Full bodycam footage of Dubose shooting released - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Flameon;48357527] the question is does the punishment fit the crime .. lmfao. people don't wanna talk about that but it is literally the crux of the debate and all I am going for. [/quote] You keep saying "punishment"; the officer shooting (and killing) him wasn't a punishment. If he was sentenced to death for his crimes in a court of law we could be debating if the punishment was "just". When an officer shoots someone, or uses any force, it is (or should be) in response to the situation at hand, not to dish out punishment for some crime. Remember that video of cops kicking a handcuffed suspect on the ground? That was cops "dishing out a 'punishment'". Making a quick decision to use force in a high stress situation isn't giving a punishment. [quote] Hey Apache can you clarify this last bit? 1.) what do you mean that you don't feel sorry for him? 2.) In making things harder for the officer, would you say it was wrong of the officer to use lethal force? 3.) Would you say we should train officers not to use lethal force in these scenarios?[/QUOTE] I agree with that quote, so: 1) He made the decision to run, he escalated the situation, he didn't have a license on him, he was driving a vehicle without a front plate. The stop was lawful, the order to exit the vehicle was lawful. It's hard to pity someone given all that. 2) "Making it harder" doesn't suddenly make lethal force OK, but it does escalate the situation and turns down the road of ending up in a situation where force is used. Answering the last question is pointless because there isn't even agreement as to what the scenario is. To give a more general answer to it: If a reasonable police officer in a given situation would feel their life is in danger, then the use of force is justified in my opinion.

If you take umbrage with the term punish thats fine, we can use another one. I still think of it as applying given the police officer, in a position of authority, decides what penalty someone has to face for whatever action they do. In this case the punishment dolled out for running away was death. The point is that using lethal force was not appropriate in this situation. 1.) Even if he ran I still have pity for him given the response he recieved was not appropriate for what he did. If someone shop lifts from a store and a police officer shoots the person as they run, I would also feel pity for them because they did not deserve to lose their lives. A life is a precious thing, and taking it away for something as trivial as running from the police is an ethical injustice. 2.) In this situation, I would say it is wrong of an officer to use lethal force. 3.) I think what I would consider a 'reasonable police officer' to decide when her life is in danger would be vastly different than your interpretation. And given that, I am not comfortable police being able to use lethal force simply when they 'feel' danger is present.

[QUOTE=Flameon;48357677]If you take umbrage with the term punish thats fine, we can use another one. I still think of it as applying given the police officer, in a position of authority, decides what penalty someone has to face for whatever action they do. In this case the punishment dolled out for running away was death. The point is that using lethal force was not appropriate in this situation. 1.) Even if he ran I still have pity for him given the response he recieved was not appropriate for what he did. If someone shop lifts from a store and a police officer shoots the person as they run, I would also feel pity for them because they did not deserve to lose their lives. A life is a precious thing, and taking it away for something as trivial as running from the police is an ethical injustice. 2.) In this situation, I would say it is wrong of an officer to use lethal force. 3.) I think what I would consider a 'reasonable police officer' to decide when her life is in danger would be vastly different than your interpretation. And given that, I am not comfortable police being able to use lethal force simply when they 'feel' danger is present.[/QUOTE] I encourage you to learn more about police work, in that case.

