Outrage after police fatally shoot Jayland Walker in Ohio

[Ana the Ist]

I find it very interesting that this young man(black) who killed nobody was pumped with 60 bullets.While the 22 y/o white dude that allegedly shot and killed six and injured 24 others was taken into custody alive.

It's probably a reaction to the multiple corpses upon entering the scene.

If you see a bunch of dead bodies...You're probably going to yell for the subject to give himself up before you even see him. If he does...you've arrested him without a shot.

When this idiot saw lights and sirens behind him? That was his chance to give himself up peacefully.

 

[Ana the Ist]

ummm...given how often cops will shoot black people with little provocation I wouldn't stay around long enough to see if they shoot me.

You mean leave the country?

Black people that 100% comply still get killed by trigger happy cops.

So do white and Latino people.

it's kinda teaching black people to flee or shoot back if you want to live, least there your trying to save yourself.

No....black people are people like everyone else and should be held to the same standards. I can't imagine a more racist idea than "we can't expect black people to comply with the police" when everyone else does.

What you should try to understand is that for every incident like this there are tens of thousands of incidents where black people are pulling over for normal traffic violations and everything proceeds as it would have if they were they white or any other race.

I've been to Akron btw....spent years living there and nearby. It has been awhile since and I've heard it's been hit really hard by the opioid epidemic, and I suspect crime has gotten worse...but in this case, I don't see anything wrong with what the cops did. We should examine what the suspect did if we're genuinely interested in preventing this in the future.

 

[Nithavela]

True....but an odd assumption. If I see a suspect shoot, and he throws the gun out the window....it would be odd to consider him armed unless he presented another weapon.

It assumes the gun thrown is pretty clearly visible though.

It's definetely not an all clear. But if the perp throws the gun out and then makes every effort to surrender and appear non-threatening, police should be disciplined enough to deescalate and end the situation with nobody shot.

 

[Nithavela]

Yes he was running on foot away from the police.

There is such a thing as context.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Thats what their training is for.

Right...and in this case they appear to have followed training correctly.

The question is whether they are trained somehow differently than other police forces

I'm sure they are.

or whether they are more afraid for their life because of guns between people or what is the reason behind such situations.

Last I checked, police are shot at 200-300 times a year. They also get run over and stabbed to death. They get assaulted thousands of times.

Do you have a police force outside the US that faces a similar amount of violence?

 

[BPPLEE]

True....but an odd assumption. If I see a suspect shoot, and he throws the gun out the window....it would be odd to consider him armed unless he presented another weapon.

It assumes the gun thrown is pretty clearly visible though.

Suspects often have more than 1 gun. When I was in law enforcement we were trained not to make the assumption they only had one. It was reinforced in training exercises.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I have found an interesting article that may give some explanations.

Why American Cops Kill So Many Compared To European Cops

By contrast, national standards in most European countries conform to the European Convention on Human Rights, which impels its 47 signatories to permit only deadly force that is “absolutely necessary” to achieve a lawful purpose. Killings excused under America’s “reasonable belief” standards often violate Europe’s “absolute necessity” standards.

For example, the unfounded fear of Darren Wilson – the former Ferguson cop who fatally shot Michael Brown – that Brown was armed would not have likely absolved him in Europe. Nor would officers’ fears of the screwdriver that a mentally ill Dallas man Jason Harrison refused to drop.
Why American Cops Kill So Many More Than European Cops

So, it seems that just a "reasonable belief" that he might have a gun, that he might shoot back, that he might endanger public safety etc. is enough for American police force to shoot. But its not enough in other countries.

I don't recall the Dallas case.

Europe doesn't have the widespread proliferation of guns nor do their criminals regularly kill police.

It's not a reasonable assumption to think your life is in danger as a cop there.

If you want police to wait until they have bullets flying past their own head....what was wrong with their response in Uvalde???

They believed he was no longer an active shooter, correct?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Suspects often have more than 1 gun. When I was in law enforcement we were trained not to make the assumption they only had one. It was reinforced in training exercises.

You're right to assume the possibility that they are still armed.

But you would be wrong to assume they are certainly still armed.

That means approaching with caution, not lethal force.

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

There is such a thing as context.

 

[Ana the Ist]

If he was shot in the back while running away that will not be justified

Actually it's justified.

In this case, the suspect demonstrated the willingness to use lethal force to evade capture. He essentially declared himself a danger to all police and the public at large.

If he's willing to kill to escape, yes, he can be shot in the back.

 

[Nithavela]

Actually it's justified.

In this case, the suspect demonstrated the willingness to use lethal force to evade capture. He essentially declared himself a danger to all police and the public at large.

If he's willing to kill to escape, yes, he can be shot in the back.

