Fresno Police shooting and killing unarmed Dylan Noble

[WackyDan]

1. He wasn't black so nobody including the media isn't going to care much...
2. WLM - White lives matter movement hasn't weighed in because they are too busy eating cheetos and watching Netflix.

... Yeah, you could hope that the police would recognize someone who is under the influence of something and maybe have a better coordinated response considering there were two of them there.... But I think we'll find that the officer's last couple of shots were questionable.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Police brutality knows no bounds sir and each incident is worthy of condemnation irrespective of the race of the victims.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Police brutality knows no bounds sir and each incident is worthy of condemnation irrespective of the race of the victims.

True however, in this case it's not police brutality, it's a case of suicide by police.

 

[Ackmed]

Decades of police brutality against black people and now you are mad that they are hogging all the attention when murdered by police.

Since the person shot was white, there might be a token effort to punish the cops, instead of the case being ignored entirely.

There has been police brutality against all races, not just once race. I am not mad, just pointing out the hypocrisy from the media and on here.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

You know people don't comply with instructions all day long but is that a legitimate reason to shoot them multiple times? This guy was in a world of hurt after the first two rounds struck him and was fumbling around in agony when the cops pumped the last two into him. There was no reason that he couldn't have been subdued in his condition without any additional gun shots.

According to the cop lovers and apologists, yes. To the rest of the world, no.

But then again many people here don't care about anyone that isn't a cop, especially minorities.

Like I said, to cops it's "kill 100 innocent unarmed men instead of one cop possibly getting hurt". That is basically there motto.

And the authoritarians here let them get away with it. They love that cops kill people. Look at the comments.....don't follow police commands (regardless if you aren't committing a crime, or if you are unarmed) you are supposed to be shot and killed.

 

[railer]

suicide by cop should be obvious to even the < 80 IQ crowd. Move along.

 

[The Merg]

suicide by cop should be obvious to even the < 80 IQ crowd. Move along.

The problem is that even those who are committed to suicide by cop will use real weapons and physically attack officers in order to fulfill their wish of dying.

At what point does the officer allow his actions to continue until? If he is showing all indications that he is armed and is failing to follow commands, at what point does the officer decide that he is not reaching for a weapon?

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

The problem is that even those who are committed to suicide by cop will use real weapons and physically attack officers in order to fulfill their wish of dying.

At what point does the officer allow his actions to continue until? If he is showing all indications that he is armed and is failing to follow commands, at what point does the officer decide that he is not reaching for a weapon?

Once again, better 100 innocent people get murdered rather then one cop possibly get shot at.

Yup, no evidence of bigotry noted here. #onlycoplivesmatter I guess.

 

[The Merg]

Once again, better 100 innocent people get murdered rather then one cop possibly get shot at.



Yup, no evidence of bigotry noted here. #onlycoplivesmatter I guess.

Understood, but could you answer these questions then:

1. At what point is the police off sir allowed to shoot him? Does the officer have to physically wait for the subject to shoot his gun?

2. I'm confused about your bigoted statement. Are you saying I am bigoted or that the cops were? And if so, how?

 

[Puffnstuff]

suicide by cop should be obvious to even the < 80 IQ crowd. Move along.

Would you say that if he were your father, brother or other family member? What if he was your only son? People like you place no value on human life but will go completely ape sh!t over a mistreated kitten or puppy. It reminds me of the CA cop not so long ago that shot a drunk guy in the neck after he wrecked his suv then attempted to get out of the drivers side window. There was no need for the violence yet nothing happened to the cop who clearly was not honest about the events as the dash camera recorded the entire episode.

 

[realibrad]

Would you say that if he were your father, brother or other family member? What if he was your only son? People like you place no value on human life but will go completely ape sh!t over a mistreated kitten or puppy. It reminds me of the CA cop not so long ago that shot a drunk guy in the neck after he wrecked his suv then attempted to get out of the drivers side window. There was no need for the violence yet nothing happened to the cop who clearly was not honest about the events as the dash camera recorded the entire episode.

You sure did read a lot into his post.

 

[Darwin333]

That would have been a great tool. Unfortunately, not all departments allow Tasers to be used and not all officers are trained on them or have the ability to carry them.

