Author Topic: Arizona shooting  (Read 7700 times)

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,570
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #25 on: December 15, 2017, 09:12:31 AM »
Common is an imprecise term. How many should we, as citizens, be OK with before we just take care of the shooters ourselves?
Sure, common is imprecise, but it takes one hell of a liberal definition to make these kinds of incidents - which are so unusual that they regularly make national news - out to be common.

In addition you present quite the false dichotomy.  We either have to be OK with bad cops, or we have to start slaughtering folks?

dogmush

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,671
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #26 on: December 15, 2017, 09:31:55 AM »
In addition you present quite the false dichotomy.  We either have to be OK with bad cops, or we have to start slaughtering folks?

I did not mean to.  I mentioned in my previous post that the preferred method is to have a justice system that punishes bad cops.  Many feel like we don't currently have one of those.  I honestly don't know how messed up the system is, because it's nigh on impossible to get unbiased details of things like police shootings.  I do have a nagging suspicion that, in general, the justice system let's LEO's kill without consequences in situations that it would punish non LEO's.

I would say, that it's not a false dichotomey to say that we can not allow a special group of people to kill without justification or consequences.  Either the systems we have in place need to provide some accountability that is palatable to the majority of society, or society needs to provide that accountability outside the justice system.

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,570
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #27 on: December 15, 2017, 10:24:27 AM »
I mentioned in my previous post that the preferred method is to have a justice system that punishes bad cops.
Even looking back at your previous post I don't see that, but I can agree with this version.

Many feel like we don't currently have one of those.  I honestly don't know how messed up the system is, because it's nigh on impossible to get unbiased details of things like police shootings.
I absolutely agree that the system is far from perfect and fails to punish in cases where from my perspective it should bring the hammer down, but I also have personal knowledge of bad cops that were dealt with both departmentally and judicially for things that probably would have been passed off as a civil issue if it were a non-LEO.  The idea that a badge is a free pass to commit crimes is every bit as wrong as the idea that cops don't commit crimes.

I do have a nagging suspicion that, in general, the justice system let's LEO's kill without consequences in situations that it would punish non LEO's.
Maybe so.  Of course, the system also sends officers into situations where non LEOs would rarely - if ever - be. 

Moreover, situations are rarely black and white.  In this case the cops involved screwed it up from the word go, but the moment the cop started firing, the victim was quickly reaching around toward his strong-side waistline as if he were going for a gun.  Yes, in my comfy office chair I can pause the video and see that he was drunkenly trying to pull up his pants because he was being told to scoot forward on his knees, but in that split second would I have known that in the cop's shoes?  I'd hope so, but my own recent experiences in force-on-force training have given a new perspective on how quickly things can go wrong and how little time you have to decide what to do.

Hawkmoon

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,199
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #28 on: December 15, 2017, 10:40:29 AM »

Maybe so.  Of course, the system also sends officers into situations where non LEOs would rarely - if ever - be. 


Is this supposed to excuse the executions of innocent people like Erik Scott? That doesn't work for me.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
100% Politically Incorrect by Design

dogmush

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,671
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #29 on: December 15, 2017, 01:57:57 PM »
Moreover, situations are rarely black and white.  In this case the cops involved screwed it up from the word go, but the moment the cop started firing, the victim was quickly reaching around toward his strong-side waistline as if he were going for a gun.  Yes, in my comfy office chair I can pause the video and see that he was drunkenly trying to pull up his pants because he was being told to scoot forward on his knees, but in that split second would I have known that in the cop's shoes?  I'd hope so, but my own recent experiences in force-on-force training have given a new perspective on how quickly things can go wrong and how little time you have to decide what to do.

In this particular situation I would argue that a LEO doesn't get to create a situation where normal movements and response could be perceived as a threat, then use a perceived threat as justification for shooting someone.  I think you are correct that at the moment the trigger was pulled, it kinda looked like the victim was going for a weapon.  Or could have looked like that.  I suspect that's why the jury acquitted.  But the LEO's, through either incompetence or malice, created a situation in which a threat was likely to be perceived.  Since they created the extra danger, the onus was on them to get it right, and they didn't.

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,570
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #30 on: December 15, 2017, 02:33:30 PM »
In this particular situation I would argue that a LEO doesn't get to create a situation where normal movements and response could be perceived as a threat, then use a perceived threat as justification for shooting someone.  I think you are correct that at the moment the trigger was pulled, it kinda looked like the victim was going for a weapon.  Or could have looked like that.  I suspect that's why the jury acquitted.  But the LEO's, through either incompetence or malice, created a situation in which a threat was likely to be perceived.  Since they created the extra danger, the onus was on them to get it right, and they didn't.
We are in total agreement about this situation.

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,570
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #31 on: December 15, 2017, 02:36:59 PM »
Is this supposed to excuse the executions of innocent people like Erik Scott? That doesn't work for me.
Yes, Hawkmoon, exactly.  It was supposed to not merely excuse but laud to the highest the merciless and brutal slaying of the innocent in all cases.

Pardon me, my horns are due for a sharpening.

Ben

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 45,745
  • I'm an Extremist!
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #32 on: December 15, 2017, 02:56:11 PM »
We are in total agreement about this situation.

I would agree there as well. As much as this situation makes my blood boil, I understand that LE gets put in situations where they do require some leeway, and that includes people making sudden moves.

It's just a different story when LE creates the situation, which they clearly did in this case. I'm in pretty good shape, but I could easily see myself losing balance and falling forward, or otherwise making a "sudden move" because I was basically just told to assume the "pretzel position" and then move around. It was like a bizarro yoga class in that video.
"I'm a foolish old man that has been drawn into a wild goose chase by a harpy in trousers and a nincompoop."

RoadKingLarry

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,841
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #33 on: December 16, 2017, 09:53:28 AM »
I physically couldn't do what they were ordering the guy to do.
I guess I'm just *expletive deleted*ed.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

Samuel Adams

230RN

  • It's like swimming to shore in an ebb tide.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 18,826
  • Pushing back. Help me out, here...
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #34 on: December 16, 2017, 02:15:14 PM »
Dogmush: "But the LEOs, through either incompetence or malice, created a situation in which a threat was likely to be perceived.  Since they created the extra danger, the onus was on them to get it right, and they didn't."

Ayup.  I didn't want to watch it again, but I did.  That "malice" part sure sounds right to me.

Terry

Hawkmoon

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,199
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #35 on: December 17, 2017, 12:34:55 AM »
Interesting editorial on the incident and the verdict: https://nypost.com/2017/12/15/no-a-cops-fears-dont-justify-every-shooting/
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
100% Politically Incorrect by Design

Scout26

  • I'm a leaf on the wind.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 25,997
  • I spent a week in that town one night....
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #36 on: December 17, 2017, 12:23:14 PM »
Here's what I meant by "common". 

In this thread we could puts names on every "bad" police shooting:  Erik Scott, Philando Castile, Justin Damond, LaQuan Macdonald, etc.

So far this WEEK in Chicago, there have been 14 people shot and killed, 31 shot and injured*....Can anyone name one off the top of their head ??  How about the circumstances (other then drive-by or drug deal gone bad, like an address or cross streets)?? 

Anyone... anyone...Bueller ??

That's what I mean by common. They might be lucky if they hit the 10pm local news.  Chances are there will just a blurb giving the total number shot in the prior 24 hours, not mention of names, maybe just an age and sex (male), unless it's a child under say 14.  Then there might be some local hoopla, but for the rest, their deaths just get lumped in with the rest. 

(Bad)Police shootings are fairly rare, and they make the news.  There have been 21 "police involved" shootings in Chicago 






*-  From http://heyjackass.com/
Some days even my lucky rocketship underpants won't help.


Bring me my Broadsword and a clear understanding.
Get up to the roundhouse on the cliff-top standing.
Take women and children and bed them down.
Bless with a hard heart those that stand with me.
Bless the women and children who firm our hands.
Put our backs to the north wind.
Hold fast by the river.
Sweet memories to drive us on,
for the motherland.

230RN

  • It's like swimming to shore in an ebb tide.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 18,826
  • Pushing back. Help me out, here...
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #37 on: December 17, 2017, 12:54:45 PM »
Sorry, Amy Schumer, but I ain't buying any "statistical" excuses for those police shootings.  Especially in re Illinois ones.

Well, Chicago ones, anyway.

Interesting editorial on the incident and the verdict: https://nypost.com/2017/12/15/no-a-cops-fears-dont-justify-every-shooting/

Very good, from that article:

Quote
One of those officers testified that he would not fire based purely on the “draw stroke” Brailsford thought he saw. He would also consider the context, such as whether a suspect is belligerent and threatening or, like Shaver, compliant, apologetic and tearful.

Wow.  I'd like to see the transcripts of that part.

I'd also like to know how he's getting along with his brother officers nowadays.

Terry, 230RN

« Last Edit: December 17, 2017, 01:12:32 PM by 230RN »

Scout26

  • I'm a leaf on the wind.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 25,997
  • I spent a week in that town one night....
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #38 on: December 17, 2017, 01:16:02 PM »
Sorry, Amy Schumer, but I ain't buying any "statistical" excuse for those police shootings.

Very good, from that article:

Wow.  I'd like to see the transcripts of that part.

I'd also like to know how he's getting along with his brother Officers nowadays.

Terry, 230RN



I'm not giving a statistical excuse.  If you go back and read my first post, the acceptable number of bad police shootings is ZERO.  I'm simply pointing out that bad police shootings are "rare".  Which is contrary to what the BLM would have you believe.   There have been 21 Police Involved shootings in Chicago this year.  How many of those made the news?  How many were "bad"??  (8 police officers have been shot).  Again to my point.  As opposed to other shootings, the bad police shootings make the news because they are "rare".  The daily shooting murders in Chicago merit merely a footnote in the local news because they have become so "common".
Some days even my lucky rocketship underpants won't help.


Bring me my Broadsword and a clear understanding.
Get up to the roundhouse on the cliff-top standing.
Take women and children and bed them down.
Bless with a hard heart those that stand with me.
Bless the women and children who firm our hands.
Put our backs to the north wind.
Hold fast by the river.
Sweet memories to drive us on,
for the motherland.

Fly320s

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,415
  • Formerly, Arthur, King of the Britons
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #39 on: December 17, 2017, 01:32:38 PM »
At no time can I see where there was any threat from the guy.

I am nitpicking your post intentionally just to make a point.

There was a threat.  The victim reached to his waist band.  That has long be known as, and considered as, a furtive movement and the courts have consistently upheld police actions that were responses to furtive movements.

I agree with everyone here that the cops could have safely and easily cuffed the man long before any shots were fired, but they didn't.  I have many complaints about their tactics and techniques, but based strictly on the furtive movement, it was a good shoot.
Islamic sex dolls.  Do they blow themselves up?

Ben

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 45,745
  • I'm an Extremist!
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #40 on: December 17, 2017, 01:55:45 PM »
I'm actually curious about where these particular cops got the training that taught them the "pretzel technique". In-house? Contractor? Who came up with that as viable and efficient? How many other departments may have been taught that by some contractor?
"I'm a foolish old man that has been drawn into a wild goose chase by a harpy in trousers and a nincompoop."

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,570
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #41 on: December 17, 2017, 02:29:14 PM »
I'm actually curious about where these particular cops got the training that taught them the "pretzel technique". In-house? Contractor? Who came up with that as viable and efficient? How many other departments may have been taught that by some contractor?
The pretzel is good if you don’t want someone to easily get up or move, but makes no sense to combine with a movement order.

I’ve been “arrested” at gunpoint maybe twenty times over the past three months. When they have me move to them, they make me walk backward to the sound of their voice. Never crawling or pretzeling around.

More and more I’m coming down that the sgt should have been the one brought up on charges.

Ben

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 45,745
  • I'm an Extremist!
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #42 on: December 17, 2017, 04:03:08 PM »
The pretzel is good if you don’t want someone to easily get up or move, but makes no sense to combine with a movement order.

I mostly agree with that. I've got no problems if cops want to anchor someone in place, given that whatever method they use can take account for someone incapable of advanced yoga, and having the cops on scene with enough common sense to recognize that someone may be having trouble, and having alternate methods available.

But that combined with moving, N-O no. In fact it seems to me any of those movement commands that don't involve the person on their feet (such as walking backwards) to me, from a lyaman's perspective, should all be the same as when you do ladder work - three points of contact, so people don't accidentally "make a sudden move" and get drilled.
"I'm a foolish old man that has been drawn into a wild goose chase by a harpy in trousers and a nincompoop."

zxcvbob

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12,208
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #43 on: December 17, 2017, 04:43:07 PM »
I mostly agree with that. I've got no problems if cops want to anchor someone in place, given that whatever method they use can take account for someone incapable of advanced yoga, and having the cops on scene with enough common sense to recognize that someone may be having trouble, and having alternate methods available.

But that combined with moving, N-O no. In fact it seems to me any of those movement commands that don't involve the person on their feet (such as walking backwards) to me, from a lyaman's perspective, should all be the same as when you do ladder work - three points of contact, so people don't accidentally "make a sudden move" and get drilled.

Unless you *want* them to make a sudden move.   :mad: 
"It's good, though..."

French G.

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,184
  • ohhh sparkles!
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #44 on: December 17, 2017, 04:49:08 PM »
Then there are marginally compliant subjects. People have limits and if you keep giving them orders eventually they will not comply. The one time I had someone at gunpoint I am now convinced that they would have stood there on the street until the cops showed up. But, I wanted them on the ground. They did not want to be on the ground so they figured I wouldn't shoot if they walked away. Probably better that way, if you show up as a cop who is the threat? The guy with the rifle or the guy just standing there? Racial profiling and the 911 call was all I had going for me there which is not 100% to keep me from getting shot.
AKA Navy Joe   

I'm so contrarian that I didn't respond to the thread.

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,622
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #45 on: December 17, 2017, 04:54:04 PM »
I am nitpicking your post intentionally just to make a point.

