police-involved shooting in Kenosha, WI...unrest ensues

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Stokely

Platinum Member
Jun 5, 2017
2,224
2,994
136
Doesn't matter what his past is, unless we have moved into the "Judge Dredd" phase of law enforcement for real. We have a right to trial in this country. If the cops ran his background and saw a history that mandated they use caution, fine. "Caution" is not shooting a guy in the back. The job of a cop is to uphold the law, and it can be dangerous--as someone else said, if it takes higher pay to get more responsibility (and a better crop of recruits surely) then lets pay them. I'd rather pay them than umpteen billions for yet another damn malfunctioning fighter jet we don't need.

I wonder what the national reaction would be if black cops were shooting white people with "iffy" justification at this pace? We'd be seeing nooses, crosses (more than we do now) and even more of white militia freedom morons out to get them some dark meat.
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
Doesn't matter what his past is, unless we have moved into the "Judge Dredd" phase of law enforcement for real. We have a right to trial in this country. If the cops ran his background and saw a history that mandated they use caution, fine. "Caution" is not shooting a guy in the back. The job of a cop is to uphold the law, and it can be dangerous--as someone else said, if it takes higher pay to get more responsibility (and a better crop of recruits surely) then lets pay them. I'd rather pay them than umpteen billions for yet another damn malfunctioning fighter jet we don't need.

I wonder what the national reaction would be if black cops were shooting white people with "iffy" justification at this pace? We'd be seeing nooses, crosses (more than we do now) and even more of white militia freedom morons out to get them some dark meat.


It certainly matters what is past was. He was supposedly being arrested for a violent criminal warrant. If the cops were arresting him based on the warrant then they knew about his violent criminal past. They need to take that into account when dealing with the situation. The fact you don't seem to understand that is crazy.

As for your other bogus claim, that happens fairly often as well. It just that the media doesn't go all viral about it.


 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
34,004
8,040
136
Yeah they certainly don’t have time to do anything else when their guns are already drawn! Do you see the problem or do we need to dumb this down for you?

The reason they drew their guns on the man clearly happened off video, before it started.

The consequence should be an arrest.

In an ideal world maybe. In reality, which seems awfully difficult to impress on many of you posters here, is that if you want to see a Court room instead of a morgue then you WILL stop moving and put your hands up. Not go reaching into a vehicle. America is armed and police react accordingly.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
Same old posters always coming in to do whatever they can to build up the victims as monsters. They don’t have any concrete information but they thought they would post what they heard anyway.


Sorry guy, I don’t care what kind of monster you think the victim was, I don’t want an obey or die type law enforcement in this country.

Yeah, damn posters always waiting for facts and presenting the evidence instead of jumping to irrational conclusions and frothing at the mouth.

Who could imagine doing something sane and rational like.... seeing what the facts are?
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,548
15,424
136
Yeah, damn posters always waiting for facts and presenting the evidence instead of jumping to irrational conclusions and frothing at the mouth.

Who could imagine doing something sane and rational like.... seeing what the facts are?

It’s not facts you fucking idiot, it’s hearsay and the poster even said as much.

Your shtick of playing the forum idiot is getting really tiring.
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
It’s not facts you fucking idiot, it’s hearsay and the poster even said as much.

Your shtick of playing the forum idiot is getting really tiring.

Yep. I said so far these are claims and I've linked to the articles where i am getting my info at least. Since there isn't any confirmation yet on anything, I said I am withholding judgement. At the same time, there are many people out there rioting, assaulting, and destroying neighborhoods over this incident without actually hearing the full story either. People are in a frothing frenzy over this story already without having any info for the tail end of a fuzzy video clip that could possibly be taking the entire scenario out of context.
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
80,287
17,079
136
Doesn't matter what his past is, unless we have moved into the "Judge Dredd" phase of law enforcement for real. We have a right to trial in this country. If the cops ran his background and saw a history that mandated they use caution, fine. "Caution" is not shooting a guy in the back. The job of a cop is to uphold the law, and it can be dangerous--as someone else said, if it takes higher pay to get more responsibility (and a better crop of recruits surely) then lets pay them. I'd rather pay them than umpteen billions for yet another damn malfunctioning fighter jet we don't need.

I wonder what the national reaction would be if black cops were shooting white people with "iffy" justification at this pace? We'd be seeing nooses, crosses (more than we do now) and even more of white militia freedom morons out to get them some dark meat.
Yeah if their argument is the guy was genuinely dangerous then they fucked up anyway, cuz they didn't handle the situation properly at all. Should not have let him get around his car and into the drivers door. They fucked up, they know they did, now they're trying to rationalize it. Just like EVERY OTHER SHOOTING caught on video since cell phones started getting cameras.
 

Stokely

Platinum Member
Jun 5, 2017
2,224
2,994
136
We'll agree to disagree. People shouldn't be executed for their past transgressions by cops on the street. If the guy was a clear and present danger to the cop, then he has the right to defend himself. The guy wasn't, and the cop didn't. I'm hoping the cop gets tossed in prison long enough to know quite well that he fucked up, and ideally other cops would learn from that guy's mistake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
It’s not facts you fucking idiot, it’s hearsay and the poster even said as much.

Your shtick of playing the forum idiot is getting really tiring.

I said WAIT on the facts. Christ, we can already see with your emotional post that you are frothing at the mouth EXACTLY as I stated.

Do you know what WAIT means? It means they currently aren't present... hence... WAITING on them.

DEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeerp
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
15,284
13,581
146
Here is the issue, if Jacob was armed with a knife, fighting back, threatening to get his gun to shoot the officers, and is bending down to reach for something I don't see what more the officers could do at that point. It is shitty even with those points in the previous sentence to shoot him in front of the kids, but I really don't see a way from them to do anything else if the above is true. Here is a video of what happens if a suspect the police are wrestling with to arrest breaks free of restraint, gets to his vehicle, and the cops don't fire.


The cops wind up shot instead.
So three trained officers are incapable of subduing a man with a knife? How do bouncers or prison guards handle situations like this? Why didn't they have pepper spray?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
34,004
8,040
136
Your argument is simple.

Resisting arrest is punishable by death.

Let your right-wing authoritarian flag fly man. Own it.

The use of force is used to protect people from an armed population, yes.

Right wingers celebrate it as a "good shoot". We all know how wrong that is. It needs no explanation.

Likewise, Left wing loons are emotional train wrecks and have dropped all concept of reason. Spouting such madness as reaching into a vehicle should just be ignored. That a person under arrest should just ignore the police and do whatever they want without consequence. There was a violent confrontation. There were tasers used. Then by his continued actions he threatened the officers.

Then you have the madness of talking about due process and Courts. No shit people are afforded that. AFTER THEY SURRENDER. He could have been peacefully detained. He chose to fight. He chose suicide by cop. His actions did that. Your words mean less than his actions, and his actions condemned him to the use of deadly force to stop the threat.

I look at this situation and I expect every officer in that position to do the same. You do not let the suspect reach into the unknown lest you forfeit your own life. I understand exactly why this happened. As a nation I want us to massively restrict guns. I want us to re-examine policing and the policies and standards that lead to violent conflicts. There are much more egregious cases than this one. And it's not just Blacks being killed by police either. We are Americans, and WE ALL suffer the consequences of the Second Amendment. Where we all fear for our lives at the barrel of a gun, where the only solution thus far is to be armed yourself and hope you can fire first. To kill or be killed. That is the violent and deadly American way of life. That is what everyone on that street faced that day.

I would see it changed. I would see policy enacted to save lives and prevent these outcomes. But I will NOT fault these officers for doing their job correctly given the circumstances.
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
So three trained officers are incapable of subduing a man with a knife? How do bouncers or prison guards handle situations like this? Why didn't they have pepper spray?

As a bouncer once, you don't handle a person with a knife. If they aren't already in the place then you shut the doors and call the cops. If they are in the place you get everyone away and call the cops. You don't mess with someone with a weapon if you can contain the situation and refrain from engaging without anyone getting hurt.

Like the above video shows of two officers at that traffic stop. They had their tazers out first. They both used them. Once they saw it wasn't effective, they tried switching to their carry guns. In that time the guy managed to get to his gun as well to shoot back first.

