East Pittsburgh police shoot teen in back (safe, park)

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by HarryRSpooner

My take on it:

If the officer had been black and the young man white = no protesting. No disruption of traffic. No innocent people getting hassled for something a rookie cop did outside of the city of Pittsburgh limits.

Bingo

[New Waver]

These protesters see the situation as being cut and dry... "He was running away and the cop shot him " It's much more complex and fluid than that.

[gladhands]

Originally Posted by HarryRSpooner

My take on it:

If the officer had been black and the young man white = no protesting. No disruption of traffic. No innocent people getting hassled for something a rookie cop did outside of the city of Pittsburgh limits.

This is such an uninformed position. Do you remember the unrest after police killed unarmed men in Charlotte, Milwaukee and Baltimore? Black officers. Your take is either completely ignorant or utterly racist.

[Lost_In_Translation]

Originally Posted by gladhands

This is such an uninformed position. Do you remember the unrest after police killed unarmed men in Charlotte, Milwaukee and Baltimore? Black officers. Your take is either completely ignorant or utterly racist.

I think if the kid was white, there wouldn’t be protests either. Anger, yes, but there would be an assumption that the officer would be held accountable. For black men shot by police, the assumption has become that they will get no justice and the system won’t punish police that violate them. There are so many examples where that’s the case that it’s hard to argue against the anger it generates.

[Charley Barker]

Originally Posted by New Waver

Most of these protesters are relatively young. They want change. Well, as a middle age man, I want change too. I want these black youths to give up the guns and stop killing each other. The protests should be against violence, not cops.





guns and stop killing each other.






the guns

Great point. Isn't this the nexus where our political leaders should be standing and LEADING? Have they been completely scared off the issue by lobbys/special interest groups?

It's not a gun problem. It is a violence problem. I recall a study showing a number of countries with high gun ownership rates having a tiny percentage of the rate of gun violence of the US (Switzerland, Norway, Canada). The easy availibility of firearms makes matters worse. However, at its core this is a social issue and good public policy should be debated and made to address it.

When people living in low crime areas realize what a detriment to everyone this violence has become, maybe they will demand some action on the political front. County commissioners should be leading on this. But pressure has to be applied by the public.

Per capita gun ownership:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/m...the-most-guns/

[gladhands]

Originally Posted by tyovan4

Let's talk about two incidents that happened within a handful of blocks of each other.

1. The beating of a white man by Pittsburgh Police outside of PPG Paints Arena. No protests, although obviously an incident of police brutality.

2. The absolute conniption this city had when an Arab pizza shop manager physically and violently ejected a black woman from Pizza Milano. That incident got a heck of a lot more attention than when a white man got beat by the cops.

Its a racial double standard. For all of the "privilege" that whites have, we don't have the ultimate privilege - the race card.

You mean the incident where a drunk man interfered with the arrest of another man, and the police beat him? I seem to remember the mayor apologizing and police taking immediate action to discipline the officers. I remember the FBI investigating whether the man’s civil rights were violated. I also remember black activists and black websites sharing the story and video to shed light on police malfeasance. What I don’t remember is black people saying he deserved the beating for interfering with an arrest.

https://www.theroot.com/penn-cop-cau...lle-1818651729

https://www.wpxi.com/news/investigat...rena/612038029

[Enough_Already]

Originally Posted by gladhands

No, KDKA Is reporting that a source tells them there is video evidence of Antwon firing the gun. The police, however, deny this claim.

https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2018...driveby-video/

Again, none of this is relevant, because at the time of his death, he was unarmed and running away.

Again you need to read PA law. He was in a car which was at the scene of a violent drive by shooting. There is no way the police would know if he was armed. He was clearly a threat and the police action fit the definition in PA law. The law is not what you want it to be.


Most people would feel at risk if someone who was just involved in a drive by shooting was running loose in their neighborhood.

[gladhands]

Originally Posted by Enough_Already

He was involved in a violent felony minutes before. He ran from police instead of cooperating. This police action fits well within PA law.

That’s not how this works. First and foremost, we do not know that he was involved in a violent felony. If it turns out that he was, that doesn’t change the fact there was no proof that he had been involved in a violent felony at the time of his execution. Furthermore the law is absurd, unjust, and possibly unconstitutional.

[Enough_Already]

Originally Posted by gladhands

As an attorney, you should be above presuming the suspect’s guilt and appalled by his extrajudicial execution. Regardless of which crime this young man may or may not have committed, he was unarmed and fleeing when he was shot three times in the back.

You keep using the term "extrajudicial" when this police action precisely fits the definition of appropriate use of force stated in PA law

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by gladhands

I’m anti-extrajudicial execution, and I demand accountability from state actors. I don’t know why that is so difficult for you to understand.

He was involved in a shooting. He knew what he was doing was wrong. He had no regard for someone else’s life and he suffered the consequences for it.