2 NYPD Officers "Executed" by man claiming revenge for Garner and Brown

[Callate]

I think I am going to walk away with "the most callous" comment award.

Until America gets its gun laws sorted out, I can't say how sad I am about cop killings, school shootings or any other gun related violence 'cos you've made your beds and refused to change them. You can't bang on about how sad all this is and still say "we need guns, it's in our constitution".

You want guns, you get cops killings and school shootings. Sorry, it's just the way it is and no "cooling off period" will stop that.

May I just take a moment to note that I once commented on a Facebook post that "Stand Your Ground" laws were ripe for abuse, and unnecessary because "Castle Doctrine" and similar laws already gave plenty of room for killing in self-defense, and had delightful people suggest they would like to shoot me?

It's difficult to argue with excessively-well-armed angry people; it's part of the reason so many of them are so damn happy to be armed in the first place.

I didn't make this bed. I would change it if I could. On an individual level, ideology is no defense against being shot.

As far as this shooting goes, all I can say (aside from a stream of profanity) is that this isn't going to make things better for anyone. Not the minority community that feels harassed and vulnerable, not the law enforcement community that feels threatened. This just sucks.

 

[Zef Otter]

How come Obama and the New York Mayer get blamed for this?

Shows how much double standards right wing news have.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/12/22/fox-news-double-standard-for-right-wing-cop-kil/201978

 

[000Ronald]

How come Obama and the New York Mayer get blamed for this?

Shows how much double standards right wing news have.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/12/22/fox-news-double-standard-for-right-wing-cop-kil/201978

Hey! Another fan of Media Matters!

But there is an interesting point I would make. Why is it that when Cliven Bundy and his group point sniper rifles at unarmed officers, they're heroes? That seems-and continues to seem-ridiculous to me.

 

[Starbird]

Are people in this forum seriously siding with this guy?

Yes, yes they are.

In fact, look at this gem:

the only thing i can fault the guy on is by just killing any 2 officers, and not hunting down the pieces of shit that killed Gardner and Brown specifically.

Not only are people siding with the guy, apparently the real problem is that he didn't kill enough cops.



Yea, let's just say my "People not to shed a single tear for if they catch a meteor to the head" list is growing at a prodigious rate from reading this thread.

I don't agree with him at all - but if it had been the officer responsible for the shooting I would have understood, at least to some extent. This was just two random police officers trying to do their job.

 

[NiPah]

Are people in this forum seriously siding with this guy?

Yes, yes they are.

In fact, look at this gem:

the only thing i can fault the guy on is by just killing any 2 officers, and not hunting down the pieces of shit that killed Gardner and Brown specifically.

Not only are people siding with the guy, apparently the real problem is that he didn't kill enough cops.



Yea, let's just say my "People not to shed a single tear for if they catch a meteor to the head" list is growing at a prodigious rate from reading this thread.

I don't agree with him at all - but if it had been the officer responsible for the shooting I would have understood, at least to some extent. This was just two random police officers trying to do their job.

The case went to trial, he was prosecuted by the state of Missouri and was found not guilty by a jury of his peers.
With that said, you say you can understand a civilian then murdering the man?

I know you're not really saying this, but I want to emphasize the fact that in all of these cases they did go to higher court and the individuals were not found guilty. They were responsible for the shooting because they were doing their job, just like the two officers who were murdered.

You can make a good argument that the trial system in America is biased towards white males, but honestly I trust the legal system a lot more then the media.

 

[madwarper]

The case went to trial, he was prosecuted by the state of Missouri and was found not guilty by a jury of his peers.

Wait... What case? What trial?

Because, if your referring to what happened in Ferguson... Darren Wilson was never charged. There was no trial. There was no "not guilty".

What actually happened was that the district attorney had an impaneled grand jury. He presented them with the evidence. Then, it was up to the grand jury to either come back with a "bill of indictment", in which case they would have moved onto an actual trial in court. Or, they would return with a "no bill", meaning that they didn't believe that there was even a preponderance of the evidence that a crime had taken place. The latter had happened.


