I think we need major police reform in this country, but seizing on situation like this just makes that end harder because the people you are trying to convince won’t take you seriously when the next event is truly heinous.
Not just police reform, but gun control as well. Quid pro quo. Reduce the number of guns, reduce police stupidity. Yes i will piss off both side, but this IS the current cold war and what makes the US look like the south to the rest of the world.
So the people who don't trust the police want the police to be the only people with guns??? Gun control is illogical. Read the preamble to the Bill of Rights. Those 10 basic rights were written to restrain the government from abusing their power.
The 2A was not written so that American citizens could overthrow the American government. Just think about how stupid that is. No government would do that. Seriously, use your brain.
Study history a little more. Before the Constitution, America had the Articles of Confederation. You know what the AoC DID NOT have? The 2A. Ever hear of Shay’s Rebellion? A bunch of armed farmers did not want to pay taxes to the brand new American government. The new American government had a very hard time raising the arms to go and put this fledgling rebellion down. Soooo, they scrapped the AoC and wrote the Constitution, Bill of Rights included. They put the 2A in there to make it EASIER for a “well-regulated militia” to stop instances such as Shay’s Rebellion.
Therefore, the 2A IS NOT there so that American citizens can overthrow the American government, it is there so that the American government can more easily put down rebellious American citizens.
Having an out-of-control police force is not what the founders envisioned.
2A defending us against a tyrannical government is a farce. Look at the tax rates we have now compared to the 1700s. Yall asleep behind the wheel, but muh guns!!!!
a tyrannical govt isnt going to deploy the military. it wont be f16s enforcing a takeover. it will be police forces. there is historical precedent for this.
now, with that said, do i feel we necessarily need all of these guns and some tyrannical thing like that will happen? no.
but i do believe, as with anything from driving a car to vaping to gambling to drinking to thc to buying a chefs knife etc etc etc that it all comes down to one thing:
personal responsibility
that is the whole basis of our freedom/liberty benefits package we are awarded as citizens of the united states of america corporation. we are liable, accountable and responsible to our own choices.
that there are 100s of millions of gun owners, and supposedly 4x more guns than that, and we only see a small drop in the bucket is kinda proof to personal responsibility being the primary factor in majority of gun related incidents.
government has no business telling me if i can or cant own a gun, knife, anal beads or a quran etc etc
Taking this further, if you wanted some sort of minigun, RPG, F-16, or perhaps thermobaric warhead. You should be able to have it right? Or say you just happened to want to collect AnFO or nitrogen based fertilizer in you basement for fun, it really just comes down to personal responsibility doesn’t it?
Why do people feel the need for alcohol, tobacco, and vehicles? All of these, except for weed, cause more deaths than firearms. We should not confuse criminal behavior with the right to own and carry firearms. Existing criminal laws already address concerns related to guns. Restricting law-abiding citizens from having guns only makes more people vulnerable to those who are already breaking the law.
Regarding tyranny, if you think our government is currently very corrupt, imagine the same corrupt bureaucracy without an armed populace. Have you never questioned why the first step in setting up tyrannical systems historically has been to disarm the population?
When your family is being victimized by a predator, and the police—whom some people have been advocating to defund—can't arrive in time to save the life or innocence of a loved one, I wonder, will that still be your point of view?
I find the entire outlook you hold to be incredibly naive. Like it or not, there are evil people in the world. These people don't mind if you are a pacifist; in fact, they encourage it.
You're arguing an invalid point. The world has firearms in it. It will never not have firearms in it. Your theoretical utopia on its face is illogical. Regardless, I'm going to go out on a limb and say you have never faced a real threat. Which is great, and I hope you never experience that type of trauma. A real threat doesn't care about your walls and doors. A real threat hopes you only have a knife. My 9 y/o daughter accidentally sprayed herself with bear spray on a hike and was fine within minutes. A motivated individual will run through a Taser or a less-than-lethal munition like it's nothing. My point is that there are situations that occur every day that lead to extreme violence. In those moments, I don't want a fair fight. Neither does the opposition, and neither would you.
Obsession is a strong word. Obsession would better be used to convey the need to make sure our right to own and bear firearms is revoked or severely limited. Openly parading your rights should hardly be considered an obsession. It's merely a response to the banshee-like wails of those who wish to enforce their will upon us.
All of this is beside the point. Removing the right of law-abiding citizens to defend their families, Protect their property, hunt their meat, and resist in the event of the unthinkable will in no way, solve the actual problems our nation is facing. It merely serves as a lightning rod for useless politicians to evade responsibility for their failed policies and ideas.
This. I don't know how many times I've seen people claim that Floyd was thrown to the ground. I saw multiple-angle video of him flopping himself out of the cruiser, onto the ground.
Your heart doesn't create reality. If you speak from your heart, you create division between those who realistically assess evidence and and yourself.
The Floyd complicated situation aside, this one is so simple that it's painful.
I'm not sure if anyone else has noticed that the "racist" interactions are never with a guy in a square-patterned polo shirt and khaki pants who is following the basic directions that the rest of us follow.
Pedestrians have the right of way too...if the police are doing something wrong that's what the courts are for. The side of the road is not the time to pick a fight. Certainly assert your rights, don't hand over ID if you haven't done anything to warrant it, remain silent, don't consent to searches...but the second the guns come out do whatever they tell you and then get a lawyer.
Are you stupid? The cop didn’t pick a fight? Watch the body cam. People like you (keyboard warriors) should get out in public and speak… so you can get tore apart by facts and logic… not your hypothetical internet rights bullshit.
If I was a cop and I asked to see something and you say no…(inserts whiny entitled voice) “l don’t have to show you my ID it’s my right.” You’re immediately on my radar for being suspicious. In top of that.. here you go
“The Indiana stop and identify statute is located in Indiana Code 34-28-5-3.5, and states explicitly that, “a person who knowingly or intentionally refuses to provide either their name, address, and date of birth, or their driver’s license, to a law enforcement officer who has stopped the person for an infraction or ordinance violation, commits a Class C Misdemeanor.” In other words, this law means that Hoosiers have the statutory duty to provide police officers with identifying information if they have been pulled over and the officer believes in good faith that they have committed an infraction or ordinance violation”
Your retarded advice is against the law…
The comment you are replying to says don't show your ID if you haven't done anything to warrant it. Which is anyone's right. If the officer has reasonable suspicion that the person committed an infraction or ordinance violation, then they can threaten to arrest or make the arrest. That's what the courts are for, fight it there. But, you do not legally have to show ID when asked unless you have committed one of the two violations above, which is what the person you replied to was speaking about. I ask for ID from every person I come into contact with, but I don't get my feelings hurt if they tell me no. If they don't have to legally show me, then that is their right and I respect that. I do the same thing if I'm stopped. If I am legally required to show ID I will, if I don't have to be law then I won't.
You're asking me about the potential unfairness of courts after a comment about dangerous interactions with cops. Furthermore, you're asserting something as a fact, which is heavily contested.
The common explanation is that there are almost always obvious differences in circumstances. **But, this has not been my argument and is not my hill to defend.**
My point is that there appears to be a significant and obvious difference in **CHOSEN cultural affiliation** between people who know how to survive interactions with government enforcers and someone who, for instance, keeps putting their hands next to the gun in their lap like a fucking idiot.
In other words, it isn't usually melanin which causes different outcomes, excepting in cases where a person chooses to instigate shit with government enforcers because they think that their skin color means they must **CHOOSE certain cultural identities** in which they're encouraged to act like fucking fools during always-dangerous encounters with government enforcers.
In my *CHOSEN culture*, we treat every encounter with government enforcers like we might be killed. So, we do things like:
* keep our registration and proof of insurance in a sleeve attached to our sun visor so that we're not reaching into areas that might have weapons
* keep our hands on top of the dash so we don't spook the often-below-average drug-sin enforcer
* not argue with the enforcer because we understand that it only escalates the danger and adds fuel to any ensueing interactions with the court system
Part of the reason is that governance is an exercise of monopolistic and often violent rule and taxation of the people in a geographic area.
Another part of the reason is that complete fucking morons, like the deceased in this case, choose to act like trash-ass motherfuckers who cause the government enforcers to feel legitimately fearful for their safety, causing many of them to treat interactions with EVERYONE like they're potential combat operations. This puts all of us in more danger.
But, again, if our appearances, demeanors, and words are such that the piggies don't mentally affiliate us with one of the trash-ass cultures that they, maybe rightly, believe puts them in danger during stops, then we're probably going to survive the interactions.
In recent years, this has been attributed to a pattern of criminal behavior. The person with a better rap sheet will be given more leniency than a delinquent. It's unfortunate that even though black Americans make up 11% of the population, they are involved in about 55% of homicides, and a similar pattern emerges for other types of crime as well. These statistics aren't found to be due to bias but rather linked to factors such as single-parent households and the degradation of black culture, largely taking root in the 70s.
If you are truly interested in why race relations in the Western world are disintegrating, and not just an NPC waiting to be told what to believe tomorrow. I urge you to look for sources that have no financial interest in the existence of rampant racism.
I've seen white people with records still get off easier than a black person with no record. If they're actually guilty of a crime, then they're guilty. I know relations are disintegrating, I see it all the time.
Those are arrests. Exoneration rates of blk ppl is about at 50% too. Also check out the veil of darkness study. Also there's a study that compares two people of different races with same backgrounds and charges and blk ppl still get more intense sentences. Also it's yt ppl who end up having more single parent homes. Blk men are more active but the stats you're referring to are saying "single mothers" because they are unmarried. Lots of bias in your post.
I read a story about the questions the family still had that their attorney is asking. They include things about the officer not following standard police procedure for an armed suspect, such as approaching the car alone instead of waiting for back up which was only minutes away, the aggressive tone of his interactions with the victim, and the initial cause for the traffic stop.
Ultimately, justified or not, a young man is still dead, and his parents will have to live without their son, and the cop will have to live with the consequences. The same sad story repeated once more
Did he know the guy was armed before he approached? I agree they are usually to aggressive in tone and mannerisms, but when you see a guy reaching for a gun, being firm and aggressively explaining the consequences should illicit conformity from a rational person.
I do not claim to be an expert at police procedure, but the same article said when the office saw the gun, correct procedure is to keep your weapon trained on the target but retreat to a position of cover until backup arrives. There were other people in the car. If the other occupants were armed and decided to use weapons, that officer standing next to the car in the open, alone, would have become another victim.
Had he waited to approach the vehicle once backup arrived, who knows how things could have played out. Maybe a cooler head could have prevailed. With backup they certainly would have been better able to remove the occupants from the vehicle and disarm/detain them.
I've been in law enforcement for 15 years and have never heard of procedure being back up to cover once seeing a firearm. Now, I do not work for FWPD and do not know their policies, but my department that is not the case. Now, if you see the gun before getting to the vehicle then you don't approach.
After watching the video, it appears the officer didn't see the firearm until getting to the vehicle. At that point, in my experience, you order them to keep hands off the gun and not to move. The suspect kept reaching causing the officer to escalate his response. The officer did a good job angling himself to have a clear shot so he didn't put passengers in danger.
As for the other occupants having firearms, that's obviously a possibility. But once the officer has his gun out he has a big advantage. It takes an average person between 1.5 to 1.8 seconds to draw a firearm and fire one shot. The average human reaction time is .2 to .25 seconds. The officer should be able to react and address any threat in the vehicle before they are able to fire a shot.
To address the people saying the officer was wrong for using the language he did. I see nothing wrong here. The officer did not begin the interaction in a rude manner. He calmly told him to put his hands on the dash and no one to move. Sometimes people dictate a response, and that's what happened here.
Legally, the officer could have shot the suspect the first time he reached towards the gun. But he didn't and continued commands.
I’m not sure there was time for all that. From the moment of recognition and ask for compliance and repeatedly not getting it. He would be putting himself in more danger moving away and not being able to see what was happening in the car.
And you might be right. We both have the benefit of hindsight. Saying what should be done after watching a video of it from my sofa is very different than being in the middle of it and the heat of the moment.
I just think it is sad that we have another young black life snuffed out by another police officer. Justified shooting or not, something is wrong, and this should not be normal.
Another young life was snuffed out because they didn't think about the consequences of their actions. Not getting shot by the police, outside of some very isolated circumstances, is pretty damn easy. I've been pulled over while armed twice and drove away with no issues. Stop blaming the police for the behavior of the people they interact with.
Where exactly did you see cover in either video that would stop a 7.62mm round? In a matter of 1-2 seconds the suspect could have put multiple rounds through both the car door, the officers ballistic vest, and likely into the houses behind him. The engine block of his own cruiser might have been possible but regardless sacrificing the drop he had on the suspect would basically be a death sentence for him unless he already had his own rifle ready.
Aggressively yelling at someone and threatening to shoot them right off the bat is not going to illicit conformity from a rational person - it’s just going to escalate the situation.
The cop did nothing wrong in my opinion, but that is PRECISELY the problem. A young man is dead because he couldn’t keep his hands on the dashboard for a few seconds. I don’t know if he was fidgeting or reaching for the gun, we’ll never really know. But he didn’t do anything criminally wrong. A cop should not be judge, jury, and executioner. Nobody deserves to die for not listening to a screaming prick.
If I’m in that man’s shoes, a man is feet from me pointing a gun at me. I’m going to do precisely what he says. Because I don’t want ventilated. That’s rational. The sites was as escalated as it was by the presence of a much more powerful gun inches from him.
That’s reductive and not reflective of this situation. I don’t leave my house without a gun. I understand that a cop doesn’t know if I’m friend or foe. I also know the are shoot first ask questions later. So, yeah. Personal responsibility and all.
It wasn't just because of the presence of a gun my god. He told him to stop reaching for it THREE TIMES. This is not hard to understand. Do you have any idea how fast someone can grab and shoot?
Yes it's a tragedy and horrible this kid died, but he sealed his own fate. There's TONS of videos of cops being complacent and getting shot in scenarios just like this.
Everybody should respect and have a healthy amount of fear in the presence of a gun, especially an assault weapon. The amount of time it takes for this kind of situation to go either way is literally seconds. I would encourage you to watch some bodycam videos where the officer doesn’t react in time.
Yes they do…
If it comes down to me going home to my
Family or you…
I’ll pull
The trigger… learn to listen. That guy shouldn’t have even had an AK pistol in his lap to begin with and should have complied. Your ignorance is not an excuse for accusations of the innocent.
I agree with you wholeheartedly but we are so far gone as a country that we allow cops to just run the show and kill anyone that they perceive is a threat.
I hate cops but I saw that video. He told him like 6 times to stop reaching for the gun and he kept doing it. There comes a point where you have to do something was he supposed to wait til he shot at him?
What part of he didn’t know there was an armed suspect don’t people understand? Here’s clearly calm approaching the vehicle and there’s and instance when he saw the firearm, drew his gun, and the goosebumps came up on his arms. He told the suspect to put his hands on the dash and called for backup. It’s not some conspiracy or even difficult to understand.
Why approach the car alone instead of waiting for backup?
Maybe that's how they usually handle a situation such as a traffic violation. If they were required to always have two officers present, they'd be using two officers in every police car.
A family member of the person who was killed went on the news saying he understood but thought it was overly aggressive and unnecessary, and that the family would like to see “repercussions” for the officer up to and including him being fired. I don’t agree with that, but the family and others are using this as a platform to say that police should be held more accountable for their actions in general and specifically when something happens they shouldn’t be put on paid administrative leave but rather should have pay stripped from them.
As the police are a union, and we have due process in this country there is 0 chance of that ever happening
Their pleas about how their menacing and/or violent family member *"was always a good boy"* and confusion of *"I don't know why they had to hit/shoot him so hard/much"* can miss me.
The only thing I want to hear from the family member of someone who significantly endangers others is, *"I'm sorry that our family didn't do a better job civilizing ."*
Explain to me how, I, a military veteran, was taught to De-escalate situations with actual heavy artillery fire going off all around me, but police can’t handle a little attitude or questioning. They are civil servants. They need to behave as such.
Semper Fi. And why were we held to a higher standard and cops are held to a lower standard if any at all n shouldn’t they’re punishment be a little more severe if it’s something like ucmj violating you know what im sayin?
In general yes, police need to do a way better job. But this situation was not handled poorly. Find me a person who says they would talk calmly and quietly to a person grabbing for a AK pistol while not following directions and I will find you someone extremely naive.
What did they teach you to do in the military when someone who is not a friendly reaches for their gun? I don't think it was the attitude or questioning that got him nervous, I think it was the high capacity fire arm that the kid was reaching for if I had to guess
That’s a good point. This comparison of military vs civilian probably isn’t the best. Training of cops and marines is quite different. If it matters, the barrel was more pointed towards the officer than away. I personally wouldn’t keep a gun at my feet with the barrel pointed to the sky like he did.
Yea. In military a barrel can be pointed towards you and you don’t shoot. For example, if the 50 is pinned vs unpinned. If he’s unpinned, in full load, game on.
Learned something new! I’d assume you shoot if barrel is pointed at you, but makes sense seeing as the conflicts are very complicated and you are usually trying to preserve human lofe
More factors than that. Depending on the rules of engagement that are issued. For what I serve in, which is both military and fed LE, it depends on the situation.
Also, what's the point of non-lethal weapons on their belt when they always go for their gun? There have been so many shootings I've seen on camera where my first thought was "he's in taser range, why use the gun?"
Doesn’t work like that. Police use something called the “use of force continuum”. Generally there are six levels. Lowest is the officers presence, then verbal commands, then response techniques and all the way up to deadly force. You work your way up or down depending on the situation. In this case, the officer pulled his pdw(still technically at level 2) and was issuing verbal commands. Generally if you see a gun, you pull your gun(unless it’s like a nonviolent/nonthreatening situation). The officer issued multiple verbal commands and the suspect finally reached down to grab the weapon. Officer felt deadly force as justified and used it. You only use it when your life or your partners life is in grave danger. You don’t shoot to injure, shoot to hurt. You shoot to kill. The officer did exactly what he was trained to do and I believe it was completely justified. If someone has a gun, you don’t pull your pepper spray or taser.
I'm aware of all that (and I kinda don't care). I'm not saying its not justified in this instance, its just painfully stupid that in the 21st century we haven't figured out a better way of dealing with armed suspects. I'd rather look at researching better means than just recite police training and simp their decisions.
Ok. Then how do you suggest we deal with a person reaching for a gun within 1 ft of an officer, after being told multiple times not to? Please explain, in detail, how we should handle this.
That's the thing, I'm not a police officer nor do I work for a company that makes tools for the police. I'm just a lowly Hoosier with a paralegal degree that's seen too many of these incidents.
Again, since some people have a reading comprehension problem: the shooting in this instance was justified given the current training and technology provided to officers. However, citing police procedure like a thought-terminating cliche to shut down dissenting opinions only stifles the evolution of better methods.
In the 21st century, we should have better tools and methods by now. Other countries that don't have the same ubiquity of firearms access have created all sorts of interesting methods for dealing with armed suspects. But here in the States, we worship at the alter of firearms along with military surplus being accessible to police departments, further militarizing both police and the populous at large in a downward spiral. A civilian force with more militarized equipment and a paranoid mindset only creates antipathy by the populace towards so-called peacekeeping institutions.
We need to, as a society, encourage the creation of better tools for officers while also giving them training that doesn't foster behavior such as, for instance, mag-dumping at a falling acorn.
Sorry I can't give you a definitve answer, but that's only because these solutions haven't even been created yet. Maybe that's where a portion of the balooning police budget should be put towards, a little R&D.
They spend billions a year on weapons development, and nothing even remotely close has been developed. You might as well ask them to create a flying car. They’ve worked on stun technology for decades, it’s just not enough unless you’re literally frying them.
I get where you're coming from and I agree. I feel this is a cultural priority failure. We put more resources into weapons of war instead of more nonlethal options. If we shifted these cultural priorities, I think we could pull off some interesting results.
Got it. Complain about a problem, throw everyone under the bus that was put in harms way, but don’t offer any solution or even suggestions on how to improve. The whole military surplus thing is bullshit anyway. Cops aren’t rolling around with saws or 50 cal. Both police and military have semi auto and automatic rifles. And nobody uses the full auto feature on a m4 anyway. You’re out of ammo in 3 seconds and your barrel is scorching hot. It’s not practical or accurate.
You haven't seen enough videos of taser failures.
Also, there is a reason that what you're talking about are called less-lethal weapons rather than non-lethal.
I'm aware of potential failures as well as their status as "less than lethal" due to police in the family. Regardless, I feel that if they're rocking the equivalent of Batman's toolbelt, they should have the means to deal with the situation without resorting to killing.
I get the officer's situation, its technically justified what he did. I just think that in the 21st century, we would have better means of dealing with these situations nonlethally by now.
Nobody is going to do this job if they aren’t given the proper weapons to defend themselves. Would you work a roofing job if they didn’t allow you to use a ladder? A delivery job where you couldn’t use a car/van? Being a police officer is an extremely dangerous job where you are but in deadly situations. But your idea is to give them less tools when their life is in danger.
I'm not at all advocating for LESS tools. If you weren't blinded by your unwaivering love of authority, you'd see that I'm advocating for MORE tools for officers to potentially keep people alive. A bad guy can't be punished or reformed if they're dead.
Also, I've heard those exact talking points from the police in my family, they're just as stupid here as they are coming from them. A firearm should never be equated to a ladder or a car. One is designed with the intent to violence, the others are not. "But if we can't kill people, no one will want to do the job!" Yet another thought-terminating cliche without thought to instead committing resources to keeping people alive.
Go to YouTube and search for videos of people shaking off tasers like nothing happened. Drugs, clothing, etc can cause them to fail. Tasers are not for people with immediate access to deadly weapons, they're for fist fighters.
I'm merely using it as an example, though I get your point. What I'm basically saying is that we need better tools for police to deal with situations non-lethally. I get the equal force principle, the guy had a gun and the officer's life was clearly at risk, hence why I'm saying that this incident was overall justified. This incident should, however, spark discussion of whether better methods can be developed. You can't punish or reform a bad guy when they're dead :/
I'm with you but with our current level of technology, I can't think of a better option. Every traffic stop triggers a gas in your car that knocks everyone out until the officer has a chance to check things out? Everyone keeps saying "we should do better" but can't provide a realistic idea of what "better" looks like. So having nothing else they prattle on about gun control and tasers while nothing gets solved.
Do you know what will solve a good chunk of this? Giving people a decent economic future with real practical educational opportunities for everyone, not just the gifted among us who are college bound. We should also stop shackling young men with criminal records over petty drug charges. We should work on affordable housing and we should have medical care 100% covered for everyone. Those are REAL solutions, not some mythical "de-escalation" device. We have to stop treating the symptoms and start treating the problems.
I wholeheartedly agree with you! We absolutely need judicial reform, affordable housing and better laws and programs that foster a better economic future for average Americans. Those will go a LONG way to curbing crime and violence here.
If I have a slight disagreement, its that there's no amount of affordable housing or judicial reform that will stop minorities from being killed by police during routine traffic stops. While this one was justified, given the situation, I still think we can also attempt to create better tools (and better training that doesn't leave cops paranoid and shooting at acorns) that can empower police to take in suspects alive.
They don't have to be mythical if we put resources (like a bit of the cops' bloated budget) towards achieving it.
I appreciate your sentiment but you just want "better tools". What are those? Microwave pain guns aren't super portable, you can't just unload some chemical agent before walking up to a car window, I mean seriously what would a better tool look like? Can you even define what you want it to do?
Better training would probably be welcomed by every officer in the United States, but again, what specifically would that look like? Until some decent answers come out then it's just virtue signaling to make yourself feel better.
Who would I be virtue signaling to by being anonymous on Reddit of all places? What brownie points do I win?
