StrangeSox

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 02:27 PM) Well, I don't necessarily disagree with some of this, since I know a few cops of this "Rambo" nature, but you seem hellbent on witch hunting any/every cop at every chance you get, and make it appear as of this was common, when it's not. I think that there are systemic problems with our police and justice systems, but I don't think I'm witch hunting every cop. Just the ones who kill unarmed civilians or otherwise use excessive force and often get away with it.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 02:19 PM) That seems about right, but it begs the question, at least to me...why? What made them drive like that when they could have easily gotten out of the car in the parking lot? Doesn't that seem odd to you? No. Some police act like they're part of a military occupation of a foreign country. Some either get in it for the authority or learn to love the authority once they're in the job. The driver of the car has caused the department to pay out a $100,000 excessive force settlement in the past. The other cop was essentially fired from his last job for incompetence. The Cleveland PD as a whole was slammed in a DoJ report released yesterday in for excessive force, civil rights violations, and unnecessarily escalating situations.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 02:13 PM) Kinda sucks when a few are used to sully the whole, right. Systemic failures of our justice system aren't few.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 02:10 PM) Keep in mind that that sat image is from summer, and they clearly pulled up in winter when there would be no trees/bushes in their way...that image makes it look like they drove through a forest, when odds are during that season there was only one tree in their way. Google Earth timeline, 4/2012. Blue line is my guess of how they drove around trees and bollards.

"Duke LaCrosse" does not actually prove that false rape allegations are widespread, but that's the effect that story and this one will have. It harms actual rape victims and makes them that much less likely to come forward.

Here's the overhead, it was in the Dem thread. Yellow lines are the camera FOV, blue box is the car. You can see that it wasn't exactly easy to drive to the gazebo the way they did.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:57 PM) Did they first pull up in that parking lot before spinning around and pulling up close? That's a long video, and at one point there is a car in that parking lot. If they pulled into the parking lot first, that makes it even worse for them. That means they saw him sitting there (by himself, again, they lied) not really actually doing anything and then decided the best thing to do was to charge towards the kid in their car. Why not try to make contact with him through the PA while in the parking lot?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:55 PM) Then you're being willfully ignorant. At the very least this video proves that the cops are liars about what they did, i.e., saying they asked him three times to put the gun down and he refused and/or went for the gun. Here's what happened, and it's obvious - they pulled up, the kid stands up, the cop sees the gun, hops out of his car, fires, runs back to the other side of the car to hide. That's all plainly visible. No audio doesn't matter, it's impossible that they asked him to drop the weapon or put up his hands. He's firing essentially as the door is opening. There was no time to respond to the "order," if one was ever given. Which is why rushing into the situation is the problem in the first place. It's going to raise everyone's tensions and get adrenaline pumping. It's going to trigger subconscious reactions instead of rational thinking. It's not going to allow anyone time to actually assess and react to a situation.

