Another "hands up, don't shoot" lie

[PreachersWife2004]

I figured this wasn't as cut and dry as the daughter was trying to make it out to be. He wasn't on his knees and he certainly didn't have his hands up.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/01/2...oregon-wildlife-refuge.html?intcmp=latestnews

The video is embedded in the article. It does show the shooting.

 

[Vylo]

Yep, at least we have video of this incident.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Yep, at least we have video of this incident.

People have donned their tin foil hats and are picking apart the video. They want to know what happened to the noise, they want to know why the cops weren't wearing body cams, etc. They're trying to play it like LeVoy was reacting to getting shot in the stomach rather than pulling out a gun.

Look. Bottom line? They FLED. They drove away from police, led them on a chase. That sets the whole thing on a new level. You get out with your hands up and you stay that way. You don't reach in your jacket.

 

[TLK Valentine]

People have donned their tin foil hats and are picking apart the video. They want to know what happened to the noise, they want to know why the cops weren't wearing body cams, etc. They're trying to play it like LeVoy was reacting to getting shot in the stomach rather than pulling out a gun.

Look. Bottom line? They FLED. They drove away from police, led them on a chase. That sets the whole thing on a new level. You get out with your hands up and you stay that way. You don't reach in your jacket.

And when you're previously on the record as saying you'll kill any cops who try to arrest you, don't be surprised when they take your word for it.

 

[football5680]

He shouldn't have put himself in that situation. If he wanted to surrender peacefully then he shouldn't have led them on a chase. Normal people would not do this so obviously the police will think he is either a person who will do whatever it takes to avoid prison or he is mentally ill. Either way he would be a serious threat to their lives and they knew he was armed. They are not going to give him the benefit of doubt when he begins to make strange gestures. Even after the chase, if he truly wanted to surrender then he should have put his hands as high above his head as possible and do everything in his power to prove he is not threatening their lives.

 

[redleghunter]

I figured this wasn't as cut and dry as the daughter was trying to make it out to be. He wasn't on his knees and he certainly didn't have his hands up.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/01/2...oregon-wildlife-refuge.html?intcmp=latestnews

The video is embedded in the article. It does show the shooting.

A high speed pursuit, reaching for a pistol and all on video. Where is Rev. Jackson?

 

[PreachersWife2004]

And when you're previously on the record as saying you'll kill any cops who try to arrest you, don't be surprised when they take your word for it.

What's the going saying these days? "Play stupid games win stupid prizes".

He said he wasn't going to come back from this, and he made sure he didn't.

 

[classicalhero]

His hands were up and he was shot in the back. Plus there is no need to fire that many bullets in to the car.

 

[essentialsaltes]

His hands were up and he was shot in the back. Plus there is no need to fire that many bullets in to the car.

Do we know that bullets were fired into the car? There were flash grenades, yes.

 

[TLK Valentine]

His hands were up and he was shot in the back. Plus there is no need to fire that many bullets in to the car.

Right... the cops should have waited for the armed insurrectionists to shoot first.

 

[Albion]

He shouldn't have put himself in that situation. If he wanted to surrender peacefully then he shouldn't have led them on a chase. Normal people would not do this so obviously the police will think he is either a person who will do whatever it takes to avoid prison or he is mentally ill.

I suppose a lot of Americans are troubled by the logic that holds that if the feds THINK you are a person "who might do whatever it takes to avoid prison" they are entitled to kill you forthwith.

 

[dgiharris]

People have donned their tin foil hats and are picking apart the video. They want to know what happened to the noise, they want to know why the cops weren't wearing body cams, etc. They're trying to play it like LeVoy was reacting to getting shot in the stomach rather than pulling out a gun.

Look. Bottom line? They FLED. They drove away from police, led them on a chase. That sets the whole thing on a new level. You get out with your hands up and you stay that way. You don't reach in your jacket.

