6/1/2015--The Counted: People killed by police in the US, During 2015 = 470

Posted by Zenphamy 4 years, 4 months ago to Government
244 comments | Share | Flag

The Guardian has compiled a unique and detailed, searchable, and interactive database and presentation of Americans killed by Police this year (470 through 6/1). There are other sites that are out there gathering information from citizen volunteers, but this one by The Guardian offers more detail and info in one place than any other I’ve seen. For those interested from either side of the issue, I highly recommend checking it out.

Needless to say, since my last post on this topic, America’s police have maintained their nearly 4/day kill rates and for the most part, their DA’s have continued justifying and protecting them from the consequences.

I reviewed one in particular from Salt Lake City last year, just today that is horrifying to watch from the Officer’s body camera. The complete video/audio was just released to the public. You can view it at : http://thefreethoughtproject.com/graphic...

As I viewed this shooting, the first thing that came to mind was the revelation of the 'No More Hesitation Target' story from last year about shooting range targets designed to remove any hesitation in real life street encounters between police and citizens that included pregnant women, mother with child, grade school age children, the elderly, etc. One story can be reviewed at Reason Magazine: http://reason.com/blog/2013/02/25/law-en...

From the article:
“According to a statement the company sent Reason last week, members of the law enforcement community inspired Law Enforcement Targets Inc. to design the "No More Hesitation" series in the first place:
The subjects in NMH targets were chosen in order to give officers the experience of dealing with deadly force shooting scenarios with subjects that are not the norm during training. I found while speaking with officers and trainers in the law enforcement community that there is a hesitation on the part of cops when deadly force is required on subjects with atypical age, frailty or condition (one officer explaining that he enlarged photos of his own kids to use as targets so that he would not be caught off guard with such a drastically new experience while on duty). This hesitation time may be only seconds but that is not acceptable when officers are losing their lives in these same situations. The goal of NMH is to break that stereotype on the range, regardless of how slim the chances are of encountering a real life scenario that involves a child, pregnant woman, etc. If that initial hesitation time can be cut down due to range experience, the officer and community are better served.”

From my memory of the stories about the targets and their use, what I don’t remember reading was how long Police Depts. had been training their officers at shooting ranges in this ‘No More Hesitation Shooting’, or what DHS did with the $2,000,000 worth of those targets that they had already ordered And I don’t doubt that training has a great deal to do with the number and types of un-armed shootings we’re seeing.

From the SLC shooting linked above, I have no doubt that Officer had passed his ‘No More Hesitation’ training class with an A+.

Let me repeat one sentence from the article above: "one officer explaining that he enlarged photos of his own kids to use as targets so that he would not be caught off guard with such a drastically new experience while on duty."
SOURCE URL: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/jun/01/the-counted-police-killings-us-database#


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by Esceptico 4 years, 4 months ago
    A quick Google search to compare life insurance rates for police officers and truck drivers finds the truck drivers have a higher risk and pay more. So much for the police putting their lives on the line every day writing traffice tickets or invading (110+ invasions per day in US) homes for victimless crimes.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by XenokRoy 4 years, 4 months ago
    My question would be how many police have been killed by people?

    I am not sure the anti-cop position is justified. I am sure it is in some cases, but most I think are not.

    We live in a world that has people attempting to get us to kill and other to create a crisis and then take advantage of it. In most cases the cops are also victimized by the elite who are looking for a way to gain greater power and use reports just like this one to create a stir and and with it the crisis they need to move forward.

    Do not get me wrong the article is interesting but to me it does not tell the whole story just an element of something I think is much larger.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Herb7734 4 years, 4 months ago
      Hello XR
      I agree. In the last week there has been a rash of police killings, or should I say assassinations. With the raging against police in the last couple of months, there seems to be a growing attitude that killing cops is a justifiable practice.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 4 years, 4 months ago
    The Reason article is particularly interesting. I have conjectured for some time that desensitization was a large part of ongoing law enforcement training.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by hattrup 4 years, 4 months ago
      I have a first hand account also of law enforcement applicant in S. California being rejected during interview for lack of hand-to-hand fighting interest/experience.
      It seems to me that bullies are attracted to the police profession, and the recruited process likely encourages this - instead of watching out for it.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by khalling 4 years, 4 months ago
        I remember one conversation I had with a young SWAT officer. they were brought in to apprehend an escapee from another state who was sighted in our state on a road near where I lived. they decided to take him down at a very busy intersection. multi-car pile up, many injuries, but they got their man. he was all excited and gleeful as he related the incident. I calmly asked about the injured bystanders. he never once mentioned that safety of citizens was his number one objective. It was to apprehend the suspect. apparently at any cost. the last is my opinion
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by strugatsky 4 years, 4 months ago
        Of course bullies are attracted to the paramilitary. Even Machiavelli wrote about that. When one has limited mental abilities, but is not satisfied with a low paying job, the paramilitary is an easy and a natural way out - it may not pay much, but he can be the king of the hill. And for women in the police - she can display a fountain of testosterone! What the limited ability cadres don't seem to understand is that they are used by the system in order to direct the citizen's hatred toward them, instead of the higher echelons, where it evil comes from. When something goes wrong, they are fed to the dogs, as in Baltimore. The cops alienate the citizens and lose their support, while their bosses see them as expendable cannon fodder. Ah, the price of stupidity...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
      What struck me was that we were so upset by those targets last Feb/13, when we learned about it, but no-one has talked about it since. Particularly after so much attention has started to focus on police shootings.

      Our attention spans are so limited.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  ObjectiveAnalyst 4 years, 4 months ago
    Yes, some police are too quick on the trigger. The Salt Lake City video is quite disturbing. The justice system that would exonerate this cop and a government that would encourage aggressive policing and make so many laws that everyone is guilty of something are all culpable to some degree. The victim could have just as easily been deaf. Just because a suspect does not respond immediately, does not a license to kill provide.
    Sad. :( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FDlcwU-...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 4 years, 4 months ago
    From the Utah shooting it states the murder was justified by the judge in the case. What is the US becoming?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by XenokRoy 4 years, 4 months ago
      Murder is often justified, even when the law does not recognize it.

      I have a friend who was a member of the swat team for 20 years that went after escaped convicts. He would often say the nicest people in prison are the murderers. Why? many of them are no threat to anyone.

      They walked in on there wife with another man and killed that man.

      They had some guy stocking their 15 year old girl after attempting rape once and the dad took care of the problem and is now in Jail.

      The first of those to cases I would like to think I would just kick them both out, but I could kill for that if I did not keep myself in check. It would be much like Hank, a great victory to let that guy and my wife leave the room alive.

      The second I would do, without hesitation and if needed go to Jail for it. A scumbag would be gone and my daughter would be safe. It would be justified and right regardless of how the courts see it.

      I do not know enough about that Utah case to really state one way or the other, but until I research it myself I will not judge one way or the other.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
        Watch the video I linked. The other two cases have little relevance to this posting.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by XenokRoy 4 years, 4 months ago
          I did watch the video, I cannot see (sun glare) if the person is armed, or simply acting aggressive in some way. I also had no sound, which I do not think there was any.

          I can see that the Cop gets out of the car, and pulls his gun. He then peruses the individual who is moving away from him, but turns back towards him before getting shot.

          I could come up with dozens of scenarios where this would be legit, and dozens where the cop simply killed the guy cause he wanted to based off the video.

          Again I wont make a judgement based off that video. A few questions that would have to be answered.

          Why did the guy that got shot move away from the officer after the gun was pulled?

          Why did the guy turn back towards the office after moving away?

          At the very least his behavior was not reasonable for the situation. If a cop pulled a gun on me I am not walking away or towards him, my hand are going out away from my body and I am going to state that I do not want any trouble and there is no need to pull the fire arm. I am going to face the cop and stand still.

          The behavior of the man shot here is not what I would expect were I cop and pulled my gun. It would make me worried that he moved away to draw a weapon and turned back to use it on me. There is nothing in the video I watched that would make this a unreasonable assumption as to what he is doing.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by strugatsky 4 years, 4 months ago
            First, have you ever had a gun in your face? Either by a cop or a criminal? (there's an imperceptible difference...) People don't always act in a "reasonable" way when unexpectedly faced with a gun. I don't suggest you try it, but trust me, that is usually the case.

            Second, if you, as a citizen, were searching for a person with a gun, who, according to the report, did not commit a crime, but had only displayed a gun (or someone reported a displayed gun, or maybe even made up a report of one) and came across this fellow, who did not display a weapon, did not make any threatening moves against you (in fact, he continued to move away from the cop) and you killed him - would there be any doubt in anyone's mind that you would have committed a murder? Does Herr Cop have special privileges that exempt him from murder? Really?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
              Yes and yes. And not too long after return from Nam. Won't tell anymore about either case, but it wasn't a smart move for either of them.

              No doubt you would be charged with homicide.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by XenokRoy 4 years, 4 months ago
              Yes I have had a criminal pull a gun on me and attempt to rob me, Also one with a knife. Both my own fault to some degree. I use to go for walks when out of town for work in the evenings and would often end up in neighborhoods I should have not been in. Both these incidents were in such cases.

              Watch the video again.

              The man was shot in the chest, in the front. He tuned back on the cop. The cop had no way of knowing if the man had a gun now or not. The mans hands were hidden.

              In hindsight he was unarmed, at the moment, if it were me. I would have shot as well because I am not waiting for the guy turning back on me to shoot first.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by strugatsky 4 years, 4 months ago
                So, as far as expecting calm, rationale and appropriate behavior in such circumstances, especially from people that may lack those qualities under the best of circumstances - do we agree that it is something that may not always happen? I sure hope that we also agree that being killed because one does not immediately stand at attention to Herr Cop is not a desirable option, for the society, that is....
                Yes, the guy turned around, while kept backing away from the cop. Yes, his hands were behind. Question for you - do you carry a gun? If you do, you should know that shooting someone just because you can't see their hands is a straight ticket to welfare for life, and if you're in Arizona, that would be welfare for life while wearing pink panties. If the cop had any part of the vessel where his brains were supposed to have been filled with the grey matter instead of testosterone, he may have realized, while observing the guy's back while he approached, that even if he had a gun back there, wearing, or almost not wearing, his pants, the way that they were hanging there, he could not have possibly quickly drawn a gun from that wardrobe, especially when the cop already had his gun drawn and aimed. And yes, the difference I'm talking about is perhaps just a second or so, but that is a difference between a legitimate stop and murder. If the cop does not have the training to differentiate the two, he should get pink panties and get on the life welfare dole while pondering the dilemma.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • -1
                  Posted by XenokRoy 4 years, 4 months ago
                  Yes people may not act rational and calm, but they face the consequences.

                  The second or two that the cop delayed, had he delayed could have meant he died rather than this guy.

                  I do carry a gun at times, but have never had to shoot anyone. I have had an occasion where I pulled a gun and leveled it at someone. The situation quickly deescalated once that happened. I hope I never feel the need to fire at someone.

