Metro Atlanta police officer shoots, kills naked, unarmed man

[pcgeek11]

It is obvious that you have never been in a life threatening situation.

 

[rudeguy]

Remember the Florida zombie? Remember the Facebook movement "Kony 2012" guy that was jacking it in San Diego?

Bath salts make people have a strange compulsion to strip naked and masturbate or eat other people's faces off.

There's lots of misinformation saying the Florida zombie cannibal was not on any drugs. It's just that bath salts were new and they weren't actually testing specifically for that.

We can always count on you to stupid up a thread!

Some politician said "people were going off their meds and walking into bullets". Hence the comment.

But thanks for posting! Maybe you can tell us more about Southern Ice ™

 

[Ichinisan]

We can always count on you to stupid up a thread!

Whoa now, friend! Are you disagreeing with me on something? What exactly?

Some politician said "people were going off their meds and walking into bullets". Hence the comment.

Which comment? Mine?
[edit]

OK. You mean Smoblikat's comment. Thanks.

I'm just throwing the bath salts thing out there because it's increasingly common and I think it could have been a factor.​

[/edit]

But thanks for posting! Maybe you can tell us more about Southern Ice ™

GA had an unavoidable incident that year. Terrible timing and absolutely nothing could be done about it. I handled it just fine. Many people did not. "Southern Ice™" is as much an invention of yours as other people in that thread. So all of my comments will be viewed in the context of an unfortunately timed weather event that I handled just fine? Why are you holding this against me?

 

[Genx87]

I see the Bush doctrine of going on the offensive as a defensive measure has filtered its way down to the police department in many peoples minds.

 

[rudeguy]

Whoa now, friend! Are you disagreeing with me on something? What exactly?


Which comment? Mine?


GA had an unavoidable incident that year. Terrible timing and absolutely nothing could be done about it. I handled it just fine. Many people did not. "Southern Ice™" is as much an invention of yours as other people in that thread. So all of my comments will be viewed in the context of an unfortunately timed weather event that I handled just fine? Why are you holding this against me?

http://countercurrentnews.com/2015/03/nypd-says-people-walking-into-police-bullets/

 

[Jaskalas]

If we're going to revisit this - I'll ask some questions.

Is it acceptable for an officer to shoot _anyone_ running towards them?
Is an obviously disturbed and mentally ill person not a credible threat if they reach you?

I look at this case, and Ferguson and I see parallels to the ultimate decision to shoot. Whereas Ferguson included prior crimes and violence against the officer, Atlanta occurred before the officer was harmed. What's the defining difference between the two cases?

 

[rudeguy]

If we're going to revisit this - I'll ask some questions.

Is it acceptable for an officer to shoot _anyone_ running towards them?
Is an obviously disturbed and mentally ill person not a credible threat if they reach you?

I look at this case, and Ferguson and I see parallels to the ultimate decision to shoot. Whereas Ferguson included prior crimes and violence against the officer, Atlanta occurred before the officer was harmed. What's the defining difference between the two cases?

There have to be some qualifiers in there. If its some naked guy hopped up on drugs? Probably not. Some guy with a crow bar bent on killing them? Probably. The real question is what were the police planning on doing when they caught up to the guy? If they knew he was drugged up and crazy, why would they be surprised when they got there and he was drugged up and crazy?

The issue is that police are now trained to fear for their lives at all times. If that means shooting some unarmed people, so be it. The police are also trained that they are above the law.

If I shot an unarmed man, I would be arrested and charged with 2nd degree murder. I would fully expect it and wait for my day in court. If a cop does it, he gets paid time off and no charges.

 

[Ichinisan]

http://countercurrentnews.com/2015/03/nypd-says-people-walking-into-police-bullets/

OK. You were saying that Smobilekat's comment was based on this. Thanks.

No matter. I just wanted to bring up the possibility of bath salts regardless of what his quote was referring to.

 

[Ichinisan]

If I shot an unarmed man, I would be arrested and charged with 2nd degree murder. I would fully expect it and wait for my day in court. If a cop does it, he gets paid time off and no charges.

You probably wouldn't be charged if you were in an SYG state and the person was coming at you in a threatening manner. Well, if that could be reasonably proved / argued anyway.

