Policeman shoots victim under dodgy circumstances

[Phil the Nuka-Cola Dude]

What information am I missing? It's a proper reasoning for starting an analysis. Germany and the United States are both first world countries with similar underlying principles, a mixed population, and enough similar factors to warrant a direct comparison.

Again, this would not be a valid comparison to make if the United States was like Somalia or Afghanistan. But it is not.

Go ask a few holocaust survivors how much the United States and Germany are alike. We get it, you're still trying to move past that six million, and have overcompensated and become ultra leftist progressives.


You cannot draw a direct comparison with any European country and the United States because of our unique political and cultural situation, along with violent minorities causing most of the crime across the board.

 

[Akratus]

What information am I missing? It's a proper reasoning for starting an analysis. Germany and the United States are both first world countries with similar underlying principles, a mixed population, and enough similar factors to warrant a direct comparison.

Again, this would not be a valid comparison to make if the United States was like Somalia or Afghanistan. But it is not.

Go ask a few holocaust survivors how much the United States and Germany are alike. We get it, you're still trying to move past that six million, and have overcompensated and become ultra leftist progressives.


You cannot draw a direct comparison with any European country and the United States because of our unique political and cultural situation, along with violent minorities causing most of the crime across the board.

You cannot draw a direct comparison with -insert country- and -insert country- because of our unique political and cultural situation, along with violent minorities causing most of the crime across the board.

 

[Tagaziel]

Go ask a few holocaust survivors how much the United States and Germany are alike. We get it, you're still trying to move past that six million, and have overcompensated and become ultra leftist progressives.


You cannot draw a direct comparison with any European country and the United States because of our unique political and cultural situation, along with violent minorities causing most of the crime across the board.

First of all, I'm Polish, not German, so your "hurr durr you are all Nazis" argument goes wide. Particularly when you consider United States' history, including institutionalized slavery, genocide of indigenous peoples, racial divisions, imperialism, and plenty of other negative aspects your "unique" political and cultural situation created.

Second, your "herp derp, I'm better cooz Germans are Nazis" argument is completely without merit, since the predominant majority of the German population was born during or after the war and as such have no connection to the crimes committed by the Nazi regime and Germans serving it.

Unless, of course, you believe that blaming children for the sins of their fathers is warranted, so how about you apply that philosophy to yourself too (see above for an abridged list of things to include).

Third, your "unique political and cultural situation" is a myth produced out of the baseless doctrine of American exceptionalism. You are not unique, not special, and no, you are not exempt from comparisons to European countries.

Finally, if you think that the civilized white man is beset in America by violent minorities which cause all the crime, just say so.

 

[Sander]

When do we (as a country) stop making excuses for violent, subhuman behavior and demand personal accountability?

Given the fact that you have the largest prison population in the world in both relative and absolute terms coupled with very harsh (often mandatory) sentencing and some of the lowest spending on poor relief in the developed world, I think you've got that whole demanding responsibility thing covered. The thing is, it isn't exactly working.

Go ask a few holocaust survivors how much the United States and Germany are alike. We get it, you're still trying to move past that six million, and have overcompensated and become ultra leftist progressives.

Don't troll.

 

[Surf Solar]

It's always bizarre to read about stuff like this. I mean sure do we have homicides and stuff like that too here, but reading about this I wonder why it always goes ultraviolent very fast for you guys in the US...

 

[Crni Vuk]

Tonight's top story: the poor and disenfranchised in a society are more often the perpetrators and the victims of violent crimes, and are far more likely to be marginalized when they turn to the system for help. Stick around after that for our hard-hitting expose on who the poor and disenfranchised in our society actually are, and how they got that way. Plus, we've got Ollie Williams with the weather.

When do we (as a country) stop making excuses for violent, subhuman behavior and demand personal accountability? We aren't talking about crimes of desperation, stealing a loaf of bread to feed your starving children. We have safety nets in place so that shit like that doesn't happen, and with a whopping 10% of the population on welfare, I'd say those programs are a rousing success.

It's time to stop treating blacks like children.

seriously ... please, you cant be THAT naive ... can you?

No nation, neither the US nor any nation in Europe has a so well thought out and perfect system that it really can help EVERYONE who is in need of support.