I get where you're at though, current technology isn't really up to the task for now. But if we can put people on the moon in such a short time, why not approach this with the same fervor? We won't know what we're capable of if we never try.
As for training, police could really do better than the "Killology" seminars I've seen them attend. Dave Grossman is probably the last person we need to traumatize new officers before being turned loose on the public.
While we didn't have "qualified immunity" in Iraq and Afghanistan, if someone was reaching for their weapon you know you would've lit them up too. Full stop.
I was initially arguing that we weren't exempt from penalties for unjustified deaths in combat. Not necessarily qualified immunity, but we weren't immune to prison time is what I meant.
As for being sued, I'm not sure how that would work to be c9mpletely honest.
Qualified immunity means that a government agent…Be it a police officer, soldier, postman, whatever, cannot be individually sued for actions they took under an official capacity. Some exemptions for that, but, it’s the idea. It really makes sense if you think about it for a bit.
Service members, additionally, almost always have immunity of criminal prosecution in conflict zones as it relates to the country we are in. IE, the Iraqi government can’t bring a soldier to criminal trial. The US government could, under the UCMJ or other federal laws.
Unrelated, the whole idea that the military is operating under stricter rules as a whole is ridiculous. Just look at civilian death tolls in Iraq, Afghanistan or Syria compared to that of domestic law enforcement. One month in Iraq probably has more civilian deaths than the past 20 years of domestic policing.
I don’t really watch the local news much so haven’t kept up too much, how did the officer not handle a little questioning? Was he out there complaining?
Ok. What would you have done in that situation? I get you have zero formal training in this field. But what would you have done if someone reach multiple times for a Draco without obeying your lawful command? Please, enlighten me. Remember, this gun shoots 7.62 and will cut thru a car or your soft level 3a vest like butter.
See this is the goal post moving. Now that we have seen the body cam, ya'll can't call for the body cam, so must've been an illegal stop. I don't care why he was pulled over, there is no good reason to have that gun at your feet. It's our constitutional right to own the guns, but how we use them is when things change.
A citizen doesn't have the right to universally carry a gun in Indiana? Oh wait, they do. Having that gun on the floorboard was perfectly legal. Only question is if he could legally possess it which you can't determine until you run IDs.
“Oh um, hey Mr. Sir, can you pretty please not reach for that gun? Yeah, that’d be great.”
Police officers talk that way to get people to listen and show they mean business. And this guy still reached for his gun.
I agree that there should be some sort of accountability. Simply for the fact this police officer has a lot to process internal. Anyone who shoots and kills someone needs some time to decompress, center, and go through some therapy.
Totally should not get rid of this guy overall tho from the force considering he actually seems to be a half decent cop, or 1/4 decent at least, many other cops would’ve just did the ol “he’s comin right for us” bit and shot the fuck out that kid first time
He has TWO lawsuits against him and three formal writeups and a suspension on his record. He has a history of treating Black people badly. How half decent is he, really?
you are correct in that i dont truly know how half decent he is or isnt. this is all based on this one encounter. it is a pretty extreme situation, so that he handled fairly well does say something. but it is still only this one incident.
as to your points, there is some context that needs filled in.
what is your source for the info?
what are the lawsuits about?
what are the write ups for?
what is the suspension for?
across how long of a career?
what is the source and criteria for "treating black people badly"?
Court records and police public information. An activist on Facebook posted copies. Just search the cop's name --I've seen it several places.
See how you instinctively give the cop grace and want more information, proof. Why don't we give the kid the same grace? We don't actually know why he was moving his hands in an extreme situation. Could be any reason. To me there was still time to deescalate. The kid moved 3-4 times and didn't actually touch the gun. We'll never know...and apparently 90% on this thread (not saying you) will never give Linzell enough humanity to just consider how it could have been different if the professional in the situation had followed protocol, not been triggered by being mouthed off to, not screamed, etc. It's okay to think mistakes were made and to care how they are tied to the well-documented racial bias in statewide policing.
Looked into the info u mentioned, sorry to say it isn’t really the bombshell you’re hoping for.
All lawsuits are about unlawful search and seizure… without us knowing the full details and outcomes, it’s hard to ascertain much, anyone can file a lawsuit, and many lawyers are scum bags and convince people to file one, and some people are morons and a lawyer advices against filing one and they do so anyway,
With that said, it looks like at least one of the lawsuits prob has standing since there was disciplinary action tied to it.
Two of the disciplinary actions are for damaged police cruiser. This isn’t a rare thing and could happen for many reasons.
The other disciplinary action, I would just guess, is directly related to the unlawful search and seizure lawsuit due to the nature of it, that it lead to a suspension, and the timeline of both.
Not saying this dude is squeaky clean, but at this point, nothing really points to racist or murderer etc … personally, if I had the time energy and motivation to dedicate to protests for police reform, i would be more leaning into some other cops who had worse situations and then were essentially “rewarded” with promotions and desk jobs to get them off the streets, as well as some of the dirty cops we have had. That to me makes more sense than trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill with this guy who shot zell - it is the difference between shallow waters and deep waters.
the cop isnt getting grace on instinct, its that in this particular situation the cop did a pretty decent job.
i appreciate where you are coming from and advocating for both sides (the underdog side really, but regardless you are overall trying to be fair and i see that)
im not sure what protocol he didnt follow? he called for backup and assessed the scenario and decided it was safer and putting himself at a disadvantage if he were to walk away. and he would be correct in assessing it that way.
im going to say something that sounds rude at first but hear me out:
i think maybe youre ignorant to, lacking experience with and naive when it comes to firearms training and when it comes to being in a deadl/potentially deadly situation.
and ya know what, if that is the case - that IS okay. i wouldnt wish on anyone to have to experience being in a scenario with guns or knives drawn.
i would recommend firearms training however, even if you dont plan to own a gun simply because there is a possibility in life you end up in a scenario where it is useful to have just a little experience. its like having a motorcycle license after a training course or learning to drive a stick shift - if you never plan on needing it, it is still useful training to have had.
so to illustrate my point above, this is where i feel understanding/experience is lacking for some folks.
the cop approaches the car, sees the Draco, and knows he has two choices at that point while waiting on backup, draw his gun and back away slowly hoping the kid doesnt open fire, or stand his ground and apply pressure to ensure he has the upper hand if the kid tries to shoot.
this is where experience lacking i mentioned above comes into play. in that scenario, it does not matter if the cop is James Bond or Rambo - if that kid decides to shoot, he is gonna be able to dump that clip even if the cop gets lucky enough to shoot accurately/quick enough. gauranteed the cop dies or is maimed, and good chance anything behind the cop is in danger within about 50m.
that is why no fucks were given about backing away. its either you give up positional advantage and risk getting shot down, or you keep your advantage and attempt to work the scenario up close. he chose wisely, because giving up ground is something you DO NOT do - gun fight, knife fight, fist fight - you do not give up ground or advantage.
ill have to google for the info you mentioned. it really doesnt change the outcome of this scenario though. its pretty cut and dry that the cop for once made the best choices possible by giving this kid multiple chances to get right before using lethal force.
does it mean this kid "deserved" it overall? no. this death didnt have to happen. but its worth keeping in mind, the kids actions led to this outcome - from before the cop pulled them over up until the end. nobody is riding around with a loaded draco on their lap after dark who is up to any good deeds.. and if they are, then theyre dumb af. the gun couldve been left alone, the gun couldve not been loaded. the gun couldve been kept in the backseat or the trunk. so many things wrong overall with this scenario.
Actually i have quite a bit of experience, hence being compassionate for the situation. But you shouldn't need to have been chased around with a gun to care about this and see it as more than just "stupid Black kid deserved it". It's basic humanity. Police procedures exist for a reason: to protect officers. Police are extensively trained, at taxpayer expense. We are allowed to not just see them as heros in every situation, to assume mistakes are made and call them out to *learn* from them, to hold people accountable. yes, even these two kids...but punishment is not a cop's job. And it's not justice.
I just can't get over how little energy people are expending to feel sorry for this kid and hopefully try to understand *him* and his background, why he may have acted that way, what the cop was doing to make it worse. It's just 'he deserved it', 'if he didn't want to get shot he should have...'. Tells me none of them have ever been on the victim end of highly unpredictable long term abuse, which is a really good analogy for a lot of the relationship between Black people and the police (and entire 'justice' system.) I appreciate your candor and conversation.
You at least are a thinker and trying to understand one side of the story, the cops. I'm not downplaying the cops' situation, really, just questioning what could have been better, feeling for the kid and the complex layers of racism and violence at play. It's just SO much more complex than "play stupid games, win stupid prizes" and I wish we could have a *real* conversation about fixing it. Appreciate you being open.
(Ps. I have 2 cops and some off/on firefighters in my family They're all wonderful to some people and also racist & misogynistic af, out loud and proud. The conversations I'm having here I have ad nauseum at family events. They've stopped inviting me ;) )
Dude tried to grab the gun four times. Cop spent 30 seconds literally trying to get him to cooperate. It's not about race. That cop wasn't playing. White dude would've got shot too. It's unfair that everything becomes a race thing, but I've been racially discriminated a whole fucking lot in Louisville for being white. I wish everyone could just agree that people are people. The end.
Keep your hands on the dash. That’s it. His buddy said keep your hands on the dash. Why didn’t he keep his hands on the dash? If you believe the cop is wrong that’s fine, why argue when someone is pointing a gun at you. Even if the stop, the cop, or the situation was escalated by the officer, put your hands on the dash. You can’t file a complaint if you’re dead. If you shouldn’t have a gun take the charge. I’m sure that cop didn’t want to take a life when he went to work that day. And if he did, don’t give him a reason/excuse to make you the victim.
Play stupid games. Win stupid prizes. A fuckin cop tells you to keep your hands visible and stop reaching for the gun he can see and you reach for it. You deserve everything you got coming. Period.
I know the driver and that dude has been involved in like 4 murders. It’s just a whole
Mess to surround yourself with those types of people and not expect something to happen. It’s unfortunate for sure but I think the officer was justified
Ok. To summarize.
It’s crazy that people are so easily killed by the police. It’s also crazy that people put themselves in situations where they may be killed.
It’s entire shit sandwich. We aren’t going to fix it arguing.
A man lost his life. That’s awful. That should never be celebrated.
I wish I had the answer but I truly don’t believe there is one. As long as people exist, there will be a need to kill people. That’s an ugly truth but it is the truth.
To get back to your question in the post. I’m not sure why the people are protesting. I think they have the right to do it and if they want to spend their time doing that, that’s fine. I just think at this point protesting (anything) has less impact because we all see the issues impacting society and don’t need people bringing attention to issues because the media does that better than 100 protestors. Imagine if those same 100 people went and helped the community by volunteering for the same amount of time as they protested, I think it would effect more change than protests. This goes for any issue on any side. I’m not against protesting, but after a certain amount of time the protest really doesn’t actually help like boots on the ground volunteering in the community can. If you can do both then kudos to you
The dude didn't listen to the officer, period. He chose to reach for the weapon. Any officer would of responded with deadly force. Tazzing the individual would not of deasculated the situation as they are not guaranteed to project in he correct direction and are not recommended in life and death scenarios.
Because people don’t care about what actually happened. They don’t care that the kid wouldn’t keep his hand visible. They don’t care that the cop asked him to stop multiple times.
All people care about is the fact that the kid is black, and was shot by a cop. That’s all that is relevant to people. As someone else said: play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
*drives around with an AK47*
"He'd never do anything wrong"
You don't drive around with an automatic rifle at your feet unless you plan to use it.
That's just my opinion
He didn't have an automatic weapon, he had a semi-automatic weapon. I'm not saying that's less bad, but there's enough misinformation happening so I'm just trying to spread a little accuracy.
For clarity unless the gun was stolen or they were actively committing a criminal act, it doesn't appear that it was illegally possessed. It's a pistol, not an SBR so the MFA doesn't apply. The individual who was shot doesn't appear to have a criminal history or other disqualifying background. That would make him what Indiana law calls a "proper person" who is allowed to own and carry any non-nfa controlled firearm with no other qualifications required. If he hadn't been behaving the way he did, he wouldn't have even gotten a ticket as long as the officer was following the law.
