[Nite]

Just out of curiosity I googled the amount of police killed in the line of work in the United States. The figure I found was twenty thousand
That's astonishing, in New Zealand it's twenty nine.
Fuck being a cop stateside

[30564U]

Originally Posted by niknik ↗

There doesn't have to be intent. He was negligent. He used excessive force.
His only defense is he reached in his car therefore I shot him. That's no legitimate reason. It's not as if he had any reason to believe this victim was violent or committed any crime.
According to the article he already lost his job. And a jury will decide if he'll do time. Since the victim lived I don't think he will, but he'll never be a cop again.

And no there's no more to the story. He got more than $120,000. That was just the cash he received. They also paid his medical, and has to pay his medical until he dies. As well as paid for all upgrades to his home and vehicle to accommodate his condition. He probably could have gotten more but he's a forgiving person and just settled with them.

It's not a normal shoot policy to shoot unarmed people in broad daylight. It's unacceptable.

Im not naive, that's just my opinion. I have the opposite opinion with the Ferguson shooting. I think in that case from what I've gathered the cop did the right or at least acceptable thing.

As I said, there's no premeditation, negligence, or excessive force if the officer honestly believed that the guy had a firearm and his life was in danger. He's within policy and law. The dashcam video showing how the driver reacted and holding what looked like a firearm is just icing on the cake. He'll more than likely get his job back and he'll never do time or be convicted of a crime.

[St. Geno]

The officer reacted too quickly. Its so obvious

[TheVrist]

Originally Posted by Nite ↗

Just out of curiosity I googled the amount of police killed in the line of work in the United States. The figure I found was twenty thousand
That's astonishing, in New Zealand it's twenty nine.
Fuck being a cop stateside

That number would be bigger, if officers were forced to be shot at first before reacting accordingly.

[niknik]

Originally Posted by 30564U ↗

As I said, there's no premeditation, negligence, or excessive force if the officer honestly believed that the guy had a firearm and his life was in danger. He's within policy and law. The dashcam video showing how the driver reacted and holding what looked like a firearm is just icing on the cake. He'll more than likely get his job back and he'll never do time or be convicted of a crime.

Umm. The district attorneys office as well as the troopers dept seem to agree with me. Hints he was fired and charged in this incident. I can see him getting away with it. I can also see him making a plea deal that will keep him from doing time.
It was a wallet in his hand. A wallet in no way resembles a gun. The officer didn't use common sense at all and someone was shot. You're making no sense, you say the cop will be absolved of any wrong doing. But the state will pay this victim damages. That's impossible. If he didn't do anything wrong then they aren't giving him any money.

[niknik]

Originally Posted by Nite ↗

Just out of curiosity I googled the amount of police killed in the line of work in the United States. The figure I found was twenty thousand
That's astonishing, in New Zealand it's twenty nine.
Fuck being a cop stateside

That's not twenty thousand being shot and killed.

[niknik]

Originally Posted by TheVrist ↗

That number would be bigger, if officers were forced to be shot at first before reacting accordingly.

More Americans have been killed by police in America than soldiers killed Afghanistan in the last 13 years. Not just American soldiers but all coalition forces put together.

[TheVrist]

Originally Posted by niknik ↗

More Americans have been killed by police in America than soldiers killed Afghanistan in the last 13 years. Not just American soldiers but all coalition forces put together.

There is a flaw in that comparison, I know its a favorite among the "police state" crowed. But none the less flawed when comparing 300, million people in america vs the few million in conflict per year.

[30564U]

Just because a politically appointed police chief fired the officer and a politically elected District Attorney files criminal charges doesn't mean that they're legally correct in doing what they're doing. I've never in thirty years heard an officer being fired and criminally charged for a shooting like this...never. This exact type of shooting is unfortunately fairly common in the realm of bad shoots. As I've said, the copper made mistakes (moving too quick, bad verbal commands, etc.)...so did the driver (moving too quick, panicking). but I've never seen an officer fired over a shooting incident like this one...it's just not that aggregious of a shooting. There's a big difference between a mistake and a criminal act (even negligent manslaughter). This was a clear mistake and this is exactly what the civil court system was designed to deal with. There just isn't anything here to prosecute as a criminal act. The chief and DA obviously have an agenda (scared of the Ferguson Effect, getting political pressure, or scared they look to easy on the police) that doesn't mean they'll win in the end...after the hype blows over on this case (and it always does) cooler heads will prevail and the charges will be quietly dropped and the driver will get his (rightly deserved) payoff. The officer will be quietly hired at another agency and life will go on. Not everything is a criminal act...why didn't the DA take this to a Grand Jury instead of just going after a criminal filing?

[30564U]

Originally Posted by niknik ↗

Umm. The district attorneys office as well as the troopers dept seem to agree with me. Hints he was fired and charged in this incident. I can see him getting away with it. I can also see him making a plea deal that will keep him from doing time.
It was a wallet in his hand. A wallet in no way resembles a gun. The officer didn't use common sense at all and someone was shot. You're making no sense, you say the cop will be absolved of any wrong doing. But the state will pay this victim damages. That's impossible. If he didn't do anything wrong then they aren't giving him any money.

This is where I just folks who've never been a police officer talk about use of force incidents. TV and the movies have really not done society any favors in this area.

First off...as I've said...if the officer honestly thought his life (or the lives of others) was/were in danger at the very moment the driver quickly turned with his hands holding a dark object at waist level, then he would be within normal American police policy and law. If, based on the actions of the individual being contacted conducts himself in a manner making a reasonable officer (with like training, experience, education, and age) think that his life is in danger, the the officer is within both policy and law. Spaze out if you like, but that's the legal standard that's used across the US and in most of Canada...in fact, much of the world. I don't make the runs I can just tell you what they are. Do I think the officer made a good decision? Absolutely not. Do I think what the officer did was acceptable? Absolutely not. Do I think he and his agency should have their collective butt's sued off? Absolutely. See this isn't just about this one officer...how was this guy trained? Was he ordered or offered counseling after his recent shooting? Did he attend the counseling? How was this guy and the other officers trained to recognize a deadly force incident about to happen? How were they trained to conduct car stops? There are a shit ton of answers I'd like to see about the agency and it's training methods. You guys all keep screaming about prosecuting this officer and locking him up...but what happens when you do? I was a thirty year cop with training and experience far superior to anything this young officer had...and I said, that put in the same we senario, I would probably have short the driver as well. Others on DR have made comments that officer should only be allowed to shoot if shot at first...and that's just plain retarded and life threatening coming from someone with absolutely no experience in human nature and shootings in general. If we make law enforcement so absurdly difficult and such a no win proposition why would someone take the job? I know for many here on DR that would be ideal...but seriously, how exactly would you recruit folks to become police officers? It's hard enough already to find anyone. Others have bitched about my political agenda...well, you usually only see leftists and neo progressives bitching about the police and abuse of power, etc. It's one of the hallmarks of their political identity...sorry if the truth is painful. I done police use of force investigations for years and I was a police officer...so I usually give the benefit of doubt to the officer...right up until I can prove he did something he wasn't supposed to do. I look at each of these police videos here on DR with an emotionless and agenda less eye. I know through years of doing the job why the officer reacted like he/she did. Most of the time it's just common sense. If people would look at these incidents without emotion, prior agenda, or without an eye toward a conspiracy, and just look at then at face value...they would usually see what I see. It always makes me laugh...but I actually make a fairly good living just looking at video tape evidence and reading witness statements and I can 99% of the time see exactly why the officer reacted or failed to react. It isn't that hard...but most folks interject their own baggage into their opinion and that screws it all up.