BLM Baton Rouge police fatally shot man

[Jaskalas]

His past history isn't really relevant to whether use of force was justified this time or not.

It alters the probability when assessing whether he may have reached for the gun, as insane as that may sound. I mean, who is going to try and shoot cops that already have you on the ground? It's almost a no-win scenario... but maybe he really didn't want to go to prison.

Hardened criminal background makes it more likely that the officer's tale could be true. Remember we're looking for reasonable doubt here. If we cannot definitively see that right hand in a video, then this sort of circumstantial lead is all we have. Unless the officers violated protocol by their actions.

 

[Meghan54]

It alters the probability when assessing whether he may have reached for the gun, as insane as that may sound. I mean, who is going to try and shoot cops that already have you on the ground? It's almost a no-win scenario... but maybe he really didn't want to go to prison.

Hardened criminal background makes it more likely that the officer's tale could be true. Remember we're looking for reasonable doubt here. If we cannot definitively see that right hand in a video, then this sort of circumstantial lead is all we have. Unless the officers violated protocol by their actions.

Since the cops that rolled up on that scene had NO IDEA who they would find, much less knew the history, criminal or otherwise, of the suspect, your point is moot and frankly, irrelevant. As far as the cops knew, it was a black male with a gun. Oh, and selling CD's. No other identifying info was given to them, so how did they know his "hardened criminal background"?

 

[Wuzup101]

Show us in either video where the "perp" acted like a "dumbass". Show us where he was violently struggling, resisting, and trying to pull a gun. Show us his long history of violent felonies. Prove to us that a man with a family had a death wish, or had mental issues. Prove to us that he indeed threatened someone earlier. Most felons in possession do not brandish, or threaten, they don't want the added heat, they either cap you or don't. I have trouble believing that this man would have risked, or thrown away his long time, and secured selling/making a living arena.

He was told to get on the ground and didn't (dumbass), was tazed and told to get on the ground and didn't (dumbass), then was tackled because he couldn't follow instructions (dumbass). They were responding to a call where a man with a gun had brandished it. Not just a man with a gun (i.e. legal open carry).

If a cop draws a taser and tells you to get on the ground... get on the ground. If it was not justified you can fight it later. Doubly so if you are armed. Get on the ground... say "I have a gun in my right pocket..." after you are on the ground and your hands are clearly visible. Don't move... and comply with the officer's commands.

I didn't say he had a death wish, I didn't say anything about his long history of violent felonies (though he did have a great long record), I didn't say he had mental issues (other than being a dumbass).

 

[NAC4EV]

This country is seriously fucked up.

 

[Svnla]

Court records indicate the man who was killed during an altercation with two Baton Rouge police officers couldn't have legally had a gun at the time of the shooting because he was a convicted felon.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/latest-dc-firefighter-investigated-over-online-post-120800916.html?nhp=1

 

[Meghan54]

Court records indicate the man who was killed during an altercation with two Baton Rouge police officers couldn't have legally had a gun at the time of the shooting because he was a convicted felon.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/latest-dc-firefighter-investigated-over-online-post-120800916.html?nhp=1

Again, so what? Unless you think that every black male is a felon and any gun owned by a black male is illegally owned.

Again, the cops had NO KNOWLEDGE of the guy's history, criminal or otherwise. They only knew he was a black male, potentially with a gun, who was selling CD's. They knew nothing else. So quit with the "convicted felon" and "illegal gun" justification for this.....it's irrelevant completely, unless you can show where the cops had received his name, rap sheet, etc. before the cops showed up at the store.

 

[umbrella39]

But, but, but he had a record!!! The lengths some people here will go to construct justification is deplorable...

 

[Svnla]

Again, so what? Unless you think that every black male is a felon and any gun owned by a black male is illegally owned.

Again, the cops had NO KNOWLEDGE of the guy's history, criminal or otherwise. They only knew he was a black male, potentially with a gun, who was selling CD's. They knew nothing else. So quit with the "convicted felon" and "illegal gun" justification for this.....it's irrelevant completely, unless you can show where the cops had received his name, rap sheet, etc. before the cops showed up at the store.

You have 2 suspects.

Suspect A - no record, has a legal gun with him.
Suspect B - a long rap sheet of several pages, full of crimes (including felonies), and an illegal gun with him.

Which suspect will likely cooperate with the cops and which suspect will likely to fight because he knows he will be back in prison for sure if he is caught with the illegal gun?