[QUOTE=Apache249;48357274]Yeah, he chose to run for 'chickenshit reasoning' and effectively ended his own life.[/QUOTE] No he didn't. This is victim blaming [editline]3rd August 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Fourm Shark;48360637]You all are acting like the officer went and thought "THIS GUY IS RESISTING KILL HIM" as if it is expected of cops to shoot people that don't comply. I really wish people would stop saying things like "The penalty for resisting should not be the death penalty." I really, REALLY don't think the cop was thinking "this guy needs to die" like you people make it out to be. Stop for a moment and consider the cops situation before making such cheeky remarks.[/QUOTE] That's what we are doing and it actually starts with the cop being kind of a dick repeating his question over and over when the guy already told him that he didn't have his license on him. [editline]3rd August 2015[/editline] [quote][Officer Ray Tensing:] You don’t have to reach for it. It’s okay. Do you have a license on you? [Samuel DuBose:] Uh…ya. [Officer Ray Tensing:] What’s that uh, bottle on the floor there? A bottle of what? [Samuel DuBose:] [inaudible] You can smell it, it’s not liquor in it. [Officer Ray Tensing:] Okay, do you have your license on you? [Samuel DuBose:] Source: LYBIO.net [Searching] [Officer Ray Tensing:] Okay, do you know where the license are? Or what? [Samuel DuBose:] I got my [inaudible] and stuff. [Officer Ray Tensing:] Okay, Ima ask you again. Do you have your license on you? [Samuel DuBose:] I have my license, you can take run my name. [Officer Ray Tensing:] So, do you not have your license on you? I’m asking you a direct question. [Samuel DuBose:] Uh… [B][Officer Ray Tensing:] Do you have your license on you? [Samuel DuBose:] I thought I did, I haven’t seen it – why – why did you pull me over for?[/B] [Officer Ray Tensing:] Again, your front tag. [Samuel DuBose:] But it’s not illegal to not have a front tag. It’s just … [inaudible] [Officer Ray Tensing:] Actually it is. Ima gonna ask you again. You have a license on you? [Samuel DuBose:] Source: LYBIO.net I have a license you could run my name. [B][Officer Ray Tensing:] Ok, is that not on you then? [Samuel DuBose:] Uh… I don’t think I have it on me.[/B] [Officer Ray Tensing:] Be straight up with me, are you suspended? [Samuel DuBose:] I’m not suspended. [Officer Ray Tensing:] Why don’t you have your license on you? [Samuel DuBose:] I – I just don’t – I’m sorry sir. I’m just gonna go [in] the house. [Officer Ray Tensing:] Okay. Where do you stay at? Down here? [Samuel DuBose:] Right around the [inaudible]. [Officer Ray Tensing:] Okay. Well, until I can figure out if you have a license or not, go ahead and take your seatbelt off for me. [Samuel DuBose:] I didn’t even do nothing… what are you… [Officer Ray Tensing:] Go ahead and take your seatbelt off. (Tensing put his hand on the door handle) [/quote] Goes on with the officer coming really close to the very very confused Dubose. It continues with Dubose being really confused and doing the wrong move by starting the motor. Full transcript here: [url]http://lybio.net/tag/samuel-dubose-shooting-transcript/[/url] So the cop reaches into the car and shoots Dubose because he thought he was gonna be run over. Just suppose this is true and can happen. Just suppose the car COULD run him over which is very unlikely up to the point where he [B]ACTIVELY REACHED INTO THE CAR BY HIS OWN ACTION[/B] It's still like reaching into a lions cage and then shooting the lion when he comes close to yor hand. "Jesus I thought the lion was gonna hurt me" This is not how you handle the situation. Especially not as a trained professional. Every fucking policeman in the world will tell you that the most idiotic thing you could do in a situation lke this is [B]REACHING IN OR EVEN GETTING CLOSE TO THE CAR[/B]

Killuah, I would normally agree that situations should be handled with some personal space in mind, but the fact of the matter is the officer was directly requesting a driver's liscense which the man failed to provide, and then when questioned on where it is, he tried to drive off. Regardless of how the situation could of ended, all roads lead to the fact the man who tried to drive-off was committing several criminal actions, and when an officer is just trying to communicate with you, no reason exists for you to bolt outta dodge like a moron.

And no reason and especially no training exists to reach into the vehicle like a moron. It's actually the worst way to handle the situation.