He was only shot when he turned around towards the police.

AFAIK, the officers were questioned seperately and all responded that they felt Walker was moving into a firing position.

 

[Ana the Ist]

He was only shot when he turned around towards the police.

AFAIK, the officers were questioned seperately and all responded that they felt Walker was moving into a firing position.

Obviously that's better for their case...

I'm saying that under lethal force guidelines I know, even shooting him in the back would be legal.

 

[Nithavela]

Obviously that's better for their case...

I'm saying that under lethal force guidelines I know, even shooting him in the back would be legal.

It's nice to agree with you for a change. People should get gunned down by the police because of their own foolishness more often.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It's nice to agree with you for a change. People should get gunned down by the police because of their own foolishness more often.

Lol I'm laughing but that highlights the absurdity of the situation.

Obviously it's still tragic for his family, his friends, anyone who loved him. I'm hoping that groups like the NAACP walk back the rhetoric. I'm hoping that they don't shove a camera in front of his mother and we hear another story about how he was just about to turn his life around.

There's a case not long ago that didn't get much coverage. A carjacking where a 17yo male and 3 females that I think we're 17-14 jacked a car from an elderly woman. The male stuck a weapon in her face and told her to get out, while the girls each jumped in a door. The woman was pretty old....60s or 70s....and she didn't react quickly.

So this 17yo male pulled her out of the car by her head (which is actually the correct way to do such things) but she was still entangled in the seat belt as she hit the ground. What ensued was these 4 minors dragging this woman to her death while she screamed for several blocks. People were obviously horrified that these children didn't even stop to disentangle her.

This case didn't have much to go on....cctv had an overhead 3/4ths view of the crime, backs of heads, clothing, etc. This is realistically the only reason it made national news for a brief blip in time. Police wanted help identifying these subjects.

Well...the 17yo male's mom turned him in....almost immediately. I don't know if she also gave the names of the girls, but she recognized her son. That's a brave thing....morally righteous. She had to know that at 17, he's gonna be tried as an adult. She may never see her son again. She won't receive any credit for doing the right thing. She won't get any accolades from the activist community, and as far as I know, she hasn't laid any blame upon anyone but her son.

Frankly, I'd throw her a million dollars if I had control of BLMs assets. She may have failed to raise her son correctly, but she redeemed the debt to her community by making a very difficult moral decision to prioritize justice. She is at her core...a good person.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Exactly! They just have to shout "stop resisting!", "you are reaching for my gun!", etc... and they already have the benefit of the doubt. But people are missing the point that 60 shots fired against someone is a clear intent to kill. If you want to disable someone you can take one shot to the leg. When someone even makes up a compliance excuse to justify someone getting 60 shots then even the logic of that is just wickedness. Jesus said if you hate someone in your heart then you are in danger of going to hell because that's like murder (Matt 5:22). The fact is there is an overwhelming hatred to not see a human being to shot at someone 60 times. The compliance excuse is part of the hatred because it's like you are justifying that.

I watched a documentary about the way a Glock pistol was handled, and it showed that in a stress situation where the police officer was trained to keep firing until the threat was eliminated, he could empty the magazine before he knew it. He would have his attention on the threat and not on how many rounds he was firing. The presenter of the documentary showed how quickly an officer could eject the magazine when it became empty and reload in a split second and keep firing.

There are video clips of armed robberies where the store owner has opened fire at the offender and filed multiple shots until the latter either got out of the store or collapsed.

So when we have a number of police officers firing at the same time, it is not surprising that the offender could have been hit 60 times. For six officers, that would be just 10 shots each.

Seeing that the offender in this case had already shot at police, the officers would have no way of knowing whether the offender was still armed when he started to run away. That had to assume that he was, and remained a threat to them. It was only afterward that they discovered that he was not armed. But the officers were not clairvoyant, and so they did what they were trained to do.

It is interesting that we don't see all this furore when police officers are killed in the line of duty, even black police officers. I guess that no one cares about a police officer to conducts a routine traffic stop and is ambushed and killed. That is probably expected and often doesn't make front page news for news media to sell more copies.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I watched a documentary about the way a Glock pistol was handled, and it showed that in a stress situation where the police officer was trained to keep firing until the threat was eliminated, he could empty the magazine before he knew it. He would have his attention on the threat and not on how many rounds he was firing. The presenter of the documentary showed how quickly an officer could eject the magazine when it became empty and reload in a split second and keep firing.

There are video clips of armed robberies where the store owner has opened fire at the offender and filed multiple shots until the latter either got out of the store or collapsed.

So when we have a number of police officers firing at the same time, it is not surprising that the offender could have been hit 60 times. For six officers, that would be just 10 shots each.

