North Carolina's outrage

[ArabChuckNorris]

Oklahoma's Outrage*

If you haven't been up to the news, here's what happened just recently.

Oklahoma is currently experiencing protests due to a killing of a black man who was un-armed ( Some claimed he had a book, not a gun ) by a cop(s) as of what some sources have stated. Others stated that he had a gun, instead of a book.
Many believe that the death of this man was due to a racial reason, however, some also believe that this happened because the man seemed to not be responding to police commands as well as attempting to go back to his car, which brought questions to the police on the scene whether or not he was attempting to reach for a weapon to open fire at the cops.
After a fatal shot, Oklahoma is currently on-going a massive protest.

I'm curious to know how many people believe that the killing of this man is justified or not.

I'm aware that I missed a few things here and there, such as the person was requesting help since his car broke down, however, personally, I find the information to be out of the table ( Not so important information )
Those who are here from Oklahoma, stay safe!

EDIT: Talking about the killing of Terence Crutcher.
For Mods: pls fix my title to 'Oklahoma's outrage' if possible.

[The Blazin1]

If you haven't been up to the news, here's what happened just recently.

North Carolina is currently experiencing protests due to a killing of a black man who was un-armed by a cop(s) as of what some sources have stated.
Many believe that the death of this man was due to a racial reason, however, some also believe that this happened because the man seemed to not be responding to police commands as well as attempting to go back to his car, which brought questions to the police on the scene whether or not he was attempting to reach for a weapon to open fire at the cops.
After a fatal shot, North Carolina is currently on-going a massive protest.

I'm curious to know how many people believe that the killing of this man is justified or not.

I'm aware that I missed a few things here and there, such as the person was requesting help since his car broke down, however, personally, I find the information to be out of the table ( Not so important information )
Those who are here from North Carolina, stay safe!

GTFO, most sources say a weapon was recovered, and there is never a good reason to commit crimes to protest anything, it's no longer a protest. I voted undecided, because I believe in due process, anyone who doesn't should stay out of my country.
Also, the broken down car was the Tulsa incident. Get your **** together, then come back.

[Tineren]

I know it can be confusing considering how many black men are killed by cops, but you seem to be mixing the Tulsa shooting with the Charlotte shooting.

[5m4llP0X]

He had a gun, not a book in fact: no book as been found.
http://ktla.com/2016/09/21/fatal-sho...lent-protests/
The riots in NC have already claimed the life of one person in a civilian on civilian shooting as well as officers wounded.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/21/us/cha...ing/index.html
And a CNN reporter was even assaulted when trying to cover the story.
http://fox6now.com/2016/09/21/video-...lotte-protest/

[ArabChuckNorris]

GTFO, most sources say a weapon was recovered, and there is never a good reason to commit crimes to protest anything, it's no longer a protest. I voted undecided, because I believe in due process, anyone who doesn't should stay out of my country.
Also, the broken down car was the Tulsa incident. Get your **** together, then come back.

Wow man, chill out.
I didn't say 'all sources' or even 'most sources'. I just stated what I read to this point.

I'm talking about Terence Crutcher incident, not the Charlotte shooting. Going to edit that in, sorry.
EDIT: 5m4llp0x, thanks for the info!

[5m4llP0X]

I would like to see some coverage on the Oklahoma one. I briefly heard about it before this fiasco and it actually sounded like it was homicide.

[The Blazin1]

That's weird, because in your original post it clearly says "North Carolina is" and then you mention a car broken down "Tulsa incident" and then finish with "Those from NC, stay safe!" So once again, GTFO until you get your **** together, this isn't politics and diplomacy where you can just make **** up

[ArabChuckNorris]

That's weird, because in your original post it clearly says "North Carolina is" and then you mention a car broken down "Tulsa incident" and then finish with "Those from NC, stay safe!" So once again, GTFO until you get your **** together, this isn't politics and diplomacy where you can just make **** up

Got the states mixed up. You have some rage issues.

[5m4llP0X]

Is Tulsa having protests? And do you have links to the incidents? All of what I posted was from NC. Also: BLM twitter is basically ignoring Oklahoma for some reason. However they are retweeting people advocating violence.

[ArabChuckNorris]

Is Tulsa having protests? And do you have links to the incidents? All of what I posted was from NC. Also: BLM twitter is basically ignoring Oklahoma for some reason. However they are retweeting people advocating violence.

This is what I found,

http://kfor.com/2016/09/21/oklahoma-...ulsa-shooting/

[Tineren]

Actually, I think the broken down car/asking for help incident he is referring to is the Jonathan Ferrel shooting in Charlotte three years ago, not the Tulsa shooting.

[ArabChuckNorris]

Actually, I think the broken down car/asking for help incident he is referring to is the Jonathan Ferrel shooting in Charlotte three years ago, not the Tulsa shooting.

lol ^

http://heavy.com/news/2016/09/terenc...ly-photos-car/
Un-sure if he was requesting for help, but most definitely his car broke down.

