SWB: Shopping While Black

[Mavorpen]

What the actual fuck? You're telling me he's the ONLY one who noticed a person supposedly waving around a "real gun"? Yeah, keep telling yourself that.

i'm sure we have experienced instances in our lives where we were the only ones in the room to notice something, even something quite extraordinary

Yeah, no, not buying this cop out.

Also, your hypothesis is just plain factually wrong.

"He didn't really want to be looked at and when people did look at him, he was pointing the gun at them. He was pointing at people. Children walking by," Ronald Ritchie said.

So unless these people are ALL blind, your conjecture is just plain nonsense.

[Condunum]

I didn't "flip out", please don't use a tone argument. I'm assuming they didn't feel threatened, because there is nothing to tell me they felt threatened, because no one said they felt threatened. Since no one claimed to feel threatened, I don't have reason to think they felt threatened.

Yeah, you did. Right but your original argument was that they didn't feel threatened, not that you assumed they didn't. Two different things. Thanks for conceding your argument though.

You're really condescending. Annoyingly so. Stop that. My point remains: There is no reason for me to believe they felt threatened just because one person said they did, if they don't confirm that. Because no one did. Not. One. Person.

And did that somehow impede you from attempting to describe the situation to the police? Because that's what we're talking about.

Yes, absolutely, I was unable to talk at all for a few hours.

Irrelevant. Afterwards, you were capable of giving a police report. It would have been the officer on the scene's responsibility to see to it that you filed a report.

You haven't shown be why they would feel judged.

I don't need to, I my argument was that just because they didn't report it doesn't mean they didn't feel threatened.

Which I never disagreed with.

[Maurepas]

I don't think you know what it's like to have people point guns at you. Or the horrible feeling of quickly trying to decide whether what looks like a gun is a gun or not, and why is this man not putting down the gun, and you were told in training that hesitating in these situations can be extremely dangerous, and HOLY SHIT WHY ISN'T THIS MAN PUTTING DOWN THE FUCKING GUN!

this is a good point

the police have to make life-and-death decisions on a regular basis. Its a very stressful job, given the situation (they were called in about a suspect armed with a gun), and the fact that he refused to drop the gun while waving it around... I think they made a reasonable, if ultimately wrong call.

No one should face any prosecution because there was no malice on the part of anyone (I'm sure the person did not prank call the police, he felt genuinely threatened). The death is regretable though.

Malice is irrelevant. Nobody asks the drunk driver whether he did it on purpose. And whether the cop was stressed out is not a factor when he committed at least manslaughter, at worse murder.

Further, if you're too stressed out to handle the job of being a police officer then you should not be a police officer. Plain and simple.

[Infected Mushroom]

Except, we're not talking about a gun. We're talking about a TOY gun. And quite frankly, I could do a shit ton more damage with a bat.


And since there is no legitimate evidence of the man doing this, this is irrelevant as hell.

How is it irrelevant? The only eyewitness who spoke out so far claims he was waving it.

Plus, the gun shot BB's and pellets. I'm pretty sure you could deal quite a bit of damage with one of those if used right.

in extreme situations they can kill

if they hit people's eyes, it could make them blind. Also, I'm sure they are lethal against very little children and toddlers.

there's a reason why we don't let kids play with those types of guns in the schoolyard. People get hurt.

[The Sotoan Union]

I don't think you know what it's like to have people point guns at you. Or the horrible feeling of quickly trying to decide whether what looks like a gun is a gun or not, and why is this man not putting down the gun, and you were told in training that hesitating in these situations can be extremely dangerous, and HOLY SHIT WHY ISN'T THIS MAN PUTTING DOWN THE FUCKING GUN!

You're right, I don't, that's why I'm not a cop. A cop has to be used to it, has to be prepared for it, and has to be able to tell the difference between a toy and an actual weapon, and be calm and collected enough to do it.

If they're not able to accomplish that feat, then they shouldn't be cops. They can do as I do and sit on a computer and talk about cops, because that's all they're good for with regard to police work.

The police have to be alert. There have been incidents when not responding to threats has gotten officers killed. They will react if you refuse to put down what could be a gun. They will all do that. That doesn't justify killing the man, but this was entirely avoidable. He should have put down the gun.

[Maurepas]

How is it irrelevant? The only eyewitness who spoke out so far claims he was waving it.