[QUOTE=Fourm Shark;48360637]You all are acting like the officer went and thought "THIS GUY IS RESISTING KILL HIM" as if it is expected of cops to shoot people that don't comply. I really wish people would stop saying things like "The penalty for resisting should not be the death penalty." I really, REALLY don't think the cop was thinking "this guy needs to die" like you people make it out to be. Stop for a moment and consider the cops situation before making such cheeky remarks.[/QUOTE] As I have said this entire time, whatever this officer felt I really do not care a bunch. He probably did fear for his life (why?...). Maybe he was racist, maybe he was punshing him for escaping. It doesn't matter what his initial motiviation was, at the end of the day he relied upon the training that was presented to him and believed that this situation was an appropriate time to use lethal force. His training failed him. An unarmed father of ten is now dead. While the DA thinks trying this dude for murder is enough, I don't. Forum Shark, given the vast ammount of deaths at the hands of the police over such trivial things as this, regardless of the officer's intent it appers it actually [I]is[/I] expected for police to shoot when people don't comply. As such, what is needed is to reform police and their practices and raise the threshold when they can use lethal force. Because if this situation is supposed to meet it - and it seems to given all the backlash I have recieved by even SUGGESTING we need to make it more difficult for police offiers to use lethal force in this thread, then just tells me how in dire need of reform we really are. [editline]3rd August 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;48361518]Killuah, I would normally agree that situations should be handled with some personal space in mind, but the fact of the matter is the officer was directly requesting a driver's liscense which the man failed to provide, and then when questioned on where it is, he tried to drive off. Regardless of how the situation could of ended, all roads lead to the fact the man who tried to drive-off was committing several criminal actions, and when an officer is just trying to communicate with you, no reason exists for you to bolt outta dodge like a moron.[/QUOTE] yes, he was a someone who desered to face time or criminal sanctions for his conduct. he didn't deserve to be shot to death.

[QUOTE=Flameon;48362281]yes, he was a someone who desered to face time or criminal sanctions for his conduct. he didn't deserve to be shot to death.[/QUOTE] That skydiver didn't deserve to have his parachute fail. This isn't about "deserving", this is about knowingly deciding to undertake in a danger activity and, due to a series of events resulting from that, being killed. When someone runs, or resists arrest, they are accepting the fact they are provoking a dangerous situation which may result in persons being hurt or killed. If you don't want to run the risk of ending up as the next "poster child" for "police brutality", comply with police. If you think they acted outside of the law, take them to court, where you actually stand a chance of winning. Don't provoke dangerous situations and then be surprised when everything doesn't work out fine.

[QUOTE=DaMastez;48362477] When someone runs, or resists arrest, they are accepting the fact they are provoking a dangerous situation which may result in persons being hurt or killed. [/QUOTE] Why?

In a pragmatic sense you are correct (dubose and countless others who didn't deserve their fate are now dead), but the law should change so that is no longer the case. ... [editline]3rd August 2015[/editline] Police officers killing people are not the equivalent chain reaction like the necessity of objects falling because of gravity. Choices are made, laws are constructed, officers are trained.

When will we hear hoe the ruling went for the cop in this case?

Lemme reiterate here, flareon is a [B]dumb[/B] brick wall to try and argue with. Like when he was sperging out about the mattress girl countersue [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Trolling" - Craptasket))[/highlight]

Just because he disagrees with you and stands firm by his opinion, he's dumb brick wall? You should keep your derogatory name calling out of this discussion.

[QUOTE=gastyne;48368823]Just because he disagrees with you and stands firm by his opinion, he's dumb brick wall? You should keep your derogatory name calling out of this discussion.[/QUOTE] "discussion"

[QUOTE=Fourm Shark;48365238]That should be obvious. They become a danger to people around them and the officers.[/QUOTE] So the solution is to turn it around and make the officer the danger for others? Which isn't even an exageration looking at the death toll of US police actions.

Sick args bra, especially love the zingy one liners.

[QUOTE=Fourm Shark;48371162]I think you should stop overgeneralizing[/QUOTE] The ones who are overgeneralizing are the people who advocate that any situation of not complying with the olice officer warrants shooting because "danger to officer and others". Not to mention that it's clearly the officer putting himself in danger in the first place.

Having watched the video, seems pretty reasonable. The cop is clearly concerned that the guy might have a weapon because he says that he doesn't have to reach around for stuff. He then goes to open the door, the guy closes it and holds it closed. He then turns the key and starts the engine. The officer reaches in to stop him from putting it in gear/drive, yells at him to stop. The car moves forwards, putting the officer off balance and possibly dragging him along. A second/couple of seconds after the second 'Stop!' he shoots him and seems to get loose of the car. Seems reasonable to me.

