Printable View
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvg/story?se...cal&id=7433661
And yet another officer with his head up his you know what.
I thought you should never use deadly force unless your life or another life is in danger?
How the hell is a person with his back to you a threat?
If I was one of the good LEO's right now I would quit and deliver mail or something else.
We've reached a point were police can invade your home and shoot. If you twitch the wrong way, shoot, .... and on and on.
Man...I could see how it could have looked like the guy was resting his hand near where a gun could have been, except, that is a natural place to hold your hand. If you already have your gun drawn, you should easily be able to fire long before someone can draw AND turn to face you. If that officer is that afraid of people, then he shouldn't be a cop. That's why I shouldn't be a cop.
Bad, bad, bad.... so many different ways copper should've handled that....
I guess next time I'm riding a bike and get stopped I'll need to throw my hands way high above my head.
Unarmed men get shot and pedophiles get six months in jail. Interesting times.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anton
So many wrong jokes can be told on that... hahaha... Behave Bear. [Beer]
In the officer's defense we don't know all of the information here. He might have been responding to an assault involving 2 guys on bikes and had resaon to believe they were involved, who knows....? There are a million different things that both the officer and Mr. McClosky could have done there, agreed. I can't pass judgement until I know more....
The article with that video is all sorts of full of information...
No Speakers on the PC at work so I couldn't catch all the specifics...
Was this just a routine traffic stop?
The Article vaguely says something about 'McCloskey takes off at a high rate of speed'
Either way... the guy was no threat, but there could be alot more to the situation then they published
I could see No threat so there was no reason for the cops action.Quote:
Originally Posted by coloccw
All the reporter mentions is that the officer had been following them. They took off from the stop at a high rate of speed. the officer then hit his lights/sirens. The other guy hits a curb loses control and McCloskey stops his bike and gets shot in the back.
The officer tells him "put your hands up" after shooting him in the back.
Genius [Poke]
so, you have 2 guys on bikes. they dont care that "the MAN" is following them. This pisses the cop off (maybe). They look to be following the traffic laws, as they stopped at the stop sign. Then, as people do, they rolled the throttle on and took off for a short distance. it looks like to me they just gunned it from one stop to the next. I ride a harley and I do that sometimes, as do many cars and bikes. So the cop lights them up, and rolls his lights and siren. this startles the one guy who then doesnt negotiate the turn. The other kid stops immediately. has his left hand holding the clutch in, maybe he didnt have time to find neutral. his is in no position (while stradling a bike) to turn his body to the left and pose a danger to the cop. he cant turn to the right because he is holding the clutch in. bang, cop fucked up. you cant go back, but someone needs to pay.
Without all the other information it almost looks from the video like it could be an ND (like that female officer who shot the guy being handcuffed on the ground), but I guess if the officer is going with "I thought he had a gun" then I guess that wasn't the case.
It did seem like the officer was unaware that the weapon had fired until he approached the man. In which case it would be an accident, to bad the guy is paralized from it.
Am I missing something here? I'm not a LEO, so my question is really a question, not rhetorical. The LEO shoots the guy, then when we see him on camera his gun is holstered and he draws it again?? Why would you shoot someone, holster your weapon, approach the guy and then draw your weapon again?
???
Piss poor.
I noticed that too. Maybe the gunman on the grassy knoll took the first shot.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldFinger
Draw, bang, holster, draw, warning. Brilliant, the most dangerous form of dyslexia.
Does the cop say anything before he shoots? The defense seems to try to make a deal out of the riders turn and hand position, but how else do you turn?
If there are any cops on the thread, it seems a bit extreme to pull the gun for a bunny rabbit start. Be interesting to see the videos from other speeding stops of motorcycles with this department.
I'd guess that the victim was watching his buddy thinking 'dumb-ass' when he gets shot in the back.
Interesting that the other unit was there too. I think those guys were going to get pulled over at that intersection no matter what.
I can understand why people think that there must be something else to the story, it is just too hard to beleive that.
I think the cop is going to see a number of negligent discharges when he is prison.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FromMyColdDeadHand
[ROFL1]
The story gives plenty of information.
The cop pulled the guy over for a traffic stop,
the guy did NOTHING. Regardless of perceived threat, there wasn't even a furtive movement!
All you have is a trigger happy cop who shot a guy in the back.
What the hell?
He shouldn't be getting assault with a deadly weapon, he should be getting attempted murder.
I'm not anti-cop, but I find myself unable to frame any comment to this incident that wouldn't make me seem so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FromMyColdDeadHand
Brilliant!
[ROFL1]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DPKf7y1F-Q
It is hard to say what was going through the cops mind, and yes he did have a split second to react.
However, if the motorcyclist had a gun and was pulling it on the cop, he would have done so on the left side of his body (think pointing the pistol below the left armpit).
To turn right all the way around on a motorcycle like that is VERY difficult (I know, I ride, well rode before I sold my bike recently). If he were left handed, then his right arm wouldn't be jerked back like that and have been a perceived threat of holding a firearm.
