Author Topic: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences  (Read 25087 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lorric

  • 212
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
I don't get what the point of that "open letter" is.

What prescriptive value does "the events turned out to be related, after the fact" have? None.
He's saying the mindset of Brown is so much more likely to be hostile due to the circumstances. That's circumstantial evidence to support that there was a good reason for Officer Wilson to have gunned Brown down.

 

Offline jr2

  • The Mail Man
  • 212
  • It's prounounced jayartoo 0x6A7232
    • Steam
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
People were complaining that the release of the tape showing Brown robbing a convenience store 10 minutes before the confrontation was unwarranted character assassination.

The flip side says no, it's more of a revealing of Browns mindset going into this.

There are speculations Brown could have had drugs on him too (based on the speculation that he wanted the $50 in cigars to make blunts, where you take the tobacco out and put marijuana in.

 

Offline Mr. Vega

  • Your Node Is Mine
  • 28
  • The ticket to the future is always blank
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
It's character assassination when you release that video and you still haven't released the findings of your own autopsy. The police cherry picked the best thing they had and released only it.

Also, CNN just reported that while Wilson was taken to the hospital for facial injuries, but his face wasn't broken - that part was a lie. If he was really that badly beaten, they could just release photos of his injuries.

Also, at this point I care less about what exactly what happened in the middle of the street between Wilson and Brown than the fact that the a bunch of punks wearing badges and armed with military equipment have violated the 1st Amendment rights of peaceful protestors in the most egregious way possible. Here's an account of the first day of tear gas that I find pretty damn trustworthy. And here's a video of an officer threatening to kill someone who was filming him (said officer was later suspended) Multiple local accounts have said that the looting has been confined to no more than 1-2 blocks (and most cases of looting have been stopped by the protestors themselves). One case of breaking into a McDonalds was to obtain milk to treat tear gas.

Are we gonna take this **** in America?
Words ought to be a little wild, for they are the assaults of thoughts on the unthinking.
-John Maynard Keynes

 

Offline Ulala

  • 29
  • Groooove Evening, viewers!
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
Are we gonna take this **** in America?

It sure seems that way. :doubt:

People need to be flooding their Congresspersons' offices with calls about this issue. Stopping the Department of Defense 1033 program, AND the $billions in grants by the Department of Homeland Security (source) would be a good start.
Our tax dollars are funding the weapons of war and tactical equipment used against us (peaceful protesters in this case). What the **** happened, America?
I am a revolutionary.

  

Offline Aardwolf

  • 211
  • Posts: 16,384
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
@Lorric, jr2: But the cop didn't know that (right?). Making the wrong choice given what you know, and then finding out you "chose right"1 because of factors you didn't know about does not make that wrong choice right.

@Ulala: Apathy and complacency happened. More specifically 9/11 happened, and the media let Congress get away with destroying our liberty2.


1Right :rolleyes:
2I say we start using "freedom" and "liberty" in place of "civil rights" and "civil liberties", since people don't seem to care about "eroding our civil liberties" but "taking away our freedom(s)" is the same thing and has a better chance of motivating people. Maybe.

 

Offline Lorric

  • 212
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
You're not getting it.

It's not about the fact Officer Wilson didn't know, it's about the fact Brown did. It's about the fact Brown knew, and Brown will have thought Officer Wilson knew as well, and will have acted based on that assumption.

 

Offline Aardwolf

  • 211
  • Posts: 16,384
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
No, I got that. But what good is that? What predictive or prescriptive value is there to be had, in saying "he only went for the cop's gun because he thought he was in trouble for shoplifting"?

It sounds like he's saying "Wilson could tell from the fact that Brown went for his gun that Brown was 'up to no good', and therefore it was correct for Wilson to shoot Brown to death (not in self defense)". Which is bull****. Police cannot kill based on arbitrary suspicions.

If that's not it, then what? What predictive or prescriptive value is there?

 

Offline Lorric

  • 212
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
No, I got that. But what good is that? What predictive or prescriptive value is there to be had, in saying "he only went for the cop's gun because he thought he was in trouble for shoplifting"?

It sounds like he's saying "Wilson could tell from the fact that Brown went for his gun that Brown was 'up to no good', and therefore it was correct for Wilson to shoot Brown to death (not in self defense)". Which is bull****. Police cannot kill based on arbitrary suspicions.

If that's not it, then what? What predictive or prescriptive value is there?
First this wasn't some sneaky shoplift, he grabbed the stuff and shoved the owner out of the way.

The article written by the other officer shows examples of people who thought the officer knew about their crime but the officer didn't reacting as if the officer does know.

