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.
Its not a war on cops. At least this incident isnt. This is a stupid police officer paying the consequences for his actions.
It is tied into the war on cops. When qualified candidates don't go into law enforcement because of the demonization, and in some cases outright murderous ambushing, of officers, you get cops like this guy.
It is tied into the war on cops. When qualified candidates don't go into law enforcement because of the demonization, and in some cases outright murderous ambushing, of officers, you get cops like this guy.
There is a reason: When there is ample reason to believe a life is in immediate danger without prompt police action.
But with regard to the drug issue, if the amount of drugs suspected is little enough to be quickly destroyed (such as flushed down a toilet), it's not worth any risk of an innocent life. The suspects can't flush a meth lab or a marijuana crop...the cops don't need a no-knock warrant to bust a substantial drug ring.
Actually, people who own guns for self protection are questioning no-knock warrants. The news makes a big deal about those involving black suspects, but there are also cases involving cops hitting the wrong addresses of white suspects that don't seem to make the national news...but gun owners know about them. Yeah, on the gun forums there are plenty of people who recognize, "That would have been me."
The same was true of the Philando Castile case. The NRA lost a lot of white membership because of their tepid response to that incident.
And the military does investigate friendly fire incidents to determine if anyone was actually negligent in causing the incident. "Fog of war" is an acceptable excuse, but if actual negligence is found people are held accountable.
For the above, that's not jhow they're used. They are almost exclusively used for drug cases, which IMO too as you say, it's not worth risking an innocent life, or to be honest, any life.
Yes, the argument that any of us has a right to defend our home and our lives is directly contradicted by no-knock warrants and innocent people killed for defending their homes and lives. In the Brionna Taylor case, not only didn't they announce themselves, they were wearing street clothes. Anyone would have thought they were about to be victims in a home invasion.
It is tied into the war on cops. When qualified candidates don't go into law enforcement because of the demonization, and in some cases outright murderous ambushing, of officers, you get cops like this guy.
This guy was a cop since 2018, in Texas. I highly doubt cops were being demoralized in Texas in 2018 to the point they didn't want to be cops. I think it has hurt their recruitment now, and will in the future, but I don't think you can pin this guy on that theory.
There have always been bad cops, in any case. That's the problem. There have even been lawsuits claiming they discriminate against high-IQ applicants. The problem has been for many, many decades, nothing at all happened to the bad cops who killed innocent people. They were protected by the "good" cops, and even if fired, still got their pension in the vast majority of cases. So now the pendulum has swung too far in the opposite direction. But change was definitely needed, and police forces were not doing that on their own.
Something needs to be examined with both their recruiting practices, and mostly their training. When I watch videos online of cop confrontations with people from traffic stops to crimes that get out of control, the one thing I notice is that in almost all the cases, it's the cop who escalates it. The cop is screaming and yelling and cursing, a lot of the time the perp is trying to calmly talk and just being screamed over. You can't think right when someone is pointing a gun at you and screaming.
They are supposed to be trained to deescalate, and I don't see that anymore.
Prosecutors and defense attorneys agree that Jefferson had a gun when she was shot, but they disagree over whether she was justified in doing so. Defense attorney Bob Gill argued that Jefferson's actions were unlawful because she pointed a gun at Dean, who was a uniformed police officer.
Prosecutors and defense attorneys agree that Jefferson had a gun when she was shot, but they disagree over whether she was justified in doing so. Defense attorney Bob Gill argued that Jefferson's actions were unlawful because she pointed a gun at Dean, who was a uniformed police officer.
Everyone who thinks the cop was guilty is basing it on a false premise.
The defense attorney is being a zealous advocate for his client, but he is an idiot. In Texas, you pretty much have an unlimited right to be armed in your own home, and pointing a gun at someone might rise to the level of terroristic threat, but not in this case. Dean did not announce himself as a police officer, and was not identifiable as a police officer in the dark. He is absolutely guilty. I do not understand why you want to keep trying to prove that Dean should walk away unscathed. He's yet another example of a coward cop who killed an innocent citizen with no justification.
Her nephew said she didn’t raise the gun, a fact corroborated by the cops testimony that he saw NO gun.
The cop is guilty.
Once again - fake 'facts'. The cop testified that he saw the gun. Her nephew confirmed it. She did not drop it when ordered to by Dean. This should have never even gone to trial.
Quote:
Carr, now 11, testified on the trial’s opening day that Jefferson always had the gun down, but he said in an interview that was recorded soon after the shooting and played in court that she pointed the weapon at the window.
Dean, while being questioned by the prosecution Monday, said Jefferson was bent over and stood upright as he drew his service weapon. He said her gun was near her chest, and he saw the barrel of the gun through the window. Dean’s lawyers have said he followed his training and met deadly force with deadly force.
Once again - fake 'facts'. The cop testified that he saw the gun. Her nephew confirmed it. She did not drop it when ordered to by Dean. This should have never even gone to trial.
Dean was a cop. He is trained to testilie, ie tell the story he needs, whether it's true or not.
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.