That's why police is trained to actually NOT come close or reach into the vehicle when they suspect that something is going on.

[QUOTE=Killuah;48361665]And no reason and especially no training exists to reach into the vehicle like a moron. It's actually the worst way to handle the situation.[/QUOTE] The worst way to handle the situation is not provide a police officer with your license and start to drive off while holding your door shut. You called it victim blaming which is fucking absurd and so wrong. How is it victim blaming when if the guy never bothered to try and drive off then a gun wouldn't have been pulled or shot? Im not defending the cop shooting or the guy dying which I know some people would think I am because they are dumb as fuck and sassy, but its not victim blaming when the driver put himself in such a situation. The driver could have provided his ID and shit, but no, he had to hold his door shut, not comply, and then start driving away and dragging the cop a bit. You just say victim blaming because at the end of the day, you really have no fucking clue on what you are talking about. You act as if just because someone died and didnt deserve it at all doesnt mean they couldnt also be in the wrong in pretty much all aspects of this situation.

I'm not talking about Dubose because of course it's wrong what he did there is no arguing that. He drove off because there was MJ scattered all over the car. It's victim blaming because even then the police officer is clearly in a far far far superior position. The "if he never drove off this wouldn't happen" argument doesn't tackle the uncalled for violence from the side of the officer. It doesn't even allow discussion of it as it is the end-to-all argument. "If he hadn't crossed the red light and discussed with us we wouldn't have broken his leg" By using this logic every officer who uses excessive force is basically unassailable by just claiming the shot/beaten/incarcerated person did something wrong. And it is happening : [url]http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cerd/docs/ngos/usa/USHRN15.pdf[/url] [quote]The police contended that they fired into the car that Bell and his friends had entered after leaving the club because they believed they had a weapon.[/quote] - "I thought he was gonna run me over" [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cases_of_police_brutality_in_the_United_States[/url] [quote]February 17, 2004: Rodolfo "Rudy" Cardenas, 43, was shot and killed by Bureau of Narcotic Enforcement agent Michael Walker in downtown San Jose. Walker mistook Cardenas for a wanted fugitive, and shot him during a foot chase. Walker was charged with voluntary manslaughter but was found not guilty.[/quote] [quote]December 23, 2004: Juan Herrera was shot and killed by Officer Ron Furtado after a car pursuit in Buena Park, California. Officer Furtado claimed that Herrera was reaching for a gun. Herrera's family sued and hired a forensic expert who was prepared to testify otherwise. However, the city settled with the Herrera family for $5 million. Officer Furtado was not charged.[/quote] Note how the "the police claimed" cases f brutality are mostly post 2001 Maybe it's because I come from a country where we rather let the criminals flee and don't risk a REALLY DANGEROUS high speed chase. And then the criminals get cought by detective work. It's less dangerous for EVERYONE.

[QUOTE=Killuah;48381523]I'm not talking about Dubose because of course it's wrong what he did there is no arguing that. He drove off because there was MJ scattered all over the car. It's victim blaming because even then the police officer is clearly in a far far far superior position. The "if he never drove off this wouldn't happen" argument doesn't tackle the uncalled for violence from the side of the officer. It doesn't even allow discussion of it as it is the end-to-all argument. "If he hadn't crossed the red light and discussed with us we wouldn't have broken his leg" By using this logic every officer who uses excessive force is basically unassailable by just claiming the shot/beaten/incarcerated person did something wrong. And it is happening : [url]http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cerd/docs/ngos/usa/USHRN15.pdf[/url] - "I thought he was gonna run me over" Maybe it's because I come from a country where we rather let the criminals flee and don't risk a REALLY DANGEROUS high speed chase. And then the criminals get cought by detective work. It's less dangerous for EVERYONE.[/QUOTE] No, if he never decided to start to run from the police in his car the cop wouldnt have gotten his gun out. If he just complied do you really think that situation would have escalated at all? I dont know how you are getting from this that it somehow wipes away the fact shooting him isnt right. The cop acted stupid, he should have just let him drive away and call back up. So getting out his gun was wrong entirely. But he wouldnt have gotten it out if he never started to drive away and just comply, that was the situation that made him grab his gun. If it didnt happen he wouldnt have had any poor reason to grab his gun and shoot. Would you act that way at a traffic stop from a cop? Would you hold your door shut, not give license or anything, not comply, and then start driving off while the cop was still holding your car? Then would you think nothing was your fault at all because you just say victim blaming?

