[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by Moderator

The topic is a police shooting that occurred in Wisconsin. A large number of posts derailed the thread by having the usual discussion about the news media. They have been removed. Please stay on topic or the thread will be closed.

Moderator

Thank you for the guidance. We do get carried away here sometimes.

[Love2Swim]

And the other side of the story is that Blake was trying to "deescalate" a domestic incident when police drew their weapons and tasered him. As he was walking away to check on his children, police fired their weapons seven times into his back at point blank range. Blake's three sons were only a few feet away. I think we need to wait for the results of the investigation until all facts are known before we jump to conclusions. And his prior record, if he has one, has nothing to do with this situation. It does not justify a police shooting.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by Love2Swim

And the other side of the story is that Blake was trying to "deescalate" a domestic incident when police drew their weapons and tasered him. As he was walking away to check on his children, police fired their weapons seven times into his back at point blank range. Blake's three sons were only a few feet away. I think we need to wait for the results of the investigation until all facts are known before we jump to conclusions. And his prior record, if he has one, has nothing to do with this situation. It does not justify a police shooting.

Well said !!

[Number 10 GI]

Originally Posted by billethkid

To take the racial focus off the shooting....all police involved shootings that day should be reported.
Secondly all non police shootings listed for that day as well.

The medias continual, selective race reporting/promoting needs to be put into the perspective of reality VS selective out of context, sensationalism seeking, disruptive reporting.

What and ruin a good story!

[Paper1]

I may be mistaken but in almost 100% of these encounters with police that end badly there seems to always have been some element of resisting arrest and it escalates from there. I for one think the penalties for resisting arrest, assaulting an officer, failure to stop (in most cases), and interfering with an officer should be automatic and substantial if proven. Watching these peaceful (sarcasm) protests for 3 month and seeing the abuse law enforcement is subjected to and takes amazes this old grandfather.

[graciegirl]

I really think that a person's "prior record" always has to do with the situation. A person who is well known to the police and with a history of violence is more dangerous. ALWAYS.

We all profile. It is how we save our bacon every day in a thousand ways. We use assessments and reasoning and we know when to walk and when to run and when to avoid a situation. It is Darwin's survival of the fitness and the smartest. There are many forms of humans recognizing danger. Not every human has all the perceptions of smelling a rat. I think gender figures into it too. These days we are deemed politically incorrect for even bringing up gender or innate ability. But mankind has used these ways of protecting themselves and protecting their family and protecting their homes to the betterment of civilization. Now we are directed to ignore reasonable assessments of danger.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

I really think that a person's "prior record" always has to do with the situation. A person who is well known to the police and with a history of violence is more dangerous. ALWAYS.

We all profile. It is how we save our bacon every day in a thousand ways. We use assessments and reasoning and we know when to walk and when to run and when to avoid a situation. It is Darwin's survival of the fitness and the smartest. There are many forms of humans recognizing danger. Not every human has all the perceptions of smelling a rat. I think gender figures into it too. These days we are deemed politically incorrect for even bringing up gender or innate ability. But mankind has used these ways of protecting themselves and protecting their family and protecting their homes to the betterment of civilization. Now we are directed to ignore reasonable assessments of danger.

I am sure you are not saying that having a "record" allows your being shot in the back for anything except of corse to save another life.

That was my understanding of the post to which I responded with well said (post you respond to)

Other reason for my "well said" was the caution that we do not know the entire story yet we have "opinions" which appear to be based on skin color, which I find offensive. No threads are begun without that ingredient.

[DeanFL]

.
.
.
...and here we go again!
Cell phones at the ready.
News ready to pounce.
Lawyers ready to investigate.

Well, only if it a cop is the shooter and the Minority is the shootee.

They (you know who I mean) are just chompin' at the bit for more and more. and more.

NO ONE waits for details of the shooting - why, how, what, who. THOSE details - even if the shooting was warranted is non-news after the inital flare-up.

sad.
.
.
.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by Bucco

I am sure you are not saying that having a "record" allows your being shot in the back for anything except of corse to save another life.