Also, pepper spray isn't always effective like tazers aren't always effective. Also many places have ordinances against pepper spray but not tazers.

Suffice it to say, not every situation is going to go perfect. It can get messy. Even still, tens of thousands of police encounters don't end up like this every year. Out of the encounters where the police have to subdue someone even those rarely resolve in a firearm being discharged. I agree that the world would be a better place if the police never had to shoot someone, but that isn't realistic. It is going to happen. Officers in the line of duty are going to have to use deadly force.
 
Last edited:

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
The use of force is used to protect people from an armed population, yes.

Right wingers celebrate it as a "good shoot". We all know how wrong that is. It needs no explanation.

Likewise, Left wing loons are emotional train wrecks and have dropped all concept of reason. Spouting such madness as reaching into a vehicle should just be ignored. That a person under arrest should just ignore the police and do whatever they want without consequence. There was a violent confrontation. There were tasers used. Then by his continued actions he threatened the officers.

Then you have the madness of talking about due process and Courts. No shit people are afforded that. AFTER THEY SURRENDER. He could have been peacefully detained. He chose to fight. He chose suicide by cop. His actions did that. Your words mean less than his actions, and his actions condemned him to the use of deadly force to stop the threat.

I look at this situation and I expect every officer in that position to do the same. You do not let the suspect reach into the unknown lest you forfeit your own life. I understand exactly why this happened. As a nation I want us to massively restrict guns. I want us to re-examine policing and the policies and standards that lead to violent conflicts. There are much more egregious cases than this one. And it's not just Blacks being killed by police either. We are Americans, and WE ALL suffer the consequences of the Second Amendment. Where we all fear for our lives at the barrel of a gun, where the only solution thus far is to be armed yourself and hope you can fire first. To kill or be killed. That is the violent and deadly American way of life. That is what everyone on that street faced that day.

I would see it changed. I would see policy enacted to save lives and prevent these outcomes. But I will NOT fault these officers for doing their job correctly given the circumstances.

Arguing with nickqt is like arguing with an emotional toddler that is mentally slow. It's easy, but mostly pointless. He's just going to respond back by calling you racist or some other childish pejorative and pretend he got a sick, burn cut-down in to win the argument. He'll slap his own hand in congratulations and the decide to climb out of his grandmothers basement to make a hot pocket to celebrate.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: s0me0nesmind1

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,548
15,424
136
Yeah if their argument is the guy was genuinely dangerous then they fucked up anyway, cuz they didn't handle the situation properly at all. Should not have let him get around his car and into the drivers door. They fucked up, they know they did, now they're trying to rationalize it. Just like EVERY OTHER SHOOTING caught on video since cell phones started getting cameras.

Exactly! And a lot of people jump on board to rationalize something that shouldn’t have happened in the first place. Instead of everyone agreeing that it shouldn’t have happened and pushing to get needed reforms through, we get to have a debate about why the victim deserved it because he was a bad guy.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,548
15,424
136
The use of force is used to protect people from an armed population, yes.

Right wingers celebrate it as a "good shoot". We all know how wrong that is. It needs no explanation.

Likewise, Left wing loons are emotional train wrecks and have dropped all concept of reason. Spouting such madness as reaching into a vehicle should just be ignored. That a person under arrest should just ignore the police and do whatever they want without consequence. There was a violent confrontation. There were tasers used. Then by his continued actions he threatened the officers.

Then you have the madness of talking about due process and Courts. No shit people are afforded that. AFTER THEY SURRENDER. He could have been peacefully detained. He chose to fight. He chose suicide by cop. His actions did that. Your words mean less than his actions, and his actions condemned him to the use of deadly force to stop the threat.

I look at this situation and I expect every officer in that position to do the same. You do not let the suspect reach into the unknown lest you forfeit your own life. I understand exactly why this happened. As a nation I want us to massively restrict guns. I want us to re-examine policing and the policies and standards that lead to violent conflicts. There are much more egregious cases than this one. And it's not just Blacks being killed by police either. We are Americans, and WE ALL suffer the consequences of the Second Amendment. Where we all fear for our lives at the barrel of a gun, where the only solution thus far is to be armed yourself and hope you can fire first. To kill or be killed. That is the violent and deadly American way of life. That is what everyone on that street faced that day.