Now, if you have ever been on a motorcycle and pulled over. You know that with your helmet on, you have limited range of vision and almost no periphery. It's possible he heard something (a noise) come from behind him on the right and that caused him to turn to see what it was. I know that lately, when I've seen people be pulled over, two cops always approach the vehicle.
Lastly, when I was pulled over on my motorcycle once late at night around 3am I was scared shitless. I kept my hands on the bars, waited until the cop got next to me and then asked if I could lift my visor. Then, after he could see my eyes (and the fear in them, lol) I asked if I could remove my helmet. Cops do presume a lot with motorcyclists, as a helmet can be used as a weapon (it's heavy and the straps can act as a swinging device). But that's also because of the preconceived notions of motorcyclists being law breakers with speed and driving wrecklessly, which sucks for us.
But without knowing EXACTLY what was going on in the video, it's hard to say anything. I'm only commenting on how I perceive it to have happened. It is definitely ashame that it went down that way, hopefully the rider gets a large settlement and doesn't have to worry about not working the rest of his life.
I'm not trying to call you out, but this just isn't the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by BuffCyclist
Whatever the circumstances, whatever "threat" the cop claims to have "perceived", it doesn't matter.
The man was shot in the back. There was no furtive movement or vocal threat in the video,
the cop just gets out, draws down on the guy, and shoots him in the back.
Even if he feared for his life, the cop won't get ANY sympathy from me.
If you wanna be a cop, you have to be willing to hold yourself to a higher standard than that. You have to be willing to risk taking a bullet in the preservation of the people.
Shooting a man in the back because you were scared is NOT ok.
He took an oath, accepted the power that came with that oath, and then GROSSLY abused that power, and destroyed a man's life.
A shot placement a few inches to the left, and he could've TAKEN that man's life.
Unless the article made an error, and there was in fact a weapon, then there is no excuse.
I am not anti-cop at all, but I'm tired of cops putting themselves above the people they swear to protect.
Protect and serve, or get the hell off our payroll.
Well, maybe if the biker didn't have such dark tinted windows, the police officer would have felt more at ease. Officers never know who is behind the wheel or what they are doing.
You do what you are trained to do in high stress situations. Standard qualifications has the cops drawing, firing, scanning, reholstering... He did what he was conditioned to do. It's not good conditioning, but there it is...Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldFinger
Watching the video, I suspect the cops going to be found guilty. It's really hard to say without seeing all the evidence though.
On a side note; many of you have been pretty hard on the cops lately. You all seem to forget that these incidents are the exception not the majority by far. Making blanket judgements on any group based on the exceptions is dangerous ground. I've read quite a few of these type statements in the last two or three "hate cops" threads lately.
I also suspect the hate cops threads keep coming like they have lately, and the mods are going to start shutting them down... Hate is easy, critical thinking takes work.
I have a handful of LEOs in the extended family and I have a lot of respect for them and the profession in general. However, incidents like this (and those in the other 'hate cops threads' recently) indicate that there is, at best, a very real, structural, problem with how law enforcement handles the 'enforcement' part of the profession.Quote:
Originally Posted by SA Friday
I realize that in all human endeavors perfection is unobtainable, but shooting unarmed men in the back and killing the family dog over a $5 bag of weed is not okay and indicative of larger problems. Its certainly not in the best interests of the average citizen to hold their tongues while such incidents seem to become common occurrences.
So you are saying there are systemic problems with LE over all in the USA based on, what, three incidents? Come on. Show me the numbers indicating there is a systemic issue here and then maybe you are talking about an overall problem versus specific incidents that need to be addressed as simply that, specific incidents. Without proof of an overall problem, there is no reason to address anything as a whole. You are reading into the publicized bad acts and overlooking the hundreds of thousands of LE interactions that happen daily without incident. Where's the logic in that? It's the same stance the anti's take with gun rights...Quote:
Originally Posted by Anton
I didn't make any blanket judgements.Quote:
Originally Posted by SA Friday
I don't hate cops.
I just can't stand THIS cop.
And other cops like him that abuse or misuse their power.
Cops that uphold honor and justice have my full support.
