Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 02:29 PM) 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. Police have always been authoritative assholes, and it's been made worse with the government giving them military gear. I'm guessing a large number of police these days are ex-military, especially police classes that have graduated in the last decade.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:56 PM) 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. And fairly so.

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. Someone in the comments seems to think the went into the parking lot a few minutes before the shooting. If so, why they didn't stay there and attempt to talk to the kid and assess the situation is beyond me.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:50 PM) Yes, I've seen that video, but watched it again, it just doesn't tell me much and causes the viewer to do nothing but speculate, which is kind of my point. Without audio, or more information on the situation, I have no idea why they pulled up so close. But me speculating as to why doesn't really solve anything. 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.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:35 PM) We are talking about multiple different things here. Which video, post it. ? We're mainly talking about this Cleveland case. Go back several pages and you can watch the video. Good to know we're arguing when you don't even know the facts of what happened. You're assuming things. Here's the video: http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2...cer_shot_1.html

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?! Do you think police have some sort of built in GPS where they know the exact coordinates of the people they're looking for when they ride up? If they saw the person ahead in the gazebo with a gun, then they're even dumber than we're claiming. Because then they knew they'd be parking their vehicle within feet of an armed individual. Literally putting their own lives at risk for no good reason.

Yeah, i'm telling you, the universal rule is "don't needlessly put yourself in danger."

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. Did you watch the video, yes or no?

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:28 PM) Well, with all your training, you'd know. 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.

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. Bad information led to that situation, not bad policing. No, they knew there was a young man with a gun in a gazebo. And then they proceeded to park their car within 5 feet of that gazebo. That was moronic. In the stand your ground argument, it's akin to starting a fight and then killing that person because you feel your life is in danger. I'm sure they violated police procedure. There's no way that's appropriate when responding to a scene. You don't drive right up to the person with the gun because if the person has any intention of killing someone, he can easily shoot the cops in the car. They should have maintained SOME kind of distance to at least give themselves time to analyze the situation. They didn't do that. And the fact that they lied about telling the kid three times to put the weapon away means they KNEW they f***ed up royally and were trying to cover themselves. Did you watch the video? Honestly? Because like you from the narrative i thought the same thing - hey cops can shoot if they feel threatened and this kid had a gun and wasn't following orders. But the video shows that the cops didn't give the kid time to follow orders. They rolled up, opened the door, and shot the kid within about 2 seconds.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 01:11 PM) I already allowed that they may have gotten too close (didn't watch it), but the call is for a person with a gun. Someone reaches for a gun, they are justified to shoot. You need to watch it. The narrative doesn't fit with the video.

