23 ms·

>driving recklessly and running away from police. he was pulled over for driving on a bus lane (not something that is so reckless that it's punishable by death

>driving recklessly and running away from police. he was pulled over for driving on a bus lane (not something that is so reckless that it's punishable by death even in the most 'based' countries, in the middle east and things.) and the running away thing is being questioned, as the passenger just testified. He says police beat the driver, which made him release the brake pedal, so the car creeped forward. And anyway, police was on the side of the car, so at not point it time they were in danger. And their version of events didn't match the social media footage that has latter emerged. Justice will take time. but it's hard to see anything but over-reaction and death penalty, as the teen matched the stereotype you described.

chongli 3y ago
And anyway, police was on the side of the car, so at not point it time they were in danger. And their version of events didn't match the social media footage that has latter emerged. That's not true. Police officers have been killed while standing beside the driver side door during a traffic stop. All it takes is for their arm to get trapped by the open window and they can fall and get dragged or even pulled under the rear wheel.
- eropple 3y ago
  Were they shoving their arm through the window? Did they need to do so? Is their safety more important than that of a civilian? These are leading questions, because the answer is obvious: if the choice is a dead cop or a dead civilian, a dead cop is the only moral choice that can be made. Optimizing for the safety of the police is how you turn police into fearful, scared "warriors" who view the citizenry as their enemy, like we have in the United States. Risk is the police's business, taken intentionally and with foreknowledge on behalf of the citizenry. Or else they're bullies with badges.
  - hinata08 3y ago
    you can't really compare the police in the USA and the police in France. US cops are just a rogue and racist organisation, who apply their own law (mostly based on racial profiling). I think that comparing it to the police in the Philippines would be more appropriate. The victim in this case got hated by the right wing was because he was a stereotypical drug dealer who drove off, and nothing else, and they wanted the police to be able to work.
    - eropple 3y ago
      Of course. Your point is a good one. But police in France aren't being dragged by cars when they stick an arm through the window, so I was accepting the implicit move in framing.
  - josephcsible 3y ago
    Your use of the word "civilian" is super misleading because of its connotation of being an innocent bystander. Replace it with "fugitive" and see if your statement is still so obvious.
    - eropple 3y ago
      Sure, no problem! Let's sound it out, just for you. If the choice is a dead cop or a dead fugitive, a dead cop is the only moral choice that can be made. That was easy. And it's true and it's right, too. The police are not judges and they are not executioners. If it takes a dead cop to bring in a non-violent fugitive, who in functional countries is to be presumed innocent until found otherwise by a court of law, that is a good price to pay for society. And I do note non-violent; somebody who's engaged in violence against other people--not property--has implicitly raised the stakes and I don't have a problem with the police then responding with force. (But they are not mind-readers, and so hypothetical future endangerment of civilians without cause is not within bounds.) If police don't like defaulting to rules of engagement where civilians' lives matter more than their own, they can find another job where they can't employ force against other people.
      - josephcsible 3y ago
        When people are close enough to your car that speeding off is likely to run them over or drag them along, doing so anyway is violent. > rules of engagement where civilians' lives matter more than their own You're back to the word "civilians" again. And I don't accept that law enforcement's lives are worth less than lawbreakers' lives.
        eropple 3y ago
        "Likely to run them over"? Please. Is it possible? Sure, I guess. Did it happen? No. Do you execute somebody for it could have happened? Well, I mean, I think officers of the peace shouldn't do so regardless of country. > You're back to the word "civilians" again. And I don't accept that law enforcement's lives are worth less than lawbreakers' lives. Because they are civilians! That's the definition! Words mean things! You don't have to accept that cops are less important than civilians. I think your position is wrong and gross, but I concede that there's a discussion to be had about rules of engagement. We could have that, if you were packing for it. But you want call me out for dirty pool about the word civilian? How about lawbreaker? In a liberal society, it is the job of a court to decide who's a lawbreaker. Cops don't make law and cops don't prescribe punishment. If we're talking about dirty pool, loading that implication onto an extrajudicial execution should make it really hard for you to look in the mirror. I hope you've got the same energy for taking one in the ten-ring when you go five miles an hour over the speed limit in an area with a few curb cuts. After all, you could have hit someone.
- hinata08 3y ago
  >Police officers have been killed while standing beside the driver side door during a traffic stop. But on his report, the officer testified that he shot because the car was heading toward him. That didn't match the video. There is an investigation because, with such a mismatch, you can wonder to what extent the officer was really in danger. You can assume that if you really faced death, you would remember what happened and describe it exactly.
freedom2099 3y ago
He was also driving without a driving license (in France you can’t drive if you are 17)
verteu 3y ago
> He says police beat the driver, which made him release the brake pedal, so the car creeped forward Fortunately there's a video to show this is an obvious lie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSfcLfoNkFk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSfcLfoNkFk

chongli 3y ago

And anyway, police was on the side of the car, so at not point it time they were in danger. And their version of events didn't match the social media footage that has latter emerged. That's not true. Police officers have been killed while standing beside the driver side door during a traffic stop. All it takes is for their arm to get trapped by the open window and they can fall and get dragged or even pulled under the rear wheel.