[Tineren]

Well, now you've edited it to OK rather than NC.
Not to derail discussion of Crutcher, but I suspect one reason Charlotte is getting more attention is the repeat nature of the shooting: Locals saw this before three years ago.

[Foley]

Well, now you've edited it to OK rather than NC.
Not to derail discussion of Crutcher, but I suspect one reason Charlotte is getting more attention is the repeat nature of the shooting: Locals saw this before three years ago.

Also a civilian was shot by another civilian during the protest.

[5m4llP0X]

Here's better info on the incident: http://kfor.com/2016/09/19/we-will-a...lved-shooting/
And Archive: http://kfor.com/?s=Terence+Crutcher

I find it odd that he walked away from a cop who had a gun drawn on him. I also find it disturbing she drew a gun on him with his hands in the air and I'm really wondering a few things:
1) why was she issuing commands? The situation isn't a routine stop, it's a stalled car so assistance not demands should be used.
2) Why was he ignoring those commands? That just raises tension and problems. Especially with the current events.
3) Was he reaching for something when he got to his car? You can see in the helicopter video his hand go down.
4) Why the hell would you lower your hand with a gun trained on you?
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/20/us/okl...lice-shooting/ (helicopter video is second one)
Additional note: Pilot needs to be fired. Listen to his comments.

Edit: Tin, Durand, MK, Rok, we love to argue wanna take the other side of my argument? So far everything I've seen about this screams bad police work.

[The Blazin1]

Got the states mixed up. You have some rage issues.

I have ******* issues, get your **** together and don't blame others for your own shortcomings.

[The Blazin1]

That was "dumb ****" and "Shat"

[Woden]

I find it odd that he walked away from a cop who had a gun drawn on him. I also find it disturbing she drew a gun on him with his hands in the air and I'm really wondering a few things:
1) why was she issuing commands? The situation isn't a routine stop, it's a stalled car so assistance not demands should be used.
2) Why was he ignoring those commands? That just raises tension and problems. Especially with the current events.
3) Was he reaching for something when he got to his car? You can see in the helicopter video his hand go down.
4) Why the hell would you lower your hand with a gun trained on you?
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/20/us/okl...lice-shooting/ (helicopter video is second one)
Additional note: Pilot needs to be fired. Listen to his comments.

From what I've read, there were two (maybe more, it's been unclear from the stories) 911 calls about a vehicle blocking traffic, and apparently at least one reported that the driver was out of his car and acting erratically. First police car on scene either doesn't have a dash cam or it was malfunctioning (again, unclear), so first two minutes or so of footage is unavailable; this was the car of Officer Shelby, who fired the gun. According to her, in those unfilmed minutes, Crutcher was acting erratically and was non-compliant, and based on her drug-recognition training, she believed him to be high on PCP. The rest is on film.

Personally, between those details and what I can see on camera, I can definitely see how she could have reasonably perceived him to be a threat. Should she have used her taser instead of her pistol? Maybe; I don't know enough about tasers, nor street drugs, to say for sure.

[5m4llP0X]

From what I've read, there were two (maybe more, it's been unclear from the stories) 911 calls about a vehicle blocking traffic, and apparently at least one reported that the driver was out of his car and acting erratically. First police car on scene either doesn't have a dash cam or it was malfunctioning (again, unclear), so first two minutes or so of footage is unavailable; this was the car of Officer Shelby, who fired the gun. According to her, in those unfilmed minutes, Crutcher was acting erratically and was non-compliant, and based on her drug-recognition training, she believed him to be high on PCP. The rest is on film.

Personally, between those details and what I can see on camera, I can definitely see how she could have reasonably perceived him to be a threat. Should she have used her taser instead of her pistol? Maybe; I don't know enough about tasers, nor street drugs, to say for sure.

Everything I've read says taser was used and he went to the ground before she plugged him. Also: she plugged him with several other officers in the close area.

[Woden]

Everything I've read says taser was used and he went to the ground before she plugged him. Also: she plugged him with several other officers in the close area.

I could have sworn the police chief said that the gunshot and taser were fired (by different officers) at the same time.

[5m4llP0X]

I could have sworn the police chief said that the gunshot and taser were fired (by different officers) at the same time.

Ah, ok.
I'm also finding info about them finding PCP in his SUV.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/20/opinio...ting-holloway/
If he was on PCP it would explain the erratic behavior. Of course, not being on it would keep me wondering why he was ignoring her unless what she demanded was a serious violation of procedure. Also: the window of his SUV was up and so he couldn't have been going for a gun inside the SUV like the police have been trying to say. Everything about this seems off.

[The Burninator]

Disobedience alone is not escalation.

Being high does not make you liable to execution.