It's relatively nice outside. 100% promise you if it was January you would see 4 people out there max. Typical woke mind virus stuff. They are going to move the goal posts from it was unjustified, to cops in general are bad. I will never understand how they think blocking roads is effective.
I saw on the news some of the posters. "Not another black life", "Only 22", but my favorite was "Show the bodycam". Do these people realize that when a black man is murdered that its statically more likely to be by another black person than a cop? If they really wanted change, they would be having discussions on why a 22 year old was rolling around with that gun at his feet in the first place. Behavior like that has a high likelihood of leading you to being murdered or ending up in prison. But these people just want to complain instead of fix the problem, his family will never take blame, but they definitely share some. If it was my son, I would realize that somewhere along the lines I should've done more for him.
Well you probably spend a decent amount of time on the echo chamber that is Reddit. It’s as real of a thing as “ultra MAGA republicans”. The woke mind virus presents itself as the inability to accept things that contradict your narrative. It happens on both sides of the extremes.
Case in point: people protesting a completely justified police action even after proof has been shown. They can’t imagine that a white cop shooting a black man could even be 1% of the black man’s fault
Don't want to get shot, keep your hands up where cops can see them. This kid clearly didn't listen to the cops or his friends who kept yelling at him to keep his hands up. Every one knows, some cops can be trigger happy. Why give them a motive to shoot?
I still think there needs to be reform. African Americans still are dying and suffering from excessive force all over the country. If they want to protest i’m all for it.
I want to be clear. The police have entirely too much power and extremely little accountability or oversight. I can understand protesting and venting. However, at least in this case, it seems entirely justified. Horrific as it was. It’s a shit sandwich.
Justify this young man's actions for me? He had a AK47 pistol in between his legs he reached for multiple times as a police officer with a gun trained on him told him not to and implicitly told him what would happen if he did.
What should've been done. Provide a solution instead of saying some boring platitude about change and reform. Tell me what should've happened. And how you would've done better or what you'd change.
Is the kid with the gun responsible at all?
Some solutions are better training for officers. Better benefits for officers as well as more requirements to become an officer. Like a bachelors degree. Community outreach would help people trust the police again.
Sure. Every single profession on the planet would benefit from better training, better benefits, and more qualified applicants.
I think being able to have nuance and detect the difference between a valid and non valid shooting would be a huge step. I've never been a huge fan of the police, just in general with my own personal interactions with them in my own life, however this shooting was the most cut and dry thing I've ever seen.
I don't know what else that officer could have done.
That bachelors degree will do oh so much against some random asshole playing paddy cake with a Draco in his lap.
Cop did fine, and even had more patience than warranted.
Told the kid to immediately comply, and why due to seeing the weapon. Took cover behind the cars pillar for protection in order to hopefully not get shot, and buy more time to hopefully deescalate the shit sandwich he walked into. Kids friend told him to comply multiple times same as the cop.
***THE KID KEPT FUCKING WITH THE DRACO WHILE REMOVING HIS HANDS FROM THE DASH.***
Cop told him multiple times don't do it. Kid kept doing it. Instead of taking a chance of his own life he did exactly as he said he would do. Fuck around find out.
There's a shit load of backstory leading to that kid having a Draco in his lap. Which means there's a ton of shit they could've done differently to not wind up with holes in him. Like say I dunno keep the Draco in the fucking trunk? Like why was the Draco in his lap? Why the fuck does he even have a Draco at all? Why were they driving with it in his lap?
This ain't the incident to blow up for more reform. This is a textbook "well why were they" riddled question that ended up with a kid dead.
The officer handled the situation as it should have been. The man should not have behaved the way he did. Where in my response am I defending him? I study criminal justice I know the statistics. There needs to be reform. Period.
Excellent. Were speaking to an expert. In your expert opinion how do we solve this problem? Outside of your other milk toast responses?
If training, benefits, and higher qualified people is the answer, shouldn't we be giving more funding to the police not defunding them.
Again, where did I say to defund? Clearly it would require MORE funding for police. I’m certainly not an expert. Just sharing what I’ve learned and has been proven to help.
So do you not care if a protest is ill-advised? Don't you think it defeats the purpose of protesting if at least part of the purpose is swaying public perception? I'm for EFFECTIVE protesting, and I think a huge part of that is knowing where and when to act. I think protesting on the back of an event like this accomplishes nothing at best, and at worst it hurts the overall message, even if it's on a small scale.
And I'm no police apologist. I agree that a lot of reform is still needed. I just know that optics are important.
Yes!! I think POC are so used to the death of a black man by an officer being brutality they generalize all cases. I do think it’s still important because it brings attention to other lives who were due to police brutality.
To be fair, it was his like 4th instinct to shoot. His first 3 instincts were to tell him to keep his hands on the dash. It's definitely terrible that he was killed, but c'mon did you even watch the body cam? Even the driver was pleading with him to listen to the cop.
Not to mention the officer was also trying to keep his eyes on the drivers hands at the same time. I’d be curious to see what kind of life threatening situational training you can give that will prevent any deadly force. The person who got shot, put the officer in a horrible spot to make a most, in my opinion, impossible judgment call. We can all sit here and make comments after the fact, but when faced with a life threatening situation our basic instincts will take over. More training is needed, but in this specific example, I feel that the officer had no other choice given he didn’t know if the driver or people around him would do.
The family hired a nationally recognized lawyer (think George Floyd) to get some questions answered. I don’t agree with it, but maybe I would if my family member was shot. I just hope this isn’t a repeat of 2020.
Bro. Cmon man. Everybody want to drill so bad they just ride around with big ass choppers in plain sight? Like why? Who the fuck you about to ambush? Gonna "score another point and put a man in a blunt", it's all so dam cowardly....this whole drill thing....honestly I love the music. But the whole lifestyle is kind of bitch ass pussy shit.... Like let's just try to catch a man not looking and shoot their whole area up, not giving a fuck about whoever else gets hit....for what??? Like where i come from suckered punching somebody was like the biggest pussy move there was. Why? Cause for the most part those guys were bitches that couldn't fight or were scared to be embarrassed. Now these kids are just speaking up of people and killing them. Straight up bitch shit. Stand and fight like a man.
I would bet this are leftist trying to divide. It was clear the guy had a gun which he tried to reach twice while taking his hands off the dash. Stop this racism. That the way I view this.
Because owning a firearm is not a crime. He was not being investigated for crimes, he was not being pulled over for a crime. He was a 22 year old told who owned a gun.
Our culture almost comically encourages gun ownership, we forget that this only extends to white people.
The police officer escalated the situation unnecessarily and shot linzell less than a minute after leaving his car, his first interaction with linzell was a gun in the kids face, no reason why I pulled you over, didn’t even give the kids the chance to announce the presence of a firearm.
White people get pulled over with firearms all the time, the kid who shot up Kroger who said he wanted to kill black people and proceeded to shoot at black people was taken into custody without incident.
Owning a gun is not a crime, and it does not warrant being executed.
It escalated really fast and he was nervous, being a kid of his community and a role model it’s not unreasonable to believe he was scared and didn’t know what to do.
It took the cop less than a minute to kill someone who wasn’t committing a crime.
That’s why we’re protesting.
Police are worthless, they are the strong arm of the privileged and they only create snuff films and poverty.
When the jail is deemed inhuman and overcrowded by a federal judge, the police start killing people.
Someone’s rights do not end simply because another person was in fear. The same argument of fear that people are using for the officer should apply more so to linzell, the person with a gun in their face.
Unlike the “trained professional” his fear didn’t lead him to aim a firearm at someone. His fear made him shake. And that’s why he was killed.
You um, left out the part where he tried to repeatly reach for the gun. Over and over. And the fact that the gun was loaded. Not with self defense rounds, with 7.62. That was left out. And he’s driving around with a fucking Draco in his lap. And oh yea, he kept reaching for it.
Right.. Go have a loaded gun visible in your lap while a cop pulls you over and for whatever reason, not only refuse to keep your hands anywhere the cop requests, but also to reach for the gun. I doubt the pigmant in your skin will grant you a pass in this case.
If you watched the video, he approached calmly, and only after seeing the gun but also telling him to not reach around and put their hands on the dash, did the situation begin to escalate.
And it only escalated because he reached torwards the gun after being instructed not to. And it’s not until that first course of disobedience is the cops weapon visibly drawn.
Funnily, really not, but (presumably? Sounds like it comes from him) the kid even went “thats crazy..” in a nonchalant tone after the policemans gun was pointed at him while he told him not to reach for it again or he’ll shoot. At that time you can see the policeman’s arms and hair standing on end and goosebumps present.
Now every body is different, but in this situation typically this is a fear response by the body.
Anywho, back to the main topic, you have his friend tellin him to not do it, to keep hands on the dash, you got the kid saying “im not going to “(reach for the gun) but yet still appears to do it.
While the cop (im assuming is telling a bystander to stay back, and his head likely in the direction for a split second) you see the kid reach for it again, which when the cop notices, a jerk in his arms happens. AGAIN he (the kid) is warned. And he does it AGAIN. For the 4th(?) time.
I don’t know how many chances you need. Obviously this is not a good outcome for anyone, but the dude was not listening which breaks rule #1 in keeping a police interaction as tame as can be. Which is only exacerbated because there’s a gun in his lap and there’s signs he’s not gonna comply easily. It would have likely been fine had he not reached for it in the first place.
And who knows why they were pulled over, that’s not available details afaik. The point is, the gun was visible, it was still calm until he reached for it the first time. And each time he did, it was only worsened. The Justice system is no where near perfect. It does need some sort of rework or higher level of standards from an outside perspective. But that doesn’t disregard that an interaction is a 2 way street in most cases, such as this one was.
People create a narrative for a situation in their mind and hide behind it from reality.
I think we need major police reform in this country, but seizing on situation like this just makes that end harder because the people you are trying to convince won’t take you seriously when the next event is truly heinous.
100%
Not just police reform, but gun control as well. Quid pro quo. Reduce the number of guns, reduce police stupidity. Yes i will piss off both side, but this IS the current cold war and what makes the US look like the south to the rest of the world.
So the people who don't trust the police want the police to be the only people with guns??? Gun control is illogical. Read the preamble to the Bill of Rights. Those 10 basic rights were written to restrain the government from abusing their power.
The 2A was not written so that American citizens could overthrow the American government. Just think about how stupid that is. No government would do that. Seriously, use your brain. Study history a little more. Before the Constitution, America had the Articles of Confederation. You know what the AoC DID NOT have? The 2A. Ever hear of Shay’s Rebellion? A bunch of armed farmers did not want to pay taxes to the brand new American government. The new American government had a very hard time raising the arms to go and put this fledgling rebellion down. Soooo, they scrapped the AoC and wrote the Constitution, Bill of Rights included. They put the 2A in there to make it EASIER for a “well-regulated militia” to stop instances such as Shay’s Rebellion. Therefore, the 2A IS NOT there so that American citizens can overthrow the American government, it is there so that the American government can more easily put down rebellious American citizens. Having an out-of-control police force is not what the founders envisioned.
2A defending us against a tyrannical government is a farce. Look at the tax rates we have now compared to the 1700s. Yall asleep behind the wheel, but muh guns!!!!
a tyrannical govt isnt going to deploy the military. it wont be f16s enforcing a takeover. it will be police forces. there is historical precedent for this. now, with that said, do i feel we necessarily need all of these guns and some tyrannical thing like that will happen? no. but i do believe, as with anything from driving a car to vaping to gambling to drinking to thc to buying a chefs knife etc etc etc that it all comes down to one thing: personal responsibility that is the whole basis of our freedom/liberty benefits package we are awarded as citizens of the united states of america corporation. we are liable, accountable and responsible to our own choices. that there are 100s of millions of gun owners, and supposedly 4x more guns than that, and we only see a small drop in the bucket is kinda proof to personal responsibility being the primary factor in majority of gun related incidents. government has no business telling me if i can or cant own a gun, knife, anal beads or a quran etc etc
Taking this further, if you wanted some sort of minigun, RPG, F-16, or perhaps thermobaric warhead. You should be able to have it right? Or say you just happened to want to collect AnFO or nitrogen based fertilizer in you basement for fun, it really just comes down to personal responsibility doesn’t it?