eropple 3y ago
Were they shoving their arm through the window? Did they need to do so? Is their safety more important than that of a civilian? These are leading questions, because the answer is obvious: if the choice is a dead cop or a dead civilian, a dead cop is the only moral choice that can be made. Optimizing for the safety of the police is how you turn police into fearful, scared "warriors" who view the citizenry as their enemy, like we have in the United States. Risk is the police's business, taken intentionally and with foreknowledge on behalf of the citizenry. Or else they're bullies with badges.
- hinata08 3y ago
  you can't really compare the police in the USA and the police in France. US cops are just a rogue and racist organisation, who apply their own law (mostly based on racial profiling). I think that comparing it to the police in the Philippines would be more appropriate. The victim in this case got hated by the right wing was because he was a stereotypical drug dealer who drove off, and nothing else, and they wanted the police to be able to work.
  - eropple 3y ago
    Of course. Your point is a good one. But police in France aren't being dragged by cars when they stick an arm through the window, so I was accepting the implicit move in framing.
- josephcsible 3y ago
  Your use of the word "civilian" is super misleading because of its connotation of being an innocent bystander. Replace it with "fugitive" and see if your statement is still so obvious.
  - eropple 3y ago
    Sure, no problem! Let's sound it out, just for you. If the choice is a dead cop or a dead fugitive, a dead cop is the only moral choice that can be made. That was easy. And it's true and it's right, too. The police are not judges and they are not executioners. If it takes a dead cop to bring in a non-violent fugitive, who in functional countries is to be presumed innocent until found otherwise by a court of law, that is a good price to pay for society. And I do note non-violent; somebody who's engaged in violence against other people--not property--has implicitly raised the stakes and I don't have a problem with the police then responding with force. (But they are not mind-readers, and so hypothetical future endangerment of civilians without cause is not within bounds.) If police don't like defaulting to rules of engagement where civilians' lives matter more than their own, they can find another job where they can't employ force against other people.
    - josephcsible 3y ago
      When people are close enough to your car that speeding off is likely to run them over or drag them along, doing so anyway is violent. > rules of engagement where civilians' lives matter more than their own You're back to the word "civilians" again. And I don't accept that law enforcement's lives are worth less than lawbreakers' lives.
      - eropple 3y ago
        "Likely to run them over"? Please. Is it possible? Sure, I guess. Did it happen? No. Do you execute somebody for it could have happened? Well, I mean, I think officers of the peace shouldn't do so regardless of country. > You're back to the word "civilians" again. And I don't accept that law enforcement's lives are worth less than lawbreakers' lives. Because they are civilians! That's the definition! Words mean things! You don't have to accept that cops are less important than civilians. I think your position is wrong and gross, but I concede that there's a discussion to be had about rules of engagement. We could have that, if you were packing for it. But you want call me out for dirty pool about the word civilian? How about lawbreaker? In a liberal society, it is the job of a court to decide who's a lawbreaker. Cops don't make law and cops don't prescribe punishment. If we're talking about dirty pool, loading that implication onto an extrajudicial execution should make it really hard for you to look in the mirror. I hope you've got the same energy for taking one in the ten-ring when you go five miles an hour over the speed limit in an area with a few curb cuts. After all, you could have hit someone.
hinata08 3y ago
>Police officers have been killed while standing beside the driver side door during a traffic stop. But on his report, the officer testified that he shot because the car was heading toward him. That didn't match the video. There is an investigation because, with such a mismatch, you can wonder to what extent the officer was really in danger. You can assume that if you really faced death, you would remember what happened and describe it exactly.

freedom2099 3y ago

He was also driving without a driving license (in France you can’t drive if you are 17)

verteu 3y ago

> He says police beat the driver, which made him release the brake pedal, so the car creeped forward Fortunately there's a video to show this is an obvious lie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSfcLfoNkFk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSfcLfoNkFk