- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: NYPD cops refuse to turn and face mayor as he walks into hospital
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:36 pm to Gulf Coast Tiger
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:36 pm to Gulf Coast Tiger
There is no action taken by police that will not be defended by someone on Poliboard.
2
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:53 pm to the808bass
quote:
small municipal police forces here are revenue generators first and law enforcement second.
Now here we have the crux of the matter.
I am totally against the use of police powers as revenue generators. However, I think this is more the fault of the elected officials than the police themselves.
For instance, in the Garner case people say - and rightly so - that no life should have been forfeited over the sale of a single cigarette. I agree with that completely. However it is not the cop's idea to do that. These cops were sent out there to 'get these vendors off the street.' In fact it was one of Blasios signature initiatives to increase revenue via cigarette taxes.
So the poor cop - would would probably love to concentrate more on violent criminal activity than a pip-squeak misdemeanor like this - was sent out with the explicit instruction to get these guys off the street. (It is my understanding that the cops involved were part of a unit dedicated to that task.) So they didn't just drive down the street and say "lookee there - a black man is violating a statute - let's go rough him up some, and if we get lucky maybe we can kill him."
It was their specific job, assigned by the mayor via the police department.
I completely object to this use of the police department and have stated such since the beginning.
My only beef is with blaming the police for the death - asserting that is was more or less intentional, or at least reckless, and was racially motivated. Based on all that has been made public about the event, it was neither, as evidenced by the Grand Jury deliberation.
The grand jury is the backbone of our judicial system - we should not so cavalierly smear it - especially with blatant misinformation.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:55 pm to ChineseBandit58
quote:
Now here we have the crux of the matter. I am totally against the use of police powers as revenue generators. However, I think this is more the fault of the elected officials than the police themselves. For instance, in the Garner case people say - and rightly so - that no life should have been forfeited over the sale of a single cigarette. I agree with that completely. However it is not the cop's idea to do that. These cops were sent out there to 'get these vendors off the street.' In fact it was one of Blasios signature initiatives to increase revenue via cigarette taxes. So the poor cop - would would probably love to concentrate more on violent criminal activity than a pip-squeak misdemeanor like this - was sent out with the explicit instruction to get these guys off the street. (It is my understanding that the cops involved were part of a unit dedicated to that task.) So they didn't just drive down the street and say "lookee there - a black man is violating a statute - let's go rough him up some, and if we get lucky maybe we can kill him." It was their specific job, assigned by the mayor via the police department. I completely object to this use of the police department and have stated such since the beginning. My only beef is with blaming the police for the death - asserting that is was more or less intentional, or at least reckless, and was racially motivated. Based on all that has been made public about the event, it was neither, as evidenced by the Grand Jury deliberation. The grand jury is the backbone of our judicial system - we should not so cavalierly smear it - especially with blatant misinformation.
Blah blah blah. Cops exercise (supposedly) discretion and judgment all the time. Even when they are sent out with explicit instructions to give a lot of speeding tickets, do you think they still don't let some people go based on judgement?
Judgment.
Judgment.
Everything is judgment. Let's stop with the "poor cop" routine.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:58 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
Big Scrub TX
pfft -
Posted on 12/22/14 at 2:00 pm to the808bass
quote:
There is no action taken by police that will not be defended by someone on Poliboard.
Have you considered the possibility that your point might resonate better if you had (literally) not said "FTP" as your response to The Garner case?
Posted on 12/22/14 at 2:04 pm to the808bass
quote:
There is no action taken by police that will not be defended by someone on Poliboard.
This is a police technique that is used nationwide. easy to defend
Posted on 12/22/14 at 2:08 pm to ChineseBandit58
quote:
Sounds like two legitimate concerns. However, on the first one, do you think it would have been different had you not been black? maybe, maybe not.
I think the first guy was just an overanxious small town cop (Baker). As far as I know his gun was drawn before he even saw me.
We are in agreement on the Brown case. My issue with the Garner case is use of the choke hold. No one with common sense believes the police officers intended to kill him but the use of the chokehold caused his death. The officers may not be guilty legally but definitely morally and likely in civil court IMO.
This post was edited on 12/22/14 at 2:10 pm
Posted on 12/22/14 at 2:54 pm to mikelowery1911
quote:
gun was drawn before he even saw me.
This is sort of what I thought.
quote:
issue with the Garner case is use of the choke hold
This is legitimate concern. Opinions can differ. I am not entirely confident of my position, but I am not at all in sympathy with the opposing opinion. My take on it is that there has to be a technique to get a man to the ground. Considering his size and bulk, I think some sort of controlling the man's head is necessary. Someone suggested a well placed kick to the backs of his knees may have taken him down. I dunno - I am not a martial arts expert.