The reason why "some" people put on their tinhats is because there are hundreds of hours of video of law enforcement lying and other law enforcement covering up said lie and hundreds upon hundreds (if not thousands) of law enforcement officers suffering no consequences for infringing on the lives and liberties of innocent citizens. So because of this, there is going to be a healthy percentage of the population that is skeptical of Law Enforcement and deservedly so until LE earns our trust back.

But in the case of this video, it appears LE was justified in their use of force.

A high speed pursuit, reaching for a pistol and all on video. Where is Rev. Jackson?

I dislike the tone of this post. It denigrates and ridicules all of the innocent people who are in jail because of police abuse of power. Similarly, our entire justice system is such where if you have no money, you have no voice.

People like Rev Jackson target high profile cases because those cases have the best chance for making the most impact. Sure, it is nice to have a smoking gun and a clear case of malfeasance, but if that is not the case, you make lemonaide out of lemons. The end goal is to change policies and to help the disenfranchised. There will be some blowback and unintended consequences. Sure. However, institutions are notoriously hard to change and sometimes the only way you can make change is to make as much noise as possible.

SUre, there are times I don't agree with him and to be honest I really don't like him all that much. However, I respect what he is trying to do and the good he has done

 

[Albion]

People like Rev Jackson target high profile cases because those cases have the best chance for making the most impact. Sure, it is nice to have a smoking gun and a clear case of malfeasance, but if that is not the case, you make lemonaide out of lemons. The end goal is to change policies and to help the disenfranchised. There will be some blowback and unintended consequences. Sure.

This sounds a lot more like Trotsky's (?) "If you want to make an omelet, you have to break some eggs" than something about lemons and lemonade.

 

[dgiharris]

I suppose a lot of Americans are troubled by the logic that holds that if the feds THINK you are a person "who might do whatever it takes to avoid prison" they are entitled to kill you forthwith.

What troubles me most is that whenever an incident involving Law Enforcement (LE) occurs, there is a large percentage of the populace who instantly side with police and believe the actions of the alleged criminal "automatically" negate his or her life and liberties REGARDLESS of the triviality of the offense in question. It can be a matter of a misdemeanor $75 traffic ticket that escalates to a citizen being beaten and imprisoned for "resisting arrest" or "disobeying a lawful order" which is more or less code for "the police officer felt like abusing his authority and trumping up charges on you so he could beat you and arrest you and show you who is boss".

So I do find any use of force by LE suspect and it scares me that my fellow citizens are so quick to write off the life and liberty of a fellow citizen as forfeit the instance he breaks the law.

FWIW, this instance does seem justified. However, speaking generically, I do not like how willing we are as a citizenry to turn off our brains when contemplating police/citizen interactions and disputes.

 

[dgiharris]

This sounds a lot more like Trotsky's "If you want to make an omelet, you have to break a few eggs" than something about lemons and lemonade.

ANd he is right. If you want to make an omelet you do have to break a few eggs. I believe it is both.
Lemonaide and omelets for breakfast

 

[PreachersWife2004]

His hands were up and he was shot in the back. Plus there is no need to fire that many bullets in to the car.

Did you see the video? He was not shot in the back. He may have been shot from behind, though.

What troubles me most is that whenever an incident involving Law Enforcement (LE) occurs, there is a large percentage of the populace who instantly side with police and believe the actions of the alleged criminal "automatically" negate his or her life and liberties REGARDLESS of the triviality of the offense in question. It can be a matter of a misdemeanor $75 traffic ticket that escalates to a citizen being beaten and imprisoned for "resisting arrest" or "disobeying a lawful order" which is more or less code for "the police officer felt like abusing his authority and trumping up charges on you so he could beat you and arrest you and show you who is boss".

So I do find any use of force by LE suspect and it scares me that my fellow citizens are so quick to write off the life and liberty of a fellow citizen as forfeit the instance he breaks the law.

FWIW, this instance does seem justified. However, speaking generically, I do not like how willing we are as a citizenry to turn off our brains when contemplating police/citizen interactions and disputes.