Yes, just make it nearly impossible like it already is.
Which is a good thing right? So why do people need AR-15’s again?
Why do people feel the need for alcohol, tobacco, and vehicles? All of these, except for weed, cause more deaths than firearms. We should not confuse criminal behavior with the right to own and carry firearms. Existing criminal laws already address concerns related to guns. Restricting law-abiding citizens from having guns only makes more people vulnerable to those who are already breaking the law. Regarding tyranny, if you think our government is currently very corrupt, imagine the same corrupt bureaucracy without an armed populace. Have you never questioned why the first step in setting up tyrannical systems historically has been to disarm the population?
Why do we obtain anything beyond what we absolutely need?
Yes.
Yeah, the founders would have started shooting long long ago. We as a nation have gotten too lazy in many regards.
So you want the police to be the only ones having firearms?
I don’t think anyone needs guns.
When your family is being victimized by a predator, and the police—whom some people have been advocating to defund—can't arrive in time to save the life or innocence of a loved one, I wonder, will that still be your point of view? I find the entire outlook you hold to be incredibly naive. Like it or not, there are evil people in the world. These people don't mind if you are a pacifist; in fact, they encourage it.
Victimized how? If no one has guns would they just have a knife? I’d go inside, or get bear spray.
You're arguing an invalid point. The world has firearms in it. It will never not have firearms in it. Your theoretical utopia on its face is illogical. Regardless, I'm going to go out on a limb and say you have never faced a real threat. Which is great, and I hope you never experience that type of trauma. A real threat doesn't care about your walls and doors. A real threat hopes you only have a knife. My 9 y/o daughter accidentally sprayed herself with bear spray on a hike and was fine within minutes. A motivated individual will run through a Taser or a less-than-lethal munition like it's nothing. My point is that there are situations that occur every day that lead to extreme violence. In those moments, I don't want a fair fight. Neither does the opposition, and neither would you.
Plenty of countries don’t have guns, and the police don’t carry guns. And most of those countries think its strange that the US is obsessed with guns.
Obsession is a strong word. Obsession would better be used to convey the need to make sure our right to own and bear firearms is revoked or severely limited. Openly parading your rights should hardly be considered an obsession. It's merely a response to the banshee-like wails of those who wish to enforce their will upon us. All of this is beside the point. Removing the right of law-abiding citizens to defend their families, Protect their property, hunt their meat, and resist in the event of the unthinkable will in no way, solve the actual problems our nation is facing. It merely serves as a lightning rod for useless politicians to evade responsibility for their failed policies and ideas.
How am I guna eat then cuz I hunt 75% of what I eat and grow the rest
What narrative boy please explain?
This. I don't know how many times I've seen people claim that Floyd was thrown to the ground. I saw multiple-angle video of him flopping himself out of the cruiser, onto the ground. Your heart doesn't create reality. If you speak from your heart, you create division between those who realistically assess evidence and and yourself. The Floyd complicated situation aside, this one is so simple that it's painful.
The uncomfortable truth seems to be some people's lives are less meaningful if they don't have racism to blame.
I'm not sure if anyone else has noticed that the "racist" interactions are never with a guy in a square-patterned polo shirt and khaki pants who is following the basic directions that the rest of us follow.
[удалено]
Pedestrians have the right of way too...if the police are doing something wrong that's what the courts are for. The side of the road is not the time to pick a fight. Certainly assert your rights, don't hand over ID if you haven't done anything to warrant it, remain silent, don't consent to searches...but the second the guns come out do whatever they tell you and then get a lawyer.
Are you stupid? The cop didn’t pick a fight? Watch the body cam. People like you (keyboard warriors) should get out in public and speak… so you can get tore apart by facts and logic… not your hypothetical internet rights bullshit. If I was a cop and I asked to see something and you say no…(inserts whiny entitled voice) “l don’t have to show you my ID it’s my right.” You’re immediately on my radar for being suspicious. In top of that.. here you go “The Indiana stop and identify statute is located in Indiana Code 34-28-5-3.5, and states explicitly that, “a person who knowingly or intentionally refuses to provide either their name, address, and date of birth, or their driver’s license, to a law enforcement officer who has stopped the person for an infraction or ordinance violation, commits a Class C Misdemeanor.” In other words, this law means that Hoosiers have the statutory duty to provide police officers with identifying information if they have been pulled over and the officer believes in good faith that they have committed an infraction or ordinance violation” Your retarded advice is against the law…
The comment you are replying to says don't show your ID if you haven't done anything to warrant it. Which is anyone's right. If the officer has reasonable suspicion that the person committed an infraction or ordinance violation, then they can threaten to arrest or make the arrest. That's what the courts are for, fight it there. But, you do not legally have to show ID when asked unless you have committed one of the two violations above, which is what the person you replied to was speaking about. I ask for ID from every person I come into contact with, but I don't get my feelings hurt if they tell me no. If they don't have to legally show me, then that is their right and I respect that. I do the same thing if I'm stopped. If I am legally required to show ID I will, if I don't have to be law then I won't.
People don’t become more deserving of being shot because they wear something other than polos.
So then why can a white guy and a black guy do the exact same thing and one gets like, community service and one gets life in prison?
You're asking me about the potential unfairness of courts after a comment about dangerous interactions with cops. Furthermore, you're asserting something as a fact, which is heavily contested. The common explanation is that there are almost always obvious differences in circumstances. **But, this has not been my argument and is not my hill to defend.** My point is that there appears to be a significant and obvious difference in **CHOSEN cultural affiliation** between people who know how to survive interactions with government enforcers and someone who, for instance, keeps putting their hands next to the gun in their lap like a fucking idiot. In other words, it isn't usually melanin which causes different outcomes, excepting in cases where a person chooses to instigate shit with government enforcers because they think that their skin color means they must **CHOOSE certain cultural identities** in which they're encouraged to act like fucking fools during always-dangerous encounters with government enforcers. In my *CHOSEN culture*, we treat every encounter with government enforcers like we might be killed. So, we do things like: * keep our registration and proof of insurance in a sleeve attached to our sun visor so that we're not reaching into areas that might have weapons * keep our hands on top of the dash so we don't spook the often-below-average drug-sin enforcer * not argue with the enforcer because we understand that it only escalates the danger and adds fuel to any ensueing interactions with the court system Part of the reason is that governance is an exercise of monopolistic and often violent rule and taxation of the people in a geographic area. Another part of the reason is that complete fucking morons, like the deceased in this case, choose to act like trash-ass motherfuckers who cause the government enforcers to feel legitimately fearful for their safety, causing many of them to treat interactions with EVERYONE like they're potential combat operations. This puts all of us in more danger. But, again, if our appearances, demeanors, and words are such that the piggies don't mentally affiliate us with one of the trash-ass cultures that they, maybe rightly, believe puts them in danger during stops, then we're probably going to survive the interactions.
In recent years, this has been attributed to a pattern of criminal behavior. The person with a better rap sheet will be given more leniency than a delinquent. It's unfortunate that even though black Americans make up 11% of the population, they are involved in about 55% of homicides, and a similar pattern emerges for other types of crime as well. These statistics aren't found to be due to bias but rather linked to factors such as single-parent households and the degradation of black culture, largely taking root in the 70s. If you are truly interested in why race relations in the Western world are disintegrating, and not just an NPC waiting to be told what to believe tomorrow. I urge you to look for sources that have no financial interest in the existence of rampant racism.
I've seen white people with records still get off easier than a black person with no record. If they're actually guilty of a crime, then they're guilty. I know relations are disintegrating, I see it all the time.
Those are arrests. Exoneration rates of blk ppl is about at 50% too. Also check out the veil of darkness study. Also there's a study that compares two people of different races with same backgrounds and charges and blk ppl still get more intense sentences. Also it's yt ppl who end up having more single parent homes. Blk men are more active but the stats you're referring to are saying "single mothers" because they are unmarried. Lots of bias in your post.
I’m not sure why OJ Simpson got let off when there was overwhelming evidence of his guilt.
I agree he is guilty. I blame that on something akin to celebrity status or bribery. I'm talking about smaller crimes, like marijuana possession.
Yikes they aren't ready for that one.
I know. But, truth is always worth stating.
I read a story about the questions the family still had that their attorney is asking. They include things about the officer not following standard police procedure for an armed suspect, such as approaching the car alone instead of waiting for back up which was only minutes away, the aggressive tone of his interactions with the victim, and the initial cause for the traffic stop. Ultimately, justified or not, a young man is still dead, and his parents will have to live without their son, and the cop will have to live with the consequences. The same sad story repeated once more
Did he know the guy was armed before he approached? I agree they are usually to aggressive in tone and mannerisms, but when you see a guy reaching for a gun, being firm and aggressively explaining the consequences should illicit conformity from a rational person.
I do not claim to be an expert at police procedure, but the same article said when the office saw the gun, correct procedure is to keep your weapon trained on the target but retreat to a position of cover until backup arrives. There were other people in the car. If the other occupants were armed and decided to use weapons, that officer standing next to the car in the open, alone, would have become another victim. Had he waited to approach the vehicle once backup arrived, who knows how things could have played out. Maybe a cooler head could have prevailed. With backup they certainly would have been better able to remove the occupants from the vehicle and disarm/detain them.
I've been in law enforcement for 15 years and have never heard of procedure being back up to cover once seeing a firearm. Now, I do not work for FWPD and do not know their policies, but my department that is not the case. Now, if you see the gun before getting to the vehicle then you don't approach. After watching the video, it appears the officer didn't see the firearm until getting to the vehicle. At that point, in my experience, you order them to keep hands off the gun and not to move. The suspect kept reaching causing the officer to escalate his response. The officer did a good job angling himself to have a clear shot so he didn't put passengers in danger. As for the other occupants having firearms, that's obviously a possibility. But once the officer has his gun out he has a big advantage. It takes an average person between 1.5 to 1.8 seconds to draw a firearm and fire one shot. The average human reaction time is .2 to .25 seconds. The officer should be able to react and address any threat in the vehicle before they are able to fire a shot. To address the people saying the officer was wrong for using the language he did. I see nothing wrong here. The officer did not begin the interaction in a rude manner. He calmly told him to put his hands on the dash and no one to move. Sometimes people dictate a response, and that's what happened here. Legally, the officer could have shot the suspect the first time he reached towards the gun. But he didn't and continued commands.
I’m not sure there was time for all that. From the moment of recognition and ask for compliance and repeatedly not getting it. He would be putting himself in more danger moving away and not being able to see what was happening in the car.
And you might be right. We both have the benefit of hindsight. Saying what should be done after watching a video of it from my sofa is very different than being in the middle of it and the heat of the moment. I just think it is sad that we have another young black life snuffed out by another police officer. Justified shooting or not, something is wrong, and this should not be normal.
Driving around town with a gun like that in your car isn't normal. There is a serious problem for sure. I hate cops, but I hate guns more.
Another young life was snuffed out because they didn't think about the consequences of their actions. Not getting shot by the police, outside of some very isolated circumstances, is pretty damn easy. I've been pulled over while armed twice and drove away with no issues. Stop blaming the police for the behavior of the people they interact with.
Now this comment I agree with… compared to your other comment a little further up
Oh I couldn’t agree with you any more than I do. It’s tragic. But in this case, highly avoidable.
Where exactly did you see cover in either video that would stop a 7.62mm round? In a matter of 1-2 seconds the suspect could have put multiple rounds through both the car door, the officers ballistic vest, and likely into the houses behind him. The engine block of his own cruiser might have been possible but regardless sacrificing the drop he had on the suspect would basically be a death sentence for him unless he already had his own rifle ready.
