3 ms·

Exactly. We've seen countless examples of "I thought he had a gun" and "I feared for my life" from cops. Can I shoot someone if I think they have a gun but, o

Exactly. We've seen countless examples of "I thought he had a gun" and "I feared for my life" from cops. Can I shoot someone if I think they have a gun but, oops, it turns out I was wrong? I'd be fine, right? I'm sure I wouldn't face any serious consequences. And therein lies the problem. There's a separate set of (lower) standards applied to the very people who are trained for this sort of thing and who are allegedly held to a higher standard.

CompanionCuuube 8y ago
>Can I shoot someone if I think they have a gun but, oops, it turns out I was wrong? I'd be fine, right? I'm sure I wouldn't face any serious consequences. If the totality of the circumstances show that a reasonable person would believe that they had a gun and there was a threat to your life, then I would expect you not to have serious consequences in the form of criminal penalties.
- Thiez 8y ago
  > If the totality of the circumstances show that a reasonable person would believe that they had a gun and there was a threat to your life, then I would expect you not to have serious consequences in the form of criminal penalties. Police officers have guns, and I suspect some minorities might reasonably fear for their lives when confronted by the police... I'm sure the bar for 'reasonable' fear is much higher for civilians.
  - turc1656 8y ago
    Yes, this is precisely the point I'm trying to make. The standards that are applied are not equal, yet police officers are not only allegedly held to a higher standard, but they are also bound to follow all the existing laws because they are citizens themselves. There isn't an exemption made that allows them to violate the law or have a different set of criteria apply to them when determining if a crime has been committed. The only exception to that rule I am aware of is in cases of undercover operations - officers are able to obtain permission in advance from their handlers for certain crimes they expect to be required to commit (i.e. bribing someone or buying drugs). Outside of that, no exceptions exist that I know of.
  - CompanionCuuube 8y ago
    Should a stereotype be sufficient to make someone reasonably fear for their lives? That's going to have some unintended consequences...
- turc1656 8y ago
  That's possible, yes. If someone was acting completely, absolutely bonkers then I think there's a decent chance...maybe...if there were witnesses. Anything other than that, I'm pretty confident the DA will "let the court figure it out" and charge me regardless because a case could be made. And that's really the brass tacks of it. That's their job - make a case for criminality. If a reasonable case can be made and they think they can win, they'll pretty much make the case every time. It's what they get paid to do. No extra inconvenience for them. It's the person being charged who has their life totally interrupted and thrown into a tornado. Many times justifiably. But not always.
  - CompanionCuuube 8y ago
    > That's their job - make a case for criminality. If a reasonable case can be made and they think they can win, they'll pretty much make the case every time. A DA can also make cases against police, it's just that they don't think a reasonable case can be made and that they could win. Just as you said. Do you think DAs bring every self-defense case to court?
- pjc50 8y ago
  ... assuming you survive the initial encounter with the police. https://www.ajc.com/news/national/armed-black-security-guard-who-stopped-bar-shooting-killed-responding-police-officer/h69lY30k1cBjSFUlxt2WqI/ https://www.ajc.com/news/national/armed-black-security-guard...

CompanionCuuube 8y ago

>Can I shoot someone if I think they have a gun but, oops, it turns out I was wrong? I'd be fine, right? I'm sure I wouldn't face any serious consequences. If the totality of the circumstances show that a reasonable person would believe that they had a gun and there was a threat to your life, then I would expect you not to have serious consequences in the form of criminal penalties.

Thiez 8y ago
> If the totality of the circumstances show that a reasonable person would believe that they had a gun and there was a threat to your life, then I would expect you not to have serious consequences in the form of criminal penalties. Police officers have guns, and I suspect some minorities might reasonably fear for their lives when confronted by the police... I'm sure the bar for 'reasonable' fear is much higher for civilians.
- turc1656 8y ago
  Yes, this is precisely the point I'm trying to make. The standards that are applied are not equal, yet police officers are not only allegedly held to a higher standard, but they are also bound to follow all the existing laws because they are citizens themselves. There isn't an exemption made that allows them to violate the law or have a different set of criteria apply to them when determining if a crime has been committed. The only exception to that rule I am aware of is in cases of undercover operations - officers are able to obtain permission in advance from their handlers for certain crimes they expect to be required to commit (i.e. bribing someone or buying drugs). Outside of that, no exceptions exist that I know of.
- CompanionCuuube 8y ago
  Should a stereotype be sufficient to make someone reasonably fear for their lives? That's going to have some unintended consequences...
turc1656 8y ago
That's possible, yes. If someone was acting completely, absolutely bonkers then I think there's a decent chance...maybe...if there were witnesses. Anything other than that, I'm pretty confident the DA will "let the court figure it out" and charge me regardless because a case could be made. And that's really the brass tacks of it. That's their job - make a case for criminality. If a reasonable case can be made and they think they can win, they'll pretty much make the case every time. It's what they get paid to do. No extra inconvenience for them. It's the person being charged who has their life totally interrupted and thrown into a tornado. Many times justifiably. But not always.
- CompanionCuuube 8y ago
  > That's their job - make a case for criminality. If a reasonable case can be made and they think they can win, they'll pretty much make the case every time. A DA can also make cases against police, it's just that they don't think a reasonable case can be made and that they could win. Just as you said. Do you think DAs bring every self-defense case to court?
pjc50 8y ago
... assuming you survive the initial encounter with the police. https://www.ajc.com/news/national/armed-black-security-guard-who-stopped-bar-shooting-killed-responding-police-officer/h69lY30k1cBjSFUlxt2WqI/ https://www.ajc.com/news/national/armed-black-security-guard...