And it isnt about making excuses, it is about looking for solutions. And to find solutions you have to understand the case in the first place. Why people, as a whole, behave in a certain way. Why are some areas more violent then others? What has this to do with excuses? I dont get it.

 

[Gonzalez]

Please enlighten me as to what makes the United States different.

For starters, you gave yourself one of the many answers.

The United States has a gun problem

Whereas Germany does not. And saying that trigger happy cops are part of the problem, well, that's a fallacy like saying the egg came before the chicken or the chicken came before the egg, maybe with so many crazed armed civilians the police does not want to take a chance. Did you find the report of how many policemen get killed in the US in the line of duty compared to Germany? You even bothered to look into it? This particular point aside, you really think The US and german societies have the same crime and social problems?

I don't know how it is in the US, but as part of the honor guard when I was in the academy I had to burry plenty of policemen who fell in the line of duty, and already two of them who I knew personally were killed since I left the academy, another one wounded, but you don't hear about every single dead policeman in the news. Thing is in the middle of the night, someone I just tased and wont go down comes charging at me with "something" on his hand why should I take the chance of being my family the one that is going to mourn a son, a brother or a father. If they warned him, tased him, aimed their sidearms at him while telling him to stop, if they did all that and the man still charged at them then what they did was completely legal, a knife is as deadly as a firearm, even more deadly if it comes into range, and someone charging at you can still stab you from 8 meters away even if you shoot him. What did he had on his hand, a knife, a club, a gun? It was the middle of the night, were the cops able to see well? They only had fractions of a second to decide, and again, none of us were there. I'm not going to exonerate this guy, I don't know what happened that night, but I'm not going to be as quick to condemn him as you either, specially from what I read on a news article.

 

[TheWesDude]

how many firearms ny vs germany

how much violent crime ny vs germany

how much gun violence ny vs germany

how "easy" to get a gun ny vs germany

im pretty sure once you started comparing more factors you would get a much different and a far more comprehensive picture.

you are guilty of the same fallacy as the people who did a "study" and found women make 72-86 cents on the dollar vs men in the US.

dont be like that.

 

[Tagaziel]

For starters, you gave yourself one of the many answers.

Whereas Germany does not. And saying that trigger happy cops are part of the problem, well, that's a fallacy like saying the egg came before the chicken or the chicken came before the egg, maybe with so many crazed armed civilians the police does not want to take a chance. Did you find the report of how many policemen get killed in the US in the line of duty compared to Germany? You even bothered to look into it? This particular point aside, you really think The US and german societies have the same crime and social problems?

I'm not sure what your point is. That the United States and Germany are different? Sure. However, the differences aren't substantial enough to make direct comparisons unwarranted.

The comparison is there not as an end result, but as a starting point for identifying the differences that cause the abnormal situation in the United States. By contrasting Germany and the U.S., states that are similar (federal state, mixed population, democracy, capitalism, etc.) it becomes possible to identify the problems.

The entire gun worship is part of the reason.

I don't know how it is in the US, but as part of the honor guard when I was in the academy I had to burry plenty of policemen who fell in the line of duty, and already two of them who I knew personally were killed since I left the academy, another one wounded, but you don't hear about every single dead policeman in the news. Thing is in the middle of the night, someone I just tased and wont go down comes charging at me with "something" on his hand why should I take the chance of being my family the one that is going to mourn a son, a brother or a father. If they warned him, tased him, aimed their sidearms at him while telling him to stop, if they did all that and the man still charged at them then what they did was completely legal, a knife is as deadly as a firearm, even more deadly if it comes into range, and someone charging at you can still stab you from 8 meters away even if you shoot him. What did he had on his hand, a knife, a club, a gun? It was the middle of the night, were the cops able to see well? They only had fractions of a second to decide, and again, none of us were there. I'm not going to exonerate this guy, I don't know what happened that night, but I'm not going to be as quick to condemn him as you either, specially from what I read on a news article.

A knife isn't nearly as lethal as a gun, but that's beside the point.