Rolling Stone failed pretty badly here, and they had to know how much damage a single high-profile instance of false or arguably false rape allegations can do. The effect of this is that we'll be hearing "UVA" as an excuse for rape allegations like we've been hearing "Duke LaCrosse" for about a decade now.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:40 PM) If it was training, it wasn't unquestionably deadly, since it wasn't deadly at all...as it was training. The training was for responding to an event with shooters who are unquestionably looking to kill anyone in their path, not that the training itself was deadly. My point is that people aren't trained to act that recklessly when there is zero doubt of deadly intent. If officer safety is your number one priority, then you shouldn't be trying to excuse tactics that make the situation substantially more dangerous for themselves and others.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:39 PM) That's the universal rule of life, too. Most police don't needlessly put themselves in danger, or mean to put themselves in danger when they do. Just so happens this is a side effect of that job. The difference here is simple, you're all assuming that's exactly what police try to do -- needlessly put themselves in danger. I've linked to the DOJ report that found that the Cleveland PD, which is the PD in question in the Tamir shooting, unquestionably does this. We also see it with the huge increase of SWAT raids and the general militarization of the police. That's the mindset that, while absolutely a minority, too many police have.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:36 PM) You make a lot of assumption when you discuss things. How do you know they didn't mean to pull up 100 yards away, when they suddenly realized, holy crap, the guy we're looking for is right there in front of us?! Well, we know they lied, but they said they saw him sitting in the gazebo (with other people around, but there weren't). The reports were that he was in the gazebo. The whole park isn't all that big. 100 yards away would be across the street. But, most damning of all, they had to drive out of the parking lot and around a bunch of trees and bollards in order to park right next to the kid. I posted an overhead shot of the area a couple of pages back. I think if you don't know where the guy you think has a gun is, the dumbest move you can make is to blindly charge into his last known area.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:28 PM) Well, with all your training, you'd know. I have witnessed actual tactical response training for unquestionably deadly situations before. You don't blindly rush into things.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:32 PM) Given that i've sued police departments for misconduct, and i've read some training manuals as part of the cases, i'm confident i know more than you. I can't say i'm an expert on procedure for arriving on scene with a potentially armed perp, but generally the rule is always "don't put yourself in danger." Parking 5 feet from a person with a gun violates that rule, and common sense frankly. Just think about a slightly different scenario unfolding to show how stupid their actions were. They fly like, just like in the video. The cop in the passenger side doesn't get out immediately, and instead the driver starts to. As he's doing this, Tamir goes to pull out what's actually a real gun. How vulnerable is the officer on the passenger side at this point? He's sitting down with his gun in his holster inside of a car. If this kid actually is some sort of a deadly threat, you've essentially written your partner's life off by driving up that close.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:27 PM) And what standard is that? That they should allow themselves to get shot, stabbed or otherwise BEFORE taking action, just in case? Laughable. The standard where they don't help to create situations where they feel their only choice is to shoot a 12 year old kid dead. Don't want to get stabbed? Don't pull up 15 feet away from a guy with a knife. Don't want to get shot? Try to diffuse the situation instead of flying up two feet away from a kid, getting out of the car and then immediately shooting him. Don't charge into a Walmart and start blasting the guy with a toy gun who's talking on the phone in the back corner of the store as soon as you see him. Stop putting yourself into more deadly situations than you need to.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:18 PM) Yes there is, because they're paid to do exactly that -- put themselves between those that are potentially dangerous and the innocent. In hindsight, it's always easy to second guess when all the facts are on display, which is exactly what you and the other armchair quarterbacks are doing now. But when riding up to that scene, they were aware of two things, 1) there was a person with a gun, and 2) there were innocent people in the immediate area. That's all they were aware of when rolling up to that scene...and they made a split second judgement call based on that information. And keep in mind this was information they had no reason to doubt, especially when they rode up and saw a person with a gun. I'm sure the outcome would be much different if they were given the information you have now, which is quite clear, "There's a kid with a toy gun in the park." Bad information led to that situation, not bad policing. There was nobody else around. There is zero justification for riding in like that. Even from an officer safety perspective, it is incredibly stupid. This is not just coming from some guy on SoxTalk, this is what the DOJ and multiple current and former police have said regarding the actions taken in this case and similar ones.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:14 PM) You need to watch it. The narrative doesn't fit with the video. That's the other aspect of the Tamir shooting. The police unquestionably lied when they claimed he was seated at the gazebo with multiple other people around when they arrived.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:13 PM) See, I agree with SS (gasp!) to an extent though, because if it's THAT dangerous, then cops shouldn't be inserting themselves into a situation where they can get hurt. There was literally no reason for them to pull into that park like they did, position themselves mere feet from someone who they've been told has a gun (someone told me today the dispatch person never told the officers that it was possibly a toy gun, so they're going in thinking they have an armed suspect), shoot first, ask questions later. That's not good policing. Yes, the caller said it was "probably" a toy gun but that was not communicated to the police.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:09 PM) You armchair quarterback a LOT when it comes to police action. They're justified to shoot in any situation they perceive as a deadly situation, sorry to correct you, since you seem to be under this completely incorrect mindset that because they're police they should know exactly what's deadly and whats not at all times. Don't take my word for it, take the Department of Justice's word. The people these cops are killing never get to see their families again. The little boy they flew up on and shot within 2 seconds will never see his family again. The guy who picked a toy gun up off the shelf in a Walmart and was shot to death for it by a police officer who rushed in and fired immediately will never see his family. Eric Garner will never see his family again. People invested with the power and authority of the state to use violence up to and including deadly force to enforce the law should be held to a higher standard.