Go ahead, answer honestly. Funny how you pulled the color card out so fast (the very first paragraph) when my post did not mention anything about color of the suspect, expressed or implied.

Uh huh.

 

[slackerinabox]

He was told to get on the ground and didn't (dumbass), was tazed and told to get on the ground and didn't (dumbass), then was tackled because he couldn't follow instructions (dumbass). They were responding to a call where a man with a gun had brandished it. Not just a man with a gun (i.e. legal open carry).

If a cop draws a taser and tells you to get on the ground... get on the ground. If it was not justified you can fight it later. Doubly so if you are armed. Get on the ground... say "I have a gun in my right pocket..." after you are on the ground and your hands are clearly visible. Don't move... and comply with the officer's commands.

I didn't say he had a death wish, I didn't say anything about his long history of violent felonies (though he did have a great long record), I didn't say he had mental issues (other than being a dumbass).

Tell me, why do you have to defend the indefensible? Does it make you feel like a tough guy? What are your political affiliations? do you have any black friends? Really? Because I see this debate, and the video is pretty clear and his crime pretty benign (he was given permission to sell there). Multiple witnesses also say they saw no struggle on his part, and the video clearly looks like an execution. We can argue about the cops motives - I think he was just scared, but he does have a rambo attitude based on his social media presence. We can guess WHY he fucked up, but he clearly fucked up. The fact that people like you keep on defending this bullshit instead of saying "hey, that was fucked up. Let's just not kill people for selling cds...) - instead of saying that, you people keep this false debate going so that absolutely nothing gets done. It's sick, unless you're just very brainwashed.. AMERICA, fuck yeah!

 

[CitizenKain]

You have 2 suspects.

Suspect A - no record, has a legal gun with him.
Suspect B - a long rap sheet of several pages, full of crimes (including felonies), and an illegal gun with him.

Which suspect will likely cooperate with the cops and which suspect will likely to fight because he knows he will be back in prison for sure if he is caught with the illegal gun?

Go ahead, answer honestly. Funny how you pulled the color card out so fast (the very first paragraph) when my post did not mention anything about color of the suspect, expressed or implied.

Uh huh.

The answer is the black one. Doesn't matter if A or B.

Tell me, why do you have to defend the indefensible? Does it make you feel like a tough guy? What are your political affiliations? do you have any black friends? Really? Because I see this debate, and the video is pretty clear and his crime pretty benign (he was given permission to sell there). Multiple witnesses also say they saw no struggle on his part, and the video clearly looks like an execution. We can argue about the cops motives - I think he was just scared, but he does have a rambo attitude based on his social media presence. We can guess WHY he fucked up, but he clearly fucked up. The fact that people like you keep on defending this bullshit instead of saying "hey, that was fucked up. Let's just not kill people for selling cds...) - instead of saying that, you people keep this false debate going so that absolutely nothing gets done. It's sick, unless you're just very brainwashed.. AMERICA, fuck yeah!

Because he thinks black people are less then human. That is the answer.

 

[Jaskalas]

Since the cops that rolled up on that scene had NO IDEA who they would find, much less knew the history...

The public knows, and now we are to judge the officers and their actions. Whether their story is likely or truthful. The background matters to us as we judge if it's reasonable doubt.

 

[Wuzup101]

Tell me, why do you have to defend the indefensible? Does it make you feel like a tough guy? What are your political affiliations? do you have any black friends? Really? Because I see this debate, and the video is pretty clear and his crime pretty benign (he was given permission to sell there). Multiple witnesses also say they saw no struggle on his part, and the video clearly looks like an execution. We can argue about the cops motives - I think he was just scared, but he does have a rambo attitude based on his social media presence. We can guess WHY he fucked up, but he clearly fucked up. The fact that people like you keep on defending this bullshit instead of saying "hey, that was fucked up. Let's just not kill people for selling cds...) - instead of saying that, you people keep this false debate going so that absolutely nothing gets done. It's sick, unless you're just very brainwashed.. AMERICA, fuck yeah!