I would see it changed. I would see policy enacted to save lives and prevent these outcomes. But I will NOT fault these officers for doing their job correctly given the circumstances.

You are right, you don’t let a suspect reach into a car. The fact that he was able to means the cops didn’t do their job properly, the fact that they didn’t do their job properly doesn’t give them an excuse to murder someone.
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
Exactly! And a lot of people jump on board to rationalize something that shouldn’t have happened in the first place. Instead of everyone agreeing that it shouldn’t have happened and pushing to get needed reforms through, we get to have a debate about why the victim deserved it because he was a bad guy.

I think the shirt grab as he is bending over is a last ditch effort and one more of reaction at that point than expected results. They already tazed him, tackled him, and tried to hold him down. He still got away and the police then pulled out their firearms while ordering him to stop and drop the knife. Again I am not saying he had a knife, but every witness statement has said the cops were ordering him to drop one. He didn't stop or listen to commands after physically resisting already.
 

nickqt

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2015
7,695
8,093
136
Arguing with nickqt is like arguing with an emotional toddler that is mentally slow. It's easy, but mostly pointless. He's just going to respond back by calling you racist or some other childish pejorative and pretend he got a sick, burn cut-down in to win the argument. He'll slap his own hand in congratulations and the decide to climb out of his grandmothers basement to make a hot pocket to celebrate.
No, I call you a white supremacist who defends white people murdering black people on video because that is who you are and what you do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Pohemi

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2004
9,452
12,988
146
I would see it changed. I would see policy enacted to save lives and prevent these outcomes. But I will NOT fault these officers for doing their job correctly given the circumstances.
Highlighted remains to be determined, and at the moment is just assumptions from you based on not-too-clear video and what limited info has been released by the media (and not official statements from police or investigators).
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
No, I call you a white supremacist who defends white people murdering black people on video because that is who you are and what you do.

I have never defended a white person murdering a black person. You want to call me that because you can't ever argue a case based on what has been presented. So you just resort to name calling as usual.
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
Highlighted remains to be determined, and at the moment is just assumptions from you based on not-too-clear video and what limited info has been released by the media (and not official statements from police or investigators).

I agree on that as well. Has yet to be determined how good or bad of a job they did based on what we know so far. If you want my speculation though based on what I've seen, I think they could have done a better job at preventing him from reaching a knife to make them back off. I am not saying he had a knife, but it strikes me odd that the police were on top of him and then completely backed away to draw their firearms while yelling "Drop the knife" as seen on video and from witness testimony about the actions of the officers at least. Maybe they thought he had one, but I am not sure. Also, we don't know of anything that was happening before that initial altercation leading to the cops trying to physically arrest him. Maybe there had been more than a single attempt. We don't know. We don't know all that was said and done. We only got bad video of fleeting moments from the incident without much context. Certainly not enough evidence to burn half of Kenosha and nearly kill another officer by throwing a brick at his head from behind by rioting about the situation.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
Doesn't matter what his past is, unless we have moved into the "Judge Dredd" phase of law enforcement for real. We have a right to trial in this country. If the cops ran his background and saw a history that mandated they use caution, fine. "Caution" is not shooting a guy in the back. The job of a cop is to uphold the law, and it can be dangerous--as someone else said, if it takes higher pay to get more responsibility (and a better crop of recruits surely) then lets pay them. I'd rather pay them than umpteen billions for yet another damn malfunctioning fighter jet we don't need.

I wonder what the national reaction would be if black cops were shooting white people with "iffy" justification at this pace? We'd be seeing nooses, crosses (more than we do now) and even more of white militia freedom morons out to get them some dark meat.
The fact that there is no national reaction to white victims of police shootings answers your question. That is because when the victim is white, the national media doesn’t gravitate to the story, and even when they do, if the shooting victim has even a hint of a criminal past, the public largely shrugs it off, even in situations when there could have been a nonlethal resolution. You see this often in suicide by cop scenarios.

Blacks are disproportionally victims of police violence, but the race of the officers is not necessarily a factor.