I've also seen a few of such things on police TV programs myself, the officer will be stopping someone for speeding or a busted tail light, something minor, but they'll have a pile of drugs in the boot or be on the run having just shot someone, and mayhem will ensue.

People also aren't going to be thinking rationally in such situations, they'll be panicking, the adrenaline will be pumping. This guy Brown has just robbed a store 10 mins ago, and now is confronted with a policeman, has just engaged in a violent struggle for the man's gun, what did he do next? Did he come back to try again and get shot down?

The officer who wrote the article isn't saying it proves anything, he's saying it increases the chances based on past events of police stopping people in similar circumstances, and is a relevant piece of the puzzle.

 

Offline Dragon

  • Citation needed
  • 212
  • The sky is the limit.
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
Exactly that. It's likely Brown panicked and attacked Wilson, trying to grab his gun, and was shot. I'd have likely done the same, had I been in Wilson's place. In Brown's... maybe too. I do tend to think before I act, but after just committing a crime, even a minor one, most people are jumpy and afraid of getting caught. I don't commit crimes so I don't know, but it's nothing unusual.

Note, once Brown went for Wilson's gun, he knew (for certain), that Brown was willing to kill him. Now, we don't have a video of what exactly has happened, but if he was violently assaulted, pushed his attacker back and then shot him dead, this could've been very well justified. Not knowing why Brown would do this, nor knowing what he was going to do, emptying a mag into him would be a human thing to do. While police isn't supposed to act on human instincts, this does downgrade it from a horrifying example of racism and bigotry to a tragic, but not unexpected mistake.

 I know that if I was assaulted, with the attacker clearly wanting my weapon, I'd likely shoot him the moment I manage to get some room to draw and aim it. The attacker's skin color, age or gender doesn't matter here. It could have happened a number of ways, with Brown, perhaps, having a chance to survive was the cop a bit more level-headed, but it likely happened that way:

1. Brown steals stuff from the store and thinks "I'd better avoid the police from now on, they're probably on me already."
2. Wilson comes by in his car and thinks "Oh, a kid jaywalking, we'd better set him straight."
3. Seeing the police car stop, Brown thinks "Hell, they got me!" and panics, attacking Wilson and trying to take his gun.
4. Wilson, stressed by the sudden assault, kicks Brown back, draws his gun, and shoots until he goes down. All in less than a minute.

This is a generous idea, but when you imagine it went like that, pretty much anyone would've reacted the same. It's a reasonable assumption that if Brown managed to take the gun, the next thing he'd do would be to fire it at Wilson. Wilson knew this, and, like any sane person would, acted on that assumption. Even if he wasn't really in danger, he had every reason to think he was fighting for his life. And remember. This happens fast. There is no time for precise evaluation, or even precise aiming. Wilson was acting under duress, since wounds on Brown's body show that he didn't aim very well, bullets were all over the his body. If Wilson gunned him down in cold blood, the wounds would be much more concentrated and much closer to the heart. Brown likely acted like he wanted to kill Wilson, and got an appropriate response. Then again, we don't have an exact account of how it really happened.

Not that it matters much. What really matters is how atrociously the rest of the department handled it. If it really went like that, it's all more moronic to go rogue over something like this. It could have been a footnote in the local news, along the lines of "stupid thief gets himself shot over some cheap stuff". Instead, the whole PD went mad, started obfuscating the case and throwing tear gas at people. That is the real problem.

 

Offline Aardwolf

  • 211
  • Posts: 16,384
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
Some versions of the story have Brown being a considerable distance from Wilson when the fatal shots were fired, as if he were attempting to flee. Or that his head was down, as if he were surrendering. Has this been disproved, or...?

Because if that's the case, "he was willing to kill me, earlier" is no excuse.

 

Offline Lorric

  • 212
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
Some versions of the story have Brown being a considerable distance from Wilson when the fatal shots were fired, as if he were attempting to flee. Or that his head was down, as if he were surrendering. Has this been disproved, or...?

Because if that's the case, "he was willing to kill me, earlier" is no excuse.
What if his head was down because he was charging?

We know he wasn't shot in the back.

 

Offline Dragon

  • Citation needed
  • 212
  • The sky is the limit.
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
Some versions of the story have Brown being a considerable distance from Wilson when the fatal shots were fired, as if he were attempting to flee. Or that his head was down, as if he were surrendering. Has this been disproved, or...?

Because if that's the case, "he was willing to kill me, earlier" is no excuse.
Depending on what you meant by "earlier". If that is "5 seconds ago", then it is an excuse. If he was attempting to flee, I think his back would be turned. He did not turn, and I don't see how could he been fleeing facing the shooter. All bullets went in from the front. Also, his head could've been down for other reasons, such as trying to look at his wounds or the gun, or maybe shock from being hit. He could even be trying to charge back at Wilson after being pushed off. At the time they was hit, his arm was not raised in any meaningful way, since that would show in bullet wounds. He could have started raising his hands at the time he was hit in the head, but given just how fast the situation likely unfolded, this wouldn't have helped much.

