Outrage after police fatally shoot Jayland Walker in Ohio

[BPPLEE]

Even then, there could still be more pistols in the car and you just threw one of them.

Once you start shooting at police, it gets increasingly difficult to not have them shoot back at you. Cops are weird that way.

When I was training as a K9 Officer we tracked the decoy to a tree he had climbed and I ordered him to drop the gun. He threw down a gun and when I approached he shot me with a paint ball gun. They taught us to never assume there was just one gun.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Jayland Walker was shot on June 27th, fleeing the police after an alleged traffic offence. His body had 60 bullet wounds. It is alleged that 90 rounds were fired at Walker in the space of a few seconds.

A firearm was discovered in his car. No weapons were found on or near the body. Eight officers have been suspended from duty.

NAACP’s president, Derrick Johnson, said in a statement that Walker’s death wasn’t self-defense, but “was murder. Point blank.”

From the Guardian article: Outrage after video of police fatally shooting Jayland Walker released

Johnson added: “This Black man was killed – struck more than 60 times by 90 fired bullets – for a possible traffic violation. This doesn’t happen to white people in America. Why do police continuously target us like domestic terrorists? We are just trying to live our lives, and we are tired of being hunted like prey.”

'Murder, point blank.' What else could it be?

Because we have problems with compliance.

 

[trophy33]

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.

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

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.

Might be armed, might shoot,might be a threat is the usual cop out. But this man was running away from the cops.

 

[BPPLEE]

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.

In America the elements that must be present for law enforcement to use deadly force are ability, opportunity, jeopardy and preclusion. Did the suspect have the ability to kill you or another person? Did he have the opportunity to kill you or another person? Would a REASONABLE PERSON believe that someone's life was in jeopardy? And in recent years preclusion has been added meaning you couldn't have stopped the threat by less deadly means. If these elements are not met the use of deadly force is not justified.

 

[Paulos23]

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.

It is a problem of culture. There has been a rise in my lifetime of people saying they would shoot it out with the police, and the police have been reacting in kind which reinforces the choice to shoot at the cops if you are being pulled over.

Until the circle of fire dies down, this will keep getting worse.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Might be armed, might shoot,might be a threat is the usual cop out. But this man was running away from the cops.

In a vehicle?

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

In a vehicle?

On foot man!

 

[Oompa Loompa]

On foot man!

Yeah..it would have been one thing if he was fleeing in a car. But on foot there is no excuse.

 

[BPPLEE]

On foot man!

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

 

[trophy33]

In Europe, killing is considered unnecessary if alternatives exist. For example, national guidelines in Spain would have prescribed that Wilson incrementally pursue verbal warnings, warning shots, and shots at nonvital parts of the body before resorting to deadly force. Six shots would likely be deemed disproportionate to the threat that Brown, unarmed and wounded, allegedly posed.

In the US, only eight states require verbal warnings (when possible), while warning and leg shots are typically prohibited. In stark contrast, Finland and Norway require that police obtain permission from a superior officer, whenever possible, before shooting anyone.

Why American Cops Kill So Many More Than European Cops

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

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

Amen! We agree.

 

[BPPLEE]

In Europe, killing is considered unnecessary if alternatives exist. For example, national guidelines in Spain would have prescribed that Wilson incrementally pursue verbal warnings, warning shots, and shots at nonvital parts of the body before resorting to deadly force. Six shots would likely be deemed disproportionate to the threat that Brown, unarmed and wounded, allegedly posed.

In the US, only eight states require verbal warnings (when possible), while warning and leg shots are typically prohibited. In stark contrast, Finland and Norway require that police obtain permission from a superior officer, whenever possible, before shooting anyone.

Why American Cops Kill So Many More Than European Cops

If someone tries to stab you or shoot you how are you going to have time to get permission from a superior officer before defending yourself?

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

Yeah..it would have been one thing if he was fleeing in a car. But on foot there is no excuse.

If he was fleeing in a car, I doubt he would have sixty gunshot wounds. By the same token,I doubt a man, running away on foot in the dark of night, a smaller moving target would get shot 60 times.

 

[Nithavela]

Yeah..it would have been one thing if he was fleeing in a car. But on foot there is no excuse.

He shot at the police while driving away from the police.

Then he got out of the car and ran.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

He shot at the police while driving away from the police.

Then he got out of the car and ran.

Okay...that changes things.

 

[Nithavela]

Okay...that changes things.

There are bodycam videos on youtube, if you can stomach them.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I do not know, but in many other cases was. The excessive amount of fired shots is just strange. Its like they thought he is a superman or something.

It's actually not that strange. It could just be bad reporting. To accurately count 60 shots means that you can find 60 entry wounds and either 60 bullets or 60 exit wounds or some combination of the two.

Otherwise that sixty is essentially a guess, and there's a possibility that entry wounds are being counted as exit wounds.

This is semantic though, they were correct to shoot in what is a reasonably justifiable situation. They shoot until he stops moving or clearly no longer has a gun. Police aren't trained to walk up on a suspect lying on the ground, clearly alive and believed armed, and give him one last chance to kill a cop because they only shot him twice and he needs medical attention.

I mean the contrast between the whining about this case and the whining over Uvalde is ridiculous.

The police didn't act with enough aggression.

The police were too aggressive. I want them to shoot exactly as many times as it takes to do the job, not a shot more.

Do you realize what this is doing to police? In Seattle, they aren't even investigating most rapes. They've lost too many police. If your stuff gets stolen or some other property crime? Don't even bother calling...they aren't showing up....there's no one to send.

Somewhere between the lack of aggressiveness of Uvalde and the correct but possibly over aggressiveness of this shooting....is some degree of both correct procedure and level of aggressiveness that the public imagines they all agree on, and they don't. It doesn't matter what a cop does I'm certain some foolish person can find some criticism 100% of the time.

How come we don't look at this guy and figure out where he turned to a life of crime? If people want to avoid these things from happening, they need to accept reality.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Even then, there could still be more pistols in the car and you just threw one of them.

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.

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

He shot at the police while driving away from the police.

Then he got out of the car and ran.

Yes he was running on foot away from the police.