- Merg

Serious question, why not? I see every officer around here with a taser. It's got to be cheaper to train and outfit them with tasers than even defending this single lawsuit much less if they get any sort of settlement.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Understood, but could you answer these questions then:

1. At what point is the police off sir allowed to shoot him? Does the officer have to physically wait for the subject to shoot his gun?

2. I'm confused about your bigoted statement. Are you saying I am bigoted or that the cops were? And if so, how?

Maybe they need to actually see a gun or other weapon? Or at least have a suspect try and close the distance to them quickly?

Otherwise your "think they might have a gun" is an open invitation for cops to shoot anyone they want at anytime, and just use that as their excuse.

Oh wait. That is what cops are doing all the time now anyway. Hold an iphone in your hand? Get gunned down since "I thought it might have been a weapon". Move your hand anywhere near your pants (god forbid that is a natural place for your hands to be), get shot for "maybe reaching for a gun". Ask a black man for his ID, then shoot him for making a "furtive movement". Want me to keep going with these incidents?


So yes, the cops (and you I guess) feel it is totally OK that hundreds of unarmed innocent people are getting gunned down when when they have done nothing wrong. Go figure, right?


And bigotry is defend as not liking people of a certain group, or treating them differently because they are from a certain group. So yes, if you support different rules for cops, and allow them to get away with crimes that non-cops would be punished for, that is bigotry. Just like when Ackmed admitted he was a bigot for saying he outright values all cop lives over non-cop lives. That is bigotry.

You cannot make accusations like this without providing Ackmed's actual words. I asked you to by pm 4 days ago, but you have not been on to respond. Justice delayed is justice denied. I am infracting you, which puts you on a cumulatively earned 1 day vacation. You may contest this infraction when you return, but only with a link to Ackmed's exact words.

Perknose
Forum Director

 

[Perknose]

n/m

 

[The Merg]

Maybe they need to actually see a gun or other weapon? Or at least have a suspect try and close the distance to them quickly?



Otherwise your "think they might have a gun" is an open invitation for cops to shoot anyone they want at anytime, and just use that as their excuse.



Oh wait. That is what cops are doing all the time now anyway. Hold an iphone in your hand? Get gunned down since "I thought it might have been a weapon". Move your hand anywhere near your pants (god forbid that is a natural place for your hands to be), get shot for "maybe reaching for a gun". Ask a black man for his ID, then shoot him for making a "furtive movement". Want me to keep going with these incidents?





So yes, the cops (and you I guess) feel it is totally OK that hundreds of unarmed innocent people are getting gunned down when when they have done nothing wrong. Go figure, right?





And bigotry is defend as not liking people of a certain group, or treating them differently because they are from a certain group. So yes, if you support different rules for cops, and allow them to get away with crimes that non-cops would be punished for, that is bigotry. Just like when Ackmed admitted he was a bigot for saying he outright values all cop lives over non-cop lives. That is bigotry.

I'll try to respond to most points in here... If I miss one, it's not intentional...

The problem with waiting until you see a gun is that action vs. reaction says you will lose every time. It takes about 2-3 seconds to process what you see and then react to it. If the officer waits until the hand comes out from behind the person's back, sees what they have in their hand, and then reacts to it, there's a good chance they will already be dead. I agree, it's a hard line to determine. In this case here, I'll have to watch the video again, but doesn't he start advancing towards the officers? I could be mixing up videos though.

With the idea of "he might have a gun", that's not an end all excuse for cops. They need to be able to articulate why that is. If you have something in your hand and the cops tell you to drop it, you should drop it. If they tell you to put your hands up and you put them towards your waist, you are indicating that you are not going to follow their directions. If they have information or there are indicators you are armed, that is going to be an issue.

With the ask for his ID and shoot him anyways, I assume you are referring to the shooting in SC where he went go back into his car and the officer shot him. That was a bad shoot and the officer was charged and found guilty for that.

And no, I don't want innocent people to be shot and killed and I'm sure that cops don't want that either. I get the impression that you feel that cops go out with the hope that they get the opportunity to shoot someone that day. I would gather that cops hope the last thing they ever have to do is shoot and possibly kill someone.

 

[The Merg]

Serious question, why not? I see every officer around here with a taser. It's got to be cheaper to train and outfit them with tasers than even defending this single lawsuit much less if they get any sort of settlement.