/argument.

[Woden]

Disobedience alone is not escalation.

Civil disobedience, where you respectfully (or even silently) just refuse to do something unreasonable? Sure.

Disregarding a law enforcement officer entirely, walking towards your vehicle (which the LEO has not yet looked at to see if there is a weapon inside), and reaching for your vehicle, in spite of being told directly to stop? I disagree. That's not an unreasonable request by the LEO at all, and disregarding it could very likely mean that the person is retrieving a weapon.

Being high does not make you liable to execution.

Agreed. However, it does raise questions about the person's behavior, which can help to explain how a situation got escalated to the point of a shooting. For this purpose, it also matters what drug was used (for example, marijuana is not very likely to lead to any violent escalation, but PCP is).

PCP, in particular, is known to cause many users to become more aggressive and violent. If Crutcher had already been acting aggressively towards the police officers there, then going to and reaching for his car can easily be interpreted as threatening behavior, even if his reasons were benign.

[5m4llP0X]

Just going to add in:
http://drugabuse.com/library/the-eff...effects-of-pcp
http://www.narconon.org/drug-abuse/pcp-effects.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phencyclidine#Effects

Keep in mind:
Misperceptions of abilities including strength, speed, and invulnerability.
Odd, erratic, or unexpected behaviors.
The drugged person lacks any rational judgment
He (or she) feels no pain
He is often aggressive
He is willing to harm himself or others

One example is the case of Big Lurch, a former rapper with a history of violent crime, who was convicted of murdering and cannibalizing his roommate while under the influence of PCP.

In short: PCP makes you very VERY unpredictable, possibly violent and extremely dangerous. So in this case: if he WAS on it (like she honestly believed and they found the vial in his car) then it explains his actions and her pulling a gun. It doesn't explain the shot especially since someone already had a taser on him.
Also: you're supposed to take the opposite side.

[mbstokem]

It's my firm belief that officers shouldn't shoot a live round unless actually fired upon. Considering the rules of engagement for the military in a foreign country pretty much requires you to be dead before you can even start slinging kill shots I think it's reasonable to require the same of police. That being said, I have no empathy for most of these situations because a large percentage of them could've been avoided.

[5m4llP0X]

It's my firm belief that officers shouldn't shoot a live round unless actually fired upon. Considering the rules of engagement for the military in a foreign country pretty much requires you to be dead before you can even start slinging kill shots I think it's reasonable to require the same of police. That being said, I have no empathy for most of these situations because a large percentage of them could've been avoided.

So you want them to have less rights in terms of self-defense than civilians? No.

[The Blazin1]

It's my firm belief that officers shouldn't shoot a live round unless actually fired upon. Considering the rules of engagement for the military in a foreign country pretty much requires you to be dead before you can even start slinging kill shots I think it's reasonable to require the same of police. That being said, I have no empathy for most of these situations because a large percentage of them could've been avoided.

This is a truly brilliant idea. Police should have to wait until they are shot, to shoot. In a hostage situation they should wait until the hostage is shot, and then wait until he fires on them as well.

[Tineren]

When the LAPD gave an award to officers who chose to deescalate rather than shoot, the LA police union made a statement that the award was a "terrible idea" because it "will prioritize the lives of suspected criminals over the lives of LAPD officers, and goes against the core foundation of an officer's training."
So anyone who a police officer suspects is a criminal is someone who's life is not worth saving. Somehow I think they have forgotten that "protect and serve" refers to how they are supposed to interact with the public, not each other.

[The Burninator]

It's my firm belief that officers shouldn't shoot a live round unless actually fired upon. Considering the rules of engagement for the military in a foreign country pretty much requires you to be dead before you can even start slinging kill shots I think it's reasonable to require the same of police. That being said, I have no empathy for most of these situations because a large percentage of them could've been avoided.

QFT.

You have very enlightened opinions, Stokem.

Police, military take a risk by joining that occupation, and I definitely agree that if it's the job of police to protect people, they can't offload the risk they agreed to by taking the job in the first place onto the citizens they're protecting. If they do, they're no longer protecting the citizens they're protecting

Pox: wrong framing; it's not that the police have fewer rights, but that the citizens have more. Your rights to self defense don't come into play in these situations because you wouldn't be putting yourself in those positions.

Blazin': if the person hasn't made clear that he is literally about to kill someone / hurt someone / blow something up, what rights has he given up that allow the police to fire on him? He doesn't lose his right to life because a police officer *mistakenly* thinks he has a weapon (and doesn't even claim to mistakenly think that said weapon is pointing at them).

[5m4llP0X]

When the LAPD gave an award to officers who chose to deescalate rather than shoot, the LA police union made a statement that the award was a "terrible idea" because it "will prioritize the lives of suspected criminals over the lives of LAPD officers, and goes against the core foundation of an officer's training."
So anyone who a police officer suspects is a criminal is someone who's life is not worth saving. Somehow I think they have forgotten that "protect and serve" refers to how they are supposed to interact with the public, not each other.