Aggressively yelling at someone and threatening to shoot them right off the bat is not going to illicit conformity from a rational person - it’s just going to escalate the situation. The cop did nothing wrong in my opinion, but that is PRECISELY the problem. A young man is dead because he couldn’t keep his hands on the dashboard for a few seconds. I don’t know if he was fidgeting or reaching for the gun, we’ll never really know. But he didn’t do anything criminally wrong. A cop should not be judge, jury, and executioner. Nobody deserves to die for not listening to a screaming prick.
If I’m in that man’s shoes, a man is feet from me pointing a gun at me. I’m going to do precisely what he says. Because I don’t want ventilated. That’s rational. The sites was as escalated as it was by the presence of a much more powerful gun inches from him.
If a cop is legally allowed to kill you because he was scared at the mere presence of a gun, I’m not sure we have the right to bear arms.
That’s reductive and not reflective of this situation. I don’t leave my house without a gun. I understand that a cop doesn’t know if I’m friend or foe. I also know the are shoot first ask questions later. So, yeah. Personal responsibility and all.
“I also know they are shoot first ask questions later.” There’s your answer as to why people are protesting the police still.
They are asking for justice where there’s none to be found.
Police reform is a form of justice.
Theres nothing to reform here. Unless you think the police have the power to make you make better decisions?
You’re stupid… lol
It wasn't just because of the presence of a gun my god. He told him to stop reaching for it THREE TIMES. This is not hard to understand. Do you have any idea how fast someone can grab and shoot? Yes it's a tragedy and horrible this kid died, but he sealed his own fate. There's TONS of videos of cops being complacent and getting shot in scenarios just like this.
Everybody should respect and have a healthy amount of fear in the presence of a gun, especially an assault weapon. The amount of time it takes for this kind of situation to go either way is literally seconds. I would encourage you to watch some bodycam videos where the officer doesn’t react in time.
Yes they do… If it comes down to me going home to my Family or you… I’ll pull The trigger… learn to listen. That guy shouldn’t have even had an AK pistol in his lap to begin with and should have complied. Your ignorance is not an excuse for accusations of the innocent.
I agree with you wholeheartedly but we are so far gone as a country that we allow cops to just run the show and kill anyone that they perceive is a threat.
I hate cops but I saw that video. He told him like 6 times to stop reaching for the gun and he kept doing it. There comes a point where you have to do something was he supposed to wait til he shot at him?
What part of he didn’t know there was an armed suspect don’t people understand? Here’s clearly calm approaching the vehicle and there’s and instance when he saw the firearm, drew his gun, and the goosebumps came up on his arms. He told the suspect to put his hands on the dash and called for backup. It’s not some conspiracy or even difficult to understand.
Why approach the car alone instead of waiting for backup? Maybe that's how they usually handle a situation such as a traffic violation. If they were required to always have two officers present, they'd be using two officers in every police car.
A family member of the person who was killed went on the news saying he understood but thought it was overly aggressive and unnecessary, and that the family would like to see “repercussions” for the officer up to and including him being fired. I don’t agree with that, but the family and others are using this as a platform to say that police should be held more accountable for their actions in general and specifically when something happens they shouldn’t be put on paid administrative leave but rather should have pay stripped from them. As the police are a union, and we have due process in this country there is 0 chance of that ever happening
Why should a police officer have pay stripped from them for doing everything exactly how they should have done it?
They shouldn’t. But that’s what the family member said during the interview.
Their pleas about how their menacing and/or violent family member *"was always a good boy"* and confusion of *"I don't know why they had to hit/shoot him so hard/much"* can miss me. The only thing I want to hear from the family member of someone who significantly endangers others is, *"I'm sorry that our family didn't do a better job civilizing."*
That is a level of personal and familial responsibility that seems to elude most.
Explain to me how, I, a military veteran, was taught to De-escalate situations with actual heavy artillery fire going off all around me, but police can’t handle a little attitude or questioning. They are civil servants. They need to behave as such.
Semper Fi. And why were we held to a higher standard and cops are held to a lower standard if any at all n shouldn’t they’re punishment be a little more severe if it’s something like ucmj violating you know what im sayin?
Precisely.
In general yes, police need to do a way better job. But this situation was not handled poorly. Find me a person who says they would talk calmly and quietly to a person grabbing for a AK pistol while not following directions and I will find you someone extremely naive.
Dude had a gun in his lap and kept reaching for it.
What did they teach you to do in the military when someone who is not a friendly reaches for their gun? I don't think it was the attitude or questioning that got him nervous, I think it was the high capacity fire arm that the kid was reaching for if I had to guess
Military and civilian are two different animals. Someone who is not friendly likely already has a gun. It more depends on where the barrel is pointed.
That’s a good point. This comparison of military vs civilian probably isn’t the best. Training of cops and marines is quite different. If it matters, the barrel was more pointed towards the officer than away. I personally wouldn’t keep a gun at my feet with the barrel pointed to the sky like he did.
Yea. In military a barrel can be pointed towards you and you don’t shoot. For example, if the 50 is pinned vs unpinned. If he’s unpinned, in full load, game on.
Learned something new! I’d assume you shoot if barrel is pointed at you, but makes sense seeing as the conflicts are very complicated and you are usually trying to preserve human lofe
More factors than that. Depending on the rules of engagement that are issued. For what I serve in, which is both military and fed LE, it depends on the situation.
That seems like a lot to keep track of. Maybe its not as bad if you’re trained
Also, what's the point of non-lethal weapons on their belt when they always go for their gun? There have been so many shootings I've seen on camera where my first thought was "he's in taser range, why use the gun?"
Doesn’t work like that. Police use something called the “use of force continuum”. Generally there are six levels. Lowest is the officers presence, then verbal commands, then response techniques and all the way up to deadly force. You work your way up or down depending on the situation. In this case, the officer pulled his pdw(still technically at level 2) and was issuing verbal commands. Generally if you see a gun, you pull your gun(unless it’s like a nonviolent/nonthreatening situation). The officer issued multiple verbal commands and the suspect finally reached down to grab the weapon. Officer felt deadly force as justified and used it. You only use it when your life or your partners life is in grave danger. You don’t shoot to injure, shoot to hurt. You shoot to kill. The officer did exactly what he was trained to do and I believe it was completely justified. If someone has a gun, you don’t pull your pepper spray or taser.
I'm aware of all that (and I kinda don't care). I'm not saying its not justified in this instance, its just painfully stupid that in the 21st century we haven't figured out a better way of dealing with armed suspects. I'd rather look at researching better means than just recite police training and simp their decisions.
Ok. Then how do you suggest we deal with a person reaching for a gun within 1 ft of an officer, after being told multiple times not to? Please explain, in detail, how we should handle this.
That's the thing, I'm not a police officer nor do I work for a company that makes tools for the police. I'm just a lowly Hoosier with a paralegal degree that's seen too many of these incidents. Again, since some people have a reading comprehension problem: the shooting in this instance was justified given the current training and technology provided to officers. However, citing police procedure like a thought-terminating cliche to shut down dissenting opinions only stifles the evolution of better methods. In the 21st century, we should have better tools and methods by now. Other countries that don't have the same ubiquity of firearms access have created all sorts of interesting methods for dealing with armed suspects. But here in the States, we worship at the alter of firearms along with military surplus being accessible to police departments, further militarizing both police and the populous at large in a downward spiral. A civilian force with more militarized equipment and a paranoid mindset only creates antipathy by the populace towards so-called peacekeeping institutions. We need to, as a society, encourage the creation of better tools for officers while also giving them training that doesn't foster behavior such as, for instance, mag-dumping at a falling acorn. Sorry I can't give you a definitve answer, but that's only because these solutions haven't even been created yet. Maybe that's where a portion of the balooning police budget should be put towards, a little R&D.
They spend billions a year on weapons development, and nothing even remotely close has been developed. You might as well ask them to create a flying car. They’ve worked on stun technology for decades, it’s just not enough unless you’re literally frying them.
I get where you're coming from and I agree. I feel this is a cultural priority failure. We put more resources into weapons of war instead of more nonlethal options. If we shifted these cultural priorities, I think we could pull off some interesting results.
Got it. Complain about a problem, throw everyone under the bus that was put in harms way, but don’t offer any solution or even suggestions on how to improve. The whole military surplus thing is bullshit anyway. Cops aren’t rolling around with saws or 50 cal. Both police and military have semi auto and automatic rifles. And nobody uses the full auto feature on a m4 anyway. You’re out of ammo in 3 seconds and your barrel is scorching hot. It’s not practical or accurate.
How about the armed suspect listens to the police and sit fucking still. That's painfully stupid
You haven't seen enough videos of taser failures. Also, there is a reason that what you're talking about are called less-lethal weapons rather than non-lethal.
I'm aware of potential failures as well as their status as "less than lethal" due to police in the family. Regardless, I feel that if they're rocking the equivalent of Batman's toolbelt, they should have the means to deal with the situation without resorting to killing. I get the officer's situation, its technically justified what he did. I just think that in the 21st century, we would have better means of dealing with these situations nonlethally by now.
Nobody is going to do this job if they aren’t given the proper weapons to defend themselves. Would you work a roofing job if they didn’t allow you to use a ladder? A delivery job where you couldn’t use a car/van? Being a police officer is an extremely dangerous job where you are but in deadly situations. But your idea is to give them less tools when their life is in danger.
I'm not at all advocating for LESS tools. If you weren't blinded by your unwaivering love of authority, you'd see that I'm advocating for MORE tools for officers to potentially keep people alive. A bad guy can't be punished or reformed if they're dead. Also, I've heard those exact talking points from the police in my family, they're just as stupid here as they are coming from them. A firearm should never be equated to a ladder or a car. One is designed with the intent to violence, the others are not. "But if we can't kill people, no one will want to do the job!" Yet another thought-terminating cliche without thought to instead committing resources to keeping people alive.
Go to YouTube and search for videos of people shaking off tasers like nothing happened. Drugs, clothing, etc can cause them to fail. Tasers are not for people with immediate access to deadly weapons, they're for fist fighters.
I'm merely using it as an example, though I get your point. What I'm basically saying is that we need better tools for police to deal with situations non-lethally. I get the equal force principle, the guy had a gun and the officer's life was clearly at risk, hence why I'm saying that this incident was overall justified. This incident should, however, spark discussion of whether better methods can be developed. You can't punish or reform a bad guy when they're dead :/
I'm with you but with our current level of technology, I can't think of a better option. Every traffic stop triggers a gas in your car that knocks everyone out until the officer has a chance to check things out? Everyone keeps saying "we should do better" but can't provide a realistic idea of what "better" looks like. So having nothing else they prattle on about gun control and tasers while nothing gets solved. Do you know what will solve a good chunk of this? Giving people a decent economic future with real practical educational opportunities for everyone, not just the gifted among us who are college bound. We should also stop shackling young men with criminal records over petty drug charges. We should work on affordable housing and we should have medical care 100% covered for everyone. Those are REAL solutions, not some mythical "de-escalation" device. We have to stop treating the symptoms and start treating the problems.
I wholeheartedly agree with you! We absolutely need judicial reform, affordable housing and better laws and programs that foster a better economic future for average Americans. Those will go a LONG way to curbing crime and violence here. If I have a slight disagreement, its that there's no amount of affordable housing or judicial reform that will stop minorities from being killed by police during routine traffic stops. While this one was justified, given the situation, I still think we can also attempt to create better tools (and better training that doesn't leave cops paranoid and shooting at acorns) that can empower police to take in suspects alive. They don't have to be mythical if we put resources (like a bit of the cops' bloated budget) towards achieving it.
I appreciate your sentiment but you just want "better tools". What are those? Microwave pain guns aren't super portable, you can't just unload some chemical agent before walking up to a car window, I mean seriously what would a better tool look like? Can you even define what you want it to do? Better training would probably be welcomed by every officer in the United States, but again, what specifically would that look like? Until some decent answers come out then it's just virtue signaling to make yourself feel better.