                  If I were in the situation this cop is in and the person I had drawn a gun on suddenly turned back at me I would not wait to get shot, I would fire and it would be justified because in my mind I am not waiting until I can see the gun to react, it is likely to late then. I would be in fear for my life when he turned.

                  From my perspective this would be an entirely different thing had the cop shot him in the back while he was running away from the cop.

                  Are you telling me this video does not present a case for the officer to have felt that his life was about to be threatened and at serious risk? I can not say that from the Video. Fact is there is plenty in the video that would give cause for concern for your own safety when a guy who ran, hands hidden from view turns back at you.

                  Do you wait to see what his intent is, based on reaction time to such situations if you do it could get you killed. If you do not you may kill someone that is not a threat. Only hindsight will tell you which it was.

                  In this case it was not an armed person attempting to take you down, it was just an irrational person acting foolishly. It could have just as easily been a guy turning back with a glock-19 about to pump 17 9mm rounds into you and in that case the cop would have died had he delayed shooting. That is why the judge ruled as he did, and properly.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
                    Roy, IMO you should not be carrying a gun. At least until you get some better shoot/don't shoot training.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by XenokRoy 4 years, 4 months ago
                      You are entitled to your option, but I live in Utah. I know the law here on shot/don't shoot. I have several friends that are police in the state and go recreational shooting with a friend that is a sheriff for the county.

                      From what is in the Video this officer was likely justified in the shooting. I do have concerns about why he pulled his gun in the first place. That is not covered by the video or the article and it is possible, even likely that a mistake was made at that point that if corrected would have kept the situation from escalating to shots fired. I cant judge that.

                      This is my main point. Were judging this cop based of a small bit of information and there is not enough to condemn the cop. What is there could be interpreted many ways. A judge interpreted as justified and off what I see it may have been, I wont judge that for myself because I do not know enough of the context around it. That is my main point.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by jdg 4 years, 4 months ago
                        Just as illegal killing is sometimes right -- legal killing is sometimes wrong. If your reasoning starts and ends with "it was justified under Utah law, therefore it's OK" you should not be trusted with a gun OR a badge.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by XenokRoy 4 years, 4 months ago
                          My reason would never start with law as the basis, that's a slippery slope, but the courts tend to do it that way.

                          Based on what we know of this case it may or may not have been justified. I think he pulled a gun in a situation that did not warrant it, and it escalated to a situation that did warrant the shooting.

                          The area of my concern is why did he pull the gun in the first place? That cannot be seen and that context is critical to judging this video and cop.

                          I do not think I would have ever pulled my gun out in the first place. Its there for needed defense for me and that's it. Why this guy pulled his gun in the first place is what needs to be known and really is not.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
                            Roy; I doubt that we'll ever be able to agree on the 'shooting' part of this situation. But you have hit on a significant part of this event, Why the hell pull the gun with the kid walking away. The kid started walking away even before the cop got out of his patrol car. Bringing the gun into the mix in the first place is the right issue to address, IMHO.

                            Once that gun is pulled and aimed, every thought in your head, from NMH training, begins with does he have a weapon, is he pulling it, etc.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by strugatsky 4 years, 4 months ago
                        I suggest that you show this video to you cop friends and ask them what would they do if the shooter was you (i.e., not in uniform)? Let's say, you are a concerned, conscientious citizen who decided to apprehend a possible criminal. The rest, as in the video. Do you think that the state of Utah would even let you out on bail? Sorry, but I do agree with Zenphamy that you should not carry until you review the law, including similar cases. You are on very thin ice here. Depending on the color of the victim and aggressiveness of the DA, you may not even escape murder 1 charges.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by XenokRoy 4 years, 4 months ago
                          funny you should mention that because I did just that to one (a sheriff) who had a response just lke mine, insufficient information to decide one way or the other.

                          There is going to be context this video and the article do not show. That needs to be known before jumping to judgement.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by strugatsky 4 years, 4 months ago
                            Roy, no one is saying that context is not important. My question to you was to ask your sheriff friend whether, based on only the information in the video, he would arrest you? And I am inclined to guarantee that he would. Perhaps, with additional information, you would not be found guilty. Perhaps, but doubtful. However, once arrested, at the very best, you are looking at several tens of thousands of dollars to the lawyers. You will probably lose your job and under the best of circumstances, your life will never be the same. Why will the cops arrest you - quite simple - the cops do not work for you, for the public or for the victim. They work for the State and their functions are 1) to protect the State and the important people writing their checks and 2) to bring a perpetrator to the justice system. Notice, they are not interested in justice - that is the courts' job. Now, with the information in the video, do you really think that your sheriff will drag in a dead, unarmed kid, or would he arrest you with the gun still smoking as evidence?
                            You have mentioned before that you have pulled a gun on someone and that de-escalated the situation. Based on the case law, you have been incredibly lucky - all the person had to do, regardless of his previous actions, is to call the police and tell them that you were brandishing a gun. Automatic arrest. The case law is straightforward here - if you did not shoot them, that means that there was no imminent threat to your life. Once they are the first to call, they gain an automatic advantage as a perceived victim.
                            The point that I'm trying to make here, is that in a similar circumstance a citizen who would do what we saw in the video, is done for, while the cop nonchalantly walks away because the system protects its own, civil servants or murderers alike.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            • Posted by XenokRoy 4 years, 4 months ago
                              Their was no chance of me being arrested. A person broke into my home in the middle of the night. I called the Cops and put a shotgun on him till they came. Luckily he choose to put down his own weapon and wait rather than run. I would have hated to have to fire.

                              I know several officers who see their job as protecting the people. I know one whom I do not care for the rest are good people attempting to do a good job at what they see the job as. Protecting the people.

                              I would tend to agree with your two points at some point up the food chain within a police department. I would not agree with it for most of the police based on those I know.
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
                            I think there's plenty of context in the video and the audio. The kid began walking away when the cops pulled in and before the cop got out of his cruiser, and when the cops finally got his attention, he turned around and saw a gun pointed at him, then he started backing up either holding up his pants or reaching to turn off his iPod. The kid was scared to death when he turned and saw a gun aimed at him by an over excited cop. And as it turned out, the kid was not the man they were supposedly looking for and had no weapon of any kind.

                            I've been in gunfights, been in an ambush, and been shot. You don't freeze. You move as fast as you can, you duck and dodge, and try to find cover. You freeze you're dead.

                            The cop pulling and aiming his weapon put himself into a shoot/don't be shot scenario that was unwarranted.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            • Posted by strugatsky 4 years, 4 months ago
                              The fact that the second cop did not draw his weapon is an indication that the first cop was looking for action...
                              Again, the report was of a person with a gun. So what? Doesn't a US citizen have a Constitutional right to have and carry a gun? Could the report be false? Was anyone hurt, were shots fired? No, no and again no. Sure looks that the only criminal here is the one in blue (should really have been pink by now...).
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
                Roy; that cop and I, and I hope you too if you carry, have had a hell of a lot more training in shooting situations than any kid on the street. In the first case, the cop had no business whatsoever in having his gun out and pointed at the guy while he was walking away and the cop was trying to get his attention. A Quick Trip is not a combat zone. There was no threat. The cop had on body armor and he had a buddy walking up on the kid from his right side (with his gun holstered).

                The cop's unreasonable initiation of contact was what ultimately led to this kid's death which I saw no reason for, as well as a lot of stupid decisions or reactions by the cop during the encounter. The cop's reactions immediately following the double tap are particularly telling. He showed no concern for the victim, he showed no adrenaline reaction, and no regret. This was a bad shoot. If I'd ever had such an idiot in a squad or team with me, I'd have gotten rid of him so fast, his head would have spun.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by XenokRoy 4 years, 4 months ago
                  From what I see in the video I wondered why the cop had his gun out at all, but have no context to judge as to why he had it out.

                  I also wondered what his buddy could see, and if they were in communication. Some context around what lead to the point of the gun being pulled and what verbal communication occurred between the officers and the dead man would help to add context.

                  With what I know there are scenarios in which the shooting could be legit. I do not judge it based of a video clip which I know tells only part of the story.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
            Roy, I appreciate that you can argue a lot of things, but my point is that we have trained the everyday patrolman to 'shoot first and ask questions later.' Added to that we've even given them practice with programs like 'No More Hesitation'. Those are quite simply, combat environment training. That's where those types of programs originated and that's where they should have stayed. A Quick Trip is not a combat zone, and you don't pull a gun until you're ready to shoot. A cop that is so frightened that he has to do that has no business being armed.

            They have turned us into 'the enemy' in their minds, their training, and their actions - and that is wrong.

            I grew up with cops that not only never shot anyone--never pulled their gun on duty in a life time career and didn't wear body armor.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by XenokRoy 4 years, 4 months ago
              I can see your point.

              We do definitely have a culture, much more so, of shoot first and ask questions later. The Cops are being taught to do it.

              At the same time the "Useful Idiots" are being taught to resist. That senseless violence is good.

              The result is a civil unrest brewing that the "Obama" camp and their like needs in order to put in place a military state where our National Socialist Party within the US can come out of hiding behind the new US gestapo.

              I realize that is a bit out there, but I think its the end game. Much backs it up.

              I see your argument but I do not blame the police for it, or the rioting hordes. I blame the people responsible for training like "No More Hesitation" and Mayors who state that violence is justified to those that are rioting in their own city.

              "No More Hesitation" is a symptom of a larger picture to create civil unrest and cause a crisis for those in power to take advantage of. I may be wrong in how they wish to take advantage of it, but they do wish to do so in some way.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
                Roy, I oan't say that you're 'out there' or wrong. But somehow, the cops need to get the message that they also are citizens and their compliance with their orders and wrong training won't save them when it comes their turn.

                What I hope to point out with Posts like this one and get discussion of is for recognition that there is a problem. And citizens that sit back and buy off on the cop as 'Hero' need to reassess their understanding of what government really is and how it affects all of us.

                The last cop shooting death in OK was a pastor with his pickup stuck during the recent floods, simply asking for help from the Highway patrolman that shot him.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by XenokRoy 4 years, 4 months ago
                  I agree there is a problem, but I think it is bi directional. More cops are dying and more people are dying.

                  I think BOTH are the result of a government looking for a emergency in order to use it to push the agenda.

                  The one you describe with the pastor may be more cut and dry and may be a good example of the cop going to far and committing murder. I believe it happens, but most of the time there is justification for the cops actions.

                  We have mayors stating the violence towards the cops is justified and ok. That is stupid. We have cops saying excessive force (not called that) is necessary to control the situation. That is stupid. If we are still a civilized people we sit down and talk about these things. We discuss we negotiate and we trade. We do not degrade to riots and excessive force. In my view it will continue to escalate from both sides until both sides step back and realize they are being played by their "officials" against one and other to create a Crisis.

