Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As I said in a previous post, tho, sooner or later you have to trust someone. The alternatives are either: to brand everybody a thug or a Nazi from the word go and/or hit the streets to loot and burn. As tough as the first option is, the last two are much worse.
Unfortunately, in order to get to that point mobs must roam the streets, buildings must burn and some people must die because that is the natural course of reform in America.
Say what you will about BlackLivesMatter, and I do have my criticisms, but without the unrest associated with the Ferguson or Baltimore, or the Rodney King verdicts the most reforms that we are seeing would have never taken place.
The "unrest" otherwise known as rioting, are one reason why progress takes so long. Every riot demonstrates that there are more concerned with a stolen tv, damaged property and lawlessness than any real concern over race relations, equality or the advancement of society. When so many are rioting, it is rather difficult to remember that some goal was to bring attention to another problem. How many people equate a burglary with someone not having a job? Likewise, how many people equate a riot to a desire for others to abide by the law?
I'll reserve judgement until A) it's determined whether or not he had a weapon and B) I want to see Mr. Flores criminal background.
Mr. Flores' (or any other person suspected of a crime) criminal background has no bearing on whether or not he should have been shot or if the policemen who did the shooting should be charged with a crime.
ALL people in the US are afforded the rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Many of the rights that you have are the result of criminals standing up for their rights in court. Look up Ernesto Miranda. He was no saint, but his lawsuit against the state of Arizona resulted in the Miranda rule whereby all suspected people are read the rights available to them by the Constitution.
If we are looking into the backgrounds of people, then maybe we should do the same for the policeman. What is his criminal background? What is his past job performance as a police officer?
Come again? There is nothing impartial investigating yourself.
It does sound counterintuitive doesn't it? But what is your solution? If we decide that in no case is a local PD permitted to investigate its own excessive force incidents, that amounts to calling every single police official in this country corrupt. Even the most die-hard activist has to admit that may not be the case (well, maybe not the most die-hard). Plus, such a decision could well have the opposite of the effect intended -- allowing PD administrators to wash their hands of the whole problem. Why would you want to make them less responsible?
Let's be honest, there are people who firmly believe that all cops are, if not bad, at least potentially so, and that anytime there is a police shooting and the officer is exonerated somebody somewhere is corrupt. Whether that is the result of political bent or daddy issues I really can't tell you, but it is true. If all such investigations are transferred to the federal level, it won't be long before an officer is exonerated and there will be a crowd in front of the FBI building waving signs and chanting, and activists will appear in the media calling for a review and policing of that law enforcement agency. Rinse and repeat.
The issue of excessive force on the part of police has to be addressed at all levels of government. Ultimately, however, I'm sorry to say that we will always have such incidents, because the underlying reasons have to do with human character, and no matter how many laws you pass, how many investigations you conduct, or how many downtowns you burn, there will always be some officers who are not fit for duty. The best we can do for ourselves is to take a rational approach and not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Mr. Flores' (or any other person suspected of a crime) criminal background has no bearing on whether or not he should have been shot or if the policemen who did the shooting should be charged with a crime.
ALL people in the US are afforded the rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Many of the rights that you have are the result of criminals standing up for their rights in court. Look up Ernesto Miranda. He was no saint, but his lawsuit against the state of Arizona resulted in the Miranda rule whereby all suspected people are read the rights available to them by the Constitution.
If we are looking into the backgrounds of people, then maybe we should do the same for the policeman. What is his criminal background? What is his past job performance as a police officer?
Bad example and flawed idea. Miranda did nothing to advance the protections about which you speak, it simply created a situation where people no longer needed to know their rights and still took the words of others as some willingness to protect their rights. The primary reason a person will have their rights violated is because they are ignorant of their rights in the first place. Then, and just as equally important, if people truly understood and accepted that rights apply to all, then the criminal behaviors they engage in wouldn't happen in the first place. Being read your rights is almost always preceeded by the criminal infringing on the rights of others... First.
Mr. Flores' (or any other person suspected of a crime) criminal background has no bearing on whether or not he should have been shot or if the policemen who did the shooting should be charged with a crime. . . . If we are looking into the backgrounds of people, then maybe we should do the same for the policeman. What is his criminal background? What is his past job performance as a police officer?
Whether the deceased had a criminal record for violent offenses, or whether he might have been wanted on an outstanding arrest warrant, may be relevant (not dispositive) in determining whether his conduct was consistent with the officers' account of the incident.
And yes, the same is true of the officers' records.
Whether the deceased had a criminal record for violent offenses, or whether he might have been wanted on an outstanding arrest warrant, may be relevant (not dispositive) in determining whether his conduct was consistent with the officers' account of the incident.And yes, the same is true of the officers' records.
How? What is relevant is whether or not he was posing an immediate and real threat to the Officers who were arresting him, or to someone else in the immediate area. If he had a warrant that burden would not change, nor would it change if he had prior police contact. I'm not sure where you are going with that...
Police are now saying the guy had a knife in his hand.
I watched the video again; the guy can be seen walking down the sidewalk with his hands by his sides, fingers loose, not clutching anything. All he was wearing was a pair of shorts. He could have had a knife in his pocket, but it would have been an awfully small knife.
Did the police yell at him to put the weapon down before shooting him? Did they tell him to get on the ground? Who knows? In any case, whether he had a knife or not, he was just standing there with at least one arm raised. Hardly any time went by between the time the guy raised his arm and he was killed.
In other words, he was not 'lunging' at the cops as so many pets are prone to do these days.
Now the police are also speculating that this guy may have wanted to commit suicide by cop.
Stupid way to do that, I think, just standing there with at least one arm raised. I mean, c'mon! Shouldn't he have tried to rush the cops or something?
I guess in this day and age people who want to commit suicide by cop have it easy...no running or lunging necessary...just stand there.
Precisely! Just what we need. Another expert witness who wasn't even there.
And a score of armchair cops that know exactly how it SHOULD have been handled.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
