4 ms·

Sure, racial disparities in police shootings is a problem. But if you look at specific incidents, you'll find that virtually every person shot by cops had a wea

Sure, racial disparities in police shootings is a problem. But if you look at specific incidents, you'll find that virtually every person shot by cops had a weapon, was a fugutive, had a violent past, was on drugs, etc., etc.. This website is framing the issue as a policing problem, not a crime problem. I don't think that is wise.

bberenberg 4y ago
How do you know this given that we don't have accurate aggregate data on this?
- JoeyBananas 4y ago
  I'm going off of lists such as this one, which I believe are 100% representative of reality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_killings_by_law_enfor... It's not like when somebody gets shot by cops, there's immediately a huge cover-up operation. Just because departments don't spoonfeed people this information doesn't mean it's completely unknowable.
  - ttfkam 4y ago
    FYI: The OP link is cited as a reference to the Wikipedia article you linked. Ask yourself how often you've seen a video where police shoot someone, cuff them, remove all weapons from reach, and then stand by without immediately rendering emergency aid. The threat is over. They were shot. They were bleeding out. As a nation I think we should probably be a lot less comfortable with the notion that police can selectively choose who is worthy of the death penalty on the spot. Reminder: the police report for George Floyd stated that he died of complications of cocaine use, not a knee on his airway for almost ten minutes AFTER he had been cuffed and put in the back of the police cruiser. Had there been no video, would there have even been an indictment let alone a trial or murder conviction? How many times are the cameras not recording?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - JoeyBananas 4y ago
      Would it be a bad idea to train cops more first aid skills? Hell no, I would absolutely support that. But I am of the opinion that the George Floyd video shows that Chauvin did nothing wrong, and I think it's disgraceful how bystanders were being douchebags by harrassing the cops. I was a Minneapolis resident at the time and I am dismayed by the way that case played out legally and how influential people in the community encouraged this behavior. I think it was a blatant kangaroo court. The abysmal state of attitudes towards police is a much more important issue. People in the ghetto oppose the police even when crime is rampant and lives are being destroyed. It makes no sense. Teaching cops how to pack bullet wounds and stuff is easy. It would barely make any difference.
      - ttfkam 4y ago
        > But I am of the opinion that the George Floyd video shows that Chauvin did nothing wrong There is clearly nothing more to say.
ashwagary 4y ago
>every person shot by cops had a weapon, was a fugutive, had a violent past, was on drugs, etc., etc.. Are there "ands" or "ors" in between those descriptors? If "or", the only ones that may be justifiable without much further exploration is "had a weapon". The rest should not be overlooked so quickly.
- JoeyBananas 4y ago
  What the law actually says is that it is illegal to kill another person unless you believe they are actively threatening your life or somebody else's life (i.e., in self-defense). You are wrong if you think that it's the weapon that determines whether the shooting was justified or not. People are not shot by police for having weapons, being a fugitive, or being on drugs even if those things are illegal. They are shot for being an immediate danger to somebody's life. Ask yourself, what generally causes a person to act violent? A mentally healthy person controls their emotions and acts intelligently. Healthy people don't lash out at others like wild animals. It's mental illness and drugs that makes people do that. And guess what? It's easy to observe that the vast majority of people shot by police are addicts or mentally ill (i.e., criminals.) And you're telling me it's the police that are the ones who introduce violence into the equation?
  - defrost 4y ago
    Yes - it's the US police and their training. Consider the UK with some ~ 70 million people, mad scotsmen on raging drunken benders (sorry, stereotype), no shortgae of drug addicts, plenty of mentally ill, etc. Per capita US police kill members of the US public at a rate 20x that of UK police killing UK members of the public. US police have little to no training wrt defusing situations, they are trained to always reach for a gun.
    - JoeyBananas 4y ago
      It's not a matter of training, it's a matter of doctrine. American police training is a lot more gun-oriented than foreign police training because Americans own more guns. Also, the laws dictating when it is legal to use deadly force are different. You have to account for the differences in the freedom vs. safety trade-off.

bberenberg 4y ago

How do you know this given that we don't have accurate aggregate data on this?

JoeyBananas 4y ago
I'm going off of lists such as this one, which I believe are 100% representative of reality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_killings_by_law_enfor... It's not like when somebody gets shot by cops, there's immediately a huge cover-up operation. Just because departments don't spoonfeed people this information doesn't mean it's completely unknowable.
- ttfkam 4y ago
  FYI: The OP link is cited as a reference to the Wikipedia article you linked. Ask yourself how often you've seen a video where police shoot someone, cuff them, remove all weapons from reach, and then stand by without immediately rendering emergency aid. The threat is over. They were shot. They were bleeding out. As a nation I think we should probably be a lot less comfortable with the notion that police can selectively choose who is worthy of the death penalty on the spot. Reminder: the police report for George Floyd stated that he died of complications of cocaine use, not a knee on his airway for almost ten minutes AFTER he had been cuffed and put in the back of the police cruiser. Had there been no video, would there have even been an indictment let alone a trial or murder conviction? How many times are the cameras not recording?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - JoeyBananas 4y ago
    Would it be a bad idea to train cops more first aid skills? Hell no, I would absolutely support that. But I am of the opinion that the George Floyd video shows that Chauvin did nothing wrong, and I think it's disgraceful how bystanders were being douchebags by harrassing the cops. I was a Minneapolis resident at the time and I am dismayed by the way that case played out legally and how influential people in the community encouraged this behavior. I think it was a blatant kangaroo court. The abysmal state of attitudes towards police is a much more important issue. People in the ghetto oppose the police even when crime is rampant and lives are being destroyed. It makes no sense. Teaching cops how to pack bullet wounds and stuff is easy. It would barely make any difference.
    - ttfkam 4y ago
      > But I am of the opinion that the George Floyd video shows that Chauvin did nothing wrong There is clearly nothing more to say.

ashwagary 4y ago

>every person shot by cops had a weapon, was a fugutive, had a violent past, was on drugs, etc., etc.. Are there "ands" or "ors" in between those descriptors? If "or", the only ones that may be justifiable without much further exploration is "had a weapon". The rest should not be overlooked so quickly.

JoeyBananas 4y ago
What the law actually says is that it is illegal to kill another person unless you believe they are actively threatening your life or somebody else's life (i.e., in self-defense). You are wrong if you think that it's the weapon that determines whether the shooting was justified or not. People are not shot by police for having weapons, being a fugitive, or being on drugs even if those things are illegal. They are shot for being an immediate danger to somebody's life. Ask yourself, what generally causes a person to act violent? A mentally healthy person controls their emotions and acts intelligently. Healthy people don't lash out at others like wild animals. It's mental illness and drugs that makes people do that. And guess what? It's easy to observe that the vast majority of people shot by police are addicts or mentally ill (i.e., criminals.) And you're telling me it's the police that are the ones who introduce violence into the equation?
- defrost 4y ago
  Yes - it's the US police and their training. Consider the UK with some ~ 70 million people, mad scotsmen on raging drunken benders (sorry, stereotype), no shortgae of drug addicts, plenty of mentally ill, etc. Per capita US police kill members of the US public at a rate 20x that of UK police killing UK members of the public. US police have little to no training wrt defusing situations, they are trained to always reach for a gun.
  - JoeyBananas 4y ago
    It's not a matter of training, it's a matter of doctrine. American police training is a lot more gun-oriented than foreign police training because Americans own more guns. Also, the laws dictating when it is legal to use deadly force are different. You have to account for the differences in the freedom vs. safety trade-off.