Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
I don't think anyone is happy about it... we just understand it.
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
PSA: Don't shoot the police in the face
Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I don't think anyone is happy about it... we just understand it.
AnthroAndStargate
Golden Member
Same difference. To accept it puts us all at danger for this. While my position in society is such that I hopefully will never have to fear being imprisoned and/or subjected to the potential for brutality I still realize that it is immoral in all regards. I fear a government (or police force) that has the power to dole out justice as it sees fit. Officers should be bound to uphold the law in all circumstances - and if they can't then they should be held accountable - just as this scumbag will be held accountable for his actions. I thought that is why so many ATOTers were pro-gun anyway - is because they are afraid of a strong armed government?
This guy was guilty - they should have let him taken his whippings in a legal and normal manner. By doing this they lessened their own moral authority and made the issue of him being a murderer not the only focus of the case.
Mardeth
Platinum Member
My theories of possible scenarios:
1. The fall injured him.
2. While being under custody, handcuffed, he bit a person in the arm and wouldnt let go, resulting in panic and beating him to submission and thus also resulting in the mask.
Who knows, so many possibilities... Usually dont support police brutality but smiled while watching this...
1. The fall injured him.
2. While being under custody, handcuffed, he bit a person in the arm and wouldnt let go, resulting in panic and beating him to submission and thus also resulting in the mask.
Who knows, so many possibilities... Usually dont support police brutality but smiled while watching this...
Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
Y'know... In order for that to happen an unbelievable series of events would have to unfold. The same chain of events that would give you the power ball lotto. Was it wrong that the guy got beat down by the cops. Sure. Am I (or apparently anyone else on my side) upset over it... no.
This isn't a question of cops dispensing justice as they see fit. This is cops beating a guy for killing a cop. I don't believe for one second that if this guy had raped and killed your mom that the cops would have done that to him. They would have found him and arrested him. Nothing more, nothing less. "I'm sorry for your loss Mr Anthro but we have the guy in custody"
To turn this into a what-if scenario for every crime on the books is silly. This is a specific case. Involving the death of an officer. In cases like this, I have no problem with what happened.
I agree with you police are not judges, however I think in this case it was pretty clear he just shot someone in the face. I'm definitely not saying that police should be obligated or should beat him, although I honestly couldn't hold it against them in this case. The guy shot a police officer in a police station, most likely on camera, with many witnesses and a ton of ways to ID him, being found not guilty would be insane.
In short, police are only human, they were in all likeliness good friends with the officer, if someone shot your best friend do you think it would be easy to react in a completely calm, non-aggressive manner?
Yes it would be ideal if the police could react calmly, however he really did ask for it.
Im sorry that I sounded like a wacko. I was half drunk last night and was very pissed. But I do stand by what I said.
http://www.courts.state.ri.us/superior/pdf/01-2086.pdf
Some of you guys need to read that.
http://www.courts.state.ri.us/superior/pdf/01-2086.pdf
Some of you guys need to read that.
mugs
Lifer
Man, I hope you never serve on a jury. :Q
This is exactly why I don't support the death penalty. Call me a bleeding heart liberal if you want. I have no qualms about a murderer getting the death penalty. I DO have qualms about an innocent man getting the death penalty. I don't know that we've ever executed an innocent person, but I do know that innocent people have been released from death row after being exonerated. That's proof enough for me that we probably have executed innocent people.
People say "yeah, but he had his chance to prove he wasn't guilty and he didn't do it." Yeah, sure. I bet the guy on death row was just too lazy to put together a good defense.
If you're bored, watch Twelve Angry Men. Amazing film. One of my top 10 of all time.
Also read The Innocent Man by John Grisham (which I didn't realize until about halfway through was non-fiction. 😱 And even after realizing that, I could hardly believe it).
waggy
No Lifer
posting while drunk is never a good idea. i know..i do it far to much myself! heh
same. I used to be 100% for the dealth penalty. then started hearing about all the people where "railroaded". it got so bad here in IL that they stoped it until they can get the processed fixed. that was like 8 years ago.
In some cases ,such as this one where there is 100% proof he did it, I am all for it.
mugs
Lifer
I read most of it. But I think the fact that most people here would have had no problem with the police beating a suspect before arresting him is just as disturbing as if the police actually did beat him. Because even though it was determined that they didn't beat him in this case, we're not naive enough to think that it never happens.
exdeath
Lifer
So he only fired once after getting the gun? How was the gun taken from him after the fact?
They should have just opened fire on him immediately during/after he shot the officer, with the gun still in his hand.
End of story, case closed, and there would be nothing here to argue about.
I'm all for keeping authority in check, but this would have just been a simple clean cut case of self defense. When you start getting elaborate with beatings, torture, revenge, emotions, etc. you start getting into the 'cruel and unusual punishment' and 'policy brutality' crap. Not that I support police acting as judge and executioner, but shooting someone for shooting you would be well within their rights and official duties more than a beating would. Just a simple by-the-book cause and effect outcome. Easier to just to shoot the guy in the chest 20 times while he has a gun in his hand, and be done with it.
Better yet, the old woman should have had a hand gun and took care of this guy before it even got this far. In situations where your life is in imminent danger and you have to make a split second decision without the convenience of a salaried authority presence, you DO HAVE the legal right to be judge, jury, and executioner. Just play it by the book and keep it clean, keeping in mind responsibility for your actions after the fact.