No it's telling them to remember the importance of safety:
1) themselves
2) their fellow officers
3) innocent civilians
4) the criminal
The criminal exists in the list, but his life because he is a criminal is less important and I agree with this 100%

[Tineren]

No it's telling them to remember the importance of safety:
1) themselves
2) their fellow officers
3) innocent civilians
4) the criminal
The criminal exists in the list, but his life because he is a criminal is less important and I agree with this 100%

Skipping the part you believe a police officer's life is more important than that of an innocent civilian, many of these shootings don't involve criminals, they involve innocent people who the police suspect are criminals.

[5m4llP0X]

Skipping the part you believe a police officer's life is more important than that of an innocent civilian, many of these shootings don't involve criminals, they involve innocent people who the police suspect are criminals.

Let us not skip it. Their own personal safety is paramount. If they die that's one less doing the job. Same thing with their fellow officers. The fact that you believe their life is worthless because "they took the job and should accept the risks" is frankly horse **** and exemplifies everything that is wrong with your argument.

[Tineren]

Let us not skip it. Their own personal safety is paramount. If they die that's one less doing the job. Same thing with their fellow officers. The fact that you believe their life is worthless because "they took the job and should accept the risks" is frankly horse **** and exemplifies everything that is wrong with your argument.

So in the hypothetical hostage sistuaion blazin mentioned above, you thin the police should ignore the hostages and just open fire, hoping to kill the criminal?

[5m4llP0X]

So in the hypothetical hostage sistuaion blazin mentioned above, you thin the police should ignore the hostages and just open fire, hoping to kill the criminal?

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2016/08/...-blamed-373420
I 100% support the cops killing her in this situation.

[Tineren]

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2016/08/...-blamed-373420
I 100% support the cops killing her in this situation.

Do you think in that situation they were acting to protect the child or themselves?

[Foley]

No it's telling them to remember the importance of safety:
1) themselves
2) their fellow officers
3) innocent civilians
4) the criminal
The criminal exists in the list, but his life because he is a criminal is less important and I agree with this 100%

It should be

1) Civilians
2) Police
3) Criminal

The safety of the public is more important that the officers life. If the death of one officer/criminal saves two lives then it was worth it.

[5m4llP0X]

It should be

1) Civilians
2) Police
3) Criminal

The safety of the public is more important that the officers life. If the death of one officer/criminal saves two lives then it was worth it.

Nope. Your own personal safety is always more important than anyone else.

Do you think in that situation they were acting to protect the child or themselves?

Both, but more themselves. They knew the mom wasn't going to shoot the kid, but she was going to use the kid to prevent herself from going to jail or dying. That goal of hers failed.

[The Burninator]

Nope. Your own personal safety is always more important than anyone else.

This definitely requires an argument. It is not obvious, and I happen to disagree. (As do most philosophers.)

Also answer:
1) is this number sensitive? (My personal safety is more important to 1, 2, 3, or 100,000 other people.)
2) is this a claim about what actually is correct, or about what is excusable? ("I agree that I can kill 3 people to reduce my chances of coming to harm," or "I think it might not be right to do so, but I can see why someone would so their offense is excusable.")

[5m4llP0X]

This definitely requires an argument. It is not obvious, and I happen to disagree. (As do most philosophers.)

Also answer:
1) is this number sensitive? (My personal safety is more important to 1, 2, 3, or 100,000 other people.)

It is more situational than anything else. I was once told by my German teacher that hijacking a plane in Germany gets the plane landed, the BDF storming and anyone dumb enough to stand up gets a condolence letter sent to the family. I find that logic to be very sound and reasonable. Just because you're doing a risky job doesn't mean you have to die so some other person can live.
But if you want a number: How many people are on this planet? I would put my own personal safety above that number.

2) is this a claim about what actually is correct, or about what is excusable? ("I agree that I can kill 3 people to reduce my chances of coming to harm," or "I think it might not be right to do so, but I can see why someone would so their offense is excusable.")

Well in the link I provided: both. In the original context of this thread: As I read up on the effects of PCP and how it can actually make you immune to tasers, pepper spray, and allow you to take down groups of people larger than you I'm beginning to think the guy would have destroyed those 4 cops. I want to see the evidence of the PCP vial and autopsy report before I make a conclusion.

[The Burninator]

Fortunately, most people do not operate as though their safety is more important than their fellow man to an unlimited degree. It is far from clear that you are correct that they should. I suspect most people disagree and venerate those who sacrifice for others.

Also, whether PCP has those effects or not he was not attacking. He was not complying with commands but as I noted earlier, that alone isn't escalation. His hands were against his car, and he was standing there. You'd have a case otherwise.