Police Release Bodycam Footage of 19 yo Dylan Noble Being Shot and Killed

a reply to: TrueBrit

The rules don't need to change...people just need to actually follow the rules...

If simon says put your hands where he can see them, then you put your hands where he can see them...it's pretty easy...

A2D

a reply to: carewemust

You don't ever shoot to wound. That's a death waiting to happen. Center mass when ever possible. If it's time to shoot, it's, unfortunately, time to kill.

From the looks of it, it was suicide by cop. But none of us, unless you've been in that situation, have a clue what was running through the officers head at that moment.

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: TrueBrit

The rules don't need to change...people just need to actually follow the rules...

If simon says put your hands where he can see them, then you put your hands where he can see them...it's pretty easy...

A2D

Even rules that are unjust and not in the interest of the people ?

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

What rules would those be?

A2D

Personaly i think the last shoots by the cops were uncalled for.

A person in shock.. do to gun shot wound would not respond to police cammands wery well if at all. To demand that a perosn who is shot and in shock would fallow commands clearly show that even the police are uneducated in situations like this.

When the individual went Down on the first shoot these static cops could have moved in, there were enough cops to secure the individual without giving him the leathal treatment.

This looks totally justified, if I follow the logic of other posters when the victim is black and doing less than this guy here.

The cops asked him to show both of his hands for over 2 minutes, he failed to comply. The cops told him to lay on the ground, he failed to comply. The cops told him to show his hands again after he was reaching one behind his back, he failed to comply.

Suicide by cop, but how were they supposed to know? The call they got stated he was armed, he was acting like he was armed and not complying. In other videos black people simply slightly resist arrest by asking why they are arrested, and they are shot. In most of the other videos the black guy is shot in less than 20 seconds after interaction, look how long it takes in this one.

The only thing I see here that's extremely disturbing is the fact that after they shot him and he was injured they could of easily restrained his arms and checked for firearms, instead they gave an injured and incoherent man the order of showing his hands when his instinct is telling him to cover his wounds - and they shoot him for it. But if you are not ready to be outraged at cop on black killings, do not be outraged at cop on white killings.

a reply to: Agree2Disagree

No.

With respect, you are simply wrong. You cannot suggest to me, that being forced to comply or die, without representing a clear and present threat to an officers life, is anything other than a code of practice of a tyrannical infrastructure.

It always sickens me when Americans, particularly those who fall to the right of matters concerning law and order, who prattle about freedom and liberty and the huge sacrifices made in times past, and currently to guarantee those things, defend this sort of utterly appalling and unjustifiable behaviour.

Unless you only pay lip service to the concepts of freedom and liberty, rather than having any genuine belief in them what so ever, you cannot defend this shooting or any other like it. You cannot defend an officer valuing his own life at such a rate, that he would take an unarmed mans life, rather than take a risk with his own. That is the act of a god damned coward. Acting through fear rather than reason, acting to preserve your own life at the expense of UNARMED others, is NOT the act of a person who should be permitted to carry a gun in a professional capacity in a law enforcement role. That is the sort of behaviour you should be able to get away with when confronting an intruder in your home, but not the sort of behaviour one expects from an agent of the law, of justice, a person whose job role is one of many which are supposed to support the rights and freedoms of the people.

If you can honestly support this officers actions, then you cannot ever state in truth, that you value liberty. The two things, this method of justification and your Simon says nonsense, and liberty, are opposed to one another. They cannot exist in the same mindset, unless that mindset has allowed itself to loose sight of reality.

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

What rules would those be?

A2D

There are there as plain as day, i will not waste my time pointing them out to you....

a reply to: TrueBrit

You cannot defend an officer valuing his own life at such a rate, that he would take an unarmed mans life, rather than take a risk with his own. That is the act of a god damned coward.

No, it is the act of a human. You value your life, and your familys lives, more than a random joes....even though you won't admit it....

and there is no reason NOT to comply....you understand that, right? Just think about it for a second....why would anyone NOT do as requested? ESPECIALLY when they have guns drawn on them.....cmon now...complying isn't THAT hard is it?

A2D

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

I'm asking you what rules you think are unjust and not in the interest of the people....how are those plain as day? Am I supposed to read your mind?