They should have just opened fire on him immediately during/after he shot the officer, with the gun still in his hand.
End of story, case closed, and there would be nothing here to argue about.
I'm all for keeping authority in check, but this would have just been a simple clean cut case of self defense. When you start getting elaborate with beatings, torture, revenge, emotions, etc. you start getting into the 'cruel and unusual punishment' and 'policy brutality' crap. Not that I support police acting as judge and executioner, but shooting someone for shooting you would be well within their rights and official duties more than a beating would. Just a simple by-the-book cause and effect outcome. Easier to just to shoot the guy in the chest 20 times while he has a gun in his hand, and be done with it.
Better yet, the old woman should have had a hand gun and took care of this guy before it even got this far. In situations where your life is in imminent danger and you have to make a split second decision without the convenience of a salaried authority presence, you DO HAVE the legal right to be judge, jury, and executioner. Just play it by the book and keep it clean, keeping in mind responsibility for your actions after the fact.
Thank you for being the voice of reason. I imagine that someone could get pretty messed up by jumping three stories. That's a long ways. Also, it sounds like his face or other body parts may have gone through the window glass before his jump. http://www.boston.com/news/local/articl...an_arraigned_in_officers_death/?page=2
Also, having worked for a law enforcement agency, I can say that internal affairs takes issues like this very seriously and does investigate them thoroughly. In this case, even the FBI came in.
A cop friend of mine was kicked off the force for striking a suspect who lunged at him, while the suspect was in cuffs. He says that he was not aware that the suspect had already been cuffed. Well, IA did their investigation and he was fired. He had been on the force for over 12 years, and this was his first violent infraction.
RagingBITCH
Lifer
"Look at what they did to him"
How about look at what he did to the cop that he shot in the face? Not only did he jump out of a 3 story window, he ran away or tried to. He got what was coming to him.
How about look at what he did to the cop that he shot in the face? Not only did he jump out of a 3 story window, he ran away or tried to. He got what was coming to him.
exdeath
Lifer
I don't condone police enforcing their own version of justice or anything like that, as they are supposed to be neutral in that regard, and everyone has a right to trial and all that, even scum. But he definitely deserved it, no doubt about that. No doubt the officers will be dragged through the coals to be made an example of and to appease a few whiny 'two wrongs don't make a right' white guilt illiterate college hippies who hate police and honest hard working people more than murderers and rapists who are down on their luck and deserve some slack :roll:
I can't believe some people though are crying about disproportionate use of force though.
He killed someone so proportionate force would have been to kill him in return. But he is still alive. What does that tell you? Strictly speaking from a personal view, I think the guy got a pretty good deal after all.
I can't believe some people though are crying about disproportionate use of force though.
He killed someone so proportionate force would have been to kill him in return. But he is still alive. What does that tell you? Strictly speaking from a personal view, I think the guy got a pretty good deal after all.
all this aside, FBI cleared it as not brutality, and I would be one of those folks who is saying "yeah, beat the crap out of him" from the sidelines. Having said that, our justice system, as flawed as it is, is the best that we have, and we have got to stick to it, or else we are screwed.
Everyone who says "well, he's guilty" before having a trial may not have all the facts. What if it was uncovered that this was a cop who was bad, and had raped the mans young daughter, and was laughing at him. I'm not saying cops are bad, or child molestors, or that even that would be a "reasonable" reason to kill someone, but WE JUST DON'T KNOW. That is why we have a trial, with evidence presented. It's hard, because, as mentioned, our emotions will often pull us one way or the other (mine were like "beat that mofo down!) but before the government dispenses justice, we have to take a step back, gather all the facts, and let someone who can (mostly) set aside emotions and have a clear head when judging a person for accused crimes.
Everyone who says "well, he's guilty" before having a trial may not have all the facts. What if it was uncovered that this was a cop who was bad, and had raped the mans young daughter, and was laughing at him. I'm not saying cops are bad, or child molestors, or that even that would be a "reasonable" reason to kill someone, but WE JUST DON'T KNOW. That is why we have a trial, with evidence presented. It's hard, because, as mentioned, our emotions will often pull us one way or the other (mine were like "beat that mofo down!) but before the government dispenses justice, we have to take a step back, gather all the facts, and let someone who can (mostly) set aside emotions and have a clear head when judging a person for accused crimes.
exdeath
Lifer
Yup. Emotions and jumping to conclusions and lashing out to punish someone... on the other hand it swings all too often the other way when peoples emotions also let people OFF who SHOULD be punished because the jurors are guilted into feeling sorry for some wacko who had a bad childhood or because hes black or brown, even when there is video of the guy doing what he did and smiling at the camera.
I think appealing to emotions, race, economic status, etc, all that ****** should be banned from being ommited in court cases as irrelevant. "You can hear the fear in her voice on the phone! Therefore he killed her!!!! *gasp*" No more court room drama. Just present facts A vs facts B and let the jury decide. Lawyers shouldn't even be allowed to see or talk to the jurors. So sick of the soap operas that go on in our halls of justice making a mockery of our great system, directed by the lawyers and filmed by the media.
I could care less if the guy was disturbed as a kid then or not, did he pull the trigger THAT time, yes or no?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