I know that what I saw done was completely within reason. I suppose there may have been other techniques utilized, but the technique used seemed entirely appropriate to me. Considering that the 'chokehold' was used solely to get the man to the ground and was immediately released. The man was not choiked. He was certainly not "choked to death' as many on here keep repeating.
And there is some difference of opinion as to whether this was a 'chokehold' - again I am not a martial arts expert, but I have read that a chokehold is designed to produce quick unconsciousness. This was certainly not of that caliber = to me it was merely used to control the man's head.
Again - I see absolutely no racial animus involved at all.
For this to devolve into some sort of civil rights racial issue is completely misguided.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:43 pm to Gulf Coast Tiger
Okay. Why was the white female not investigated in the same manner? She was the driver and owner of the vehicle that ran a stop light , not the passenger.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 4:24 pm to ChineseBandit58
quote:
Again - I see absolutely no racial animus involved at all. For this to devolve into some sort of civil rights racial issue is completely misguided.
For me animus is the wrong word to use. To me it's a lack of empathy, a lack of giving someone the benefit of the doubt, possibly because of someone's skin color.
With the exception of the Michael Brown case, most of these incidents appear to be the result of miscommunication that should have been handled differently.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 4:43 pm to Gulf Coast Tiger
quote:
This is a police technique that is used nationwide. easy to defend
Like I said. There is no action taken by police which is not defended by someone on Poliboard. With self-righteous assurance to boot.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 4:50 pm to the808bass
Well I'm sorry no one asked you for approval. You sound like your feelings are hurt. A officer uses a LEGAL tactic to investigate a crime further and you act like he did something wrong.
You are the exact opposite because you refuse to ever think a police officer has done anything right.
You are the exact opposite because you refuse to ever think a police officer has done anything right.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 4:56 pm to Gulf Coast Tiger
You are 100% wrong. I think the vast majority of cops do a great job in a difficult job.
I have some specific issues.
1) hyper responsiveness to non-existent threats
2) police as revenue generators
3) lack of accountability legally for actions which citizens would be prosecuted for
4) police unions defending bad eggs and also bad hiring practices - these lead to repeat offenders doing bad stuff
The inability to admit the basic problems of police by police will lead to painful reform process. Acknowledging common sense issues and working together to solve them would gain a lot of capital for the police in general. Sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "good shoot" as we watch a 12-year old get gunned down won't.
I have some specific issues.
1) hyper responsiveness to non-existent threats
2) police as revenue generators
3) lack of accountability legally for actions which citizens would be prosecuted for
4) police unions defending bad eggs and also bad hiring practices - these lead to repeat offenders doing bad stuff
The inability to admit the basic problems of police by police will lead to painful reform process. Acknowledging common sense issues and working together to solve them would gain a lot of capital for the police in general. Sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "good shoot" as we watch a 12-year old get gunned down won't.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 5:05 pm to the808bass
1- officers have to make judgment calls quickly and we sometimes have tough calls to make. If we fix 4, then this issue would go away. Bad cops make bad decisions. I am not talking about crooked officers, I am talking about officers that mentally shouldn't be doing this job. Zimmerman failed the mental part of this when he applied for a police job.
2- I would agree with you on this. Traffic is a major issue in a lot of cities so you have to write tickets, but writing tickets just for money is a misuse of police officers.
3- we are prosecuted for crimes. Most of the things that we are doing a normal citizen doesn't have the right to do the things we can so yes they would be arrested for that.
4- You are right. Cleveland PD seems to be the poster child for this and for bad hiring practices. We don't have a lot of unions in the south and therefore a lot more officers can be taught to do the job right instead of being a bad and/or lazy cop protected by the Union.
The 12 year old getting shot was terrible tactics for one. That approach was one of the worst I have ever seen.
2- I would agree with you on this. Traffic is a major issue in a lot of cities so you have to write tickets, but writing tickets just for money is a misuse of police officers.
3- we are prosecuted for crimes. Most of the things that we are doing a normal citizen doesn't have the right to do the things we can so yes they would be arrested for that.
4- You are right. Cleveland PD seems to be the poster child for this and for bad hiring practices. We don't have a lot of unions in the south and therefore a lot more officers can be taught to do the job right instead of being a bad and/or lazy cop protected by the Union.
The 12 year old getting shot was terrible tactics for one. That approach was one of the worst I have ever seen.
This post was edited on 12/22/14 at 5:07 pm
Posted on 12/22/14 at 5:10 pm to the808bass
quote:
I think the vast majority of cops do a great job in a difficult job.
I have some specific issues.