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 mindset that because they're police they know exactly what's deadly and whats not at all times. At least, you seem to think you'd know if you were in the same situation. In your world, I assume they should do nothing and hope the person they're called about doesn't turn out to kill people? Because if that actually happened, you'd be the first to say, "well, they called the police, why didn't they do anything?! I thought they were there to serve and protect?" I know plenty of police, and on a daily basis they deal with the parts of society you never have to talk too out in the open, so much as even look at, and they have to make decisions on a split second basis whenever they're in those situations. Those decisions could lead to them never seeing their families again...and for what? Because in your opinion, "just in case" the perpetrator didn't actually mean any harm when he approached them with a knife, they should wait and see? I think you need to watch less television. 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.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 11:39 AM) so the oline wasn't exactly fixed then Sure, "fixed" was a poor choice. Significantly upgraded from what it used to be when Cutler would get sacked 5 times a game.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 11:03 AM) What kind of person is the officer? IIRC he didn't have a record. He wasn't caught on film assaulting an elderly man and committing a crime 30 minutes before he got into a fight with a cop.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 11:06 AM) Missing on the coaching staff in totality and relying on Cutler should get him fired. He had two much better options for head coach that he missed on to think outside of the box. At this point in time this team is horrendous, they are not just losing they are embarrassed on a weekly basis. Teams have three and four play drives that go 50+ yards fora score. They look like an over-matched college teams at times. The entire franchise structure needs to be rebuilt not just the coaching staff. I'm in agreement with this. But it's never going to happen. The Bears are one of the most conservatively owned teams in the league. And who can blame them when they make buckets full of money every Sunday despite being a pretty s***ty franchise since the mid-80's.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 11:00 AM) Look, im not absolving Cutler of blame here. He has not had a good season. But the Bears frittered away the Buffalo game by trying to pass all over the place and didnt run at all in the second half to control the score and the clock. Im sorry you feel that Jay is the only one who deserves blame in that loss, and he certainly deserves some, but not all. 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.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 10:47 AM) One thing worth pointing out...the initial officer's story in the Cleveland case completely does not match up with the video. They said afterwards that he was in the gazebo with several other people and was thus a threat to them - untrue. They said that they told him to get down and put his hands up 3 times - also untrue. I point this out to reemphasize that people keep trusting the statement of the shooter because the other witness is dead. Note that i didn't call these "lies", which IMO could imply that they're deliberate. I don't know that. But I wish people would remember this case where the officers statements are factually inaccurate when they take Officer Wilson's word months after the fact for what happened in that case. Most reasonable people are going to understand that an officer is going to make self-serving statements. That's an obvious bias there. But when you add what he said with what other witnesses say, with the type of person Brown was 30 minutes before the shooting, etc., the picture is painted.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 10:50 AM) You can also point to the Bears completely abandoning the run game in that first game as a good reason they lost That is such an overblown talking point. Dump off passes and screens provide the same space. Forte was a monster the first half of the season. edit: and what a criticism - forcing Cutler to throw the ball to Marshall, Jeffrey and Bennett, three of the best weapons in the entire league.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 10:45 AM) Oh give it up already. He played well in SF and NY and most of the first half against GB. Oh wow! The highest paid player in the league played well for 5 halves of football! Give him the MVP! You have such a hard on for Jay. I don't get it. He's TERRIBLE. He's not a franchise QB. Not even close.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 10:20 AM) Two players from Emery's first draft/offseason are on the roster. Isiah frey may be somewhere but who knows and Shea is not a first round talent. So we have years of bad Angelo drafting and nothing emery has done has shown he knows what he is doing. This coaching staff is all his, does he get a pass on that as well as his first draft? This team is not only bad they are embarrassing, the coaching all has to go, every one of them, so two years later Emery gets to try again....... That's a bunch of bull. He got Marshall for nothing. He fixed the O-line in practically one season. He's drafted no worse than average, but I'd argue it's trending slightly above average. Realistically he missed on the coach, he f***ed up relying on Cutler, and he thought he could piece together a defense to be average along side his supposedly above-average offense. The plan obviously didn't work, but i'm not sure his plan was really all that unreasonable at the time. I liked most of the moves he made. Hell, I thought they were a playoff team at worst and a contender at best. It just didn't work out. He still dealt with massive injuries on both sides of the ball this year, and guys who should be producing more than they are (see, Allen, Jared, Cutler, Jay, etc.) The bigger problem is moving forward. They're f***ed for the foreseeable future. At least three seasons. He better draft a QB in waiting, draft young defensive talent and hope in 2017 or 2018 the QB in waiting can become a starter.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 09:59 AM) Well, look at what happened this year...Jay had a few good games to start the year, everything is ok. We win in SF and then NY. Then he struggles and plays an especially bad half against Green Bay. The criticism starts. Jay begins pouting. Coaching staff worries he will quit on the team if criticism continues. They go into Carolina and keep things conservative in order to protect Cutler from interceptions leading to more criticism. We lose again. This is basically what I see happening. It's why we started dumping everything down into the flats instead of throwing the ball down field. Jay didn't start well. He lost the first game of the season by being a moron.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 10:03 AM) I just want to point out, that every time you have seen an actual video of a controversial shooting that sounded like it had justification, you have been surprised at how quickly and thoughtlessly the situation was "resolved". Other than the Cleveland case, what other justified shootings have I seen video of? This is a rarity. edit: You might be referring to the knife case. And I did think they acted a little too quickly for my liking, but they were still justified in shooting under the law.

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. Watch the video. The car pulls up 2 feet from the kid, the officer jumps out, shoots, then runs to hide behind the other side of the car. It all happened in about 2 seconds. Physically it would have been impossible for him to order the kid to put down the weapon or put his hands up, have the kid move in such a away as to create fear of imminent danger, and then the shot.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 09:08 AM) Do you deny that he was resisting arrest? That is opening the door for the police to escalate the situation. And no it doesn't absolve the police of responsibility. It just adds some of that back on him for resisting. Why can't both be at fault? It was stupid of the cops to even be arresting the guy. There's your government chasing the almighty tax dollar.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 07:09 AM) If I were rating all three of these incidents on a scale of 1-10, with 1 being the victim is fully liable, 10 being the police officer is fully liable, and 5 being the threshold at which charges should be brought, I would say: Ferguson: 2 New York: 7 Cleveland: 8 I'd go 0, 2, 8. Ferguson he was completely justified. New York I don't think warrants a murder charge at all. I'm curious if an expert would say whether he would have died without the choke hold. Either way, the culpability is slightly more than Wilson. The Cleveland situation I think deserves charges. As SS points out, the officers put themselves in that situation for no good reason, and the video looks like he jumped out of the car and shot the kid right away. There was no time to order the kid to drop the weapon and wait for a response. You might as well claim that in any situation where the assailant has a gun, if the cop jumps out in front of him and fires he's justified because he could have been shot at any moment. edit: that's basically the "it's coming right for us!" south park shooting defense.