There was a threat.  The victim reached to his waist band.  That has long be known as, and considered as, a furtive movement and the courts have consistently upheld police actions that were responses to furtive movements.

I agree with everyone here that the cops could have safely and easily cuffed the man long before any shots were fired, but they didn't.  I have many complaints about their tactics and techniques, but based strictly on the furtive movement, it was a good shoot.
I disagree.  There needs to be something else that makes it a viable threat.  Otherwise, cops would be justified in drawing and gunning down people every day as they walked down the street.  Someone draws a cell phone off their belt when an officer happens to be nearby and he shoots them.  I really doubt that is justified.  They never saw a weapon or aggressive behavior at all.  I find it doubtful they even knew for certain at the time this guy was the one who pointed the gun out the window.  
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

Fly320s

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,415
  • Formerly, Arthur, King of the Britons
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #46 on: December 17, 2017, 10:56:02 PM »
I disagree.  There needs to be something else that makes it a viable threat.  Otherwise, cops would be justified in drawing and gunning down people every day as they walked down the street.  Someone draws a cell phone off their belt when an officer happens to be nearby and he shoots them.  I really doubt that is justified.  They never saw a weapon or aggressive behavior at all.  I find it doubtful they even knew for certain at the time this guy was the one who pointed the gun out the window.  

There was:

1.  Report of a man with a weapon in the hotel room.
2.  The man was being held at gun point and being giving commands, which he wasn't complying with.
Islamic sex dolls.  Do they blow themselves up?

KD5NRH

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,926
  • I'm too sexy for you people.
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #47 on: December 18, 2017, 04:42:56 PM »
I mostly agree with that. I've got no problems if cops want to anchor someone in place, given that whatever method they use can take account for someone incapable of advanced yoga, and having the cops on scene with enough common sense to recognize that someone may be having trouble, and having alternate methods available.

This.  I've been handcuffed plenty of times, not all by ex girlfriends, and even twice for real.  My aikido instructors also teach the police academy's handcuffing and control techniques class, and often bring cadets into the aikido class for extra practice.  I'm a good compromise between "small" and "gorilla," as well as between "newbie" and "street fighter," so I tend to be a preferred "normal size guy with a bit more than everyday skills."

Every movement command is either standing (walking backward) or knee walking.  No crawling, no slithering like a snake.  Stationary positions for actual restraint don't tend to be that pretzely, either; standing is pretty much fingers laced on head for the pat down, then (cooperative) arms straight out at the sides, palms back, with the officer controlling each hand in for cuffing or (less cooperative) controlling them directly off the head to the cuffing position.  (Controlling off the head has more potential for injury to the suspect, since the officer has to make the hand turn properly to get from there to the small of the back, while making sure it can't move on its own.)  Prone is basically the same; unless you've got a lot of yoga, kung fu or similar experience, having the legs spread uncomfortably-but-not-quite-painfully apart while prone is slower to get up from than having them crossed.

Interestingly, the two "for real" times were both "turn around and put your hands behind your back," with no serious control technique applied.  The finger control we use is basically yubi gatame with just enough pressure in a "can't go that way" direction to keep it ready to hurt, without actually hurting at all.  Since it's held with the entire hand against 1-2 fingers, it can overcome a huge disparity in strength, and can go from "firm grip" to "excruciating pain that stops when you cooperate" to "that's not going to heal without surgery" pretty much instantly.  Essentially, an ideal compromise between not making the cooperative guy any more uncomfortable, and still being able to restrain and control him at any time.

Another problem I have with their "training," though, is that they had him crawl right over the woman's purse.  It's a state with a lot of concealed carry, and I don't recall hearing them even ask her if she had a gun in the purse.  They even had another officer available to at least kick it out of the path, though considering where she was cuffed, they should have already had him stationary and been cuffing him at the point where he got to it instead of ordering him to crawl more.

tokugawa

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,846
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #48 on: December 18, 2017, 08:51:21 PM »
Here is my question- blunt and simple. If he had just laid there, arms outstretched, and not moved a muscle, would they have killed him anyway for "non compliance"?

,

   Repeatedly telling some one they will be shot for the slightest false move, then forcing the subject of the commands go through a contortionist routine  in order to "comply", is a Kafkaesque nightmare. 

 
 
 

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,570
Re: Arizona shooting
« Reply #49 on: December 18, 2017, 10:42:38 PM »
Here is my question- blunt and simple. If he had just laid there, arms outstretched, and not moved a muscle, would they have killed him anyway for "non compliance"?
The way the sergeant was priming the situation, I'm not sure.  Probably would have survived a little longer, though.  At least long enough for him to yell "IF YOU LAY THERE WITHOUT MOVING WE WILL SHOOT YOU."