1) hyper responsiveness to non-existent threats
2) police as revenue generators
3) lack of accountability legally for actions which citizens would be prosecuted for
4) police unions defending bad eggs and also bad hiring practices - these lead to repeat offenders doing bad stuff
The inability to admit the basic problems of police by police will lead to painful reform process. Acknowledging common sense issues and working together to solve them would gain a lot of capital for the police in general.
I agree with everything you said ^ until you got to this \/
quote:
Sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "good shoot" as we watch a 12-year old get gunned down won't.
I don't know enough about the shooting of the kid with the fake gun, but I am willing to withhold condemnation of the cops unless someone provides information that they knew there was no danger posed by the kid with the gun. You cannot assume the cops knew the gun was fake.
If there was no real danger (had the gun been real) then yes, the police should not have shot. But if the situation had involved a real gun and people were in danger, then the shooting would be justified. Tragic occurrence.
Do you know that it was evident the kids gun was fake?
And if not, do you know if his actions could have presented a danger to people had the gun been real?
Those are the questions that need to be answered before you condemn the cops.
I refuse to believe the cops just wanted to kill a kid - unless they knew the gun was fake, then murder would be indicated. I will accept that they made a mistake if you can show there could have been no danger from a real gun.
Why did you use this example? - do you have some info that is not generally known?
eta
quote:
The 12 year old getting shot was terrible tactics for one. That approach was one of the worst I have ever seen.
J will accept this as evidence of a bad shoot. Cops should be held responsible either individually or indicative of poor teaching.
This post was edited on 12/22/14 at 5:14 pm
Posted on 12/22/14 at 8:26 pm to ChineseBandit58
quote:
I refuse to believe the cops just wanted to kill a kid - unless they knew the gun was fake, then murder would be indicated. I will accept that they made a mistake if you can show there could have been no danger from a real gun.
I don't think they wanted to kill a kid. They weren't informed by the dispatcher that the gun was likely fake, which she had been told.
I'm speaking more of the after action on the internet. And you kinda started it in your post. A 12 year old playing with a BB gun is never going to be a "good shoot," even if police follow every procedure in the book. Some basic sensitivity to the public view of things would be a good idea.
The same thing happened in the Christopher Roupe shooting earlier this year. There were plenty of internet cop and cop apologists explaining why it made perfect sense to shoot a kid answering the door with a Wii remote. They would be far better off just admitting it was awful and that it shouldn't happen. Further, they should note that the officer there was a basket case and had discharged her gun at an unarmed teen before.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 8:34 pm to the808bass
quote:
And you kinda started it in your post. A 12 year old playing with a BB gun is never going to be a "good shoot,"
I don't think I have started anything about the 12 yr old kid - I did respond to YOUR post about it.
I wasn't aware it was a BB gun. What I read about it was that it was a very realistic looking toy gun that had the orange tip removed. Don't think BB guns have the orange tip. been a long time since I looked at BB guns tho - maybe they do.
All I recall about that case is that a 911 came in about someone with a gun threatening people in a park. Turned out to be a kid with a toy.
quote:
same thing happened in the Christopher Roupe shooting
Never heard of it.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 8:38 pm to ChineseBandit58
Nobody hears of any of these cases. It's amazing.
That's irrelevant spin the police department released. The BB gun was in his waistband. It never came out. He was shot before he could have taken it out. The police couldnt have seen whether or not it had an orange tip.
And I'll bet dollars to donuts he was told both to throw down the weapon and to put his hands up. Which is great unless you have to decide which one to do and not doing the right one gets you killed.
quote:
orange tip removed
That's irrelevant spin the police department released. The BB gun was in his waistband. It never came out. He was shot before he could have taken it out. The police couldnt have seen whether or not it had an orange tip.
And I'll bet dollars to donuts he was told both to throw down the weapon and to put his hands up. Which is great unless you have to decide which one to do and not doing the right one gets you killed.
Posted on 12/23/14 at 6:30 am to the808bass
quote:
I don't think they wanted to kill a kid. They weren't informed by the dispatcher that the gun was likely fake, which she had been told.
Honestly that would not have mattered. I wouldn't risk my life on a civilians opinion if a gun was real or not. I would have used different tactics though. No matter what the call is I am not driving right up to the call.
Posted on 12/23/14 at 8:35 am to Gulf Coast Tiger
quote:
Honestly that would not have mattered. I wouldn't risk my life on a civilians opinion if a gun was real or not.
But police will risk the life of the person they are receiving the call about. The police in the Crawford case took the caller completely at his word. Why didn't they doubt that opinion of a civilian? And now we're back to the hyper-reactive response of police.
I do appreciate your candor on the tactics of the approach.
Page 8 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News