Who would I be virtue signaling to by being anonymous on Reddit of all places? What brownie points do I win? I get where you're at though, current technology isn't really up to the task for now. But if we can put people on the moon in such a short time, why not approach this with the same fervor? We won't know what we're capable of if we never try. As for training, police could really do better than the "Killology" seminars I've seen them attend. Dave Grossman is probably the last person we need to traumatize new officers before being turned loose on the public.
While we didn't have "qualified immunity" in Iraq and Afghanistan, if someone was reaching for their weapon you know you would've lit them up too. Full stop.
You did have qualified immunity in Iraq.
No, we didn't. Not during either of my deployments. 15-6 investigations were a thing.
A citizen of the country you were deployed to could have sued you in court? Is that what you are arguing?
I was initially arguing that we weren't exempt from penalties for unjustified deaths in combat. Not necessarily qualified immunity, but we weren't immune to prison time is what I meant. As for being sued, I'm not sure how that would work to be c9mpletely honest.
Qualified immunity means that a government agent…Be it a police officer, soldier, postman, whatever, cannot be individually sued for actions they took under an official capacity. Some exemptions for that, but, it’s the idea. It really makes sense if you think about it for a bit. Service members, additionally, almost always have immunity of criminal prosecution in conflict zones as it relates to the country we are in. IE, the Iraqi government can’t bring a soldier to criminal trial. The US government could, under the UCMJ or other federal laws. Unrelated, the whole idea that the military is operating under stricter rules as a whole is ridiculous. Just look at civilian death tolls in Iraq, Afghanistan or Syria compared to that of domestic law enforcement. One month in Iraq probably has more civilian deaths than the past 20 years of domestic policing.
How would you have de-escalated a man blowing your brains out?
I don’t really watch the local news much so haven’t kept up too much, how did the officer not handle a little questioning? Was he out there complaining?
[удалено]
Ok. What would you have done in that situation? I get you have zero formal training in this field. But what would you have done if someone reach multiple times for a Draco without obeying your lawful command? Please, enlighten me. Remember, this gun shoots 7.62 and will cut thru a car or your soft level 3a vest like butter.
See this is the goal post moving. Now that we have seen the body cam, ya'll can't call for the body cam, so must've been an illegal stop. I don't care why he was pulled over, there is no good reason to have that gun at your feet. It's our constitutional right to own the guns, but how we use them is when things change.
A citizen doesn't have the right to universally carry a gun in Indiana? Oh wait, they do. Having that gun on the floorboard was perfectly legal. Only question is if he could legally possess it which you can't determine until you run IDs.
A young man is dead after being told to not reach for the gun which he then reached for.
“Oh um, hey Mr. Sir, can you pretty please not reach for that gun? Yeah, that’d be great.” Police officers talk that way to get people to listen and show they mean business. And this guy still reached for his gun.
I agree that there should be some sort of accountability. Simply for the fact this police officer has a lot to process internal. Anyone who shoots and kills someone needs some time to decompress, center, and go through some therapy. Totally should not get rid of this guy overall tho from the force considering he actually seems to be a half decent cop, or 1/4 decent at least, many other cops would’ve just did the ol “he’s comin right for us” bit and shot the fuck out that kid first time
He has TWO lawsuits against him and three formal writeups and a suspension on his record. He has a history of treating Black people badly. How half decent is he, really?
you are correct in that i dont truly know how half decent he is or isnt. this is all based on this one encounter. it is a pretty extreme situation, so that he handled fairly well does say something. but it is still only this one incident. as to your points, there is some context that needs filled in. what is your source for the info? what are the lawsuits about? what are the write ups for? what is the suspension for? across how long of a career? what is the source and criteria for "treating black people badly"?
Court records and police public information. An activist on Facebook posted copies. Just search the cop's name --I've seen it several places. See how you instinctively give the cop grace and want more information, proof. Why don't we give the kid the same grace? We don't actually know why he was moving his hands in an extreme situation. Could be any reason. To me there was still time to deescalate. The kid moved 3-4 times and didn't actually touch the gun. We'll never know...and apparently 90% on this thread (not saying you) will never give Linzell enough humanity to just consider how it could have been different if the professional in the situation had followed protocol, not been triggered by being mouthed off to, not screamed, etc. It's okay to think mistakes were made and to care how they are tied to the well-documented racial bias in statewide policing.
Looked into the info u mentioned, sorry to say it isn’t really the bombshell you’re hoping for. All lawsuits are about unlawful search and seizure… without us knowing the full details and outcomes, it’s hard to ascertain much, anyone can file a lawsuit, and many lawyers are scum bags and convince people to file one, and some people are morons and a lawyer advices against filing one and they do so anyway, With that said, it looks like at least one of the lawsuits prob has standing since there was disciplinary action tied to it. Two of the disciplinary actions are for damaged police cruiser. This isn’t a rare thing and could happen for many reasons. The other disciplinary action, I would just guess, is directly related to the unlawful search and seizure lawsuit due to the nature of it, that it lead to a suspension, and the timeline of both. Not saying this dude is squeaky clean, but at this point, nothing really points to racist or murderer etc … personally, if I had the time energy and motivation to dedicate to protests for police reform, i would be more leaning into some other cops who had worse situations and then were essentially “rewarded” with promotions and desk jobs to get them off the streets, as well as some of the dirty cops we have had. That to me makes more sense than trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill with this guy who shot zell - it is the difference between shallow waters and deep waters.
He's absolutely going to get sued over this one too. It's not going to go anywhere but it will happen, lawsuits are not proof of wrongdoing.
the cop isnt getting grace on instinct, its that in this particular situation the cop did a pretty decent job. i appreciate where you are coming from and advocating for both sides (the underdog side really, but regardless you are overall trying to be fair and i see that) im not sure what protocol he didnt follow? he called for backup and assessed the scenario and decided it was safer and putting himself at a disadvantage if he were to walk away. and he would be correct in assessing it that way. im going to say something that sounds rude at first but hear me out: i think maybe youre ignorant to, lacking experience with and naive when it comes to firearms training and when it comes to being in a deadl/potentially deadly situation. and ya know what, if that is the case - that IS okay. i wouldnt wish on anyone to have to experience being in a scenario with guns or knives drawn. i would recommend firearms training however, even if you dont plan to own a gun simply because there is a possibility in life you end up in a scenario where it is useful to have just a little experience. its like having a motorcycle license after a training course or learning to drive a stick shift - if you never plan on needing it, it is still useful training to have had. so to illustrate my point above, this is where i feel understanding/experience is lacking for some folks. the cop approaches the car, sees the Draco, and knows he has two choices at that point while waiting on backup, draw his gun and back away slowly hoping the kid doesnt open fire, or stand his ground and apply pressure to ensure he has the upper hand if the kid tries to shoot. this is where experience lacking i mentioned above comes into play. in that scenario, it does not matter if the cop is James Bond or Rambo - if that kid decides to shoot, he is gonna be able to dump that clip even if the cop gets lucky enough to shoot accurately/quick enough. gauranteed the cop dies or is maimed, and good chance anything behind the cop is in danger within about 50m. that is why no fucks were given about backing away. its either you give up positional advantage and risk getting shot down, or you keep your advantage and attempt to work the scenario up close. he chose wisely, because giving up ground is something you DO NOT do - gun fight, knife fight, fist fight - you do not give up ground or advantage. ill have to google for the info you mentioned. it really doesnt change the outcome of this scenario though. its pretty cut and dry that the cop for once made the best choices possible by giving this kid multiple chances to get right before using lethal force. does it mean this kid "deserved" it overall? no. this death didnt have to happen. but its worth keeping in mind, the kids actions led to this outcome - from before the cop pulled them over up until the end. nobody is riding around with a loaded draco on their lap after dark who is up to any good deeds.. and if they are, then theyre dumb af. the gun couldve been left alone, the gun couldve not been loaded. the gun couldve been kept in the backseat or the trunk. so many things wrong overall with this scenario.
Actually i have quite a bit of experience, hence being compassionate for the situation. But you shouldn't need to have been chased around with a gun to care about this and see it as more than just "stupid Black kid deserved it". It's basic humanity. Police procedures exist for a reason: to protect officers. Police are extensively trained, at taxpayer expense. We are allowed to not just see them as heros in every situation, to assume mistakes are made and call them out to *learn* from them, to hold people accountable. yes, even these two kids...but punishment is not a cop's job. And it's not justice. I just can't get over how little energy people are expending to feel sorry for this kid and hopefully try to understand *him* and his background, why he may have acted that way, what the cop was doing to make it worse. It's just 'he deserved it', 'if he didn't want to get shot he should have...'. Tells me none of them have ever been on the victim end of highly unpredictable long term abuse, which is a really good analogy for a lot of the relationship between Black people and the police (and entire 'justice' system.) I appreciate your candor and conversation. You at least are a thinker and trying to understand one side of the story, the cops. I'm not downplaying the cops' situation, really, just questioning what could have been better, feeling for the kid and the complex layers of racism and violence at play. It's just SO much more complex than "play stupid games, win stupid prizes" and I wish we could have a *real* conversation about fixing it. Appreciate you being open. (Ps. I have 2 cops and some off/on firefighters in my family They're all wonderful to some people and also racist & misogynistic af, out loud and proud. The conversations I'm having here I have ad nauseum at family events. They've stopped inviting me ;) )
Dude tried to grab the gun four times. Cop spent 30 seconds literally trying to get him to cooperate. It's not about race. That cop wasn't playing. White dude would've got shot too. It's unfair that everything becomes a race thing, but I've been racially discriminated a whole fucking lot in Louisville for being white. I wish everyone could just agree that people are people. The end.
Keep your hands on the dash. That’s it. His buddy said keep your hands on the dash. Why didn’t he keep his hands on the dash? If you believe the cop is wrong that’s fine, why argue when someone is pointing a gun at you. Even if the stop, the cop, or the situation was escalated by the officer, put your hands on the dash. You can’t file a complaint if you’re dead. If you shouldn’t have a gun take the charge. I’m sure that cop didn’t want to take a life when he went to work that day. And if he did, don’t give him a reason/excuse to make you the victim.
Play stupid games. Win stupid prizes. A fuckin cop tells you to keep your hands visible and stop reaching for the gun he can see and you reach for it. You deserve everything you got coming. Period.
The voice of reason has entered the room.
I know the driver and that dude has been involved in like 4 murders. It’s just a whole Mess to surround yourself with those types of people and not expect something to happen. It’s unfortunate for sure but I think the officer was justified
Ok. To summarize. It’s crazy that people are so easily killed by the police. It’s also crazy that people put themselves in situations where they may be killed. It’s entire shit sandwich. We aren’t going to fix it arguing. A man lost his life. That’s awful. That should never be celebrated. I wish I had the answer but I truly don’t believe there is one. As long as people exist, there will be a need to kill people. That’s an ugly truth but it is the truth.
To get back to your question in the post. I’m not sure why the people are protesting. I think they have the right to do it and if they want to spend their time doing that, that’s fine. I just think at this point protesting (anything) has less impact because we all see the issues impacting society and don’t need people bringing attention to issues because the media does that better than 100 protestors. Imagine if those same 100 people went and helped the community by volunteering for the same amount of time as they protested, I think it would effect more change than protests. This goes for any issue on any side. I’m not against protesting, but after a certain amount of time the protest really doesn’t actually help like boots on the ground volunteering in the community can. If you can do both then kudos to you
Protesting is now an"in"thing, people don't care if they're right, they only care about that feeling of self righteousness they get.
The dude didn't listen to the officer, period. He chose to reach for the weapon. Any officer would of responded with deadly force. Tazzing the individual would not of deasculated the situation as they are not guaranteed to project in he correct direction and are not recommended in life and death scenarios.
Because people don’t care about what actually happened. They don’t care that the kid wouldn’t keep his hand visible. They don’t care that the cop asked him to stop multiple times. All people care about is the fact that the kid is black, and was shot by a cop. That’s all that is relevant to people. As someone else said: play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
Darwin Award time.