I have plenty of black friends, and white friends, and Asian friends. As far as my political affiliations, I'm independent and will most certainly be voting for NOT Trump in the upcoming election. This isn't a race thing, or a political thing. I would be saying the same thing if he was white. He wasn't shot for selling [illegal bootleg] CDs, he was shot because he [allegedly] brandished a weapon and then didn't comply with police demands and then struggled when he was on the ground. As far as the video is concerned, I personally do think that it looks like he is struggling with them on the ground, and I think everything could have been avoided if he just submitted to the police demands originally. While whitenesses can (rightly) say that he wasn't holding his [illegally possessed] firearm when the police confronted him, I find it highly unlikely that given the angle he was pinned down at, where the officers were restraining him (and blocking view from both videos we have seen), and where the car was positioned (against the right side of his body) that any whiteness can truthfully say that he was or wasn't trying to get into his pocket / gun while being held on the ground. They would literally have to have been standing on the car hood directly over the scuffle. Could the police officers have restrained him in such a manner that they didn't have to use deadly force - possibly yes. Does that mean that they didn't have the right to use deadly force if they believed that he was trying to go for his weapon? - No. This wasn't an Eric Garner case (which was a f-ed up killing of an unarmed man for a petty non-violent crime).

There have been plenty of well documented racially fueled shootings recently and they are horrible. Look at the Castile shooting... that was an atrocity... assuming it went down as his girlfriend said (and there is no indication that it didn't). As someone who carries a gun on a daily basis, I'm pissed that something like that would happen.

 

[CZroe]

Tell me, why do you have to defend the indefensible? Does it make you feel like a tough guy? What are your political affiliations? do you have any black friends? Really? Because I see this debate, and the video is pretty clear and his crime pretty benign (he was given permission to sell there). Multiple witnesses also say they saw no struggle on his part, and the video clearly looks like an execution. We can argue about the cops motives - I think he was just scared, but he does have a rambo attitude based on his social media presence. We can guess WHY he fucked up, but he clearly fucked up. The fact that people like you keep on defending this bullshit instead of saying "hey, that was fucked up. Let's just not kill people for selling cds...) - instead of saying that, you people keep this false debate going so that absolutely nothing gets done. It's sick, unless you're just very brainwashed.. AMERICA, fuck yeah!

Quoting so we can all laugh at the idiot who actually thought the police were called/responded because a man was selling pirated CDs. That's freakin' hilarious. You are a shining example of what it wrong with all the idiots jumping to conclusions without any facts and only seeing what they want to see.

An anonymous caller said that the man threatened them with a gun. THAT is the call they were responding to. THAT is why they told him to get on the ground first before investigating further. THAT is why they tazed him when he didn't comply. THAT is why they tackled him when the tazer didn't work. The video "clearly" shows the struggle your eyes refuse to see. DOES YOUR BRAIN EVEN FUNCTION?!

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

His past history isn't really relevant to whether use of force was justified this time or not.

You're right it's not because most of the time it's about how you act during that specific time of the incident.

But is it more likely the man was well behaved and speaking courteously and complying with everything the officers wanted? Or do you think this guy would be more likely to be someone who goes "Naw man, fuck the PO-LICE." All that matters because how he interacted likely had a huge impact on how the situation turned out. It doesn't make what the cops did correct, but it certainly has some bearing.

Similarly complaints against cops matter too because if these are officers with historical issues with use of force, then it helps paint the narrative better.

Quoting so we can all laugh at the idiot who actually thought the police were called/responded because a man was selling pirated CDs. That's freakin' hilarious. You are a shining example of what it wrong with all the idiots jumping to conclusions without any facts and only seeing what they want to see.

An anonymous caller said that the man threatened them with a gun. THAT is the call they were responding to. THAT is why they told him to get on the ground first before investigating further. THAT is why they tazed him when he didn't comply. THAT is why they tackled him when the tazer didn't work. The video "clearly" shows the struggle your eyes refuse to see. DOES YOUR BRAIN EVEN FUNCTION?!

If what you say is true in regards to the call to the cops, then we need to perhaps put some onus on idiots reporting these things. Remember that dude who was shot while wearing earbuds too? The call came in saying that he and others had guns and were making a scene on the way to the convenience store. Imagine if there was no cops and they were only pulling up to buy donuts. Do you think that would've happened?

 

[Subyman]

You have 2 suspects.

Suspect A - no record, has a legal gun with him.
Suspect B - a long rap sheet of several pages, full of crimes (including felonies), and an illegal gun with him.

Which suspect will likely cooperate with the cops and which suspect will likely to fight because he knows he will be back in prison for sure if he is caught with the illegal gun?

Go ahead, answer honestly. Funny how you pulled the color card out so fast (the very first paragraph) when my post did not mention anything about color of the suspect, expressed or implied.

Uh huh.

His point was the cops didn't have any information on the man when they rolled up other than the call. So, your question is irrelevant.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

His point was the cops didn't have any information on the man when they rolled up other than the call. So, your question is irrelevant.