Granted, given that the DA has all the evidence, if he didn't believe that Wilson had committed a crime, then he could have publicly stated that he wouldn't be perusing charges against Wilson. If he did believe that Wilson had committed a crime, then he could have presenting a more damning case to the grand jury to ensure an indictment. Either way, the grand jury was just an expensive dog and pony show to attempt to placate the mob outside the courthouse, which obviously failed.

 

[Kopikatsu]

How come Obama and the New York Mayer get blamed for this?

Shows how much double standards right wing news have.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/12/22/fox-news-double-standard-for-right-wing-cop-kil/201978

Hey! Another fan of Media Matters!

But there is an interesting point I would make. Why is it that when Cliven Bundy and his group point sniper rifles at unarmed officers, they're heroes? That seems-and continues to seem-ridiculous to me.

During the Ferguson riots, police and emergency services were forced out of some sections of the town by heavy gunfire from the protesters, which is why the damage ended up being so extensive.

It's not 'Cops only shoot black people', it's 'Cops can be pushed back and held off by guns'. Which Bundy had.

How come Obama and the New York Mayer get blamed for this?

Shows how much double standards right wing news have.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/12/22/fox-news-double-standard-for-right-wing-cop-kil/201978

If a Neo-Nazi group came out and started demonizing minorities, and shortly afterwards violence against said minorities increased, would you not make a connection there?

This whole thing is getting beyond ridiculous. Guy pulls a gun on officers and aims it at them before being fatally shot by police. [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/24/antonio-martin-police-shooting_n_6376210.html] People STILL defend the deceased. It seems like they won't be placated until the police are piled on a funeral pyre.

 

[Kittyhawk]

@Nods

Let me make it clear. Officers sitting in a car were doing their job (fine. However, other officers that previously managed to end a persons life might claim they were also doing their job, but we know different, even when some clearly kill a person.

If families can't get any justice for their loved ones being killed, even when they are innocent, it means that perhaps the system is rigged from the start as many have claimed for years. And like someone said with the weed possession stuff, just goes to show how warped it can all get and how many people end up filling jails, so someone out there can make their quota. Its a work many years in the making.

What might really need to happen is revision of the shoot to kill policy. If officers shot to wound/incapacitate and not kill, many more people would still be here today. Likelihood of it happening is slim.

 

[madwarper]

If families can't get any justice for their loved ones being killed, even when they are innocent,

Please, define "innocent". And, to which case you're referring to.

What might really need to happen is revision of the shoot to kill policy. If officers shot to wound/incapacitate and not kill, many more people would still be here today. Likelihood of it happening is slim.

You're right, likelihood of it happening is slim... But, that's because police operate in reality, rather than in movie-land.

The policy isn't shoot to kill, it's shoot to eliminate threat. Also, the practice to aim at center mass is because that's the biggest part of the person. Trying to get a limb shot on a moving target is not only unlikely, but foolish because you're more likely to miss, possibly shooting someone else in the process.

 

[Kopikatsu]

What might really need to happen is revision of the shoot to kill policy. If officers shot to wound/incapacitate and not kill, many more people would still be here today. Likelihood of it happening is slim.

There is no such thing as 'shooting to disable'. No military or police organization has ever had such a policy because it's absurd. A shot anywhere to the body can be fatal (especially to the legs, since there are major arteries there), a single gunshot rarely stops a person (which is why you're taught to empty your entire magazine into the target), and it's hard to aim for limbs anyway (So you don't)

 

[Kittyhawk]

Well, whatever but change needs to happen. Surely you don't want police shooting to become an everyday thing, just as civis by police deaths are? Maybe those police body cams couldn't come any sooner as standard to every P.D in the U.S.

Oh look, another civi lost life today. How many more?

You say define innocent/guilt, but that works both ways. What's clear is whoever has the gun has the power over life and death to those around them. Might be a difficult job, but when you kill someone, you should fall on the sword that you so rightfully wield. But hey, that's not going to happen to any with a badge, and some making excuses for them isn't helping the issue.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Well, whatever but change needs to happen. Surely you don't want police shooting to become an everyday thing, just as civis by police deaths are? Maybe those police body cams couldn't come any sooner as standard to every P.D in the U.S.

Those may or may not help. That unarmed guy that was died in a chokehold a lil while back was caught on film.