Seeing that the offender in this case had already shot at police, the officers would have no way of knowing whether the offender was still armed when he started to run away. That had to assume that he was, and remained a threat to them. It was only afterward that they discovered that he was not armed. But the officers were not clairvoyant, and so they did what they were trained to do.

It is interesting that we don't see all this furore when police officers are killed in the line of duty, even black police officers. I guess that no one cares about a police officer to conducts a routine traffic stop and is ambushed and killed. That is probably expected and often doesn't make front page news for news media to sell more copies.

The reply is typically "that's part of the job".

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

The reply is typically "that's part of the job".

The issue with police officers in the United States is that they have to go out on duty every day not knowing if and when they may take a bullet in the line of duty. I think it takes extraordinary bravery to be a police officer in the United States.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

The issue with police officers in the United States is that they have to go out on duty every day not knowing if and when they may take a bullet in the line of duty. I think it takes extraordinary bravery to be a police officer in the United States.

Some neighborhoods yes, others, not so much. Most officers in rural and suburban settings go the majority of their career without ever having to fire their weapon in the line of duty.

I think that's why we've seen a couple of cases where officers have hesitated to act during high profile shootings. While a seasoned officer working the beat in a bad neighborhood may accustomed to hearing gun fire and dealing with tense situations, a lot of cops in the "burbs" are likely mentally unprepared for such an event if they've spent the majority of their time on the force doing traffic law enforcement and perhaps breaking up the occasional bar fight.

 

[Juan777]

I watched a documentary about the way a Glock pistol was handled, and it showed that in a stress situation where the police officer was trained to keep firing until the threat was eliminated, he could empty the magazine before he knew it. He would have his attention on the threat and not on how many rounds he was firing. The presenter of the documentary showed how quickly an officer could eject the magazine when it became empty and reload in a split second and keep firing.

There are video clips of armed robberies where the store owner has opened fire at the offender and filed multiple shots until the latter either got out of the store or collapsed.

So when we have a number of police officers firing at the same time, it is not surprising that the offender could have been hit 60 times. For six officers, that would be just 10 shots each.

Seeing that the offender in this case had already shot at police, the officers would have no way of knowing whether the offender was still armed when he started to run away. That had to assume that he was, and remained a threat to them. It was only afterward that they discovered that he was not armed. But the officers were not clairvoyant, and so they did what they were trained to do.

It is interesting that we don't see all this furore when police officers are killed in the line of duty, even black police officers. I guess that no one cares about a police officer to conducts a routine traffic stop and is ambushed and killed. That is probably expected and often doesn't make front page news for news media to sell more copies.

If the man was running away then he is not a threat to the officers. If they take the job as a police they are swearing an oath and are voluntarily putting their lives on the line. The question then becomes if they really are serving and protecting the public and enforcing the law, or if they are really race soldiers enforcing white supremacy under the color of law.

One might conclude, in allot of cases that, it's the latter when they see that there is a double standard when it comes to how white people are treated. For example, a white person points a loaded gun at the police in a stand-off and does get shot, like Cliven Bundy, who was also acquitted later by an all white jury. Guys who are mass shooters like Dillon Roof, or the recent one in Buffalo, don't end up getting shot, despite the fact they have a gun and killed allot of people. Or, lets look at the January 6, 2020 insurrection. Would you say that crowd loved the police? Were they the blue lives matter crowd? Folks you are being gaslighted by the police and by the narrative that they and right-win

That's why anyone arguing for the police can only be taken with a grain of salt. When it benefits them and they are the recipients of a power advantage than its easy to stick up for the police. However, when it does not benefit them then they attack the police just like anyone else who they claim are anti-police or anti-white, etc.... Did you notice how the white insurrectionists got very light sentences for taking over the White House? It becomes a selfish argument rather than one based on principle.

Ask yourself this...would you still stand up for the police if a white person or someone you knew was shot by a Black, Muslim or other diversity hire working as the police? Or would your support for the police end there? Where was the blue lives matter crowd for Mohammad Noor or Derrick Strafford? These are cops who where thrown under the bus, who were legitimate worried about their lives but shot ONE fatal shot at a white person. Do you notice when it's a black cop they end up going to jail for 40 years? He did not shoot 10 or 60 shots and aim to kill like the suspect was an animal...no, it's just one unfortunate accidental shot that he had to make to do his duty and they get thrown under the bus and under the jail. Where is the blue lives matter crowd for him?

 

[timtams]

LShe may have failed to raise her son correctly, but she redeemed the debt to her community by making a very difficult moral decision to prioritize justice. She is at her core...a good person.

You know though, sometimes the best of parents just have bad kids, and it sounds like she was a good one.