The main reason I'm not going to assume the policeman did right is because they aren't civilians. Cops are trained specifically to handle situations like these. The fact that a guy who was in an accident ended up gunned down by cops after a panicky 9-1-1 is, to me, failure of the policemen to do their job.

how many firearms ny vs germany

how much violent crime ny vs germany

how much gun violence ny vs germany

how "easy" to get a gun ny vs germany

im pretty sure once you started comparing more factors you would get a much different and a far more comprehensive picture.

you are guilty of the same fallacy as the people who did a "study" and found women make 72-86 cents on the dollar vs men in the US.

dont be like that.

And be like you? Sorry, I'll prefer to trust research over prejudice and denial of pressing social issues.

 

[Gonzalez]

A knife isn't nearly as lethal as a gun

Can it still kill you? Specially when we take into account the body armor law enforcement officers in the US is usually designed to stop bullets but not stabbing weapons, that's why I said it could be more lethal.

The main reason I'm not going to assume the policeman did right is because they aren't civilians. Cops are trained specifically to handle situations like these. The fact that a guy who was in an accident ended up gunned down by cops after a panicky 9-1-1 is, to me, failure of the policemen to do their job.

You talk like you even know what the procedures and the law are. I'm going to cite the PFA procedure, wich might or might not be similar to the specific law enforcement agency the officer belongs to, but it might enlighten things a bit for you.

On the subject "Imminent danger" "It exists when... ...the perpetrator has the capacity to cause death or serious injury even without weapons and shows intention of doing it"

Also, the call was a breaking and entering, the officers arrived on the premise a crime was taking place, they did not know if the person was armed and what he was armed with, they were not given details on the 911 being "panicky" whatever that means, they are not the ones who talk to the woman.

Are you saying mistakes happened and things went to hell? Yes, I agree. Could the officer in question have to answer for not acting professionally enough? Crimes can be committed by incompetence, so yes. Does this mean he was gun happy? Not necessarily. Does this means he was biased about black people? Not necessarily, there are other reasons why he might have felt threatened and opened fire.

And as for he was guilty or not, I will leave the people in charge of the investigation and the court decide rather than "assume" it.

I would need more facts, like knowing if they warned him or not, the fact they tried to tase him first tells me they were not trigger happy, but just trying to get him to stop from charging at them, and that they felt threatened but tried non lethal first. Then more investigation would be needed to determine if the taser worked properly, if the officer was competent enough to use it, and so on.

Fact is none of us will get direct access to the evidence of this case and none of us is either on the investigation or in the litigation. So pardon me for not "assuming" things.

 

[mobucks]

If we were to tackle and overcome all social issues in the world and create a utopia for mankind where no one dies, no one starves, and no one steals or kills or gets disease, how long would the planet survive?

 

[Tagaziel]

Can it still kill you? Specially when we take into account the body armor law enforcement officers in the US is usually designed to stop bullets but not stabbing weapons, that's why I said it could be more lethal.

Yes. I was actually referring to actual internal damage caused by a knife and a bullet. The latter is much more devastating, since it's high powered (compared to a knife) and rips through everything in its path. Knives cause limited damage by comparison.

Can that damage be lethal? Yes, but the placement is much more important than with a bullet.

You talk like you even know what the procedures and the law are. I'm going to cite the PFA procedure, wich might or might not be similar to the specific law enforcement agency the officer belongs to, but it might enlighten things a bit for you.

I have a Master's degree in law, though I graduated with a thesis on legal history, rather than criminal law.

On the subject "Imminent danger" "It exists when... ...the perpetrator has the capacity to cause death or serious injury even without weapons and shows intention of doing it"

I'm not sure if you're translating correctly, but the wording implies objective capacity to cause death or serious injury. In order for the situation to constitute imminent danger, the dead guy in this case would have to have had said capacity and show intention of doing it.

The former would be non-existent, by the virtue of him just having been in a car accident, the latter is dependent on whether the judge interprets it as subjective (meaning if he takes the policeman's stance into account) or objective (whether the victim's behavior could reasonably be interpreted as threatening).

Also, the call was a breaking and entering, the officers arrived on the premise a crime was taking place, they did not know if the person was armed and what he was armed with, they were not given details on the 911 being "panicky" whatever that means, they are not the ones who talk to the woman.

Are you saying mistakes happened and things went to hell? Yes, I agree. Could the officer in question have to answer for not acting professionally enough? Crimes can be committed by incompetence, so yes. Does this mean he was gun happy? Not necessarily. Does this means he was biased about black people? Not necessarily, there are other reasons why he might have felt threatened and opened fire.