In the vast majority of these cases, the officers presumably do not see themselves as doing anything in the wrong. If they are in fear of their lives, they are allowed to use lethal force. They make a judgement call of whether or not the civilian is a threat. Certain groups are generally viewed as a lot scarier than others.

Changing the way police/society views certain groups is no small thing, body cameras are useful, but won't really help with that.

Also, with respect, doesn't help that there is a lot of misinformation around, which could easily be cleared up if people made the effort. As mentioned, "shooting to wound" is a myth, with no factual basis, that could be easily disproven, but many people cling to.

 

[madwarper]

Oh look, another civi lost life today. How many more?

How about the "civilians" start acting more "civil"?

You know, when you see a cop...
Don't reach into their squad car and start punching them in the face.
Don't pull a gun on them when they ask you a few questions.
Don't resist arrest when they take you into custody, regardless for how petty of a crime you think you were committing.

You say define innocent/guilt, but that works both ways.

How so?

Someone who has committed assault is not innocent.
Someone who is resisting arrest is not innocent.
Someone who pulls a weapon on a police officer is not innocent.

What's clear is whoever has the gun has the power over life and death to those around them. Might be a difficult job, but when you kill someone, you should fall on the sword that you so rightfully wield. But hey, that's not going to happen to any with a badge, and some making excuses for them isn't helping the issue.

"Fall on their sword"? Do you even know what the heck you're talking about?

 

[Thaluikhain]

Oh look, another civi lost life today. How many more?

How about the "civilians" start acting more "civil"?

Unfortunately, that's no guarantee of not being shot by police.

If someone is posing a threat to police officers, then, yes, they carry weapons for a reason. But not everyone they use them on is actual committing a crime. That's the problem.

 

[DrOswald]

Well, whatever but change needs to happen. Surely you don't want police shooting to become an everyday thing, just as civis by police deaths are? Maybe those police body cams couldn't come any sooner as standard to every P.D in the U.S.

Oh look, another civi lost life today. How many more?

You say define innocent/guilt, but that works both ways. What's clear is whoever has the gun has the power over life and death to those around them. Might be a difficult job, but when you kill someone, you should fall on the sword that you so rightfully wield. But hey, that's not going to happen to any with a badge, and some making excuses for them isn't helping the issue.

Well, I think we can all agree that something needs to change. But suggestions like "shoot to wound" are not going to help and only reveal how deep your ignorance of the issue is. If you want to actually make a difference then you should do the research to figure out what can be done. They you can throw your weight behind a real solution instead of ineffectively flailing in the general direction of the problem.

Listen, I really am not trying to be rude here, and it really isn't fair for me to single you out like this because it is certainly not just you doing this, but I feel like this is something that needs to be said. Good intentions are not enough to make a difference. You have to actually couple those good intentions with a viable solution.

There is no A for effort in social revolution.

Well, whatever but change needs to happen. Surely you don't want police shooting to become an everyday thing, just as civis by police deaths are? Maybe those police body cams couldn't come any sooner as standard to every P.D in the U.S.

Those may or may not help. That unarmed guy that was died in a chokehold a lil while back was caught on film.

True, but the police are catching hell for that one right now. It was caught on film, we all saw what happened, and that is making the difference. People are finally trying to do something about it on a large scale. And that was only a single incident. Can you imagine the social upheaval it would cause if every one of these events were caught on film?

 

[Thaluikhain]

Good intentions are not enough to make a difference. You have to actually couple those good intentions with a viable solution.

There is no A for effort in social revolution.

On the one hand, yes, plenty of people are just making noise without getting anything done.

OTOH, who gets to decide who is just making noise, and what they should be done is a tricky question. You'll get a lot of people, often also with good intentions, deciding that doing X won't work, without proposing a better solution, or wanting things postponed to some unspecified time in the future. They are even less likely to get anything done.

True, but the police are catching hell for that one right now. It was caught on film, we all saw what happened, and that is making the difference. People are finally trying to do something about it on a large scale. And that was only a single incident. Can you imagine the social upheaval it would cause if every one of these events were caught on film?

True, I was being a bit cynical there. But if the officers feel they are doing the right thing, being filmed, in of itself, isn't likely going to change their actions.