 

[rudeguy]

You probably wouldn't be charged if you were in an SYG state and the person was coming at you in a threatening manner. Well, if that could be reasonably proved / argued anyway.

And where would that be proven or argued?

I live in a SYG/Castle Doctrine state. That being said, I can use deadly force when I fear death, rape or great bodily harm that could cause death. A bad guy having a weapon of any kind has already been deemed a clean shoot but a naked guy with no weapon? NO

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I bet a person could use deadly force and cite fear of great bodily harm as the reason if someone was running towards them in a threatening manner. Most normal people do not go out in public nude nor do they bum rush people.

 

[Ichinisan]

And where would that be proven or argued?

I live in a SYG/Castle Doctrine state. That being said, I can use deadly force when I fear death, rape or great bodily harm that could cause death. A bad guy having a weapon of any kind has already been deemed a clean shoot but a naked guy with no weapon? NO

Florida zombie cannibal did some pretty nasty damage without a weapon. The first thing that would come to mind: "Unstoppable bath salts rampage. DO NOT LET THIS GUY NEAR ME."

The nakedness is a pretty clear sign that someone is mentally unstable with unpredictable behavior. Charging toward me, I'd defend myself if I was armed with a weapon.

 

[rudeguy]

Florida zombie cannibal did some pretty nasty damage without a weapon. The first thing that would come to mind: "Unstoppable bath salts rampage. DO NOT LET THIS GUY NEAR ME."

The nakedness is a pretty clear sign that someone is mentally unstable with unpredictable behavior. Charging toward me, I'd defend myself if I was armed with a weapon.

Please answer my question.

Where would that be proven or argued?

 

[TechBoyJK]

Yet another example of where the very existence of a gun was the cause of the killing. Because if there'd been no gun, there could be no claim that "He was going for my gun." And without that claim (and without a gun), the officer would have hit the man with a likely non-lethal blow to the head with his baton.

But we all know that guns don't kill people; only people kill people.

The last part is true.

No matter how you spin it, inanimate objects don't decide to kill people.

Also, it should be noted, that going for a gun is naturally going to be interpreted as life threatening, so if you go for someone's gun and get shot..... Well, as Louis CK puts it 'but maybeeeee'.

 

[rudeguy]

The last part is true.

No matter how you spin it, inanimate objects don't decide to kill people.

Also, it should be noted, that going for a gun is naturally going to be interpreted as life threatening, so if you go for someone's gun and get shot..... Well, as Louis CK puts it 'but maybeeeee'.

Have you seen all the videos posted where cops put in their report "the suspect reached for my gun" or "the suspect lunged at me" and then the video clearly shows no such thing happening?

 

[Ichinisan]

Please answer my question.

Where would that be proven or argued?

You wouldn't have to argue it. If you declare it was self defense in your description of the incident, and they don't have evidence or contradictory statements from witnesses at the scene, they aren't supposed to even charge you. SYG laws are supposed to protect you from being charged at all.

Why are you being hostile to me?

 

[CZroe]

I am sick and tired of this "it's wrong to shoot someone who is unarmed" BS assumption that idiots are running wild with. Where did anyone EVER get the idea that it was only OK to shoot someone who has a weapon? George Zimmerman was having his head pounded into concrete. Was George Zimmerman supposed to wait until Trayvon took his weapon or picked up a blunt object?! Hell no. Was Officer Wilson supposed to wait for Michael Brown to take his gun, arm himself, and threaten him first? Hell no. What would he have returned fire with?!

Using a firearm for protection does not require you to be injured first. It does not require the threat to have an equivalent weapon. It does not require the threat to have ANY weapon. It requires a justifiably perceived threat to your personal health and safety. You do not have to sustain bodily injury to justify a response. I should not have to explain this.

If we're going to revisit this - I'll ask some questions.

Is it acceptable for an officer to shoot _anyone_ running towards them?
Is an obviously disturbed and mentally ill person not a credible threat if they reach you?

I look at this case, and Ferguson and I see parallels to the ultimate decision to shoot. Whereas Ferguson included prior crimes and violence against the officer, Atlanta occurred before the officer was harmed. What's the defining difference between the two cases?

Isn't it obvious? Dorian Johnson, the media, and the false witnesses creating a false narrative.