                  I think within the cops they are setting up (through training and attitude) a police force that will do more oppression than police work. They wish to create Obama's "Civil Defense Force" which he stated we need when first running for president. Obama could not make that happen so he is attempting to federalize and centralize our police force and turn them into the "Civil Defense Force" he wants. I do not disagree with that and I think that is what your getting at in the end. The cops are being trained in that direction and they do need to realize it. I agree with that.

                  I do not agree with an example of a specific case where it is quite likely that the cop acted quite appropriately for the situations based on the information he had at the time and the actions of the target.

                  Overall I agree with what I think your getting at. Cops are being trained to become a federally controlled force of oppression against the citizens. I recognizing it would be a good thing to have cops become aware of this and stop it. I think we are to far down the road, any cop that recognizes and rejects becoming a force of oppression will loose their job over some technicality. The very acts that are occurring by the police and by citizens against the police will create the crisis that will allow a new federal police department that will be the start of federalizing and militarization all police everywhere. I do not believe that anything will stop that unless the masses (even more than the police) stop buying what they are being sold.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by wiggys 4 years, 4 months ago
      You ask "what is the US becoming/" A third world country or is it now? my opinion yes!

      If all of the police officers were from prior military service specifically those who served in combat were allowed to apply for jobs as police officers we would see a different personality of man working at the job. Most were never in the military so they have this superiority complex and with a gun in hand they believe they are god. They just want to kill someone. The beginning of the end result is what we are seeing such as in Utah. I would not be surprised to learn that they are trained to shoot first and go on, not even ask questions. I maintain it all comes down to the fact that we have a population that is just plain dumb. Yes Khalling what you are seeing (A=A) is what we have become, it is our reality.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
        Most people in the military wouldn't qualify you want the shooters not the moochers. But it's two completely different mind sets although the REMFs try to use one to guide the other. Soldiers kill people and break things They have certain rules to follow but the rules are different although soldiers and police have one thing in common. A country that doesn't back them up and WTF they represent the main two legitimate reasons for government to exist.

        As for the numbers presented completely insufficient to draw any conclusions nor were the ones presented given the present climate in the USA enough to draw much interest. Now had you mentioned the rise of federal police departments and their powers in the last 30 years...

        As for No hesitation? Wow they got a name for it finally? In our department it was no warning shots, no wounding shots, shoot twice, the 158 grain .38 cal. lead bullets were banned in favor of 39 + P 125 grain SJHP. We used a .357 revolver as it was both stainless and could handle the souped up .38 round. Surprise for some all of that and .357 are all the same diameter. the rest is advertising. so is the .380 round AKA 9mm kurz. Why do police and soldiers fire so many 9mm rounds? Because it takes a lot of them per target but they sound so PC. Unarmed but on angel dust? Better bring Dirty Harry along.

        As for insurance risk? Not even apples an organges more like apples and potatoes. Has to do with proven accident rates and their penchant for driving excessive hoursl. Same reason an 18 year old girl pays more insurance than a 40 year old man. Proven accident rates.

        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
          Sounds like you enjoyed being the 'Statist Shooter'. I wouldn't be surprised if you called yourself an 'Operator.'
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
            you assume far too much but that doesn't count as the information I asked for. I lived in the old days when it took more than one day. None of which answers the question nor provides the information requested. Although that is in and of itself an answer. Red herring number one - X Ring.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
              I fail to see any information request in your reply. Let me review; 'you want shooters not the moochers', 'had you mentioned the rise of federal police', 'In our department it was no warning shots, no wounding shots, ...', 38+P 125 grain...', 'it takes a lot of them per target...', 'Has to do with proven accident rates and...'

              If there's a request for information in that or a question. please direct me to it.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 4 years, 4 months ago
    maybe its the police that should not carry guns, rather than us citizens.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
      Agreed.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 4 years, 4 months ago
        there are a lot of non lethal ways to subdue the bad guys I would think in this day and age. Shooting is a bit of a gross solution to this- other than to let the police exert their ultimate power to kill
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  Technocracy 4 years, 4 months ago
          Any method forceful enough to subdue can also have lethal results depending on circumstance. Either with or without intent for a lethal result.

          Any use of force to overpower is sufficient to kill if applied in the right or wrong way.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by jdg 4 years, 4 months ago
          The police abuse pepper spray and Tasers as well -- both by using them on people who haven't used or threatened force, and by using them as torture devices.

          If I had my way, cops convicted of repeated abuses such as these should be literally disarmed by sentence of court. Make them quadriplegics, and let them live the rest of their lives afraid, just like they tried to make us. It should take only a few dozen cases to really "encourage the others."
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
    ""As for the numbers presented completely insufficient to draw any conclusions "

    this and similar comments are found throughout the comments.

    Therefore I draw no conclusions. I can draw some partial possibilities and one probable solution. but absent any more information it is possible, entirely possible something will be left out or not properly addressed.

    Some things can be addressed.

    FACT - NHS or whatever it's called has been around for decades. Nothing new there. No great controversy in Hogans Alley. (Dirty Harry II), Great applause in MIB I, the only negative was Harry's big bad .44. Per your professed love affair with the Constitution the public made no outcry from that day to this. Nor did your answer have much to do with anything. for example I could easily say, "You must be a left wing liberal or worse a RINO or an unknown quantity hawking Rogaine with equal validity which is - none. The suggestion to change the laws was as it happens completely in line with the Constitution and has a great deal of merit. It establishes one of three choices. The other two are give them greater powers and modify the current system especially in view of the seeming reticence to take over the job.

    FACT - The way facts are presented are often designed to draw wrong conclusions. A great example is children killed by weapons. The term child includes up to just before the 21st birthday and does not include what the ''child'' was doing at the time such as gang on gang shootings, nor do the facts which are nothing more than hyped up media propaganda define armed or unarmed. To a little old lady three or four 18 year old fists constitutes arms.

    I have not nearly enough information to form any conclusion too include your agenda and solution. Strangely enough I probably agree. If I knew what those two points might be? Still we progress.

    Three issues make that four.

    First. Are the issues valid? If so were they addressed in a court of law? If no is/are the local public doing anything to make a change. Recall the judge, fire the police chief, force a change in training standards? Based on a percentage of incidents as compared to crime rate, percentage of criminals percentage where criminality was in doubt or not proven (which seems to be the complaint possibly), followed up by further investigation or a civil suit action? On the other hand was there none of the above. to delve deeper. Was/is there any unspoken unstated conditions? Racism, sexism, religious intolerance, If not why not? What was the background of the individual? Lay Preacher who ran the local food bank? Rap Sheet Artist with five pages to his/her history. Finally what are the local people doing about it? Do they consider it to be as important as outsiders. If so or not why so or not.

    Second. Two wrongs make a right. This is one of the main principles of law If the police officer violates the law AND evidence shows the individual was nevertheless guilty the result should be two prosecuted wrongs. Any other conclusions to my way of thinking are just another version of greater or lesser evil. It would certainly stop or slow down or preclude misconduct. This consideration is one of jurisprudence with other specifics not mentioned.

    Third. If the public insists on arming police with popguns which leads to firing a larger number of rounds I(same thing in the military I suspect (except the Marine Corps) to get the job done is another issue This love affair Crapsters have with a nine milla me tah doesn't prove anything either way. What we do know is when you are forced to use a substandard round with a really big magazine of seventeen you shoot more rounds. I some department are not allowed to fire warning shots, wounding shots or less than two shots Some changed the 158 grain lead round nose to a ta .38 plus P 125 grain semi jacketed hollow point which would certainly do the job.Pay attention I just switched from semi-automatic pistol to a revolver because all of the above are fairly standard. Add in the federal agencies you may include 10 mm or .40 cal

    Fourth? What is the US becoming? That one is easy. A Police State compared to previous decasdes, but it has nothing to do with a situation that has been around for decades perhaps centuries. Not only that we have an infant Protective Echelon in place and being developed. A big wall between government and citizens.You don't like that? Most do as they voted it in consistently since the mid nineties or before. Most of the one's whose ballots were counted. Overwhelming landslide. 95% of the votes cast sometimes. You'll find the development of the police state has continued regardless of which candidate was elected.

    What is true is the public gets what it wants and got what it voted for. Now they are stuck with it. That is the real problem. Getting something useful done to a. change the situation and b. still provide police protection to the extent allowed is a much more real problem. Probably something will be done. Whether it helps or hinders is conjecture.

    But that doesn't provide any useful information not suggestion on how to correct the situation as far as this thread is concerned.

    Conclusion? Another valid discussion down the drain for lack of core information. Were it not for some useful comments.

    Begs the question as part of the answer. Two major legitimate reasons for government to exist are police and military protection of the group. I would add fire fighters myself. Do we a. get rid of them. b. Keep them c. Modify their use.

    Or is this just a witch hunt, perhaps a venting of rage against the machine?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
      Well, a remarkably well thought out and written comment. Thank you.

      I will differ with you on the legitimate reasons for government. Rather than protection of the group, their purpose is to provide retributive force for individual rights violations and to provide a military to prevent invasion by an outside force. Fire fighting as a responsibility of the government, I have to think about.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by khalling 4 years, 4 months ago
      how about "reasonable cop." that's what I want. a cop that assumes I am innocent because I have not been proven guilt yet. yes, I want my cop to hesitate, unless he sees a firearm. and then, it's shoot to kill.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
        Excellent. And too make sure he or she is reasonable and some damn sure aren''t I keep both empty hands in plain view with license, registration and insurance in one hand and pen in the other. the pen always throws a loop.

        What's that for.

        To sign the ticket.

        Do you know why I pulled you over?

        No. But if you are correct it's to sign the ticket.

        And if not?

        I put the pen back in the glove compartment - after you have departed the scene..

        I tend to drive too fast though I did get popped for doing 65 in a 55 for driving too slow one time. I took that one to court.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Ben_C 4 years, 4 months ago
    Where is the outrage? Of the 472 reported deaths by police 238 are white and 136 are black. The rest are unknown, Hispanic, or Asian. Shouldn't there be a national outcry by white ministers about racial profiling of white people and the almost 2 to 1 ratio of killings? Where is the white Al Sharpton when we need him. It is safer to be black than white. And if this website information is true then why doesn't the media report this data?
    The Ferguson effect is in full force and I suspect the unwritten police agenda is to let the bad guys kill off each other with hopefully minimal collateral damage. Proactive policing got them in trouble with The DOJ so the Ferguson effect is the result. But no outcry if a white person is killed. Wonder why?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jdg 4 years, 4 months ago
      Reason has reported two or three such cases in the last year. It happens to whites a lot less often than blacks (per capita), though that is changing.

