[QUOTE=SeamanStains;48327804]Shooting tires doesn't do shit, this isn't GTA, standard procedure would be to stop the vehicle by replacing some of the drivers chest with air.[/QUOTE]
Shooting tires severely slows a vehicle and allows the chassis' weight to shift so far to one side that powersteering is no longer effective. Police don't shoot at fleeing vehicles unless they are acting extremely recklessly or aiming for people because their lives are not in danger and shooting at a moving vehicle risks causing collateral damage.
The officer in the video was stuck to the vehicle. He wasn't behind it or entirely out of the rear wheel's range of travel. If he had shot from behind and struck the driver, there would have been no case--he would have been guilty.
[QUOTE=SeamanStains;48327804]Shooting tires doesn't do shit, this isn't GTA, standard procedure would be to stop the vehicle by replacing some of the drivers chest with air.[/QUOTE]
I've seen many cases where it is effective, but I can understand why it's not a standard thing anymore, and how exactly is shooting the driver safer anyway? In both cases the vehicle loses most or all control.
[QUOTE=Sonador;48327224]Happens more likely than you think when a department is under pressure from the public. One of my supervisors, a former cop of 25 years, has been placed on trial for vehicular manslaughter for running over a man with a gun threatening someone with his cruiser. He was cleared, because hitting someone with a car is lethal force, and the man with the gun was using force likely to cause great bodily or death on his victim.
Believe it or not, in the US you are innocent until proven guilty in the court of law, and we'll see what the verdict is.
[editline]29th July 2015[/editline]
Turn on your speakers and listen to the video, you can hear the engine[/QUOTE]
True, which happens after he gets shot. We don't know if that was intentional or not, however. If I were shot, I think I would try to get away as well.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;48327847]Shooting tires severely slows a vehicle and allows the chassis' weight to shift so far to one side that powersteering is no longer effective. Police don't shoot at fleeing vehicles unless they are acting extremely recklessly or aiming for people because their lives are not in danger and shooting at a moving vehicle risks causing collateral damage.
The officer in the video was stuck to the vehicle. He wasn't behind it or entirely out of the rear wheel's range of travel. If he had shot from behind and struck the driver, there would have been no case, he would have been guilty.[/QUOTE]
I'm honestly left in awe the court found him guilty of involuntary manslaughter. The only way this could have happened that I would reasonably understand ifs if the cop caved during testimony and stated he didn't mean to shoot the guy, or if the grand jury was grossly incompetent. I'd give good money to read the transcript, I might look it up if it's public domain.
[QUOTE=Sonador;48327858]I'm honestly left in awe the court found him guilty of involuntary manslaughter. The only way this could have happened that I would reasonably understand ifs if the cop caved during testimony and stated he didn't mean to shoot the guy, or if the grand jury was grossly incompetent. I'd give good money to read the transcript, I might look it up if it's public domain.[/QUOTE]
He was only indicted. The trial hasn't happened yet.
After watching the video I can understand why the guy was shot.
Here's how I do it when I get pulled over: Shut off the car and remove the keys, put both hands on the steering wheel and keep them there until the cop asks me to get something. Answer questions with a simple yes/no, no stuttering or stammering to explain anything. Produce the documents they ask for or tell them you don't have said documents.
That's all you can do to keep the incident peaceful and as non confrontational as possible. Don't challenge cops on the street, you won't win, they can't let you win. They can't lose face on the street.
This guy did everything wrong. He might as well have committed suicide by cop. Was no front tag a reason to kill someone? No of course not. But by the time the gun came out, no front tag wasn't what was fueling this shooting.
[QUOTE=Sonador;48327858]I'm honestly left in awe the court found him guilty of involuntary manslaughter. The only way this could have happened that I would reasonably understand ifs if the cop caved during testimony and stated he didn't mean to shoot the guy, or if the grand jury was grossly incompetent. I'd give good money to read the transcript, I might look it up if it's public domain.[/QUOTE]
it's not decided yet it seems you don't know what a grand jury is
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_jury[/url]
[editline]30th July 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;48327865]After watching the video I can understand why the guy was shot.
