically incorrect post

a reply to: Useurbrain

I guess you didn't read the disclaimer in this forum--use of practical logic is neither welcomed nor accepted here.

Of course, I agree with you and use the same logic every time a post like this comes up where the officer was absolutely justified in his assumption--usually to angry, rantish reactions and accusations of wanting a police state and hating freedom.

Good luck avoiding all of that. Good post.

originally posted by: rossacus
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Thankyou for addressing that, I wanted to but due to the ignorance I would have said some terrible things. Delusional is the best way to describe that historically incorrect post

I do what I can, even if I assume that it will fall on deaf ears.

And trust me, I re-read and delete things quite a few times before I hit the submit button...in the end, I try to not sound like an uneducated, emotional prone to rants in lieu of educated responses.

a reply to: PraetorianAZ

So, Utah has created a new law that will make all cop shootings justified, you don't have to pose a threat, the cop just has to say he felt threatened .

I purpose a new logo for PD cars, instead of "to protect and serve" how about " KILL THEM ALL, LET THE COURTS SORT IT OUT "