Plus, the gun shot BB's and pellets. I'm pretty sure you could deal quite a bit of damage with one of those if used right.

in extreme situations they can kill

if they hit people's eyes, it could make them blind. Also, I'm sure they are lethal against very little children and toddlers.

there's a reason why we don't let kids play with those types of guns in the schoolyard. People get hurt.

If I really tried hard enough, in an "extreme situation" I could kill a man with a dinner knife. That doesn't mean cops should murder me when I buy one, even if I wave it around first.

[Infected Mushroom]

this is a good point

the police have to make life-and-death decisions on a regular basis. Its a very stressful job, given the situation (they were called in about a suspect armed with a gun), and the fact that he refused to drop the gun while waving it around... I think they made a reasonable, if ultimately wrong call.

No one should face any prosecution because there was no malice on the part of anyone (I'm sure the person did not prank call the police, he felt genuinely threatened). The death is regretable though.

Malice is irrelevant. Nobody asks the drunk driver whether he did it on purpose. And whether the cop was stressed out is not a factor when he committed at least manslaughter, at worse murder.

Further, if you're too stressed out to handle the job of being a police officer then you should not be a police officer. Plain and simple.

they just made a wrong, but reasonable call and it was in the line of duty.

The reasoning was perfectly sound even if the judgement turned out to be incorrect, its a fine line. They saw a person who was waving a gun around and refused to drop it, so they did what in their professional training/experience was the best course of action to save lives and protect themselves.

They were acting in their capacity as police officers; they weren't drunk. They were doing their job. Once in a while, you're going to make a bad call. Just because someone died doesn't mean you did something criminal. There is room for serious mistakes when your task is as dangerous as that of the police. It is your job to uphold the law and so you're always at the crosshair of criminals...

[Maurepas]

You're right, I don't, that's why I'm not a cop. A cop has to be used to it, has to be prepared for it, and has to be able to tell the difference between a toy and an actual weapon, and be calm and collected enough to do it.

If they're not able to accomplish that feat, then they shouldn't be cops. They can do as I do and sit on a computer and talk about cops, because that's all they're good for with regard to police work.

The police have to be alert. There have been incidents when not responding to threats has gotten officers killed. They will react if you refuse to put down what could be a gun. They will all do that. That doesn't justify killing the man, but this was entirely avoidable. He should have put down the gun.

Yes, he should've put down the gun. But as you said this does not justify killing the man. And that cop must be held accountable for that action.

[Infected Mushroom]

in extreme situations they can kill

if they hit people's eyes, it could make them blind. Also, I'm sure they are lethal against very little children and toddlers.

there's a reason why we don't let kids play with those types of guns in the schoolyard. People get hurt.

If I really tried hard enough, in an "extreme situation" I could kill a man with a dinner knife. That doesn't mean cops should murder me when I buy one, even if I wave it around first.

if someone was waving a knife around in public, refused to drop the knife when the police pointed a gun at them, and the police decide to open fire... I would understand that.

See you can't always expect the police to be able to differentiate between kitchen knives vs killer knives, guns vs fake guns... you should NOT be waving those things around in public.

[Polkopia]

How is it irrelevant? The only eyewitness who spoke out so far claims he was waving it.

Right, and not a single person has verified that claim, despite the fact that the guy was supposedly pointing it at people.

Plus, the gun shot BB's and pellets. I'm pretty sure you could deal quite a bit of damage with one of those if used right.

And?

And what? America has had its share of shootings in the last few years. You really can't be too careful. Although the gun isn't directly lethal, it looks real enough to compare to one that is. Besides, haven't you seen A Christmas Story?

[Maurepas]

Malice is irrelevant. Nobody asks the drunk driver whether he did it on purpose. And whether the cop was stressed out is not a factor when he committed at least manslaughter, at worse murder.

Further, if you're too stressed out to handle the job of being a police officer then you should not be a police officer. Plain and simple.

they just made a wrong, but reasonable call and it was in the line of duty.

The reasoning was perfectly sound even if the judgement turned out to be incorrect, its a fine line. They saw a person who was waving a gun around and refused to drop it, so they did what in their professional training/experience was the best course of action to save lives and protect themselves.