on the other hand, South Carolina Breaks National Trend, Indicts 3 Cops In Past 4 Months

They're justified to shoot in a deadly situation, but that ignores that they helped create the danger. The initial failure was driving right up to the kid so that if this kid you think has a gun makes any move whatsoever, you need to fear for your life and kill him instantly. And then there's the Walmart shooting, where the police just rushed in and shot the guy before he could even realize what was going on.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 11:11 AM) They can't run the ball. It's been proven this entire season. Being stubborn and keeping at something that isn't working is a dumb strategy. Yes, others (the defense, coaching, Marshall I believe had some terrible drops) deserve blame, but Jay is the only one who literally threw away a chance at winning that game in the 4th. so the oline wasn't exactly fixed then

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 10:18 AM) The original story I heard about Cleveland was that the kid reached for the gun in his waistband. I don't know if that's true, but that justifies deadly force. And the Missouri knife thing, I discussed that a while back. That's about as textbook as it comes. And I'd venture to guess that was a suicide by cop. He reached for it, but the gun didn't leave his waistband so whether the tip had been altered or not isn't relevant. It could have still had the orange tip and he'd be just as dead. I'm pointing that out because that was a central part of the original story, "how could this kid or these parents be so dumb?" angle. A comparison would be yet another black man shot to death on police in a matter of seconds for holding a toy gun he picked up off of the shelf in a Walmart. This incident was also caught on tape, and there were no charges against the rambo cop who rushed in and immediately killed a guy who was talking on his phone and looking at fish food. In all cases, the police decided to dive right into the middle of things so that their only remaining options if the person looked like they were making any sort of move would be to shoot them dead. If there's a guy with a knife, why do you need to start the situation by driving within about 20 feet of him so if he takes one step toward you, you start shooting? If there's a kid with an alleged gun, why pull up with your partner's face about two feet from the kid, so that if the kid does anything at all you shoot and kill him in under two seconds? That's exactly the sort of thing the DoJ just criticized in a report on the Cleveland PD. In both of these situations, it seemed to be about escalating things from the start instead of defusing them. And a big part of this goes back to what Jake said yesterday, which is that, consciously or subconsciously, there's biases against black people and especially young black males to view them as more likely to be criminals or dangerous and threatening.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 4, 2014 -> 10:14 PM) I'm not defending the choking thing at all. I'm just saying that pulling away is technically resisting. If some kind of charges were brought, I'd completely understand why. If he violated the department's general orders, he'll probably be fired (I think someone said he already is). And he'll almost certainly face a civil suit and pay. And the department more than likely won't indemnify him due to breaking department orders. Understood, that was kind of a crappy, rushed phone post so sorry about the tone. I posted it in the Dem thread, but their actions are exactly the sort of thing the DoJ just blasted the Cleveland PD over. They've found that Cleveland PD officers routinely take unnecessary actions where they place themselves in a situation where the deployment of force, sometimes lethal, is their only option. These two clowns drove around a bunch of bollards just so they could pull up two feet away from the kid they thought had a real gun. Then they shoot him to death within two seconds. The gun was still in the kid's waistband when he was shot, so the fact that the orange tip was removed isn't even relevant. Then the police lied about what happened, claiming that they saw him in the gazebo with other people around and that they told him to put his hands up three times. If they hadn't charged in like a bunch of cowboys for no reason, then the situation doesn't escalate rapidly and they aren't left with little choice but to kill a kid with a BB gun. It's similar to the shooting of the guy with a knife in Missouri a few months back. The police pulled up pretty damn close to the guy, leaving them little time to react and diffuse the situation without it turning deadly.

No turnovers from Jay tonight but he missed some big throws. And of course can't get any run game going against a bad run defense.