Here's how I do it when I get pulled over: Shut off the car and remove the keys, put both hands on the steering wheel and keep them there until the cop asks me to get something. Answer questions with a simple yes/no, no stuttering or stammering to explain anything. Produce the documents they ask for or tell them you don't have said documents.
That's all you can do to keep the incident peaceful and as non confrontational as possible. Don't challenge cops on the street, you won't win, they can't let you win. They can't lose face on the street.
This guy did everything wrong. He might as well have committed suicide by cop. Was no front tag a reason to kill someone? No of course not. But by the time the gun came out, no front tag wasn't what was fueling this shooting.[/QUOTE]
what gun? there was no gun except the cops gun?
[editline]30th July 2015[/editline]
the cop who is trained for deescalating situations like this
[QUOTE=Killuah;48327871]it's not decided yet it seems you don't know what a grand jury is[/QUOTE]
Misread 'indicted', it didn't make much sense to me either.
Deescalation only works with cooperative suspects, bud. You can't talk down someone who doesn't want to be talked down.
[QUOTE=Killuah;48327871]it's not decided yet it seems you don't know what a grand jury is
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_jury[/url]
[editline]30th July 2015[/editline]
what gun? there was no gun except the cops gun?
[editline]30th July 2015[/editline]
the cop who is trained for deescalating situations like this[/QUOTE]
He meant once the officer's gun came out. There is no deescalating the situation when your life is in immediate danger. The second the driver hit the gas pedal, he was liable to die. He (the officer) couldn't back off because he was caught in the vehicle.
[QUOTE=Sonador;48327897]Misread 'indicted', it didn't make much sense to me either.
Deescalation only works with cooperative suspects, bud. You can't talk down someone who doesn't want to be talked down.[/QUOTE]
deescalation is certainly not meant for people who don't want to throw a fit anyway and please don't call me bud that is kinda creepy and belittleing again
[editline]30th July 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;48327904]He meant once the officer's gun came out. There is no deescalating the situation when your life is in immediate danger. The second he hit the gas pedal, he was liable to die. He couldn't back off because he was caught in the vehicle.[/QUOTE]
I think the officer himself escalated pretty quickly.
[QUOTE=Killuah;48327918]deescalation is certainly not meant for people who don't want to throw a fit anyway[/QUOTE]
What? What was the point of this post
[editline]29th July 2015[/editline]
After watching the video and looking at the thumbnails again, I noticed this:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/zDbHPVy.png[/img]
At the point of shooting, DuBose has Tensings' arm grabbed or locked into the vehicle while he is attempting to drive away. I have no doubt in my mind now the shooting was justified. I would have done the exact same thing.
[QUOTE=Killuah;48327918]deescalation is certainly not meant for people who don't want to throw a fit anyway and please don't call me bud that is kinda creepy and belittleing again
[editline]30th July 2015[/editline]
I think the officer himself escalated pretty quickly.[/QUOTE]
Believe it or not, this would be considered a form of deescalation. Physical force (up to lethal force if the situation requires it) is a valid means of deescalation and assurance of compliance in this country. You can't negotiate with a suspect who is entirely uncooperative and dragging you along the road without regard for your life, but you can destroy their ability to resist.
You cannot refuse an officer's lawful order in this country, so he didn't have to do jack squat to make the suspect calm down. It is standard procedure to remove an uncooperative suspect from a vehicle.
I don't think the cop did anything wrong other than giving the guy the benefit of the doubt. I would have fucking lost my shit the moment he turned the engine on, removed him from the car, cuffs on, and make him sit on the trunk as I figure out if he's a licensed driver or not.[QUOTE=Killuah;48327871]the cop who is trained for deescalating situations like this[/QUOTE]
He tried to though, and then the dude drove off and dragged the cop along and could have [i]easily[/i] killed him. Newsflash everybody, if you run somebody over you can kill them and it's why reckless driving isn't tolerated in the United States.