And as for he was guilty or not, I will leave the people in charge of the investigation and the court decide rather than "assume" it.

I would need more facts, like knowing if they warned him or not, the fact they tried to tase him first tells me they were not trigger happy, but just trying to get him to stop from charging at them, and that they felt threatened but tried non lethal first. Then more investigation would be needed to determine if the taser worked properly, if the officer was competent enough to use it, and so on.

Fact is none of us will get direct access to the evidence of this case and none of us is either on the investigation or in the litigation. So pardon me for not "assuming" things.

I'm not assuming either, I'm going by what I have available to me. And my impression is that the policemen fucked up, severely, just like yours is that the situation is not clear cut.

 

[Shoveler]

I'm not sure what your point is. That the United States and Germany are different? Sure. However, the differences aren't substantial enough to make direct comparisons unwarranted.

The United States and Germany are different. In many ways, but a few important ones that haven't been mentioned. Germany's aversion to guns didn't happen because of enlightenment, it happened because directly after the conclusion of WWII guns were forcibly taken from the populace. Losing a major (world changing) war changed the German psyche as well. Now several generations later, that psyche is well established.

The U.S. doesn't have that mentality, with the exception of the East and West coast. "Middle" America is pretty much gun friendly. We grow up with guns, they're always around, part of every day life (very nearly). It's not because the government wants to take them, or because we fear the government, it's a way of life. I hunt, I fish, I live off the land (sometimes).

Invariably, some one will say "Why do hunters need assault rifles?" The answer is we don't. However, the founding fathers of the U.S. endowed the population with the right be armed, and didn't emphasize to what degree.

Some will state that the founding fathers didn't have Assault Rifles in mind, and I agree. However, they also didn't have in mind Kevlar and some of the other protective equipment that is in wide and available use today. IF, and invading army ever did arrive on our shores, I'd like to have more than pea shooters available to help drive them back. We think that scenario can't happen in this day and age, but it can.

Shov
(PS. I don't think either mentality is more right, or more wrong. Just different, different enough to not be able to be compared accurately.)

 

[Gonzalez]

The former would be non-existent, by the virtue of him just having been in a car accident, the latter is dependent on whether the judge interprets it as subjective (meaning if he takes the policeman's stance into account) or objective (whether the victim's behavior could reasonably be interpreted as threatening).

You are looking into specifics again, the PFA internal law might be different from that in the US, the citation was to put an example, not to be used as something specific for this particular case, like I said, we cannot look into the specifics, only the official investigation can.

What bothers me is that the article and the way it was presented in the thread was to show how much of a bigoted trigger happy person this officer was and by extension the rest of the police force or forces.

 

[Tagaziel]

snip

I followed you, right up until you mentioned foreign invaders. Listen, disorganized civilian rabble with automatic weapons is not a challenge for any army that can invade the United States and defeat its conventional forces. Really.

Plus, the gun culture was the point. What separates the U.S. and Germany that can account for such a wild discrepancy in gun usage by police force? You wrote the answer. Guns, guns everywhere.

You are looking into specifics again, the PFA internal law might be different from that in the US, the citation was to put an example, not to be used as something specific for this particular case, like I said, we cannot look into the specifics, only the official investigation can.

What bothers me is that the article and the way it was presented in the thread was to show how much of a bigoted trigger happy person this officer was and by extension the rest of the police force or forces.

Actually, BBC's coverage is fairly neutral. I went through other news reports and went with the least biased.

My point is was that this death was easily avoidable. And yet it happened. I kind of hope the U.S. will eventually figure that out.

 

[Hassknecht]

I'm not sure what your point is. That the United States and Germany are different? Sure. However, the differences aren't substantial enough to make direct comparisons unwarranted.

The United States and Germany are different. In many ways, but a few important ones that haven't been mentioned. Germany's aversion to guns didn't happen because of enlightenment, it happened because directly after the conclusion of WWII guns were forcibly taken from the populace. Losing a major (world changing) war changed the German psyche as well. Now several generations later, that psyche is well established.

That is not entirely accurate I think. Firearms were never all that common in Germany, since long before WWII. Monarchic states don't like their commoners to be armed.