In fact, that's why I think it happened very fast. There's no reason not to use a gun after just winning a struggle for it, and Brown didn't shift noticeably between shots, meaning they were fired in very close succession. Not taking chances in such situation would be the correct course of action for a civilian. A policeman should, perhaps, have attempted to subdue Brown after pushing him off, but I can see why he decided to shoot.

 

Offline Aardwolf

  • 211
  • Posts: 16,384
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
I read something like 30 feet... or 35 feet? or meters? Idr.

 

Offline Lorric

  • 212
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
I read something like 30 feet... or 35 feet? or meters? Idr.
35.

Here, this should be helpful:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-28841715

 

Offline Aardwolf

  • 211
  • Posts: 16,384
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
So according to the St. Louis County Police Chief, Wilson shot Brown from 35 feet away. Attempting to flee or not, an unarmed man at 35 feet is not a danger to the officer's life.

 

Offline Lorric

  • 212
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
So according to the St. Louis County Police Chief, Wilson shot Brown from 35 feet away. Attempting to flee or not, an unarmed man at 35 feet is not a danger to the officer's life.
He is if he's coming forward though.

 

Offline Scotty

  • 1.21 gigawatts!
  • 211
  • Guns, guns, guns.
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
I'm going to assume MP-Ryan doesn't particularly feel inclined to join in on the discussion, based on his inactivity for the last few pages, and take up the mantle in providing meaningful numbers.  I know for a fact that several times in threads where members participating in this thread were also watching that MP-Ryan has mentioned a very important number: 21.

An assailant is capable of closing 21 feet before a trained person can draw, take aim, and fire.

The struggle supposedly happened in or near the vehicle, where Brown attempted to take Officer Wilson's weapon.

Brown was killed 35 feet from the vehicle.

The fact that Brown was killed 35 feet from the vehicle indicates that Officer Wilson was able to draw his weapon and fire, placing the potential distance where Brown allegedly started charging upwards of 50 feet from the vehicle.  Alternately, he already had his weapon in hand when Brown was 35 feet from the vehicle and fired.

If the struggle took place in or near the vehicle, why the **** would Brown run 35-55 feet away, turn around and then run toward an armed person he had just tried to take a weapon from.  That's what doesn't make sense here.  For Brown to have been "charging" at Officer Wilson, he would have to have done so after withdrawing 35-55 feet from the vehicle, turning around, and running back.


 

Offline Lorric

  • 212
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
If the struggle took place in or near the vehicle, why the **** would Brown run 35-55 feet away, turn around and then run toward an armed person he had just tried to take a weapon from.  That's what doesn't make sense here.  For Brown to have been "charging" at Officer Wilson, he would have to have done so after withdrawing 35-55 feet from the vehicle, turning around, and running back.
The only scenario I could imagine is Brown does his damage to Wilson's face and thinks he can get away while Wilson is stunned. But Wilson is able to recover too quickly, so Brown comes back in and gets gunned down. It takes very little time to cover 35 or even 50ft, especially with adrenaline surging through your body, so all this could have happened in a matter of seconds.

 

Offline Lorric

  • 212
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
There's a lot of information here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/20/us/shooting-accounts-differ-as-holder-schedules-visit.html?_r=0

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/08/13/us/ferguson-missouri-town-under-siege-after-police-shooting.html

The witness accounts seem to agree on there was a struggle and that Brown stopped and turned around. Where things differ is what happened next. Some say he surrendered, others he came forward. There doesn't seem to be anything about him charging.

Quote
According to his account to the Ferguson police, Officer Wilson said that Mr. Brown had lowered his arms and moved toward him, law enforcement officials said. Fearing that the teenager was going to attack him, the officer decided to use deadly force. Some witnesses have backed up that account. Others, however — including Mr. Johnson — have said that Mr. Brown did not move toward the officer before the final shots were fired.

It's a real mess and I don't know how they're going to sort it out.

 

Offline deathfun

  • 210
  • Hey man. Peace. *Car hits them* Frakking hippies
Re: Police militarization in the US, and its consequences
I read something like 30 feet... or 35 feet? or meters? Idr.

*From the car

There were no numbers of the distance between cop and perpetrator (which as I said earlier, is an important number)
We also have reports that the cop moved from the car to give some sort of chase, but those are just eyewitness reports and aren't trustworthy

Other note: There were shots hit in the back *but they were merely grazes*. Check the autopsy report
"No"