A2D

a reply to: theySeeme

Justified my left ventricle! No weapon..none, zilch. There was not any immediate threat once he was out of the vehicle. Two armed cops with a vehicle in between them.

Sounds like your a little miffed he wasn't killed sooner and that he was white.

a reply to: Agree2Disagree

We could start with the rules that allow the wealthy to get off scot free while the poor are incarcerated and used as slave labor....

How the average joe is jailed for tax evasion yet corporations get a free ride...

I really could go on but there is no point...if you do not see there is nothing i can say that will change that.....

a reply to: Agree2Disagree

I am neither a coward or a liar sir, so I will admit no such thing. As I have stated however, a police officer is not a random member of the public, untrained, in their own home, acting to protect family. The entire time they wear the uniform and carry the badge and the gun, they should not be thinking of themselves as individuals, but as avatars for law, justice, protectors of all who live under the law of the land, be they sane or addled, be they peaceful or full of ill temper. Only when their lives are actually threatened, not just when their idiot lizard brain makes their sphincter tighten, but when they are ACTUALLY in mortal danger, should they react with lethal force.

If you cannot see the difference here, then I applaud your blindness on the matter, for it is a vast and impressive edifice.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

We were discussing how the police handled this situation....they followed the rules pretty clearly....they asked the suspect to comply repeatedly...they warned him....he never once attempted to comply...they could not determine if he was armed or not....escalation of force was appropriate given the circumstances....

“The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution is interpreted by the Supreme Court that sets the legal standard for Use of Force in the United States. … The early application of a reasonable amount of force will result in less force having to be used; less injury to suspects, less injury to officers. … Officers have to use force that’s objectively reasonable based on the totality of the facts and circumstances confronting the officer at the time of the seizure. … Holding the officer to the least intrusive or minimal amount of force is a subjective standard. … Imposing such a requirement would inevitably induce hesitation by officers, and thus deter police from protecting the public and themselves. It would also entangle the courts in endless second guessing of police decisions made under stress and subject them to exigencies of the moment. … The court went on to say that officers … do not have to avail themselves of the least intrusive means of responding to an exigent situation;only a reasonable one."

A2D

a reply to: TrueBrit

You're speaking to a combat veteran...so I'm speaking from experience here..I joined the Marine Corps not for myself...but for my fellow americans....to defend those who can't defend themselves....but when faced with life and death decisions...it was MY life that flashed before my eyes....not yours...not my mothers...not my fathers...not my neighbors...and not random joes....BUT MINE....call me a coward...call me selfish....call me human....because the reality is that we are driven by LIFE...we have a desire to live...and we have a strong desire to provide and protect our family....and that desire to protect ourselves and our families is much stronger than any empathy we may experience towards strangers....

A2D

originally posted by: TrueBrit
Only when their lives are actually threatened, not just when their idiot lizard brain makes their sphincter tighten, but when they are ACTUALLY in mortal danger, should they react with lethal force.

a perfectly normal situation can turn deadly in the blink of an eye, i dont think a police officer will have the reaction speeds/skills to quick draw old western style to save his own life.

a reply to: choos

Then why are they cleared for duty?

If they lack the skills to perform their duties to a high minimum standard across the board, why are they permitted to carry a gun in an official capacity? If the city lacks the funding to make that training happen, why is the city permitted to operate what increasingly resembles a paramilitary wing?

a reply to: Agree2Disagree

You joined the Marine Corps, not a law enforcement organisation. It cannot be stated strongly enough that the motivations and necessities of service in one, are not identical, or interchangeable with the other in the least. For all that I respect what it must have taken to serve in the capacity you did, it has only the most tenuous relevance to the threads subject matter.

A Marine and a policeman have different duties, and should be expected to have different priorities.

a reply to: TrueBrit

they are trained to shoot straight.

not quick draw.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: theySeeme

Justified my left ventricle! No weapon..none, zilch. There was not any immediate threat once he was out of the vehicle. Two armed cops with a vehicle in between them.

Sounds like your a little miffed he wasn't killed sooner and that he was white.

Did you even read my post in it's entirety? Why are you making this about race?