There's an equal population who automatically put their trust in the "victim" before having the entire story as well. It goes both way.

I DO tend to trust the LEO more often than not, because more often than not, the "victim" was actually a criminal doing criminal things.

I defended this, initially, because his daughter and "witnesses" claimed that he was on his knees surrendering and the cops just shot him in the face. They didn't mention the chase or anything else. Once more of the story came out, I became doubtful. Then when I saw the video, I realized that he brought on his own consequences.

 

[dgiharris]

.....There's an equal population who automatically put their trust in the "victim" before having the entire story as well. It goes both way.

I DO tend to trust the LEO more often than not, because more often than not, the "victim" was actually a criminal doing criminal things.

I defended this, initially, because his daughter and "witnesses" claimed that he was on his knees surrendering and the cops just shot him in the face. They didn't mention the chase or anything else. Once more of the story came out, I became doubtful. Then when I saw the video, I realized that he brought on his own consequences.

This is not true and statistics bear this out.

When it is your word vs a police officer's word in court, police always win. Period. Not even close. Hell, the entire legal system swings into place to protect police. The Public Defender spends on average 9 minutes on each of their cases. 9 whole minutes to fight for someone's life and liberty. 95% of Public Defender cases are plea bargains to lesser chargers because the victims can't afford a real trial and will take the deal as to literally just get out of jail so they don't lose their jobs or homes. We can have an entire thread on how there is no equality as far as "benefit of the doubt" goes. No, it is 99% weighted to support police officers and it's not even close

........
I DO tend to trust the LEO more often than not, because more often than not, the "victim" was actually a criminal doing criminal things..

You see, this right here is why police have support. Many people like you just assume that if you are arrested, then you did something wrong. Otherwise, as you imply above, if you weren't doing something wrong, if you weren't a criminal doing criminal things, then obviously you wouldn't have been arrested.

You are biased without even knowing you are biased.

My whole spiel really is to trust no one. Not the LEO not the victim. Instead, just look at the entirety of what happened and use common sense.

You can have a field day watching officers abuse their power and authority and trample on the rights of citizens. And every time we support and enable this, it hurts us all.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Okay, I'm not going to turn this into yet another "policemen suck" thread, okay? Go complain about them elsewhere - there's plenty of threads for it. This isn't one of them.

Don't post videos that have nothing to do with the topic at hand. This is about the guy who decided to be stupid after he fled from police. Plain and simple.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Okay, I'm not going to turn this into yet another "policemen suck" thread, okay? Go complain about them elsewhere - there's plenty of threads for it. This isn't one of them.

Don't post videos that have nothing to do with the topic at hand. This is about the guy who decided to be stupid after he fled from police. Plain and simple.

lol, ok. You're the one who started a thread with the title "Another hands up don't shoot lie." You're the one who presented this video in the context of Michael Brown and a host of other alleged cases of police misconduct. You're the one who made it the topic. If you want to talked about this situation in isolation, don't present it in the greater context of police abuse and public mistrust.

 

[Shodan]

I DO tend to trust the LEO more often than not, because more often than not, the "victim" was actually a criminal doing criminal things..

You see, this right here is why police have support.

Yes, that's why. Because more often than not, the victim was actually a criminal.

Many people like you just assume that if you are arrested, then you did something wrong.

Probably because, more often than not, it is true.

You are biased without even knowing you are biased.

Oh, I know I'm biased. I am biased in favor of people who are usually not doing anything wrong.

My whole spiel really is to trust no one. Not the LEO not the victim. Instead, just look at the entirety of what happened and use common sense.

Okay, having looked at the entirety of what happened here, and having used common sense, who would you say was the wrong-doer in this case?

It seems you are eager to condemn the police. Would you agree that this shows you are biased without knowing you are biased? Or are only people who turn out to be right subject to that failing?

Regards,
Shodan