3 ms·

How can the police aim a gun at someone that clearly do not pose a threat?

by hoppla 6y ago

djrogers 6y ago
I didn't see any gun-aiming at her, or even drawn guns before she was escorted outside in the posted video. The only place I've seen that claim is from the subject of the raid.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- unsatchmo 6y ago
  Then you weren't watching the video. They drew guns after entering the residence. They pointed them up the stairs where she said her husband and two children were. Thus they were pointing guns at her children. Watch the full video on her twitter account, it happens about 10-20 seconds into the video.
  - cgriswald 6y ago
    Whether the claims are true or not, the video does not support it. > They drew guns after entering the residence. Yes, but she claims: >> They pointed a gun in my face. In the video, she clearly leaves the residence before any guns are drawn. Potentially the cop to the left of the door from the camera's perspective has his hand on his gun, but it's not drawn either. So if this happened, it's not on video. > They pointed them up the stairs where she said her husband and two children were. Thus they were pointing guns at her children. She doesn't say that and the video doesn't support it. She says: >> I tell them my husband and my two children are upstairs... and THEN one of them draws his gun. >> On my children. According to the video, she's outside at this point. It's not clear how she can know where they are, except that she might have assumed they were where she last saw them. She actually says they 'are upstairs' which doesn't mean 'at the top of the stairs', but 'on the second floor.' If anything, the video disputes the idea that they are at the top of the stairs. There is a light source shining down on the steps, but there are no shadows. In fact, I don't even read that she's making the claim that the cops pointed guns at her children, merely that they drew the guns on her children. The video does support this claim since it could be argued that they were drawing their guns on anyone who might be in the house, whether they were physically in the same space or not.
    - splaytreemap 6y ago
      Yup. You can even hear her complaining about the cops pointing guns at her children while she's outside the house and can't possibly know what the police are pointing guns at. I'd bet she was planning this smear campaign from the moment police showed up at her house. Having guns drawn while making sure there's no threat in the house is perfectly normal. I'd do the exact same if I was executing a search warrant.
caconym_ 6y ago
Because they are scum. Many police in America are scum, a state of affairs perpetuated by a profound lack of accountability to the public. They can break down the wrong door in the night, murder the innocent occupants, and face no meaningful penalties (let alone meaningful criminal penalties) despite obvious negligence leading up to and during the incident. Given that, one can see how the wrong kind of people (assuming the job is what we naively assume it's supposed to be about) are often drawn to police jobs. edit: This is a strongly worded comment. I believe strong words are appropriate when we’re talking about atrocities like the murder of innocents under the color of law. These scum are not a “side” that deserves “equal consideration”—we have a responsibility to figure out what’s true and what isn’t to the best of our abilities, but ultimately we need to strongly condemn evil whenever and wherever it manifests, and the breed of authoritarian cruelty practiced by many American police definitely qualifies. Also note that I have intentionally not said all police are scum, because that’s obviously not true.
mentalpiracy 6y ago
In most cases, one reason they can is because there is no enforced repercussion for doing so. Most police forces do in fact have rules for this type of conduct and institutional mechanisms to regulate it, but enforcement has become discretionary to the point of non existence. Please note that this description is extremely generalized and that there are numerous other factors.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
jamesrcole 6y ago
I’m not making a comment about whether it was right for them to do so or not, but “someone that clearly do not pose a threat” is not as clear cut a category as it might seem. When the potential consequences of making an incorrect judgment are very large, they have to be extremely careful in drawing such conclusions.
Teknoman117 6y ago
Another major issue we have with policing in the US (aside from the people who are only there as a power trip) is that one group with little variation in training is sent in for everything from jaywalking to armed robbery. The odds of any random police officer encountering a situation where they are going to be truly in harms way are lower than the odds they use excessive force against a cooperative person. It's horrific. Being a pizza delivery driver is twice as dangerous as being a police officer.