 

[Morthello]

http://pix11.com/2014/12/20/video-nypd-officers-turn-away-from-mayor-de-blasio-as-he-enters-police-presser/

Video of NYPD cops turning their backs, literally, on Mayor De Blasio as he walks into a conference regarding the killing of the officers. And I say good on them.

I had a big post for this, but it my internet ate it, so I will just sum it up quickly:

De Blasio? Sharpton? Jackson? The Media? I blame EVERY. LAST. ONE. OF. THEM!! For the death of these officers. They Fanned the flames, stoked the hatred, and threw officers under the bus to score political brownie points and then have the utter GAUL to act upset when the officers they have spent the past months saying they are all evil. And yet, police keep showing up day after day to do their jobs, protecting the ungrateful masses and being called evil by the politicians that should be backing them and protesters that are more concerned about criminals than police. They continue to stand as that Thin Blue Line even with all the shit that put up with and that to me speaks volumes about the character of those who become police. "New York's Finest" indeed.

Spoiler: Some other pics to sum up my feelings

And Finally

I couldn't possibly agree more. This is the same fucking shit that went on with the Trayvon Martin case, race baiters tried to paint it as a racial hate crime from the outset but when evidence outright contradicting that narrative cropped up they kept purporting it as fact. I understand the police are far from perfect. Corrupt cops will always exist and innocent people will be killed without any provacation. However, this whole Michael Brown affair has been proven to not be that case. There was no "hands up don't shoot", there was no execution, and Brown was far from the innocent blameless choir boy that the media tries to paint him as. People are angry that there was a fair trial and there wasn't enough evidence to convict, now they're resorting to the mob mentality to achieve which they think is "justice". I mean hell, two of the witnesses that supported Wilson's account have already been murdered at this point and you have people like Brown's stepfather firing up the crowd to "burn this ***** down". In the end, it's all a bunch of pointless violence masquerading as equality.

There was never a trial to be considered fair or otherwise because the officer wasn't indicted. Similar to the Garner case a Grand Jury decided not to indict which stopped either case from even going through what would be considered fair trials. These Grand juries are done in secret under the supervision of State prosecutors that usually have a working relationship with the police to get convictions, indictments on other cases. So it can be argued that there is a bit of conflict of interest when an officer accused of wrong doing has said prosecutors overseeing their cases. Especially if that prosecutor happens to have a history of hardly ever indicting officers(despite the high rate that indictments usually happen in any other circumstance) and who was the son of a police officer that was killed by a black man in his youth.See Bob Mcculloch.

 

[DrOswald]

Good intentions are not enough to make a difference. You have to actually couple those good intentions with a viable solution.

There is no A for effort in social revolution.

On the one hand, yes, plenty of people are just making noise without getting anything done.

OTOH, who gets to decide who is just making noise, and what they should be done is a tricky question. You'll get a lot of people, often also with good intentions, deciding that doing X won't work, without proposing a better solution, or wanting things postponed to some unspecified time in the future. They are even less likely to get anything done.

While I agree with your statement to some extent, I believe making noise in the direction of a completely inane solution like "shoot to wound" actually hurts the movement. Because anyone who has done even the most basic of research will instantly recognize that "solution" for what it is. It wont convince anyone of anything and it will make people associate the movement with ignorance, irrationality and stupidity. Hardly the face we want on the social revolution.

On the other hand, we have solutions like the cop camera. We can debate if it will be as effective as we would like it to be (or effective at all,) but at least we don't already know it wont work.

True, but the police are catching hell for that one right now. It was caught on film, we all saw what happened, and that is making the difference. People are finally trying to do something about it on a large scale. And that was only a single incident. Can you imagine the social upheaval it would cause if every one of these events were caught on film?

True, I was being a bit cynical there. But if the officers feel they are doing the right thing, being filmed, in of itself, isn't likely going to change their actions.

It isn't likely to force the police to change their behavior directly, but what it could do is convince the politicians that this is a hot issue that will get them votes and therefore something they can bring up during the next election process. It will motivate politicians to change laws to make it harder for the police to get away with this sort of thing. And all because politicians are greedy bastards who will buy public approval with changes to the law despite what they actually think is right.

Cynicism can work in our favor too.