The reason this somewhat matters is because we don't have full video of the encounter. If we had video of the encounter from start to finish we wouldn't need to make assumptions. Now if the cops are saying Victim B was combative and didn't behave at all, and was threatening, then it might make sense with his history. If Victim B was an upstanding citizen working a white collar job making 6 figures with no criminal history, then you might call BS on a claim he was being combative.

 

[buckshot24]

His point was the cops didn't have any information on the man when they rolled up other than the call. So, your question is irrelevant.

Just the information in the 911 call.

 

[CZroe]

If what you say is true in regards to the call to the cops, then we need to perhaps put some onus on idiots reporting these things. Remember that dude who was shot while wearing earbuds too? The call came in saying that he and others had guns and were making a scene on the way to the convenience store. Imagine if there was no cops and they were only pulling up to buy donuts. Do you think that would've happened?

What *I* say? Is this the first time you're hearing it?
*facepalm*

Now, I never assumed that the caller was telling the truth (honestly, that doesn't even matter), but you sure seem to have assumed that the caller wasn't. I just don't understand how anyone can be so damned biased to assume these kinds of things but it seems like 90% of the population somehow manages to surprise me.

Let's say that the caller wasn't telling the truth. Now: Does that change anything? No! They still encountered an armed man with a report that the man was threatening people and the man was completely uncooperative with them as they responded/investigated, fought them every step of the way, and made them justifiably fear for their life! There is no excuse for his actions. NONE. He should not have even had a gun. You are REALLY reaching if you are trying to blame the callers for this outcome as ALL of that blame lies on him.

This isn't Minnesota.

 

[Ichinisan]

He was told to get on the ground and didn't (dumbass), was tazed and told to get on the ground and didn't (dumbass), then was tackled because he couldn't follow instructions (dumbass). They were responding to a call where a man with a gun had brandished it. Not just a man with a gun (i.e. legal open carry).

If a cop draws a taser and tells you to get on the ground... get on the ground. If it was not justified you can fight it later. Doubly so if you are armed. Get on the ground... say "I have a gun in my right pocket..." after you are on the ground and your hands are clearly visible. Don't move... and comply with the officer's commands.

This.

 

[Svnla]

His point was the cops didn't have any information on the man when they rolled up other than the call. So, your question is irrelevant.

Again, I am NOT asking about the cop(s) point of view/state of mind. I am asking about the suspect. Very simple to understand if a suspect wants to cooperate or "I have nothing to lose and I surely do not want to go back to jail" mentality. It is RELEVANT to the case. And what do you think the color card he pulled out right away in reply to my post? Was it relevant? Funny how the post from me that he quoted did not have any racial mentioned at all. Hummmm.....

Also, see post #166.

Latest news - at least two cops (now it could be up to four) in Dallas were shot at the protest in downtown about the last two shootings. It is on the 10 p.m. local news cast right now.

Update - at least 1 cop is dead (as of 10:30 p.m. Central time).

 

[Knowing]

https://twitter.com/hscheinukphoto/status/751271816862113793

"3 victims reportedly shot at Gus Young and N. 47th"

 

[SP33Demon]

Quoting so we can all laugh at the idiot who actually thought the police were called/responded because a man was selling pirated CDs. That's freakin' hilarious. You are a shining example of what it wrong with all the idiots jumping to conclusions without any facts and only seeing what they want to see.

An anonymous caller said that the man threatened them with a gun. THAT is the call they were responding to. THAT is why they told him to get on the ground first before investigating further. THAT is why they tazed him when he didn't comply. THAT is why they tackled him when the tazer didn't work. The video "clearly" shows the struggle your eyes refuse to see. DOES YOUR BRAIN EVEN FUNCTION?!

Don't worry, he'll only believe everything his idiot FB friends are posting. Facts aren't required.

 

[CitizenKain]

This.

Of course you can do exactly what a cop says and get murdered anyway, so yea.

 

[CZroe]

Of course you can do exactly what a cop says and get murdered anyway, so yea.

...so we should all resist while illegally carrying a deadly weapon. Yay!

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Bad situation all around. Guy shouldn't have had pistol on him and definitely not threatening people with it if that's true. Cops seemed trigger happy at first glance. I could see how either side could be blamed depending on the side you take. I really think both sides made bad decisions. I don't know the right answer tbh. Video wasn't 100% clear and the judicial system is always going to be partial to their own which makes it look suspicious to those on the outside.