      I hope we can raise awareness enough that whites scream about it as much as blacks do. When *that* happens, we'll start seeing reform candidates for chief of police.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Riftsrunner 4 years, 4 months ago
      It isn't reported because it isn't news as far as they are concerned. The white cop/black suspect killing feeds into our national guilt over how blacks were treated in this country up to 40 years ago. And what makes it worse is that blacks harass other blacks who try to work within the system and get educated. And they call anyone who uses proper English "talking white". How can we purge this mentality from black communities while they feel like they are being targeted by cops?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by blackswan 4 years, 4 months ago
        The "talking white" issue is one of laziness vs. ambition. If one in the community can learn to "talk white" and be numerate, then that exposes the laziness of those who won't (not can't). It's the same thing that Ayn Rand described in one of her essays, where the conscientious worker was fired, because he showed up his co-workers, and the co-workers threatened a strike if he wasn't let go. So, we have a community where ambition is punished, and thuggery is extolled. Now, imagine that mentality facing a symbol of authority.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
        The racial issues arise as a result of the socialist welfare system that tells so many people that they're victims and have always been victims. To purge the problem in any racial group, eliminate any and all government welfare systems, completely.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
      I don't do racist but US citizens of caucasian descent 55% and there has been claims that 25% are Latino which means Iberia, Europe mixed with native population but not always leaving 20% as African descent (minus a good deal of north Africans and south Africans) and Asians which includes the middle east but not Turkey.. You left out Ira Hayes and friends and the neighborhood. involved. As to your last question i can tell it was because they were sexists as easily seen by the use of the word perSON. the terms have been so balkaniized they essentially are meaningless unless as a racial slur. or reverse racist slur. A good start is get the US government out of the business of being the foremost proponents of racism.If you riead just below by riftsrunner maybe hoods need to be earmarked for literates and illiterates but then where would all the Californians go?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Abaco 4 years, 4 months ago
    Over 100,000 will be killed this year, willingly, by their doctors prescribing drugs to them. By "willingly" I mean the medical system expects that many to die from known drug reactions and has, essentially, actuaried (not a word?), that into the business. I think the last annual number I saw was a few years back and it was 108,000 killed. My own dad almost became such a statistic a few months ago. I had to tell his doctor to back off. The doctor actually admitted that I was right. (amazingly)

    My point is that we're really just livestock to the system. To see the farm is to leave it...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jdg 4 years, 4 months ago
      Risks that the (competent adult) victim voluntarily takes for a greater benefit shouldn't even count. They are accidents (accidental suicides, if you prefer).
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by XenokRoy 4 years, 4 months ago
      Livestock is eaten, not the comparison I would use but I agree with the concept :)

      We are more like the slaves. Used to produce for the master. Used to create crisis that the master can use to their perceived betterment. For the few of us that have the brains to attempt not to be slaves tools such as the useful idiots, IRS, Osha and other government organizations can be employed to break us through some perceived civil process that is not really civil at all.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
        But how about the individual Americans that are the parts and pieces of these organizations, 'Just following orders'.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by XenokRoy 4 years, 4 months ago
          Slaves as well. Some duped, some willing for whatever it is they get for giving up their freedom. The youtube video of the "Obama phone" lady comes to mind. A slave duped into being one by the "free stuff" she gets that has cost her much more than it would have to earn the money to buy the phone herself.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
          Just following orders or the Nuremberg Defense has long been regarded as a voluntary admission of guilt coupled with a plea for clemency, mercy or a lighter sentence. It's modern counterpart is Victim Of Circumstance.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
            Yes, I agree. But we have so many Americans that don't have a good history education and are so many years away from WWII that they don't know what it was like. On top of that, our kids are being taught to obey, don't question, just obey.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 4 years, 4 months ago
    The best counter to the adversarial cop vs community situation is to create more interaction and opportunity for personal contact. Something as simple as waving to the cop in the cruiser who passes helps develop empathy. Community support for fallen or injured officers, including funeral attendance or creating funds to help families of those officers help as well. Police respond particularly well to support of their K-9 members, as they're as prone to affection for their dogs just like the rest of us.

    Viewing law enforcement as the enemy is counterproductive. We create enemies by allowing distance between us and them, and making sure that distance is kept narrow is the best defense against a trigger-happy police force.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jdg 4 years, 4 months ago
      The people didn't choose to become enemies of cops. It's the other way 'round.

      Laws against too many things (and police willingness to enforce them) are part of the problem, too. But at some point, a cop or even a soldier has to say "Enough!" or be one of the bad guys.

      If a cop doesn't think he can be a cop without committing aggression, then the honorable thing to do is get a different job.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
      Didn't you read within the last 2 months of the white guy in Florida that was pulled over by the SWAT team in their MRAP for 'waving' at the cops as they drove by? Doesn't look like they responded well to being 'waved' at by a lowly citizen.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by DrZarkov99 4 years, 4 months ago
        Lots of missing information. Did the police think he was signaling he needed help? Did he appear somehow "suspicious"? Was he driving a vehicle that might have matched one involved in some kind of criminal activity? Why was a SWAT in an MRAP in that vicinity - some kind of emergency situation? Making judgments on partial information can lead to the wrong conclusion.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
          The cops were returning from a day training on the freeway. The guy gave them the finger. Turns out the judge explained to them, that was not a crime nor probable cause for a stop.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • -1
            Posted by DrZarkov99 4 years, 4 months ago
            I said WAVE, not shoot them the bird!
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by khalling 4 years, 4 months ago
              what difference does that make?!!! do we not have 1st Amendment rights?!!!
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by DrZarkov99 4 years, 4 months ago
                Of course we have 1st amendment rights, but no one guarantees there won't be consequences for particularly obnoxious expressions of opinion. The reaction by the police in this instance was doubly unwarranted, because they represent a government entity. The driver, however foolish his actions may have been, has good grounds for a lawsuit.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by khalling 4 years, 4 months ago
                  understood, however when police man speed traps, etc. people get POed. They are looked upon like jerks sitting there with speed guns instead of monitoring truly disruptive traffic. I can see it happening. Maybe if in the academies they were trained to show resistance to being flipped the bird instead of desensitization by shooting at pictures of children and women-btw, that is training for war, imo, not to be neighborhood policeman. Now I am aware of tough inner city neighborhoods. and realize additional training is needed for such areas-but all of the US is not an inner city hellhole and neither our our roads glutted with banditos.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • -2
                    Posted by DrZarkov99 4 years, 4 months ago
                    It's always easier to be the critic than the actor. To be a good cop requires a unique form of schizophrenia: gentler and more tolerant of obnoxious fools than any ordinary person would be, but able to switch at an instant's notice into full-up security mode, ready to use lethal force if needed. Any cop who's responded to a domestic call can tell you just how scary and unpredictable that can be, with the possibility of the victim suddenly turning lethal force on the cop for restraining their significant other. The job is often thankless and always dangerous, and Monday morning quarterbacking from couch potatoes with easier lives make it hard not to think of the public as the adversary.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
                      It might make sense for the victim in a domestic violence situation to learn to deal with their situation instead of relying on the cop to do so.

                      And the job they do should be thankless--following nonsense laws because they're ordered to and spending their time collecting money from people to fund their operations instead of watching for true safety problems.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by khalling 4 years, 4 months ago
                      minus 1 for name calling. This is a legitimate issue to discuss and your attempt to shut the discussion down with an appeal to authority and name calling does not help your argument.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by DrZarkov99 4 years, 4 months ago
                        What name-calling? If I point out that there's more than one side to a discussion, that should be censored? If you and Zenphamy want to demonize all law enforcement as thoughtless oppressors, that's it, the "science is settled?" There are lots of aspects of improper police training that should be addressed, but helping to further a hostile attitude toward police in general serves no one well.

                        Regards your point about speed traps, the whole idea of using police to generate revenue is imposed by politicians. A cop is not usually happy to be sitting on the side of the road when he could be chasing real bad guys. All I'm saying is that without being willing to take a walk in the other guy's shoes, it's hard to find sympathy for one's complaints.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
                          The man enforcing a bad law or regulation is as guilty as is the politician as is the cop that doesn't do everything possible to stop the bad apple cop in his organization. Why should anyone respect someone that sought out the job he's got doing these bad things instead of quitting and finding an honorable job.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by  $  ObjectiveAnalyst 4 years, 4 months ago
                            I feel that way about IRS agents and all other bureaucratic regulators with too much power and a big brother attitude. I could not be a tax collector and sleep at night while remembering the history of the Boston tea party and the other reasons for our founding. The taxes then were a mere pittance compared to the punitive taxes on success we endure now.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by khalling 4 years, 4 months ago
                          "Monday morning quarterbacking from couch potatoes with easier lives make it hard not to think of the public as the adversary."

                          it was a reasonable assumption that you intended this comment for at least me and perhaps Zen. I have not been critical of all police. I have been critical of training methods and how things have changed over the years. I am highly critical of asset forfeiture. and yes, bad shit goes down and cops can be corrupt. so unless we know them individually, why do we have to tke a patriotic view of their "service." People who dive working for oil rigs have a much more dangerous job and we don't put them on pedestals. and that's part of the problem for me. It's a job, a career. It involves danger. It attracts cocky individuals who like the idea of a uniform and authority. -and hopefully, to make communities safe. I was just enjoying a conversation with a gentleman from Deming, NM. Here was the scam the police were running there. They pulled over individuals arrested them for suspicion of drugs and ordered they get colonoscopies to check body cavities for drugs. In ALL cases, those charged were innocent and the hospitals stuck them with the bills for the procedures done against their will. How sick is that? having a healthy skepticism of ANYONE who has authority over you-is a good thing. My husband and I used to cross the border and head into Deming all of the time. Luckily we did not have any run-ins. Oh, there's border stops-you are not a US citizen entitled to the rights of citizenship 100 miles (that's right) within any international border. It's no man's land
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by DrZarkov99 4 years, 4 months ago
                            First, I didn't intend the comment as an insult, but how the police tend to view people without any idea of their profession are all too ready to tell them how to do their job. As retired military I had many "eye rolling" moments when I had to listen to people without a clue tell me they knew better how we should be doing our job.

                            Your point about the oil rig divers is important, because most of us never have any contact with these folk, or with many other people with dangerous jobs (like Alaskan fishermen - the most deadly American profession). By contrast, we have contact with a police presence almost daily, so it's hard not to have some opinion about their behavior or job performance. We all generally wish there was a little more slack, but cities make money from non-violent offenders, and the cops have to enforce the rules, even when they don't personally think it's a good use of resources. I personally find it hard to have a favorable view of law enforcement when they deliver a document about how I've violated yet another nonsense city ordinance, or get a ticket for overtime parking.

                            It takes self-discipline to remind yourself that the other person has to live by different rules, and act in accordance with those rules, even when they make your life uncomfortable. We should focus on the people who make up the rules, the politicians. They're the ones who create the adversarial environment between the public and law enforcement.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
                              And I'll say again that he politicians couldn't enforce those bad laws and bad practices if cops refused to enforce them or refused to be the enforcers for those bad governments.

                              They took the same oath to the Constitution that I and you did. It's time they started obeying that oath. It doesn't disappear because a politician tells you to do something else.
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                              • Posted by DrZarkov99 4 years, 4 months ago
                                Enforcing traffic laws isn't unconstitutional, just less exciting than apprehending serious criminals. Enacting warrantless searches is another matter, and police need to be held accountable for violations of any of our constitutional rights. The courts have recently begun to take unlawful property seizure by law enforcement more seriously, prosecuting some offenders, so there may be some hope of rectifying that rights violation.