[QUOTE=Sonador;48327933]What? What was the point of this post
[editline]29th July 2015[/editline]
After watching the video and looking at the thumbnails again, I noticed this:
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/zDbHPVy.png[/IMG]
At the point of shooting, DuBose has Tensings' arm grabbed or locked into the vehicle while he is attempting to drive away. I have no doubt in my mind now the shooting was justified. I would have done the exact same thing.[/QUOTE]
Sorry what
Here you can see the gun coming up on the right side of the frame. DuBose's arm is pointing toward the roof of the car. You can also see the officer's sleeve and his arm extending into the car towards his waist:
[img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/t6q29H3.jpg[/img_thumb]
Right before the gunshot. Actually sort of looks like he's holding on to his seatbelt, to me. Dubose's arm still in the air:
[img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/tOhxM9U.jpg[/img_thumb]
Right after the shot. I'm willing to bet he's holding the seatbelt at this point:
[img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/Hvx7WAA.jpg[/img_thumb]
This frame is closer to yours. Considering he was hit in the head I think it's safe to assume his arm fell into that position onto the officer's arm:
[img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/0fogTCB.jpg[/img_thumb]
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;48327904]He meant once the officer's gun came out. There is no deescalating the situation when your life is in immediate danger. The second the driver hit the gas pedal, he was liable to die. He (the officer) couldn't back off because he was caught in the vehicle.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, what I mean is once things have gone from "I'm being pulled over" to "The cop is pulling out his gun" no one cares WHY you were getting pulled over. It's too late to worry about stuff like that by that point.
Fair enough, my mistake.
I'm just glad there's body cam footage at all, and even more impressively that the footage is being made public for the especially controversial cases. While there are still a lot of questions in cases such as this one, I think we can all be grateful that this practice has brought a great deal more clarity to the investigative process than we had previously. These cameras were a brilliant compromise from officials for those demanding more accountability and transparency from their police forces.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;48328178]I'm just glad there's body cam footage at all, and even more impressively that the footage is being made public for the especially controversial cases. While there are still a lot of questions in cases such as this one, I think we can all be grateful that this practice has brought a great deal more clarity to the investigative process than we had previously. These cameras were a brilliant compromise from officials for those demanding more accountability and transparency from their police forces.[/QUOTE]
The bodycam footage allows for increasingly unrealistic and impossible legal standards and precedents to be set for the behavior of people who are tasked with doing things that give the controls of the mind and body over to pure physiological and unconscious processes. They are going to give overzealous prosecutors and an unappreciative and poorly educated public a means of ruining lives on technicalities that shouldn't exist. They present the same problems as speed cameras or stoplight cameras in that while they do their jobs very well, they will end up causing extreme problems because of how they forcibly alter behavior.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;48328239]The bodycam footage allows for increasingly unrealistic and impossible legal standards and precedents to be set for the behavior of people who are tasked with doing things that give the controls of the mind and body over to pure physiological and unconscious processes. They are going to give overzealous prosecutors and an unappreciative and poorly educated public a means of ruining lives on technicalities that shouldn't exist. They present the same problems as speed cameras or stoplight cameras in that while they do their jobs very well, they will end up causing extreme problems because of how they forcibly alter behavior.[/QUOTE]
yea and russian drivers don't need dash cams
[editline]30th July 2015[/editline]
everything will turn out alright lmao
[editline]30th July 2015[/editline]
NO ONE NEEDS TO KNOW WHAT REALLY HAPPENED
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;48328071]I don't think the cop did anything wrong other than giving the guy the benefit of the doubt. I would have fucking lost my shit the moment he turned the engine on, removed him from the car, cuffs on, and make him sit on the trunk as I figure out if he's a licensed driver or not.
He tried to though, and then the dude drove off and dragged the cop along and could have [i]easily[/i] killed him. Newsflash everybody, if you run somebody over you can kill them and it's why reckless driving isn't tolerated in the United States.[/QUOTE]
he tried? when? when he repetedly asked "do you have your license on you" when the guy had answered "no"? when he just repeated the questions and the protocol he learned instead of dealing with the situation ?