How can the police aim a gun at someone that clearly do not pose a threat?

by hoppla 6y ago

How can the police aim a gun at someone that clearly do not pose a threat?

I didn't see any gun-aiming at her, or even drawn guns before she was escorted outside in the posted video. The only place I've seen that claim is from the subject of the raid.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
unsatchmo 6y ago
Then you weren't watching the video. They drew guns after entering the residence. They pointed them up the stairs where she said her husband and two children were. Thus they were pointing guns at her children. Watch the full video on her twitter account, it happens about 10-20 seconds into the video.
- cgriswald 6y ago
  Whether the claims are true or not, the video does not support it. > They drew guns after entering the residence. Yes, but she claims: >> They pointed a gun in my face. In the video, she clearly leaves the residence before any guns are drawn. Potentially the cop to the left of the door from the camera's perspective has his hand on his gun, but it's not drawn either. So if this happened, it's not on video. > They pointed them up the stairs where she said her husband and two children were. Thus they were pointing guns at her children. She doesn't say that and the video doesn't support it. She says: >> I tell them my husband and my two children are upstairs... and THEN one of them draws his gun. >> On my children. According to the video, she's outside at this point. It's not clear how she can know where they are, except that she might have assumed they were where she last saw them. She actually says they 'are upstairs' which doesn't mean 'at the top of the stairs', but 'on the second floor.' If anything, the video disputes the idea that they are at the top of the stairs. There is a light source shining down on the steps, but there are no shadows. In fact, I don't even read that she's making the claim that the cops pointed guns at her children, merely that they drew the guns on her children. The video does support this claim since it could be argued that they were drawing their guns on anyone who might be in the house, whether they were physically in the same space or not.
  - splaytreemap 6y ago
    Yup. You can even hear her complaining about the cops pointing guns at her children while she's outside the house and can't possibly know what the police are pointing guns at. I'd bet she was planning this smear campaign from the moment police showed up at her house. Having guns drawn while making sure there's no threat in the house is perfectly normal. I'd do the exact same if I was executing a search warrant.

caconym_ 6y ago

Because they are scum. Many police in America are scum, a state of affairs perpetuated by a profound lack of accountability to the public. They can break down the wrong door in the night, murder the innocent occupants, and face no meaningful penalties (let alone meaningful criminal penalties) despite obvious negligence leading up to and during the incident. Given that, one can see how the wrong kind of people (assuming the job is what we naively assume it's supposed to be about) are often drawn to police jobs. edit: This is a strongly worded comment. I believe strong words are appropriate when we’re talking about atrocities like the murder of innocents under the color of law. These scum are not a “side” that deserves “equal consideration”—we have a responsibility to figure out what’s true and what isn’t to the best of our abilities, but ultimately we need to strongly condemn evil whenever and wherever it manifests, and the breed of authoritarian cruelty practiced by many American police definitely qualifies. Also note that I have intentionally not said all police are scum, because that’s obviously not true.

mentalpiracy 6y ago

In most cases, one reason they can is because there is no enforced repercussion for doing so. Most police forces do in fact have rules for this type of conduct and institutional mechanisms to regulate it, but enforcement has become discretionary to the point of non existence. Please note that this description is extremely generalized and that there are numerous other factors.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

jamesrcole 6y ago

I’m not making a comment about whether it was right for them to do so or not, but “someone that clearly do not pose a threat” is not as clear cut a category as it might seem. When the potential consequences of making an incorrect judgment are very large, they have to be extremely careful in drawing such conclusions.

Teknoman117 6y ago

Another major issue we have with policing in the US (aside from the people who are only there as a power trip) is that one group with little variation in training is sent in for everything from jaywalking to armed robbery. The odds of any random police officer encountering a situation where they are going to be truly in harms way are lower than the odds they use excessive force against a cooperative person. It's horrific. Being a pizza delivery driver is twice as dangerous as being a police officer.