                                The use of body cameras and public rights to the video should help prevent serious violations by law enforcement. The flip side of that is that those cameras should help police against false claims of abuse, and I have spoken to some in law enforcement whose reaction has been "about time."

                                I'm not against police having military gear, but its use needs to be restricted to only the most serious situations. Proportional response should be the rule.
                                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by smichael9 4 years, 4 months ago
    This is a horrifying clip to watch. I have always supported local law enforcement and realize that they are faced with decisions that you and I will never have to face. They have to assess tense situations within seconds and try to respond appropriately while realizing that theirs or others lives' may be in jeopardy. I'm not sure that any type of training will ever prepare them for that one instance when adrenalin, stress, noise and the pressure to react will result in a an unjustified fatality. We want to view our law enforcement personnel as this powerful force for protection and forget that it is made up of men and women just like you and me. They can error in the same ways that you and I do regardless of their training. When they do error, maybe it should be part of the weeding-out process to be used to remove these officers from active duty on the street.

    i find it difficult for this specific department to class this as a 'justified shooting", since it seems very questionable when viewing the video clip.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
    I'll have to see how much of this will fit but it does provide some of the easy to find

    My first search pattern was Police Officer Deaths by Year in USA, The second was Law Enforcement Officer Deaths in USA. The third was Federal Law Enforcement Officers US All provided much the same but I noticed a blurb that asked did I mean US? Idiot Question I wasn't including Mexico. However I modifeid the last one and hit paydirt. Apparently the FBI doesn't know there are two United States in North America.

    So....


    Year-by-Year Breakdown of Law Enforcement Deaths throughout U.S. History
    Year
    Officers
    In Two Columns 1791 1 1920 196 for example
    179111920196
    179211921241
    179411922233
    179711923221
    180411924259
    180611925246
    180841926236
    181011927269
    181111928251
    181411929265
    181621930301
    181811931262
    182321932273
    182521933226
    182711934240
    182811935217
    183011936192
    183641937190
    183811938189
    183921939122
    184021940134
    184111941142
    184211942122
    18432194385
    18442194491
    184541945113
    184731946138
    184811947126
    184931948139
    185031949104
    185151950114
    185251951135
    185371952118
    1854101953119
    185581954136
    185681955121
    1857141956108
    1858131957118
    185991958112
    186091959110
    186191960129
    186251961140
    1863121962140
    1864111963137
    1865101964150
    1866151965138
    1867171966161
    1868171967192
    1869271968191
    1870211969194
    1871201970219
    1872241971248
    1873211972228
    1874271973275
    1875141974280
    1876291975239
    1877191976201
    1878441977192
    1879251978215
    1880311979215
    1881451980207
    1882441981203
    1883381982195
    1884421983193
    1885541984183
    1886471985176
    1887381986179
    1888561987183
    1889391988195
    1890571989196
    1891531990159
    1892651991148
    1893551992161
    1894641993158
    1895581994179
    1896481995183
    1897471996140
    1898701997172
    1899641998171
    1900681999144
    1901812000162
    1902882001241
    1903872002159
    1904802003150
    1905742004165
    1906782005163
    1907932006156
    19081222007192
    1909892008148
    1910982009125
    19111302010161
    19121052011171
    19131142012126
    19141162013107
    19151312014117
    1916156
    1917166
    1918159
    1919215
    TOTAL: 20,538

    Figures updated April 9, 2015

    Over the Past Decade (2004-2013)
    YEARDEATHS*ASSAULTS**ASSAULTS WITH INJURIES**
    200416560,37316,706
    200516259,70216,072
    200615660,66915,916
    200719162,90715,736
    200814262,43415,554
    200912460,17115,166
    201016158,37714,313
    201116957,32014,832
    201212055,72514,884
    201310051,62514,857

    Next are Federal Law Enforcement and USA wide in two different types

    While searching I found most of the links for most of the reports many copycatted. The Guardian a well known and respected British Liberal Labor Party publication (don't get twisted in a wad it means something different there than here) provided a starting point with links. Sadly most of the links dissolved into NY Times style propaganda but with just a LITTLE effort one could gain enough information. So what's a good libertarian doing quoiting the Washington Post and the Guardian? I read it because it's where I came from and US newspapers are so ..rejectable but it gives me one of several windows on blighty and a start point for Europe without th propaganda.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
      the part the missing link missed

      Wikpedia time to find 37 seconds.

      Listed below are lists of people killed by law enforcement in the United States, whether in the line of duty or not, and regardless of reason or method. Inclusion in the lists implies neither wrongdoing nor justification on the part of the person killed or the officer involved. The listing merely documents the occurrence of a death.



      These lists are incomplete. Although Congress instructed the Attorney General in 1994 to compile and publish annual statistics on police use of excessive force, this was never carried out, and the FBI does not collect these data either.

      [1] The annual average number of justifiable homicides alone was previously estimated to be near 400.

      [2] Updated estimates from the Bureau of Justice Statistics released in 2015 estimate the number to be around 930 per year, or 1240 if assuming that nonreporting local agencies kill people at the same rate as reporting agencies.

      [3] The Washington Post tracked shootings (only) in 2015 and on May 30 reported a rate so far that would be equal to 937 shootings/year (385 as of that date).

      [4] The Guardian is also tracking killings in 2015 and counted 464 killed as of the end of May (rate of 1122/yr).[5].



      The Wikpedia article is backed up sufficiently to have merit.

      But there are some serious questions never asked nor answered.

      What happened to the Attorney General in 1994 who refused to carry out the instructions of Congress presumably signed in to law by ---wait for it--- Bubba himself. Well for one thing she was busy gassing and burning children in Waco Texas. Which if you haven't noticed is why I dubbed her Jackboot Janet Von Flamethrower Reno.

      But that law was in effect for six years of the Clinton Presidency who having laid off a huge number of federal law enforcement in units such as the Border Patrol then back tracked with the 100,000 Cops Project. Which did lower crime by 8% or so in some very heavily targeted areas but also had two major flaws. It only paid for the first year leaving the local area to continue or not continue through higher taxes. Reportedly a good deal of the 100,000 figure was used to replace previously laid off federal agents I recall specifically Border Patrol.


      To find the missing information needed to support the original post took about 40 minutes. go look at it if for nothing else thatn the graph which didn't allow copying very well. But here is where the real credibility lies and has lain since 2010.

      Clinton Admininstration failed to provide the required reporting for six years too busy gassing and burning children.

      Bush Administation for eight years so ditto the Republican half.

      Obeyme Administration for it's entire time in office. too busy heisting FIFA, running guns, and too busy continuing to set up the Schutz Staffel national police.

      During all of those years the federal government had the perfect big stick and that was aid to local local enforcement money. No report no check.

      So 68 minutes plus some grammar checking and here we have it with plenty of links

      CATO Institute


      Arguing The Case For Police Accountability – Part 1
      May 9, 2010 @ 4:56 PM by David Packman

      cut I didn't cut the meat of it but you should go look it up yourself.....the best part is in the last half

      The argument of small percentages

      I’ve seen people point to one of our daily reviews of police
      misconduct reports and say, “Look, 28 cases in one day! That’s a problem!” to which an antagonist will say “No it’s not, 28 officers is a very small number of the 800,000 police officers in the US!”

      Well, they are right, 28 out of 800,000 is a small percentage and nowhere near a majority of the police population in the US. In fact, our statistics indicate that just under 1000 per 100,000 police officers per year are involved in credible reports of police misconduct. Yes, that translates to under 1% of all police officers.

      cut

      So, what am I talking about?
      Making a point that police misconduct is a problem worth study is a matter of comparing the rates of police misconduct with the rate of crime in the US.


      Why?

      Because, as a percentage of population, criminal activity represents a relatively equally small percentage of the overall population in the US as does the rate of police misconduct… so if you believe that crime is a problem in the US worthy of trillions in tax fund expenditure, then surely police misconduct is worthy of study if it represents an equally large percentage of the police population.

      How So? Well, here’s some numbers taken from the 2008 UCR statistics and 12-months worth of statistics taken from the NPMSRP between April 2009 – March 2010 (a combination of our 2009 annual statistics and our Q1 2010 quarterly statistics):

      As you can see, when we examine violent crime statistics, law enforcement officers appear to be involved in violent crime in a comparable rate with the general population. 432 officers out of every 100,000 compared to 454.5 people out of every 100,000. So, roughly 0.43% vs 0.45%.

      Both seem like small numbers, don’t they? Yet most people would probably tell you that they are worried about the rate of violent crimes… but not police misconduct even though both occur at similar rates statistically.

      If you’re wondering about the homicide rates, “Homicide Charged” compares the number of alleged homicides in general population with the number of police officers actually charged with homicide or murder. The “Homicide” number compares the same general population statistic with the number of officers involved in questionable non-vehicular homicide deaths including deaths in custody as a result of excessive force that were not charged as homicides.


      The statistic for sexual assaults is the stunner for us though. 29.3 per 100,000 in the general population vs 73.3 per 100,000 for law enforcement officers. That would seem to catch people’s attention as a problem, but apparently it doesn’t.

      So, you see, it’s all a matter of context. Sure, .073% is a small percentage of the population of police officers in the US, but that number represents 522 officers per year and is a larger, by over 2x, ratio of the population of police than are the number of alleged sexual assailants in the US general population at .029%.

      So, the next time you find yourself challenged by a law enforcement officer who says that police misconduct isn’t a problem because it only represents a small percentage of the number of police officers in the US. Remember that it really does represent a small percentage but so does crime in the general population but that doesn’t stop people from worrying so much about it that they’ll spend a majority of their tax dollars to fight it.

      And they are still publishing a well sourced list of daily incidents.