[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;48381634]No, if he never decided to start to run from the police in his car the cop wouldnt have gotten his gun out. If he just complied do you really think that situation would have escalated at all? I dont know how you are getting from this that it somehow wipes away the fact shooting him isnt right. The cop acted stupid, he should have just let him drive away and call back up. So getting out his gun was wrong entirely. But he wouldnt have gotten it out if he never started to drive away and just comply, that was the situation that made him grab his gun. If it didnt happen he wouldnt have had any poor reason to grab his gun and shoot. Would you act that way at a traffic stop from a cop? Would you hold your door shut, not give license or anything, not comply, and then start driving off while the cop was still holding your car? Then would you think nothing was your fault at all because you just say victim blaming?[/QUOTE] [quote]The "if he never drove off this wouldn't happen" argument doesn't tackle the uncalled for violence from the side of the officer. It doesn't even allow discussion of it as it is the end-to-all argument.[/quote] As I said, of course Dubose acted retarded and wrong. They found bags of MJ in his car. The police officer however is a trained professional and I doubt police training doesn't teach officers that reaching into the car of a suspect is really really dangerous and wrong.

[QUOTE=Killuah;48381184]That's why police is trained to actually NOT come close or reach into the vehicle when they suspect that something is going on.[/QUOTE] Nothing was going on until well into the traffic stop. He wasn't even bothered by the fact that he was digging around in the glovebox. It was all routine until it was too late. Not to mention my doubts about your knowledge of how out police operate. [editline]5th August 2015[/editline] Have you actually done any research, or are you just talking out of ass?

[QUOTE=Killuah;48381661]As I said, of course Dubose acted retarded and wrong. They found bags of MJ in his car. The police officer however is a trained professional and I doubt police training doesn't teach officers that reaching into the car of a suspect is really really dangerous and wrong.[/QUOTE] The point is you called it victim blaming, as if that somehow means anything at all.

[QUOTE=Apache249;48382355]Nothing was going on until well into the traffic stop. He wasn't even bothered by the fact that he was digging around in the glovebox. It was all routine until it was too late. Not to mention my doubts about your knowledge of how out police operate. [editline]5th August 2015[/editline] Have you actually done any research, or are you just talking out of ass?[/QUOTE] I actually asked my step-uncle who is a teacher the police school of Saxony. [editline]6th August 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=HoodedSniper;48382941]The point is you called it victim blaming, as if that somehow means anything at all.[/QUOTE] Yes because he is the victim of unwaranted police brutality. guess it tells a lot that you're not reacting to the further ponts explaining why it's important .

[QUOTE=Apache249;48382355]Nothing was going on until well into the traffic stop. He wasn't even bothered by the fact that he was digging around in the glovebox. It was all routine until it was too late. Not to mention my doubts about your knowledge of how out police operate. [/QUOTE] "Until it was too late" - the officer made a concious decision to shoot a fleeing suspect who was unarmed. Too late my ass.

[QUOTE=gastyne;48368823]Just because he disagrees with you and stands firm by his opinion, he's dumb brick wall? You should keep your derogatory name calling out of this discussion.[/QUOTE] You weren't in the thread about the false rape accusations. Even with literal proof Flame on argued for 10+ pages. Its not that their opinions are different, its that even if wrong they react the same way. Also flame on tends to flame other users, a lot.

[QUOTE=Killuah;48385804]I actually asked my step-uncle who is a teacher the police school of Saxony.[/QUOTE] Germany isn't the United States, police in Germany have virtually nothing to worry about compared to an American police officer.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;48388239]Germany isn't the United States, police in Germany have virtually nothing to worry about compared to an American police officer.[/QUOTE] But that makes reaching into the vehicle even more of an idiotic move?