 

[Subyman]

Couldn't be bothered to grab the pepper spray instead of the gun? Sadly, this is how cops treat people experiencing mental health issues. They must have more mental health training as the article says.

 

[zephyrprime]

Using a firearm for protection does not require you to be injured first. It does not require the threat to have an equivalent weapon. It does not require the threat to have ANY weapon. It requires a justifiably perceived threat to your personal health and safety. You do not have to sustain bodily injury to justify a response. I should not have to explain this.

Isn't it obvious? Dorian Johnson, the media, and the false witnesses creating a false narrative.

But doesn't the law in the US prohibit using disproportional force to defend yourself? I believe that one of the earlier posters was right in saying that if a civilian used a gun to protect himself from an unarmed man, he would get a second degree murder charge.

 

[CZroe]

Couldn't be bothered to grab the pepper spray instead of the gun? Sadly, this is how cops treat people experiencing mental health issues. They must have more mental health training as the article says.

Was it ever confirmed that the man was mentally ill as opposed to being deranged under the influence of something?

 

[DrPizza]

There have to be some qualifiers in there. If its some naked guy hopped up on drugs? Probably not. Some guy with a crow bar bent on killing them? Probably. The real question is what were the police planning on doing when they caught up to the guy? If they knew he was drugged up and crazy, why would they be surprised when they got there and he was drugged up and crazy?

The issue is that police are now trained to fear for their lives at all times. If that means shooting some unarmed people, so be it. The police are also trained that they are above the law.

If I shot an unarmed man, I would be arrested and charged with 2nd degree murder. I would fully expect it and wait for my day in court. If a cop does it, he gets paid time off and no charges.

Wait. So, killing is justified in a one-on-one physical confrontation if the aggressor toward the police officer has a weapon? You're aware of some facts about reality, I hope. The officer has a lethal weapon. Someone is charging toward them. If there's a disparate amount of force, e.g., a strong officer against a 4th grader, then no need to shoot. But, if the person charging the officer is anywhere near the size of the officer, then you don't know who's going to win a fight. (And, let's not bring up the retarded logic of earlier in this thread where magically, policemen are the strongest, best trained fighters in the entire population.) Winner of the fight has a gun. And, you said it's okay to kill a person charging the officer if that person is armed.

So, by your logic, it's okay to kill someone with a weapon. If the person doesn't have a weapon, then you need to fight them. If they lose, all's well in Rudeguy's universe. But, if they win, then the officer is justified in shooting... the guy who now has the officer's gun. Sounds like you're having difficulty thinking things through to their conclusion.

 

[CZroe]

But doesn't the law in the US prohibit using disproportional force to defend yourself?

It wouldn't be disproportionate if you believed the person was a threat to your life. A gun isn't some mythical device that can only be used against projectile weapons. Where would you draw the line? A baseball bat? Brass knuckles? Being curb-stomped by a sneaker?

I believe that one of the earlier posters was right in saying that if a civilian used a gun to protect himself from an unarmed man, he would get a second degree murder charge.

He was dead wrong. It happens all the time. People are only charged when there is reason to believe that they acted illegally.

 

[rudeguy]

You wouldn't have to argue it. If you declare it was self defense in your description of the incident, and they don't have evidence or contradictory statements from witnesses at the scene, they aren't supposed to even charge you. SYG laws are supposed to protect you from being charged at all.

Why are you being hostile to me?

Then why did you say I could argue it?


Your ignorance on this subject isn't keeping you from opening your head hole. That's why I'm being hostile. Every time we talk about serious things like this, morons like you come into the thread and try to derail it.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

But doesn't the law in the US prohibit using disproportional force to defend yourself? I believe that one of the earlier posters was right in saying that if a civilian used a gun to protect himself from an unarmed man, he would get a second degree murder charge.

There are a number of examples of people killing unarmed intruders, assailants etc... and successfully using stand your ground laws (or similar styled laws, castle doctrine etc...) as a defence.

 

[rudeguy]

There are a number of examples of people killing unarmed intruders, assailants etc... and successfully using stand your ground laws (or similar styled laws, castle doctrine etc...) as a defence.

Its usually Castle Doctrine. Castle says I can assume anyone trying to break into my home, business or vehicle (if I'm in it) is out to do me harm. SYG says I can defend my life. 2 different points.