 

[Surf Solar]

I'm not sure what your point is. That the United States and Germany are different? Sure. However, the differences aren't substantial enough to make direct comparisons unwarranted.

The United States and Germany are different. In many ways, but a few important ones that haven't been mentioned. Germany's aversion to guns didn't happen because of enlightenment, it happened because directly after the conclusion of WWII guns were forcibly taken from the populace. Losing a major (world changing) war changed the German psyche as well. Now several generations later, that psyche is well established.

That is not entirely accurate I think. Firearms were never all that common in Germany, since long before WWII. Monarchic states don't like their commoners to be armed.

And I am glad that the gun culture is kept very small in our country.

 

[Ilosar]

The U.S. doesn't have that mentality, with the exception of the East and West coast. "Middle" America is pretty much gun friendly. We grow up with guns, they're always around, part of every day life (very nearly). It's not because the government wants to take them, or because we fear the government, it's a way of life. I hunt, I fish, I live off the land (sometimes).

I never understood that ''the guns protect us from the govn't'' mentality. The US's leaderships have done pretty horrible things all along its history (Tags has got most of them covered, I'll personally highlight slavery, mass segregation, near-genocide and concentration camps) and none of those were stopped by upstanding citizens going on shooting sprees because of that one bill they didn't like. They were stopped either by laws, the end of its necessity, or all-out war. A gun is useless as a protection from the State unless you start shooting at its agents. But I digress.

As for the events, we know too little. It's possible the cops were jumpy/trigger-happy, while it's also possible the guy was drunk off his ass and charged at them. We cannot make reasonable assumptions, not that this will stop ratings-oriented media from taking whichever stance they think will bring them the most viewers.

 

[Yamu]

I never understood that ''the guns protect us from the govn't'' mentality. The US's leaderships have done pretty horrible things all along its history (Tags has got most of them covered, I'll personally highlight slavery, mass segregation, near-genocide and concentration camps) and none of those were stopped by upstanding citizens going on shooting sprees because of that one bill they didn't like. They were stopped either by laws, the end of its necessity, or all-out war. A gun is useless as a protection from the State unless you start shooting at its agents. But I digress.

I suppose the argument makes a bit more sense when you realize that a lot of the people that hold to it are in this thread arguing in favor of the same kind of use-of-force police protocols that got a guy killed for eating a pear once. If I thought "when in doubt, kill the perp" was supposed to be the status quo, I'd want a little protection from "legitimate" authority, too. But as you say, I digress.

As for the events, we know too little. It's possible the cops were jumpy/trigger-happy, while it's also possible the guy was drunk off his ass and charged at them. We cannot make reasonable assumptions, not that this will stop ratings-oriented media from taking whichever stance they think will bring them the most viewers.

Truth, and, as far as the original topic goes, the beginning and the ending of the discussion. I've seen some wild speculation (the guy was probably on bath salts? Yeah, sounds like the M.O. of a chemistry major with a 3.7 G.P.A.), but at the end of the day, you're either arguing the facts you wish were true, or you're arguing about the underlying issues, which is a factual/mythical can of worms all its own. The media bottom-feeders (a label which is increasingly oxymoronic) don't help, but I'm not sure one can label them the chicken to the egg. The whole thing is really more of a self-evolving ouroboros of provincial ignorance.

 

[Gonzalez]

My point is was that this death was easily avoidable. And yet it happened.

Really? Easily avoidable? I'd like to see how you would have reacted if I gave you a gun and told you to go to a location where a crime is taking place and you are supposed to stop it, and when you arrive the perpetrator start running towards you in the middle of the dark, ignoring your commands. You have zero time to think what to do and you have to make a choice, so, what do you do?

And don't give me that "they are supposed to be trained these kind of situation", there is no "this kind of situation", no amount of training can possibly prepare you for every single conceivable scenario, each situation is different from another and more often than not you are expected to use your judgment than to follow a 1, 2 ,3 step. There is a procedural framework, but it's just that, a framework, it is not supposed to give you the answer for every single thing. He had to make a call, and it was a bad one, now all that's left is to see if he did it within the procedural framework that governs his duties.

In this tragedy, like in most tragedies, it's never one single factor that defines it all, the accident, the woman confusing him for a burglar, the taser not working, all led to the instant the shit hit the fan.