      Conclusion: A little research goes a long way. A lot further than sources that are routinely suspect. It also brings up answers to a number of points. in the discussion. Now you all have what you need to determine the merits. I come down as usual with the question of why twelve years of Democrats and eight years of Republicans or twenty years of Government Party have failed to do the job they assigned to themselves. How many more chances you want to give them?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  ObjectiveAnalyst 4 years, 4 months ago
        Hello MichaelAarethun,
        Excellent research. I am of the opinion that police should be trained and held to a higher standard than the general population. So many times it seems the police are shown in these incidents coming in guns blazing when some of these suspects could be approached more stealthily and apprehended perhaps by plain clothes officers that track the suspects and catch them off guard, or simply shown a bit more patience and presumption of innocence. After all, the police have the better training, can have their guns already drawn and should be wearing bullet proof vests when attempting to apprehend someone they believe is armed. I remember how the story of the Branch Davidians was that Koresh regularly went walking the sidewalks of town and could have been apprehended quietly many times before the whole siege mentality erupted. In regards to “Homicide Charged” numbers, there is the perception (right or wrong) that the numbers for police are underrepresented since they are often given the benefit of the doubt in the eye of the court. There is also a perception that the police cover for each other when more often they should do more to maintain their good name by outing the "few" bad apples. Of course much of the perception problem may be attributable to the media's love to report dirty laundry while avoiding the good. Militarization of the police does not help this perception. For this we can probably spread the blame to politicians, bureaucrats and some of the gung-ho police chiefs. That said; I do feel that most police are doing there jobs honorably and do not wish to paint with too broad of a brush. Still, any innocent lives unjustly lost should not be tolerated... on either side.
        Respectfully,
        O.A.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
        Well, we finally find something to agree on. Why not start a separate Post of your research and findings. My post was intended as a general update to a problem I'm concerned about. Your issue deserves further discussion as a separate issue.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
      Is it a little surprising to you that you can find all kinds of information on cops killed and assaulted, but it doesn't exist on 'civilians'. It's only volunteer citizens and news orgs that have started gathering the deaths data the last two years. Nothing yet on assaults with injuries or shootings that lived.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by khalling 4 years, 4 months ago
      also, this list in the format we have it in, is kind of obnoxious. It takes up a significant amount of post space. why?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
        Why? Because it points up what should have been in the first post. Was asked for and wasn't produced which produces two reactions. Some will do the work for others some will just round file. In this case it needed support. But I'll give you a week i've got this new book to read. Also I shortened up the other side of the coin Because you are right about the space.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
      A different type of report furnished by Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund

      YEAR DEATHS* ASSAULTS** ASSAULTS WITH INJURIES**
      2004 165 60,373 16,706
      2005 162 59,702 16,072
      2006 156 60,669 15,916
      2007 191 62,907 15,736
      2008 142 62,434 15,554
      2009 124 60,171 15,166
      2010 161 58,377 14,313
      2011 169 57,320 14,832
      2012 120 55,725 14,884
      2013 100 51,625 14,857
      Averages over the Last Decade

      149 deaths per year 58,930 assaults per year 15,404 injuries per year
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
      Washington, D.C.
      May 11, 2015

      FBI National Press Office
      (202) 324-3691
      Preliminary statistics released today by the FBI show that 51 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in the line of duty in 2014. This is an increase of almost 89 percent when compared to the 27 officers killed in 2013. (Note: From 1980–2014, an average of 64 law enforcement officers have been feloniously killed per year. The 2013 total, 27, was the lowest during this 35-year period.) By region, 17 officers died as a result of criminal acts that occurred in the South, 14 officers in the West, eight officers in the Midwest, eight in the Northeast, and four in Puerto Rico.

      By circumstance, 11 officers died from injuries inflicted as a result of answering disturbance calls (one of which was a domestic disturbance). Ten officers were conducting traffic pursuits or stops, eight were killed as a result of ambushes (six due to entrapment/premeditated situations and two during unprovoked attacks), and six officers were investigating suspicious persons or circumstances. Five officers sustained fatal injuries while they were performing investigative activities, four while they were engaged in tactical situations, three officers were handling persons with mental illness, and one officer was slain during a drug-related matter. Three officers were killed while attempting other arrests.

      Offenders used firearms in 46 of the 51 felonious deaths. These included 32 incidents with handguns, 11 incidents with rifles, and three incidents with shotguns. Four victim officers were killed with vehicles used as weapons, and one was killed with the offender’s personal weapons (hands, fists, feet, etc.).

      Thirty-five of the slain officers were confirmed to be wearing body armor at the times of the incidents. Five of the 51 officers killed fired their own weapons, and six officers attempted to fire their service weapons. Seven victim officers had their weapons stolen; one officer was killed with his own weapon.

      The 51 victim officers died from injuries sustained in 48 separate incidents. All 48 of those incidents have been cleared by arrest or exceptional means.

      An additional 44 officers were accidentally killed in the line of duty in 2014. This total represents five officers fewer than the 49 officers who were accidentally killed in 2013. By region, 19 officers died due to accidents in the South, 13 in the West, seven in the Northeast, four in the Midwest, and one in Puerto Rico.

      Twenty-eight of the officers died as a result of automobile accidents, six were in motorcycle accidents, and five were struck by vehicles. Two of the officers were killed from accidental shootings, one from drowning, one from blunt force trauma, and one died as a result of smoke inhalation.

      Of the 28 officers who died due to automobile accidents, 15 officers were wearing seatbelts. 10 officers were not wearing seatbelts (six of whom were ejected from the vehicles), and seatbelt use was not reported for three of the officers who were killed due to automobile accidents.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by khalling 4 years, 4 months ago
        the point is-while we the US, keep meticulous records on fallen officers, we do not have good records on citizens shot by officers.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
          True i'm working on that now. When you want something done right and all that. It takes some cross checking and like birth dates for ancestors separating wheat from chaff. I doubt I'll get around to all four hundred and some. If you have any particular incident interest let me know.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
          Done took about one hour to get to the meat of it and a rather detailed day by day report.
          Wikpedia then Cato Institute the answer is yes we need a change in the white house to get the problem looked at much less addressed. A serious change.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
            Agreed, we need change, but if nothing else, the last many years certainly should point out that a change in the White House only won't solve the problem. The change needs to take place in the citizenry so that they'll no longer put up with this type of nonsense. IMHO
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
            • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
              It won't if you keep voting for the lesser of two evils. The point is finding out if your charges are legitimate no matter the rather curious cites. All decidedly left wing. As it turns out I now believe they developed nothing but used previous, at hand, and easy to find information then slanted and spun it for other purposes. Two years? Try 2010 and long before. Can't change the White House nor probably the Congress but you can learn whose responsible for the cover up and get rid of them. that means using the vote as intended while we still have it to use.

              The blame is equally spread over three Presidents and twenty years of their Congress's and their Attorney Generals. Along with the obvious support of some but not all the news media. That leads to the citizens who openly and willingly supported by re-electing at least six times a dirty government. Having now defined the validity and those responsible it's time to decide a course of action. Action does not mean endless go no where posts. It also means deciding how to circumvent by use of the 911 tragedy to stage a revolt against Constitutional law - the present Government.

              Before it goes any further it's time to answer the question. What Are You Prepared To Do?: If it is solely rely on a document no longer in force step aside. if it is - for example - to speak with and recruit the one organization that is legally entitled to take the necessary steps then take the lead. But at this point recall you don't know to whom you are speaking and neither do I. I suspect that should remain the case. the charge is fundamentally changing the Bill of Rights without first amending the Constitution as required and usurping power and powers not granted. The primary action is one granted to any citizen assuming the right to do so still exists. An action which any good citizen knows how to take - as long as it's still available the rest follows. One whomever the present incumbent - assuming voluntary abdication - annoints as heir opinion repudiate he, she, and their supporters. Two whomever the other half of the the Government Party or Coalition chooses as the companion candidate shun them. The third and most difficult is finding someone suitable - or raise the spectre of the military be held accountable for not up holding their oath of office to the Constitution. If it means dividing the nation so be it. No biggie it's already divided. As of yet no white horse candidate has appeared. Put another way who is the most trusted individual in the country. Is there such a person who has not been thoroughly smeared or tainted.

              You can't change citizens without offering them a reason to change or at least a reason to reject.

              Didn't work? Fine. Did it do damage to the opposition? Better yet. The cycle of repression works in both directions and so does the cycle of expression. I guess i fibbed about one week off from this . I'll rule it started today and go fishing. Until the 14th. So...What are you prepared to do? What can you offer?
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
                I'm tired of your accusations of left leaning tendencies or my voting habits, which you know absolutely nothing about.

                I think Mark Twains comment about voting covers that topic: (paraphrased)
                'If voting could make a difference, they wouldn't let us do it'
                .
                Other than that, this is at least second caution to stay on topic
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
                  One way street? Has to do with your sources of information or lack there of. And your school of red herrings.Can't take the heat stay out of the kitchen.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by blackswan 4 years, 4 months ago
    One comment. From January 1 through June 1, you have 152 days. If 470 people were killed during that time, that comes to about 3 people per day (3 x 152 = 456 (plus 14)); 3.092, to be exact, for all of the US, and that includes blacks, whites, Hispanics, Asians, etc. That means that, for the entire year, around 1129 people will succumb to police shootings. If you remove those who were actual thugs, the number of bad shootings vaporize before your eyes. I bet the number of killings in Chicago alone exceed that number, with many of the victims being "pain in the ass innocent bystanders." Where should we focus our attention on this subject? If we're looking at causes of death, 1129 in a year pales into insignificance to other, more pressing issues. It would be best to take a Pareto chart approach to death, if we want to really make a dent in that problem.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by RonC 4 years, 4 months ago
    You want anti-cop? Look at Baltimore last month. When we reach the point the cops cannot use force for fear of law suit, felony charges, or loss of career; they will just ignore the radio calls from dangerous areas. I understand there are places in LA or Chicago where police or medics don't go.

    Also, Looking at the stats in the article...If they are accurate there were more whites shot by cops than all other groups combined. Obviously, Jackson and Sharpton will leave that alone since there is no upside for the racist argument.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
      The sooner they can't use deadly force, the happier I'll be. And this post has absolutely nothing to do with race. It has to do with the 4th and 5th Amendment and the actions of government to ignore those rights as well as all non-enumerated rights.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by RonC 4 years, 4 months ago
        We have a difference of opinion. I recall seeing the gendarmes roll up on the terrorists in Paris. They realized the bad guys had firearms while the police were armed with whistles. I recall seeing those first responders retreat, in reverse, at an unsafe speed. On the other hand a traffic cop put a stop to the shooting at the "Draw Mohammed event" in Texas. How many artists would have died had the traffic cop used his whistle?

        We have a sort of neutered policing in Baltimore these days and the kill rate is the highest since the 60s. Not the police on civilians, the civilians killing each other with no police to protect the innocents. San Francisco was that way in 1849. It got so bad the people armed themselves for protection. When the "lawmen" came to town and finally straightened it up, they built Alcatraz. If we fail to learn from history, we are bound to repeat it.

        On the point of "Harm's Way", yes it is military jargon. I have many friends in police uniforms. If you patrolled Baltimore, Ferguson, or Chicago on an average night would you look at your situation as "Harm's way", or crimes yet to be committed by the innocent until proven guilty? If you can't see the eminent danger before these officers my guess is no one would ride with you because they are counting on you to protect them from eminent danger.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
          Let the citizens of those areas police themselves rather than cops from outside the area trained for combat, and taught to treat 'civilians' as the enemy and the funding source to support your department. Might be a difference.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by jdg 4 years, 4 months ago
            Exactly. I'm no anarchist, but so long as the cops are a greater danger than the other bad guys, we'd be better off not having them around.