There are many jurisdictions that won't touch using a Taser. I'm sure you've heard or read about lawsuits that claim people died from being Tasered. Those lawsuits scare some places that they won't issue them.

From my reading, it appears that just about all deaths that occurred after someone was Tasered was someone that had drug psychosis. In those situations, the person was most likely going to die anyways, but due to the psychosis, police used the Taser as their option to stop the subject. Once the person comes back down, their body shuts down. Tasers get blamed for the death though.

There's also the fear that officers might use their firearm when they mean to use a Taser even though there are lots of safeguards that can be done to prevent that. However, there is still a chance it will happen (e.g. The Bart office in SF that shot the guy in the back or the reserve deputy in the mid-west that shot the guy while he was on the ground).

Also, as I mentioned in the other thread, some places are making it more restrictive as to when you can use a Taser, such as only when the subject is an active resister or a threat to someone else (and running from the police in itself would not count). In VA, the State Supreme Court ruled recently that a Taser cannot be used on a passive resister.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Suicide by cop. Good shoot.

 

[NAC4EV]

Suicide by cop. Good shoot.

An American Epidemic of Police Shootings

 

[Victorian Gray]

Suicide by cop. Good shoot.

So, congrats to the police for shooting and killing an unarmed and mentally unstable individual. Good shoot indeed.

 

[The Merg]

Suicide by cop. Good shoot.

It's a justified shoot. It's anything but good. Someone is dead that ultimately does not need to be. Two officers have to live every day knowing they killed someone that forced their hand. No one won here.


- Merg

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Why do people defend mentally unstable individuals as if that's something worth protecting? He was reported as a potential threat, and then tried very hard to convince cops that he was one, to great success. I don't understand why supposed social liberals are against euthanasia. Maybe you wouldn't have crazies going around shooting up schools and malls if you gave them a chance to kill themselves first.

 

[Perknose]

Why do people defend mentally unstable individuals as if that's something worth protecting? He was reported as a potential threat, and then tried very hard to convince cops that he was one, to great success. I don't understand why supposed social liberals are against euthanasia. Maybe you wouldn't have crazies going around shooting up schools and malls if you gave them a chance to kill themselves first.

Here's a slogan for you: All Lives Matter!

Even obese virgins with little else to offer the world should be able to open their ignorant yaps and have their voices heard . . . even if the Nazis might have included them with the other mental and physical defectives they considered "useless eaters."

You're not a pig because you might not be able to refuse that third piece of pie, no. You're a pig because your callous opinions are repugnant, ignorant, and inhumane.

Eat that.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

And what happens when you have a society like Japan, sliding deeper and deeper into debt, the young workforce bearing all the stress, just to support a crippled, unproductive geriatric population of useless eaters that refuse to die? If those lives matter so much, you'd think they could find support at the very least from family and friends. Do we even know that the useless eater in this thread's story had parents that cared about him before he died? His dad is reported having said that he was a perfectly normal and sane kid, which means this idiot fell through the cracks somewhere. Shouldn't be the cop's duty to evaluate a suspected gun-wielder when people that knew him from childbirth apparently never saw anything wrong.

 

[NAC4EV]

Why do people defend mentally unstable individuals as if that's something worth protecting? He was reported as a potential threat, and then tried very hard to convince cops that he was one, to great success. I don't understand why supposed social liberals are against euthanasia. Maybe you wouldn't have crazies going around shooting up schools and malls if you gave them a chance to kill themselves first.

I suppose you should also say: "Where is Hitler when you really need him"
FAIL

 

[AntonioHG]

Man, the comments make me want to tear my eyes out. Where was he hiding a rifle? In his pants? Sigh.

Alright, so maybe he has a pistol, both cops are in front, one can't go around back to tackle him while the other is in front, nope. Guess not.

Now he's down on the ground, he's still reaching for...something. Not one of these cops will risk going over to grab this guy while he's on the ground and check for whatever they suppose he's hiding. He's going to somehow, from the ground while wounded, pull a gun and shoot one of them..? What ever happened to taking a calculated risk? You sign up for a dangerous job where one would be expected to take risks daily. Not a single chance taken. Nope. Just shoot him over and over and over while he's down.

And then the assclowns on here call it a "good shoot". Totally ridiculous.