Unfortunately, nobody keeps track of how many unarmed suspects are shot in the back, or how many no-knock warrants go wrong. But there are some statistics that do support my thesis,Quote:
Originally Posted by SA Friday
"In 1997 alone, the Pentagon handed over more than 1.2 million pieces of military equipment to local police departments."
http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/ba...paper_2006.pdf (Page 8)
"In a widely cited survey, criminologist Peter Kraska found that as of 1997, 90 percent of cities with populations of 50,000 or more had at least one paramilitary police unit, twice as many as in the mid-1980s.45 The increase has been even more pronounced in smaller towns: In a separate study, Kraska found that the number of SWAT teams serving towns with populations between 25,000 and 50,000 increased 157 percent between 1985 and 1996.46"
http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/ba...paper_2006.pdf (Page 9)
"In 1972, there were just a few hundred paramilitary drug raids per year in the United States.69 According to Kraska, by the early 1980s there were 3,000 annual SWAT deployments, by 1996 there were 30,000, and by 2001 there were 40,000.70 The average city police department deployed its paramilitary police unit about once a month in the early 1980s. By 1995, that number had risen to seven.71 To give one example, the city of Minneapolis, Minnesota, deployed its SWAT team on no-knock warrants 35 times in 1987. By 1996, the same unit had been deployed for drug raids more than 700 times that year alone.72
In small- to medium-sized cities, Kraska estimates that 80 percent of SWAT callouts are now for warrant service. In large cities, it’s about 75 percent. These numbers, too, have been on the rise since the early 1980s.73 Orange County, Florida, deployed its SWAT team 619 times during one five-year period in the 1990s. Ninety-four percent of those callouts were to serve search warrants, not for hostage situations or police standoffs.74"
http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/ba...paper_2006.pdf (Page 11)
Because I only had time to find one research paper on the matter, the quotes target only one portion of Law Enforcement. Should you wish I continue the discussion (although I believe that another thread should be created to do so) I would be happy to spend some time researching the matter and finding more information to present.
No-knock warrants, the militarization of law enforcement, etc. certainly are problems with the current manner in which law enforcement works. We can ignore it or we can address it.
Sure start a new thread, but none of the above shows anything other than tactics and equipment in LE have changed over the years. Surely, you are not suggesting that the LE tactics should never change and they shouldn't utilize new technology... Or are you suggesting that no-knock warrants should be made illegal? Or are you relating that no-knock warrants should have a higher level of proof before being approved by a judge (this is a problem with Judges, not LE BTW). What's your point in this info?Quote:
Originally Posted by Anton
My point was many on this site lately have been making generalizations based on a huge minority of incidents. These numbers don't relate to my post or my point. So, I'm not really sure what you are getting at here.
I don't think the majority of people mean to make generalizations about all cops,Quote:
Originally Posted by SA Friday
they're just referring to the bad ones,
and yes, there are bad ones.
I agree with the above, but that's not what some are posting. I will give you there are many who have probably not posted what they truely mean, but it's hard to say without clarification. Thus, my comments.Quote:
Originally Posted by iamhunter
I also agree there are cops that shouldn't be cops. I have been involved in removing more than a couple of these over the years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SA Friday
lol this is just like black people that walk around with a chip on their shoulder thinking to themselves "he's calling me a ****** in his mind"
you want honesty? fine.
I think the cop in the video is a dipshit that fucked up and I hope they make him pay.
furthermore, I hope every apologist cop lover and walker of that thin blue line has something similar happen to them or a loved one at the hands of dipshit law enforcement, so that when they say "But without knowing EXACTLY what was going on in the video, it's hard to say anything." those words taste different in their mouths.
now I'm going to say this one more time, even though it won't matter to some: I don't hate cops.
I hope every good officer, especially the ones here, stays safe and protected by the Almighty every day.
What I do hate is: 1. Cops who want it both ways. Who say "we are the intrepid defenders of your freedom who run to danger when everyone else runs away, doing a thankless job nobody else will do" OR "we are only human and make mistakes just like anyone else" (depending on which way the wind is blowing, the latter usually said after they fuck up)
2. Cops who get away with things that I'd get in trouble for. (speeding, talking on the phone while driving, shooting dogs, abusing their station, etc.)
3. Dismissal of mistakes on the grounds of statistics. (it's not that bad, the vast majority of times this never happens) .. yeah, tell that to the guy who's paralyzed for life.
there's more but I think you get the point.
so that's my opinion.
don't like it? cry harder.
maybe you'll feel better.
THIS^^^^ +1Quote:
Originally Posted by Elhuero
I am no cop hater either. I also hope the good ones stay safe daily.
But in all honesty the more of them I deal with almost everyone has an attitude or chip on their shoulder as mentioned.
I always give a friendly smile with a wave/nod to officers while in traffic. You know how many of them wave back? 0. That's right not a one. They either looked at me like like I was doing somthing foolish or just turned away with no acknowledgment at all. To me that's an asshole.
+1 Elhuero & SU405
Cops should have term limits. The power goes to their head.
Funny thing is all the cops I've ever known are good people. I think something happens when they put on the mirrored sunglasses and macho mustache. The attitude seems to go with the glasses.
I hope he's released from prison with an asshole the size of a coffee can.
I find this statement very curious. Maybe you are right and I'm just not a critical thinker. But your statement leads me to believe that it's OK to trash our governors, senators, and our president. But don't be critical of my hero cops. Because I sure see a lot of criticism of our elected officials which we can just be voted out. But you seem very sensitive to criticism of our domestic military force (police) that can not just be voted out when they overstep their authority.Quote:
Originally Posted by SA Friday