            I believe that any police department dirty enough that Serpico could not get a job there and keep it (and that's pretty much all of them) needs to be abolished, and all its members banned for life from being cops. Then after we repeal all their immunities and make them fully accountable for their actions, we can start recruiting new police. In only the numbers and strengths actually needed, which is much less than we have now. For instance, no city of less than a million population needs its own SWAT team, or the equipment for one.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  allosaur 4 years, 4 months ago
    In that video, the suspect looked like he was going for a gun. Idiots who do not simply raise their hands while a cop aims a gun at them are asking for it.
    If I were that cop, I'd likely have shot the man too out of sheer fear of my life.
    Now retired from the Alabama Department,of Corrections, I was annually trained to shoot a revolver, a shotgun and an AR-15.
    I was also trained to shoot (to stop by aiming at upper torso center mass) a convicted felon for simply running away, such as one taken to the hospital or to court.
    I also recall being trained by the Marines to fire a ,45 way long ago. I had to yell "Halt!" twice at a target that was rolling away before I holed it with 7 shots!
    Fortunately, I never had to shoot anyone, though I fired a total of three warning shots within 21 years with the DOC.
    After my last career shot stopped a runner, I had a dude aimed in with "shoot to stop" heart shot as he raised his hands. "Hands up--don't shoot."
    Al Sharpton would have approved. Naw, the inmate was white. He would not have cared.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
      Interesting. Most of them that claim 'fear for my life', state that the victim was coming at them. In this one, the guy can clearly be seen walking away, then turning around to face the cop, but still backpedaling while shot. And he wasn't even black.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by hattrup 4 years, 4 months ago
      You get shot even following an officers orders. A few months ago a (probably profiled) black person at a gas station was shot (killed?) by an officer when he opened the back door of his car to get his
      license/registration/proof of insurance from his bag on the back seat floor. Following THE OFFICERS REQUEST for the information.

      The reason shot ... of course - the cop thought the profiled victim was going for a gun.

      The corrupting influence (on officers , and the system) of our many victimless crime laws makes it even harder on all sides, and introduces unnecessary violence via black markets/smuggling.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
      Interesting that upper center of mass as a target area. Ever notice the area covered by protective vests. Upper center of mass. I taught my troops to shoot from the knees to belly button area. Lower center of mass, guts, nuts, kidneys, pelvic bone two big bone legs and two femoral arteries and the lower end of the spine. And that was long before the word operator had been heard of except when you picked up the phone for a long distance call. And much larger than the head and shoulders.

      Until Second Chance came along and many of us in the military bought our own the protective vest wasn't worth the wight penalty. Would stop 00B and .22 would not defeat blunt trauma from a .45 pistol. Second Chance had insert plates and covered a lot more area. I don't know why unless it's some kind of PC fair play thing.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  allosaur 4 years, 4 months ago
        It just occurred to me that total torso center mass would put a bullet into the pit of the stomach otherwise known as the solar plexus, a bundle of nerves that is a martial arts target.
        I learned how effective getting hit there was on Parris Island. A huge black Senior D.I. hit me there a couple of times and my lower rib cage helped me stay on my feet.
        Then along came a regular white D.I. with a skinny fist that speared in between bone. That knocked the wind out of me so hard that I was on my knees before I knew I was there.
        Ah, how succinctly sweet are the memories of 1969 Parris Island!
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
          Semper Fi from the other soldiers at Fort Bragg. Nice you didn't have to suffer the indignity of time out cards. Just thinking had the USMC recruiter not been at lunch the day I walked in the recruiting office.....I may well have been saying the same thing in reverse. Or been an ex former Marine.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  allosaur 4 years, 4 months ago
            Holy Moses! I had to look that up.
            All looking stressed got you back in '69 were drill instructors turning up the heat.
            I'll never forget my first morning of waking up on Parris Island.
            A metal trash can was thrown across the concrete floor. Then three D.I's turned in the lights and came in screaming their heads off.
            I was never so scared in my life. And I was freaking drafted!

            http://www.snopes.com/military/stresscar...
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
              66
              Arkansas boy drafted, about a week later shows back up at home.
              Pa says, "what you doing boy, they kick you out?"
              Boy says, "No Pa, I really liked the food and a real bed and indoor plumbing"
              "But Pa, First day they issued me a comb. Then took me to another bldg and cut off all my hair."
              "Next day they issued me a tooth brush and tooth paste. Then sat me down and pulled some of my teeth.'
              "But Pa, that third day, they issued me some new skivvies and Pa, I was out of there."
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  allosaur 4 years, 4 months ago
                I like to think that joke was about Bill Clinton's daddy.
                I think a stockade is to the Army as the brig is to the Marines.
                The brig is where most Parris Island runners wound up before being given a second chance.
                Those who could not be caught fairly quickly were listed as deserters.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by tdechaine 4 years, 4 months ago
    Before being anti-cop, you might want to put yourself in their position; and you might want to focus on the attitude and actions of those who force cops to take such actions. Except for the small number of bad cops that need to be removed, our police force is performing properly.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Riftsrunner 4 years, 4 months ago
      While I agree that police are performing properly, that doesn't make them your friends. They are trained to illicit information from you to get you to implicate yourself in an investigation. Unless you call them, you should exercise your constitutional rights in any situation that brings you into contact with them. Even something you feel is minor that you say, could unintentionally get yourself into some grief as you don't know what crimes are being investigated. I am not anti-cop, I just want to make sure that the cops are doing their job if they want to arrest me. I am not going to do it for them. (Read Ferris' statement to Hank Rearden concerning crime in society in AS. "Governments have no way to control innocent people, so it passes laws to make everyone a criminal and let's their guilt do the rest).
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by hattrup 4 years, 4 months ago
        The caution to exercise your constitutional rights is a very good one. There are so many laws on the books that almost all of us are criminals multiple times throughout the day - it is only whether you become a target for enforcement that determines whether you will be fined or arrested.
        Criminal activity such as: Making a cash deposit of slightly less than $10K, leaving your secured child in a conditioned, running, securely locked car for a minute or two, having a K-9 "alert" (LOL) near you or your home/car, running (away) if an officer is nearby, growing medicinal herb in 19 legal states, watering you garden more than 2xweek (California), ... etc.
        I am sure you have even better examples.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by khalling 4 years, 4 months ago
      training police officers like we train the military is anti-thetical to what a police force was ever to be in the US. Police were never intended to be soldiers against the citizens. If we want to clean up crime-we are going to have to first not pay people to sit around doing nothing. We are going to have to decriminalize those non-violent ventures that make crime appealing. We are going to have to train our policemen not to run down non-violent criminals because their authority must be supreme. when I was a kid, the police were helpful and friendly. IF I am stopped by a trooper or city police nowadays, there is nothing friendly about the exchange. why is that? It is how they are trained.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Your_Name_Goes_Here 4 years, 4 months ago
      I wholeheartedly agree. We may have arguments over how police are being militarized, but the focus on Police = Evil is unfounded for the vast majority of cases. Remember the sweet little kid, Michael Brown? Well, we later heard what Paul Harvey would call "the rest of the story". He was a thug, he resisted arrest and went for an officer's weapon. Clearly not a smart move, and he paid the price for it.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
        That is the crux of the problem with the left. They say one thing then do another. Police = Evil so lets have a National Evil Force. Let's pull the troops out so elect me and seven years later???. OK we move from Iraq to Afghanistan and wow now it's Kurdistan which at least has a good purpose. Religion is bad so let's glorify religion. Guns are bad so let's run guns to Mexico. I support the Constitution but we're going to follow the Patriot Act and live under executive order. We're anti big government let's have some more police forces. On a list of seven or is it seventeen greatest dangers do Tsunamis out rank ozone? Some get the guy a gift certificate to Spatula City and another 535 for Congress.

        Speaking of flip flopping Obeyme decided to stick around or abdicate? I still think he's going to stick it to Hillary.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
          The truth for me is that this doesn't have anything to do with the left/right paradigm. This is about people we pay to arrest law breakers (even though I don't agree with most of the laws) and get them before a judge and jury, not beat them up, not shoot them, and not kill them.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • -1
    Posted by NealS 4 years, 4 months ago
    How ironic as to the timing of this article. Earlier this morning as I left my coffee group, I asked my waitress to give me the tab from the booth with three Highway Patrol Officers and just tell them it's taken care of. It's my way of telling them, "thank you for your service". They do what I don't have to do to keep our streets and highways safe, and it's a dangerous service job. And some of our leaders are making it more difficult with their big prejudiced mouths.

    As far as the Salt Lake video, the video isn't very clear and doesn't tell enough of the story. Perhaps the officer was a little early in his decision. In any case I'd suggest everyone put their hands up when told to do so by a police officer, or actually anyone else with a gun. These incidents involve a lot of adrenalin, and sometimes the adrenaline takes over, I can definitely attest to that. It's no different than in a combat situation. Sometimes it's better to shoot, or shoot first, than to be sorry or to not be at all.

    I see little difference between some of these incidents where the target taunts the cop, compared to where Saddam Hussain taunted the United States. It matters little whether he had WMD’s or not, don’t taunt the man with the gun. You could be dead right. All these things are related these days with the instant media we have. If we hadn’t gone to Iraq, Iran would be taunting even more than they are today. I’m sure glad I didn’t join the Sheriff’s Dept. or move up to supreme commander of our military, I’d already blown up much of Iraq just for their arrogance and threats to other countries. Something, I guess, I learned in Vietnam, kill or be killed.

    If we don’t want the police to take control and be able to order someone to put their hands up, then we should let them find other jobs and take our chances on our own. Nothing is cut and dry, and the advantage has to remain with the cops, not the criminals.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
      So you don't like The Constitution or the concept of individual liberty?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by NealS 4 years, 4 months ago
        Did this come across that I don't like the Constitution? If it did I need to delete it. Please explain.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
          The Founders fought against a standing army and placed the Bill of Rights in the Amendments to stop the kind of situation in which some dummy with a gun from coming on you during your normal day time activities, with that gun drawn, without probable cause that you were involved in criminal activity or actually threatening another.

          And we've allowed our police to turn into exactly what was fought against.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by NealS 4 years, 4 months ago
            Did we allow the police to evolve into that, or did we push them to do it? Would you, or would you let your spouse, walk the streets of DC or Baltimore at night alone? Without a gun, or some other lethal method of protection?

            I see your point, but I think its evolved to the point where police are more afraid of the public, more so than the other way around. I would also venture a guess that firing all the police and hiring new ones would do nothing at all. Maybe we should get rid of all the criminals and get new ones and see if that does anything to reduce crime. That would stand a better chance than replacing all the cops with new, unarmed, and unafraid ones. New cops get shot, it's just like second lieutenants in Vietnam. They haven't yet gotten the proper sense of self preservation and protection, they are unafraid.