They were acting in their capacity as police officers; they weren't drunk. They were doing their job. Once in a while, you're going to make a bad call. Just because someone died doesn't mean you did something criminal. There is room for serious mistakes when your task is as dangerous as that of the police. It is your job to uphold the law and so you're always at the crosshair of criminals...

There is no room for serious mistakes if you're stressed and making serious mistakes you don't need to be on duty, and yes when you cause someone's death it does mean you did something criminal, that's what Manslaughter is actually.

[Wisconsin9]

Malice is irrelevant. Nobody asks the drunk driver whether he did it on purpose. And whether the cop was stressed out is not a factor when he committed at least manslaughter, at worse murder.

Further, if you're too stressed out to handle the job of being a police officer then you should not be a police officer. Plain and simple.

they just made a wrong, but reasonable call and it was in the line of duty.

The reasoning was perfectly sound even if the judgement turned out to be incorrect, its a fine line. They saw a person who was waving a gun around and refused to drop it, so they did what in their professional training/experience was the best course of action to save lives and protect themselves.

They were acting in their capacity as police officers; they weren't drunk. They were doing their job. Once in a while, you're going to make a bad call. Just because someone died doesn't mean you did something criminal. There is room for serious mistakes when your task is as dangerous as that of the police. It is your job to uphold the law and so you're always at the crosshair of criminals...

You know, if we were discussing doctors making a mistake that kills someone then they actually would have done something criminal.

[Mavorpen]

If I really tried hard enough, in an "extreme situation" I could kill a man with a dinner knife. That doesn't mean cops should murder me when I buy one, even if I wave it around first.

if someone was waving a knife around in public, refused to drop the knife when the police pointed a gun at them, and the police decide to open fire... I would understand that.

See you can't always expect the police to be able to differentiate between kitchen knives vs killer knives, guns vs fake guns... you should NOT be waving those things around in public.

Aaand again, there's no legitimate evidence he was "waving it around" or threatening anyone in any way.

[Maurepas]

If I really tried hard enough, in an "extreme situation" I could kill a man with a dinner knife. That doesn't mean cops should murder me when I buy one, even if I wave it around first.

if someone was waving a knife around in public, refused to drop the knife when the police pointed a gun at them, and the police decide to open fire... I would understand that.

See you can't always expect the police to be able to differentiate between kitchen knives vs killer knives, guns vs fake guns... you should NOT be waving those things around in public.

Yes I can expect that actually. I fully expect cops to be trained in the ability to tell the difference between actual weapons and fake weapons. It seems ludicrous to me that we wouldn't.

[Iron Dog]

if someone was waving a knife around in public, refused to drop the knife when the police pointed a gun at them, and the police decide to open fire... I would understand that.

See you can't always expect the police to be able to differentiate between kitchen knives vs killer knives, guns vs fake guns... you should NOT be waving those things around in public.

Aaand again, there's no legitimate evidence he was "waving it around" or threatening anyone in any way.

And on the other hand do you have legitimate evidence he was no do that? None of us were there.

[Mavorpen]

Right, and not a single person has verified that claim, despite the fact that the guy was supposedly pointing it at people.

And?

And what? America has had its share of shootings in the last few years. You really can't be too careful. Although the gun isn't directly lethal, it looks real enough to compare to one that is. Besides, haven't you seen A Christmas Story?

Yeah, no, I refuse to accept this as an excuse to justify racial profiling, whether it's conscious or not.

[The Sotoan Union]

The police have to be alert. There have been incidents when not responding to threats has gotten officers killed. They will react if you refuse to put down what could be a gun. They will all do that. That doesn't justify killing the man, but this was entirely avoidable. He should have put down the gun.

Yes, he should've put down the gun. But as you said this does not justify killing the man. And that cop must be held accountable for that action.

True.

[Mavorpen]

Aaand again, there's no legitimate evidence he was "waving it around" or threatening anyone in any way.

And on the other hand do you have legitimate evidence he was no do that? None of us were there.

Yes. The very fact that NO ONE that he supposedly waved or pointed the gun at spoke up about it.

[Infected Mushroom]

they just made a wrong, but reasonable call and it was in the line of duty.

The reasoning was perfectly sound even if the judgement turned out to be incorrect, its a fine line. They saw a person who was waving a gun around and refused to drop it, so they did what in their professional training/experience was the best course of action to save lives and protect themselves.