[QUOTE=Leon;48328261]yea and russian drivers don't need dash cams
[editline]30th July 2015[/editline]
everything will turn out alright lmao
[editline]30th July 2015[/editline]
NO ONE NEEDS TO KNOW WHAT REALLY HAPPENED[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying that nobody needs to know what happened, I'm saying that body cameras set a standard that is going to cause undue apprehensiveness in a situation where an officer needs to use lethal force. Not long ago, there was a massive legal battle in a nearby state because traffic cameras were causing fatal accidents by suddenly causing breaks in the normal flow of traffic. Cameras allow hindsight to go wild and ignore the human standard of deviation.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;48328239]The bodycam footage allows for increasingly unrealistic and impossible legal standards and precedents to be set for the behavior of people who are tasked with doing things that give the controls of the mind and body over to pure physiological and unconscious processes. They are going to give overzealous prosecutors and an unappreciative and poorly educated public a means of ruining lives on technicalities that shouldn't exist. They present the same problems as speed cameras or stoplight cameras in that while they do their jobs very well, they will end up causing extreme problems because of how they forcibly alter behavior.[/QUOTE]
you mean cops will not drop tazers next to people they shot in the future?
[editline]30th July 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;48328292]I'm not saying that nobody needs to know what happened, I'm saying that body cameras set a standard that is going to cause undue apprehensiveness in a situation where an officer needs to use lethal force. Not long ago, there was a massive legal battle in a nearby state because traffic cameras were causing fatal accidents by suddenly causing breaks in the normal flow of traffic.[/QUOTE]
undue aprehensiveness
maybe you should look at the OP and the video again
[QUOTE=Killuah;48328294]you mean cops will not drop tazers next to people they shot in the future?
[editline]30th July 2015[/editline]
undue aprehensiveness
maybe you should look at the OP and the video again[/QUOTE]
The actions of one officer don't reflect the actions of any other. There is already a precedent showing the problems brought by perfect evidence with a muddled and broken legal system.
[QUOTE=Killuah;48327622]I agree that it's not murder but he reacted totaly wrong.
[editline]30th July 2015[/editline]
ok yeah agree but reaching into the car is really not the right solution to the danger of being dragged along/under.
he fucked up[/QUOTE]
It's not the officer's job to put his safety above others, it's his job to protect others from danger, and that is precisely what he was trying to do by keeping an unlicensed driver that he didn't even catch the name of off of the street by any means necessary. Not to mention that the victim had likely committed three other offenses, not including resisting arrest and fleeing from an officer: driving without a license, driving under suspension, and a missing tag. This guy was a danger to citizens around him by the officers code which is, if they don't have a license, they should not be on the road. He did his job, only mistake was trying to go for the keys. Like SeamanStains said, he tried for the solution that was nonviolent but had to resort to the violent solution.
Id like to think this was just some accident, cop took gun out as standard procedure thinking the guy was a threat , got dragged, accidentally shot from the moment maybe from tensing up or whatever from getting dragged a bit.
Other than that though I really only see the cop completely in the wrong in this video. I see him wrong regardless honestly, no reason to take a gun out for that.
There's a reason why traffic cameras are being phased out in the Northeast and there is a reason why cameras are not allowed in federal courts. I don't see why anyone should be held to a machine standard. Either the law should change to be more lenient towards officers caught in murky situations or the usage of bodycams should be restricted in some way.
[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;48327865]After watching the video I can understand why the guy was shot.
Here's how I do it when I get pulled over: Shut off the car and remove the keys, put both hands on the steering wheel and keep them there until the cop asks me to get something. Answer questions with a simple yes/no, no stuttering or stammering to explain anything. Produce the documents they ask for or tell them you don't have said documents.
That's all you can do to keep the incident peaceful and as non confrontational as possible. Don't challenge cops on the street, you won't win, they can't let you win. They can't lose face on the street.
This guy did everything wrong. He might as well have committed suicide by cop. Was no front tag a reason to kill someone? No of course not. But by the time the gun came out, no front tag wasn't what was fueling this shooting.[/QUOTE]
same mindset as telling people that were raped that "they had it coming"
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;48328361]There's a reason why traffic cameras are being phased out in the Northeast and there is a reason why cameras are not allowed in federal courts. I don't see why anyone should be held to a machine standard. Either the law should change to be more lenient towards officers caught in murky situations or the usage of bodycams should be restricted in some way.[/QUOTE]
Yeah but traffic cameras don't carry hand guns.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;48328313]The actions of one officer don't reflect the actions of any other. There is already a precedent showing the problems brought by perfect evidence with a muddled and broken legal system.[/QUOTE]
so, did you look at the video in the OP again or not.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