That was my understanding of the post to which I responded with well said (post you respond to)

Other reason for my "well said" was the caution that we do not know the entire story yet we have "opinions" which appear to be based on skin color, which I find offensive. No threads are begun without that ingredient.

Having a record does not allow you to be shot however it is rather remarkable that in all the police shootings we have seen the guy getting shot has a record a yard long.

Having said this if the police are guilty they deserve to be held accountable.

And this is an excuse for a new round of riots and destruction.

In 99% of police shootings once all the facts are out it is clear why they shot and are found not guilty. The police tried to stop him getting into his car by nonviolent means first (grabbing his shirt) then when Blake bent down to grab a weapon the police had to defend themselves and shot. As regards the seven shots, in a tense situation one bullet or even several may not stop a determined criminal.

"As he was walking away to check on his children, police fired their weapons seven times into his back at point blank range."

I can't imagine the thinking behind his decision to check on his kids while the police were pointing guns at him. I'm sure they were also giving him commands to follow.

I will not rush to judgment on whether the cop acted properly or not.

I can say that I wouldn't want to be the officer that felt the need to shoot Mr Blake. I can imagine the fear of the situation. A man clearly disregarding my commands as I point my gun at him and goes around his vehicle, opens the drivers door and reaches inside as I pull at his shirt. Now I have to decide if I want to wait and see what he's reaching for and hope it's not a gun. If it's a gun I'll probably get shot, if he's just taking this moment to check on his kids then I'll be in a lot of trouble. If I shoot I'm a bad cop, if I don't I could be a dead cop.

If I was a cop, I would quit my job. I would not want people like Mr Blake putting me in this situation because he wanted to go check on his kids while 3 cops have guns pointed at him.

I have defended blm and stand against racism where racism exists but I don't defend the actions of people that put our police officers in dangerous situations so they can call it racism, for a money grab or whatever.

Hopefully the investigation will exonerate the police and Mr Blake will recover fully.

[Number 10 GI]

Originally Posted by John41

In 99% of police shootings once all the facts are out it is clear why they shot and are found not guilty. The police tried to stop him getting into his car by nonviolent means first (grabbing his shirt) then when Blake bent down to grab a weapon the police had to defend themselves and shot. As regards the seven shots, in a tense situation one bullet or even several may not stop a determined criminal.

The police are trained to shoot until the threat is no longer a threat.

[Stu from NYC]

Than their is the old police expression, Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

If these people would only follow the officers instructions we would all be in a better place.

Originally Posted by Love2Swim

And the other side of the story is that Blake was trying to "deescalate" a domestic incident when police drew their weapons and tasered him. As he was walking away to check on his children, police fired their weapons seven times into his back at point blank range. Blake's three sons were only a few feet away. I think we need to wait for the results of the investigation until all facts are known before we jump to conclusions. And his prior record, if he has one, has nothing to do with this situation. It does not justify a police shooting.

Don’t you think you should take your own advice and wait for results of the investigation before jumping to conclusions?
Domestic abuser stops to breakup domestic dispute? Not likely.
Went to check on his kids. Were they under the seat?

[tvbound]

There just has to be more than what was seen on the video, or even reported as this started as a domestic dispute, so I'll wait to hear a lot more facts before judging what looks right now to me, like an out of control and scared officer trying to murder him. To justify 7 shots, point blank, into the back of an unarmed man however, it is going to take an awful lot to convince me to even imagine this being justified. As for whatever prior record he had, that has absolutely nothing to do with what the officer did (that's for a jury or judge at the time of any potential sentencing) and it's sad to think that anyone would feel otherwise. I am amazed that the guy is even still alive at this point, so I'm hoping for a full recovery so that our justice system can work like it's supposed to. I am also hoping that people allow the system to work and they don't start rioting, looting or setting things on fire. If they do, they need to be arrested and prosecuted fully.