            I see your point too in relation to the video, it looked like the cop came with his gun drawn. My question is why did he even come there, was he called, or did he just stop for coffee and decide to pull his gun on some "suspects"? I just say we didn't get enough info to make ant kind of a decision. Perhaps he had more info than we did, perhaps not. And when criminals start hunting police I say that is much more of a problem than the opposite scenario. I know you'll reject that last statement, but I'd defend myself profusely if I was in that position. I just say we've created these problems just by not enforcing the laws. and it's moving in the wrong direction, and the wrong parties are being blamed. Increase in crime is not caused by the police, it's caused by criminals.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
              The increase in crime might have more to do with the government making more and more people criminals through non-violent criminalization laws, ruining the small chance a lot of the people put in prison in there early 20's might have had to become at least minimally productive.

              I agree that it is my position that every one in government at any level should fear the citizenry. The citizenry should never have to fear their government. That was the primary reason for the 2nd Amendment.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by NealS 4 years, 4 months ago
                Today, even I have come around believing maybe Marijuana should not be criminalized. I don't use it, never will, at least I don't think I will at this point in my life. Some of my comrades from Vietnam live on the stuff and I see it in their interactions with society. If they want to screw up their heads that’s up to them. Most of them are retired now and are just waiting for their final outcome. They have little effect on society, and if society wants to bear the problems this might create so be it. I'm not against them but I'm still against it, perhaps not so much as to pass a law, but it seems we as a society have accepted it, so be it. Now, those laws need to be modified to meet society’s desire. Obey the law, or cause the law to be changed.

                Cops need rules too, but if you as a cop get a call to respond it should be up to you to decide to draw first or not draw at all. And disrespect for the law, not doing what a cop directs you to do in such a situation, is mandatory, especially today. It’s like running a stop light at full speed, I’m not going to do it, besides it’s against the law. If you disagree get the law changed. Years ago it wasn't the same, cops didn't need to worry as much about getting shot or prosecuted. That's only my perspective, I could be wrong.

                It seems to me that our leaders, those people we elect and hire to address everyone have thrown cops (hired and paid by us) under the bus because of a possible few bad ones. Police forces are never going to be perfect, they are human not computer controlled robots. Yes, there are dirty cops, but there are hundreds of times more that are not, and there are even hundreds of times more criminals than there are clean cops. I know which of those groups I want hanging around in my neck of the woods.

                Perhaps my perspective may have to do with my experience in combat and my combat with the public as I arrived home. It’s no wonder why they didn’t let us bring our side arms home with us. The people we went over to represent, how we were treated for doing what we were ordered and paid to do by the laws of the same people that sent us over there, who then threw us under the bus when we came home, still remains the biggest disappointment in my whole life. Now history is even getting it all screwed up, with the lies and political twists for someone else's agenda. I know it wasn’t everyone that spit on us but it sure seemed there weren’t too many that actually stood up against them with us. I would imagine that the average cop today feels more like a returning Vietnam Veteran than ever before, we’re doing the same thing to them. We need to make sure this is not allowed to continue and to escalate. Most of it has been based on totally false information and the media’s need to invent news. It’s everyone’s choice, either stand up with the cops or stand up with those that disrespect the cops and only sound off when one makes a poor judgment. Criminals make even worse judgments, just by being criminals. In any case at least stand up, your vote just doesn’t count if you don’t make it. And some of our leaders today that we elect and pay actually embarrass me not only for what they say but what they don’t say.

                Sorry for the babble, but this is an issue that’s really on my mind lately. Throwing cops under a bus full of criminals is not going to make America a better place to live. Some places actually still honor them and let them know that we support them, some don’t. At this year’s most recent Memorial Day presentation during the laying of the wreaths, when the police were called up, they got a standing ovation. I was so proud that it was actually my wife and my daughter that broke the ice and started it, then the majority of the crowd immediately followed.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
                  Neal; I can appreciate and know your disappointment and issues with the return from Nam, but that was a great deal different set of situation than what I'm talking about in this Post. The vast majority of us coming back from there were either drafted under threat of prison or joined under threat of the draft. Cops choose their jobs, and it is a job. And the job is not killing citizens, particularly innocent, unarmed citizens.

                  We weren't heroes coming back from Nam, and these cops certainly aren't heroes for killing American citizens. They're criminals and those that work with them and protect and lie for them are criminals as well. These guys aren't thrown under the bus, they jumped under it.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by NealS 4 years, 4 months ago
                    Your entitled to your opinion, but my impression is you seem to be siding with the demonstrators over the police. It can’t be about that, there can be no sides. I wrote another reply but it turned into a short story (a rather long one, and a lot longer than this one). I do that sometimes, so I deleted it. The points I want to make though are, first there is no difference between drafted and volunteer military, we all fight and bleed the same. There are a few that murder, they should be prosecuted, when there is doubt the default has to be in favor of the soldier and he can be reassigned or fired. When there is no doubt he should be prosecuted. In any case the rest of us should not be held accountable for the actions of a few or we will just destroy the whole organization. This is what I saw some people doing when I came home, they threatened me, I represented the whole organization, not the individuals that they night have had a beef with. And, I almost forgot, neither color didn’t shoot each other, or even the other color at all, at least not in my unit*. And, we were all armed, and even had real bullets, grenades, claymores, etc. We too covered each other’s back to fight against the enemy.

                    The same goes for civilians, some are cops and most are not. The cops are trained and hired to protect us and enforce our laws. Every once in a while there is a bad one, or sometimes one that makes a gross error in judgement when his adrenalin is ready to pop the top of his head off. Prosecute the bad ones, reassign (perhaps to a desk) the ones that are in doubt, or even fire them. But in any case don’t let the public or anyone burn down the police station because of one bad cop. Just like the returning Nam vets, don’t blame the whole police force or you will destroy it. I think it’s been severely damaged already.

                    And the demonstrators, my God, what kind of brain does it take to burn your own businesses the ones you frequent, and destroy people’s lives that are hiding at home? Where are the demonstrations against the 43 some murdered in May in Baltimore, not murdered by cops but murdered by each other? I understand that‘s a record. And we want the cops to go back in there an put a stop to it without using their guns? It's almost like, if you just leave us along we’ll annihilate ourselves. Is that where where Baltimore is headed now? Would you want a cops job after the whole institution was demeaned for a few bad ones. Is that any different than demeaning all the people of Baltimore for committing 43 murders last month, or should it be just all of the blacks? If we continue this nonsense none of it will matter in the end, we’ll just eventually destroy ourselves.

                    What are the results of all the preaching Al Sharpton has done over the years? As I see it he has been making things worse for black people, not better. The people that despise him are living in my neighborhood and friends of mine. We don’t have riots and no one is burning our businesses down. Hell, we don’t even have cops shooting anyone, and no one is shooting back. Now why is that?

                    Just think, if we didn’t have criminals we wouldn’t need cops. If we didn’t have dictators we might not need militaries. Until that happens we have to support them. I may have misinterpreted your message, if so, I apologize profusely.

                    *We had one incident after a card game. A grenade came in the hooch and the handle was definitely missing. Everyone got out quick enough and no one was injured except for a few scratches form the screens as they jumped through them. The one that tossed it was courts martialed. It was similar to having one bad cop. No one rioted, but a few took a couple of punches at the perp, and he didn’t get off because of it.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
                      Neal; I'm not sure that you've misinterpreted my message. It's simply that from an Objectivist mind, that the individual is primary and is the only entity that has rights, all rights which includes the right to be left alone, to go about his day as he wishes excepting that he may not initiate force against another in doing that.

                      A cop is an agent of the government, and the only legitimate function of a government is retributive force in that case where one individual does initiate force against another, and only that force necessary to make him stop that force; and to provide for the protection of the country from those foreign forces that are actively attacking this country.

                      A cop or soldier as an agent of that government has a moral obligation to follow the 'only that force necessary' to bring the individual to a court to be tried by a jury of his peers or to stop the attack on this country and it's citizens. In our case, the Founders penned the Constitution and Amendments that spell out that obligation.

                      We may not like the results of the protestors/rioters of late or the expressions of the race haters in our population, but remember that the Founders themselves, were considered to be protestors/rioters and criminals and British haters by a significant proportion of the population and the British police force (standing army) of their day. They destroyed things of their day such as the Boston Tea Party and a good deal more. They smuggled all types of goods, against the law of the land, to avoid ruinous taxes and items the government didn't want them to have, and they disobeyed laws they considered to be wrong.

                      We may feel and want to believe that the individuals being killed by cops in shootings, tasering, and beatings on our own streets, are not the type of people that we want as our next door neighbors, but that does not take away their rights that are identical to ours. And when we allow or excuse the cops to exceed that moral obligation, we are not ourselves being true to our own moral obligations in respect to the rights of man, and rational, reasoning, logical minds. We are bound by our ethical standards, based on that rational, logically reasoned mind to at least voice our condemnation of those in our society and government that are not following those same ethical standards, if not actively stop such violations.

                      The law of the individual's rights, living in nature have primacy far above any laws of the state and we fail to enforce that primacy when the actions of government and government agents and those that support that government and defend it's agents in the wrongdoings, violate those rights of the ugliest and meanest individual in our society, then we too have no rights and can fully expect that we are next on the list

                      Logically and historically proven time and time again in our rise from the animal, there can be no doubt. Our turn will be next. We either stop these situations now or we face the total destruction of what little freedom we have left.

                      So in a way, I have taken sides. The side of the rights of individual man over the authority of the state and her agents. I am after all, an Objectivist and an American.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by NealS 4 years, 4 months ago
                        I think we're pretty much in agreement. Perhaps we're just a little different in opinion of what is needed to put a stop to the destruction of our people and our cites. I would guess I'm more for going to war, as I see too many Al Sharpton's, knowingly or unknowingly, trying to tear this country apart. And when our government seems to support the Sharpton Theory and put a target on all police for the wrongs of a few, we are doomed if we don't stop it soon.

                        Like I said before, now I understand why the military didn't let us bring our side arms home with us, my life might be different if I had. But that was way back then. By the way, I had little idea what was going on at home before I got back. Today I thank God that I didn't take that Sheriff job offer back in '69.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
                          Sharpton doesn't give a hoot over the whether the country is torn apart or not, he's in it for the money, it's that simple. He's a charlatan using his race. I know a few blacks that totally agree.

                          I as well, was pretty surprised when I got home and was spit on the first time.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • -1
    Posted by woodlema 4 years, 4 months ago
    Yes and the number of people killed by medical malpractice, and I mean gross negligence was over 99,000.

    I wrote a LOT on this that when you take into account the total number of "OFFICIAL" Police interactions across the country, and look at the total killed by cops, and look at the total number if Civil Rights Violations that were "claimed" Cops, using Six Sigma Metrics are 99.997% perfect, under fire at times, at risk for their life on every call..

    Like it or not those are the numbers. My Burger King Whopper I might see 90% accurate....and when you look at Deaths by hospital/doctor, you get something that would terrify you.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 4 years, 4 months ago
      Medical malpractice and Burger King are not relative to this post.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 4 years, 4 months ago
        No but Medical malpractice and Jack In The Crack were certainly linked. I linked it to Whopper and the State of Washington linked it to E. Coli especially when both Jack in the Box and the state health inspectors failed to follow up on health practices.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo