Police Shoot and Kill Homeless Man

Celticfire

Egginacup wrote: »

Karma, you're dealing with sadists here. David and Caovyn and Lil Cuchulain and DPD if given a choice whereby a situation could be concluded peaceably or with the death of a suspect they would opt for the slaying, even if it was just as easy to end it with no shots fired.

This should be post of the day. Hilarious :pac:

Egginacup

true567 wrote: »

There were no facts stated no arguments made, typical drivel.

But while I have you here I would like to add that it is absolutely hilarious that someone who within the past week stated Russia is not a police state, is condemning the entire U.S. policing force. Honestly, if please answer this question for me so I know what I am dealing with, what is more representative of a police state- the U.S. or Russia?

We're not talking about "anywhere" here. My opinions about Russia or Mongolia or Cape Verde are irrelevant to this discussion.

Egginacup

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

What exactly is your point? That trained mental health workers with knowledge of a patient and a pre existing relationship with him are better suited to dealing with him than police?

Are you allergic to thinking rationally? I get the impression that there are a lot of people on here, yourself included, who would be very disappointed at the outcome of the case I just described. I get the impression you'd feel cheated if the poor misfortunate guy wasn't actually terrorised, beaten and shot so you could rub your hands together with glee and gloat "See, don't resist if you don't want to get shot!"

I feel a bit sorry for you.

Little CuChulainn

Egginacup wrote: »

Karma, you're dealing with sadists here. David and Caovyn and Lil Cuchulain and DPD if given a choice whereby a situation could be concluded peaceably or with the death of a suspect they would opt for the slaying, even if it was just as easy to end it with no shots fired.

And of course you can quote the posts where this opinion is stated, or even implied.

Egginacup wrote: »

Are you allergic to thinking rationally? I get the impression that there are a lot of people on here, yourself included, who would be very disappointed at the outcome of the case I just described. I get the impression you'd feel cheated if the poor misfortunate guy wasn't actually terrorised, beaten and shot so you could rub your hands together with glee and gloat "See, don't resist if you don't want to get shot!"

I feel a bit sorry for you.

Don't feel sorry because you have fabricated a moral position for me that suits you to argue against. I'm open to correction but I'm almost certain every single post you've made in this thread has consisted of fabrications of your own making.

Nucular Arms

true567 wrote: »

There were no facts stated no arguments made, typical drivel.

But while I have you here I would like to add that it is absolutely hilarious that someone who within the past week stated Russia is not a police state, is condemning the entire U.S. policing force. Honestly, please answer this question for me so I know what I am dealing with, what is more representative of a police state- the U.S. or Russia?

Very little difference between the two in my opinion.

Both corrupt oligarchies.

Both foreign military aggressors in illegal wars.

Both employ brutal tactics in subjugating the 'undesirable' elements of their populations.

Both promote cultural propaganda preaching that their respective nations are the greatest.

Both employ spying and monitoring practices on a mass scale over their populations.

(also FYI on your earlier post re: the chicago black site, just google homan square, should get about 800,000 citations)

JCX BXC

Guarantee if it was a black cop who had killed a homeless person there would be no outburst.

I have no doubt in my mind that there was nothing racially involved in this shooting. It may have been a little discrimination towards homeless people, but I have little sympathy. The problem with alot of the protesting blacks in America is that they are arrested more than white people and rightly so. Its not the colour of skin thats behind the arrests its the persons crime record. I guarantee you that there would be simular arrest rates if the harlem was a mostly white community.

People really like to make things out of nothing.

Edit: I am also commending the name of the thread, as it doesn't specify skin colours which was probably not the reason for the shootings.

NachoBusiness

Carnacalla wrote: »

Guarantee if it was a black cop who had killed a homeless person there would be no outburst.

It was a black cop that killed a homeless person.

JCX BXC

I thought it was a white cop. I apologise if i got my info wrong.

Egginacup

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

What exactly is your point? That trained mental health workers with knowledge of a patient and a pre existing relationship with him are better suited to dealing with him than police?