They were acting in their capacity as police officers; they weren't drunk. They were doing their job. Once in a while, you're going to make a bad call. Just because someone died doesn't mean you did something criminal. There is room for serious mistakes when your task is as dangerous as that of the police. It is your job to uphold the law and so you're always at the crosshair of criminals...

There is no room for serious mistakes if you're stressed and making serious mistakes you don't need to be on duty, and yes when you cause someone's death it does mean you did something criminal, that's what Manslaughter is actually.

its not manslaughter if you can justify your reasoning and if you were acting in a professional capacity. Its not just the outcome, the reasoning is important too.

For example, not every soldier is going to face court-marshall if he accidentally shoots and kills a civilian. If he can justify that he was acting in his professional capacity and made a reasonable but ultimately wrong decision (ex he thought the civilian had a bomb or was going to draw a gun), he should be exempt.

The same would apply to a police officer. In this case, they killed him because they thought he was going to fire a gun which he had been waving around and which he refused to drop.

It was a reasoned, reasonable, if ultimately wrong call but it was a professional call. It was a hard decision, they only had a few split seconds to make it, and they chose. The police need some room to make mistakes.

[Iron Dog]

And on the other hand do you have legitimate evidence he was no do that? None of us were there.

Yes. The very fact that NO ONE that he supposedly waved or pointed the gun at spoke up about it.

It will come down as a good shoot. He did not obey orders to put said object down, there is a 911 call that stats he was waving it around. Seems pretty clear cut to me.

[Condunum]

Yes. The very fact that NO ONE that he supposedly waved or pointed the gun at spoke up about it.

It will come down as a good shoot. He did not obey orders to put said object down, there is a 911 call that stats he was waving it around. Seems pretty clear cut to me.

So disobeying the police means you can be shot now? Nothing is ever clear cut. I would imagine the last 7 pages demonstrate that well.

[Earth in Roughly 1000 Years]

You're really condescending. Annoyingly so. Stop that. My point remains: There is no reason for me to believe they felt threatened just because one person said they did, if they don't confirm that. Because no one did. Not. One. Person.

You were being just as condescending if not more to multiple people in this thread just because they didn't share your opinion.
That still doesn't mean that no one felt threatened, it just means they didn't report it, that's all that means.

Irrelevant.

No, you asked me a question and I gave you an answer it was completely relevant to the question you asked me. Again, you brought it up, this is the second time you'e brought something up only to dismiss it as irrelevant when you don't like my response. Pathetic.

Which I never disagreed with.

Yes you did, that was your original point.

[Iron Dog]

It will come down as a good shoot. He did not obey orders to put said object down, there is a 911 call that stats he was waving it around. Seems pretty clear cut to me.

So disobeying the police means you can be shot now? Nothing is ever clear cut. I would imagine the last 7 pages demonstrate that well.

Disobeying orders to put down a weapon or something that looks like one will get you shot.

[Mavorpen]

Yes. The very fact that NO ONE that he supposedly waved or pointed the gun at spoke up about it.

It will come down as a good shoot. He did not obey orders to put said object down, there is a 911 call that stats he was waving it around. Seems pretty clear cut to me.

That police are trigger happy when it comes to black people? I agree.

[Infected Mushroom]

they just made a wrong, but reasonable call and it was in the line of duty.

The reasoning was perfectly sound even if the judgement turned out to be incorrect, its a fine line. They saw a person who was waving a gun around and refused to drop it, so they did what in their professional training/experience was the best course of action to save lives and protect themselves.

They were acting in their capacity as police officers; they weren't drunk. They were doing their job. Once in a while, you're going to make a bad call. Just because someone died doesn't mean you did something criminal. There is room for serious mistakes when your task is as dangerous as that of the police. It is your job to uphold the law and so you're always at the crosshair of criminals...

You know, if we were discussing doctors making a mistake that kills someone then they actually would have done something criminal.

doctors performing dangerous operations have many many clauses which limit/exempt them from criminal prosecution and civil prosecution so long as they can justify the decisions they make (it's not just based on the outcome) and so long as they act within professional capacity. In most cases, even a bad outcome doesn't place blame on the doctor if he has a justification. The reasoning is important.

I would expect such things to also protect the police from accusations of manslaughter. It should not just focus on the outcome. It's not Dead Body that shouldn't be dead = Manslaughter. There's more to it than that...