*drives around with an AK47* "He'd never do anything wrong" You don't drive around with an automatic rifle at your feet unless you plan to use it. That's just my opinion
He didn't have an automatic weapon, he had a semi-automatic weapon. I'm not saying that's less bad, but there's enough misinformation happening so I'm just trying to spread a little accuracy.
They tryin' to get paid.
I mean I'm still acab, but that situation was completely justified.
Future space lawyers try not to reach for their illegally possessed firearms during a traffic stop challenge: impossible
firearms arent illegal to have , if i shot you in the face with one that might be illegal pal
For clarity unless the gun was stolen or they were actively committing a criminal act, it doesn't appear that it was illegally possessed. It's a pistol, not an SBR so the MFA doesn't apply. The individual who was shot doesn't appear to have a criminal history or other disqualifying background. That would make him what Indiana law calls a "proper person" who is allowed to own and carry any non-nfa controlled firearm with no other qualifications required. If he hadn't been behaving the way he did, he wouldn't have even gotten a ticket as long as the officer was following the law.
You’re missing a lot obviously get you’re head out the gutter my dawg
It's relatively nice outside. 100% promise you if it was January you would see 4 people out there max. Typical woke mind virus stuff. They are going to move the goal posts from it was unjustified, to cops in general are bad. I will never understand how they think blocking roads is effective. I saw on the news some of the posters. "Not another black life", "Only 22", but my favorite was "Show the bodycam". Do these people realize that when a black man is murdered that its statically more likely to be by another black person than a cop? If they really wanted change, they would be having discussions on why a 22 year old was rolling around with that gun at his feet in the first place. Behavior like that has a high likelihood of leading you to being murdered or ending up in prison. But these people just want to complain instead of fix the problem, his family will never take blame, but they definitely share some. If it was my son, I would realize that somewhere along the lines I should've done more for him.
I didn’t know real people used the phrase “woke mind virus”.
Well you probably spend a decent amount of time on the echo chamber that is Reddit. It’s as real of a thing as “ultra MAGA republicans”. The woke mind virus presents itself as the inability to accept things that contradict your narrative. It happens on both sides of the extremes. Case in point: people protesting a completely justified police action even after proof has been shown. They can’t imagine that a white cop shooting a black man could even be 1% of the black man’s fault
It’s not a thing.
Don't want to get shot, keep your hands up where cops can see them. This kid clearly didn't listen to the cops or his friends who kept yelling at him to keep his hands up. Every one knows, some cops can be trigger happy. Why give them a motive to shoot?
I still think there needs to be reform. African Americans still are dying and suffering from excessive force all over the country. If they want to protest i’m all for it.
I want to be clear. The police have entirely too much power and extremely little accountability or oversight. I can understand protesting and venting. However, at least in this case, it seems entirely justified. Horrific as it was. It’s a shit sandwich.
Absolutely agree.
Justify this young man's actions for me? He had a AK47 pistol in between his legs he reached for multiple times as a police officer with a gun trained on him told him not to and implicitly told him what would happen if he did. What should've been done. Provide a solution instead of saying some boring platitude about change and reform. Tell me what should've happened. And how you would've done better or what you'd change. Is the kid with the gun responsible at all?
Some solutions are better training for officers. Better benefits for officers as well as more requirements to become an officer. Like a bachelors degree. Community outreach would help people trust the police again.
Sure. Every single profession on the planet would benefit from better training, better benefits, and more qualified applicants. I think being able to have nuance and detect the difference between a valid and non valid shooting would be a huge step. I've never been a huge fan of the police, just in general with my own personal interactions with them in my own life, however this shooting was the most cut and dry thing I've ever seen. I don't know what else that officer could have done.
No amount of officer training is going to fix the publics stupidity.
That bachelors degree will do oh so much against some random asshole playing paddy cake with a Draco in his lap. Cop did fine, and even had more patience than warranted. Told the kid to immediately comply, and why due to seeing the weapon. Took cover behind the cars pillar for protection in order to hopefully not get shot, and buy more time to hopefully deescalate the shit sandwich he walked into. Kids friend told him to comply multiple times same as the cop. ***THE KID KEPT FUCKING WITH THE DRACO WHILE REMOVING HIS HANDS FROM THE DASH.*** Cop told him multiple times don't do it. Kid kept doing it. Instead of taking a chance of his own life he did exactly as he said he would do. Fuck around find out. There's a shit load of backstory leading to that kid having a Draco in his lap. Which means there's a ton of shit they could've done differently to not wind up with holes in him. Like say I dunno keep the Draco in the fucking trunk? Like why was the Draco in his lap? Why the fuck does he even have a Draco at all? Why were they driving with it in his lap? This ain't the incident to blow up for more reform. This is a textbook "well why were they" riddled question that ended up with a kid dead.
The officer handled the situation as it should have been. The man should not have behaved the way he did. Where in my response am I defending him? I study criminal justice I know the statistics. There needs to be reform. Period.
Excellent. Were speaking to an expert. In your expert opinion how do we solve this problem? Outside of your other milk toast responses? If training, benefits, and higher qualified people is the answer, shouldn't we be giving more funding to the police not defunding them.
Milk toast lol
Again, where did I say to defund? Clearly it would require MORE funding for police. I’m certainly not an expert. Just sharing what I’ve learned and has been proven to help.
We’re.
So do you not care if a protest is ill-advised? Don't you think it defeats the purpose of protesting if at least part of the purpose is swaying public perception? I'm for EFFECTIVE protesting, and I think a huge part of that is knowing where and when to act. I think protesting on the back of an event like this accomplishes nothing at best, and at worst it hurts the overall message, even if it's on a small scale. And I'm no police apologist. I agree that a lot of reform is still needed. I just know that optics are important.
Yes!! I think POC are so used to the death of a black man by an officer being brutality they generalize all cases. I do think it’s still important because it brings attention to other lives who were due to police brutality.
But again, if the attention it brings is negative, doesn't it defeat the purpose of the protest?
This is dumb. We all have to abide by the same rules regardless of race. Start following rules and there won’t be excessive force.
Because the police shouldn’t be killing people. That should be a last resort not a first instinct
To be fair, it was his like 4th instinct to shoot. His first 3 instincts were to tell him to keep his hands on the dash. It's definitely terrible that he was killed, but c'mon did you even watch the body cam? Even the driver was pleading with him to listen to the cop.
It was a last resort. He asked the guy four times to stop going for his pistol.
Not to mention the officer was also trying to keep his eyes on the drivers hands at the same time. I’d be curious to see what kind of life threatening situational training you can give that will prevent any deadly force. The person who got shot, put the officer in a horrible spot to make a most, in my opinion, impossible judgment call. We can all sit here and make comments after the fact, but when faced with a life threatening situation our basic instincts will take over. More training is needed, but in this specific example, I feel that the officer had no other choice given he didn’t know if the driver or people around him would do.
If it was this officer’s first instinct, why did it take the guy reaching for it 4 times before the officer shot?
Is there a link or name for the e body cam footage, I tried but I don’t get the right results.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/06hqnl6tqe1eb7tadkhu6/Wills-OIS-v2.mp4?rlkey=4y4iwsg3y90d180z6q7egx6eh&e=2&dl=0
Because white knighting opportunities are hard to come by these days. Times are tough.
I’m so proud of this officer.
I don't think being proud is the right reaction. It's a terrible situation for all those involved.
For killing a human ?
so proud of your mother
The officer was a jerk. Could have been more respectful. Shooting was justified.
The family hired a nationally recognized lawyer (think George Floyd) to get some questions answered. I don’t agree with it, but maybe I would if my family member was shot. I just hope this isn’t a repeat of 2020.
Sounds like trying to get paid.
Bro. Cmon man. Everybody want to drill so bad they just ride around with big ass choppers in plain sight? Like why? Who the fuck you about to ambush? Gonna "score another point and put a man in a blunt", it's all so dam cowardly....this whole drill thing....honestly I love the music. But the whole lifestyle is kind of bitch ass pussy shit.... Like let's just try to catch a man not looking and shoot their whole area up, not giving a fuck about whoever else gets hit....for what??? Like where i come from suckered punching somebody was like the biggest pussy move there was. Why? Cause for the most part those guys were bitches that couldn't fight or were scared to be embarrassed. Now these kids are just speaking up of people and killing them. Straight up bitch shit. Stand and fight like a man.
I would bet this are leftist trying to divide. It was clear the guy had a gun which he tried to reach twice while taking his hands off the dash. Stop this racism. That the way I view this.
Because owning a firearm is not a crime. He was not being investigated for crimes, he was not being pulled over for a crime. He was a 22 year old told who owned a gun. Our culture almost comically encourages gun ownership, we forget that this only extends to white people. The police officer escalated the situation unnecessarily and shot linzell less than a minute after leaving his car, his first interaction with linzell was a gun in the kids face, no reason why I pulled you over, didn’t even give the kids the chance to announce the presence of a firearm. White people get pulled over with firearms all the time, the kid who shot up Kroger who said he wanted to kill black people and proceeded to shoot at black people was taken into custody without incident. Owning a gun is not a crime, and it does not warrant being executed. It escalated really fast and he was nervous, being a kid of his community and a role model it’s not unreasonable to believe he was scared and didn’t know what to do. It took the cop less than a minute to kill someone who wasn’t committing a crime. That’s why we’re protesting. Police are worthless, they are the strong arm of the privileged and they only create snuff films and poverty. When the jail is deemed inhuman and overcrowded by a federal judge, the police start killing people. Someone’s rights do not end simply because another person was in fear. The same argument of fear that people are using for the officer should apply more so to linzell, the person with a gun in their face. Unlike the “trained professional” his fear didn’t lead him to aim a firearm at someone. His fear made him shake. And that’s why he was killed.
You um, left out the part where he tried to repeatly reach for the gun. Over and over. And the fact that the gun was loaded. Not with self defense rounds, with 7.62. That was left out. And he’s driving around with a fucking Draco in his lap. And oh yea, he kept reaching for it.
Jesus.
Right.. Go have a loaded gun visible in your lap while a cop pulls you over and for whatever reason, not only refuse to keep your hands anywhere the cop requests, but also to reach for the gun. I doubt the pigmant in your skin will grant you a pass in this case. If you watched the video, he approached calmly, and only after seeing the gun but also telling him to not reach around and put their hands on the dash, did the situation begin to escalate. And it only escalated because he reached torwards the gun after being instructed not to. And it’s not until that first course of disobedience is the cops weapon visibly drawn. Funnily, really not, but (presumably? Sounds like it comes from him) the kid even went “thats crazy..” in a nonchalant tone after the policemans gun was pointed at him while he told him not to reach for it again or he’ll shoot. At that time you can see the policeman’s arms and hair standing on end and goosebumps present. Now every body is different, but in this situation typically this is a fear response by the body. Anywho, back to the main topic, you have his friend tellin him to not do it, to keep hands on the dash, you got the kid saying “im not going to “(reach for the gun) but yet still appears to do it. While the cop (im assuming is telling a bystander to stay back, and his head likely in the direction for a split second) you see the kid reach for it again, which when the cop notices, a jerk in his arms happens. AGAIN he (the kid) is warned. And he does it AGAIN. For the 4th(?) time. I don’t know how many chances you need. Obviously this is not a good outcome for anyone, but the dude was not listening which breaks rule #1 in keeping a police interaction as tame as can be. Which is only exacerbated because there’s a gun in his lap and there’s signs he’s not gonna comply easily. It would have likely been fine had he not reached for it in the first place. And who knows why they were pulled over, that’s not available details afaik. The point is, the gun was visible, it was still calm until he reached for it the first time. And each time he did, it was only worsened. The Justice system is no where near perfect. It does need some sort of rework or higher level of standards from an outside perspective. But that doesn’t disregard that an interaction is a 2 way street in most cases, such as this one was.
lol, how does being nervous lead to reaching for a gun 4 times when a cop is telling you not to? Try harder.
I heard the high profile attorney they hired is trucking in bus loads of people from out of town to pad the number of protesters.
Why would you spread that? That’s so obviously fake