My point is that if cops were given just a fraction of the training that care workers were given they would very easily be able to recognise someone with autism or someone who is frightened, prone to panic, things like that. Instead of just piling onto to someone and beating the shit out them when they start screaming for their mothers. Anyone can recognise someone with Downs Syndrome. A 6 year-old can look at someone with Downs and know straight away that they are "different" or "special needs". Cops in the US know this too. It's impossible NOT to know it. You can tell by their features. Yet they callously brutalize people with Downs as well:

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/man-syndrome-beaten-police-walking-street/

This ultra-asshole even said when asked if he knew his victim was Downs Syndrome that "I'm not a doctor. I didn't know" (!)

http://www.dcclothesline.com/2014/05/01/cop-beats-young-man-syndrome-packinga-colostomy-bag/

And that is the level of prick we are dealing with. You don't need to be a doctor to know that someone is Down's, but this loathsome scum just throws out a comment like that.

No amount of training would make this wanker into a better cop. When he batters a weakling that he knows full well is Down's Syndrome then there's no place for him in any position of power, even managing a burger joint.

But other cops can be trained to recognise that calming people down, not scaring the life out of them or beating them will generally defuse a situation.

Making up hypothetical reasons and excuses for taking the easy option of doling out brute force and ignorace is the realm of the lazy-minded non-thinkers.

Little CuChulainn

Egginacup wrote: »

My point is that if cops were given just a fraction of the training that care workers were given they would very easily be able to recognise someone with autism or someone who is frightened, prone to panic, things like that. Instead of just piling onto to someone and beating the shit out them when they start screaming for their mothers. Anyone can recognise someone with Downs Syndrome. A 6 year-old can look at someone with Downs and know straight away that they are "different" or "special needs". Cops in the US know this too. It's impossible NOT to know it. You can tell by their features. Yet they callously brutalize people with Downs as well:

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/man-syndrome-beaten-police-walking-street/

This ultra-asshole even said when asked if he knew his victim was Downs Syndrome that "I'm not a doctor. I didn't know" (!)

http://www.dcclothesline.com/2014/05/01/cop-beats-young-man-syndrome-packinga-colostomy-bag/

And that is the level of prick we are dealing with. You don't need to be a doctor to know that someone is Down's, but this loathsome scum just throws out a comment like that.

No amount of training would make this wanker into a better cop. When he batters a weakling that he knows full well is Down's Syndrome then there's no place for him in any position of power, even managing a burger joint.

But other cops can be trained to recognise that calming people down, not scaring the life out of them or beating them will generally defuse a situation.

Making up hypothetical reasons and excuses for taking the easy option of doling out brute force and ignorace is the realm of the lazy-minded non-thinkers.

You are making the assumption that everyone can be calmed. This is not always the case. Sometimes they do not have a legitimate reason and they do not want to go easy. Sometimes lethal force is needed. This doesn't mean it is always needed, which for some reason you keep insisting I am saying, it means it cannot always be avoided.

true567

Nucular Arms wrote: »

Very little difference between the two in my opinion.

Both corrupt oligarchies.

Both foreign military aggressors in illegal wars.

Both employ brutal tactics in subjugating the 'undesirable' elements of their populations.

Both promote cultural propaganda preaching that their respective nations are the greatest.

Both employ spying and monitoring practices on a mass scale over their populations.

(also FYI on your earlier post re: the chicago black site, just google homan square, should get about 800,000 citations)

Not a single remark you just made has anything to do with local police forces... You reference the military, politicians, propaganda, NSA programs, etc. But this has nothing to do with this case or the Michael Brown case for the matter.

Although I partially agree with you sentiment regarding the U.S. but to a lesser extent but yes I think the country is going under and their politicians and actions are often compromised by unconstitutional beliefs to favor a very few. However, none of these sentiments relate to bad local police forces. My point is that the argument that " an unarmed man shot by cops" is indicative of a U.S. police state is retarded. Watch the video and tell me that guy was not asking for it- I am sure he was mentally unstable but at the end of the day he either tried to or did grab the gun and therefore he was essentially committing suicide. Same for Michael Brown, or any case where they claim the person was unarmed, because if the cop waits another second then it may be the cop that is unarmed and you have to assume someone crazy/dumb enough to go for a pistol plans on using it.

We probably do not differ in many views; I just strongly believe that the title of this thread is very misleading because the homeless man was about to be armed if he got the gun and also it involves no context whatsoever. Essentially, the U.S. is not a police state, nor are cops actively hunting down individuals. People don't let facts get in the way though and instead have their minds made up, most likely without even watching the video. It is the exact same thread as the Michael Brown thread.

true567

Egginacup wrote: »

We're not talking about "anywhere" here. My opinions about Russia or Mongolia or Cape Verde are irrelevant to this discussion.

They are completely relevant. Your definition of a police state should not change based on the country of discussion. You argued that Russia is not a police state, but is the U.S.? That is my question for you.

If it makes it easier for you, then disregard the Russian part and simply answer: Is the U.S. a police state?

the_monkey

Egginacup wrote: »

That's standard operating procedure now for cops in America. When then slam your face onto the concrete and kneel on your head they repeatedly yell "Stop resisting! Stop reaching for my gun! Stop resisting! Stop reaching for my gun!" You might actually be unconscious and incapable of doing anything but they still yell this for all to hear so that if they kill you then that will be their story....that you were resisting and/or "reaching" for the cop's gun.

Here's another bunch of heroes tazing a pensioner:

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/watch-florida-police-tase-elderly-man-hands/

Disgracefull all right, I remember another incident where they shot some guy who was reaching for his licence after they ASKED for it !!

Then he was apoligizing !! and he was the one who got shot !!

Caovyn Lineah

Egginacup wrote: »

Karma, you're dealing with sadists here. David and Caovyn and Lil Cuchulain and DPD if given a choice whereby a situation could be concluded peaceably or with the death of a suspect they would opt for the slaying, even if it was just as easy to end it with no shots fired.

Excuse me?

I justified the killing in one way, he was trying to take or already had a gun. What would you have done in the officers situation? Hoped he had a bad aim? Asked him nicely not to shoot at you or a work colleague?

No, what they did was completely justified in my opinion. It was him or one of them.

Caovyn Lineah

Egginacup


I'll keep this short. Have you any clue on what these officers are trained in? Are you aware that they were on this beat specifically because of their experience in dealing with people like this man, people with mental health problems.

Nucular Arms

true567 wrote: »

Not a single remark you just made has anything to do with local police forces... You reference the military, politicians, propaganda, NSA programs, etc. But this has nothing to do with this case or the Michael Brown case for the matter.

Although I partially agree with you sentiment regarding the U.S. but to a lesser extent but yes I think the country is going under and their politicians and actions are often compromised by unconstitutional beliefs to favor a very few. However, none of these sentiments relate to bad local police forces. My point is that the argument that " an unarmed man shot by cops" is indicative of a U.S. police state is retarded. Watch the video and tell me that guy was not asking for it- I am sure he was mentally unstable but at the end of the day he either tried to or did grab the gun and therefore he was essentially committing suicide. Same for Michael Brown, or any case where they claim the person was unarmed, because if the cop waits another second then it may be the cop that is unarmed and you have to assume someone crazy/dumb enough to go for a pistol plans on using it.

We probably do not differ in many views; I just strongly believe that the title of this thread is very misleading because the homeless man was about to be armed if he got the gun and also it involves no context whatsoever. Essentially, the U.S. is not a police state, nor are cops actively hunting down individuals. People don't let facts get in the way though and instead have their minds made up, most likely without even watching the video. It is the exact same thread as the Michael Brown thread.

True enough, it is a bit of a tangential post I suppose.

I guess I just see this case as symptomatic of a broader malaise. I call the US a police state because it is the term I beleive most closely resembles the attitude to the application of law and order in america, though I concede that it doesn't strictly speaking adhere 100% to the label.

Amazingfun

More information is coming out about the homeless man shot and killed by police in Los Angeles on Sunday, including that he was a convicted bank robber who took over a French man's identity 15 years ago in order to gain entrance to the United States.

"He fooled a lot of people, including us, years ago," French consul general Axel Cruau told the Los Angeles Times. He said that the man, identified by the LAPD as Charley Saturmin Robinet, stole the identity of the real Robinet in the late-1990s. The man calling himself Robinet was convicted of a bank robbery in 2000, and Cruau said that French officials let the United States know that Robinet had assumed someone else's identity and was not a French citizen. The actual Charley Saturmin Robinet is still alive and living in France. Catherine Garcia

http://theweek.com/speedreads/542357/homeless-man-shot-by-lapd-officers-came-using-stolen-identity

RWCNT

Amazingfun wrote: »

http://theweek.com/speedreads/542357/homeless-man-shot-by-lapd-officers-came-using-stolen-identity

My inner conspiracy theorist is always mistrustful of this sort of stuff. EVERY time this happens we have all this information come out as if its supposed to make us feel better that someone was publicly executed.

My tin foil hat aside, I don't care if the guy has past convictions for murder, the cops still did a ****ty job and messed up in the worst way possible.

darkpagandeath

RWCNT wrote: »

My inner conspiracy theorist is always mistrustful of this sort of stuff. EVERY time this happens we have all this information come out as if its supposed to make us feel better that someone was publicly executed.

My tin foil hat aside, I don't care if the guy has past convictions for murder, the cops still did a ****ty job and messed up in the worst way possible.

Nah, Lets put you in that same situation. Your mate shouts he's got my gun. What's your next move. And remember Police officers are only trained to kill when using a weapon. No police force in the world Is trained to wound.

RWCNT

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Nah, Lets put you in that same situation. Your mate shouts he's got my gun. What's your next move. And remember Police officers are only trained to kill when using a weapon. No police force in the world Is trained to wound.

I might end up shooting him to be honest. How did he wind up getting my mate's gun anyway since we outnumbered him? I'd say me and my friends probably made a total pig's ear of that one.

Amazingfun

:pac:

RWCNT

Amazingfun wrote: »

:pac:

That video is rubbish, I agree.

Amazingfun

Nope not rubbish at all. Bang on the money it is really. You're free to explain what you find offensive, of course

darkpagandeath

Amazingfun wrote: »

Nope not rubbish at all. Bang on the money it is really. You're free to explain what you find offensive, of course

I like the fact the lady went out of her way to help return that baton to the police And the crowd shouting sell out and traitor.... :pac:

creolebelle

Egginacup wrote: »

Have they rounded up all the homeless and herded them out to Trenton?

Pretty much. A lot of shelters have closed and they were priced out the city.

RWCNT

Amazingfun wrote: »

Nope not rubbish at all. Bang on the money it is really. You're free to explain what you find offensive, of course

Why don't you explain which inciteful points it raised to you which you didn't gather yourself from the original vid? You're the one who posted it as if its the answer to something.

Amazingfun

Right so you have nothing to back up your "rubbish" comment. Thanks

NachoBusiness

Amazingfun wrote: »

Right so you have nothing to back up your "rubbish" comment. Thanks

It's rubbish because it disingenuously uses irrelevant statistics in effort to justify executing a man for reaching for an officer's gun.

Amazingfun

NachoBusiness wrote: »

It's rubbish because it disingenuously uses irrelevant statistics in effort to justify executing a man for reaching for an officer's gun.

No it doesn't and the stats used in the vid were anything but irrelevant.

RWCNT

Amazingfun wrote: »

Right so you have nothing to back up your "rubbish" comment. Thanks

Hahah, can you not work out my beef based on what I said? That video adds absolutely nothing to the discussion except for some statistics, which I don't feel justify anything. I don't see how a bunch of cops getting killed in similiar situations excuses the police in question from handling the affair so sloppily that they ended up in that danger and felt lethal force was necessary. Seems to support my theory that these guys don't have a clue what they're doing.


What do you like so much about the video anyway, apart from it telling you what you want to hear? The sarcastic quip about white male privilege or the thug life meme bit? They were both pretty crass.