police shootings of unarmed teens

ok, final straw...I just read about another police shooting of an 'unarmed' black teen..his name is Tony Robinson....well, I'll give you one, and only one, guess on if the teen had a criminal record for armed robbery before he was shot...of course, the mother says he was not violent..and then--OMG--his culture and community says his record has nothing to do with the shooting!! just like the Ferguson shooting
I for one, feel safer knowing a criminal is not around anymore..that may sound harsh to some, but tough...the world is harsh, violent, terrible, etc..should the police just shoot for no reason?? no, of course not...do police get out of hand sometimes, ? sure....but before there is any trial or evidence shown, people are protesting, for a known criminal!! I would think the police would be innocent until proven guilty, especially when the 'unarmed' teen has a record...he's been violent before, and they--parents, and friends-- don't think he will be again?????
I understand the history of the US after slavery....but when someone is convicted of armed robbery, or some other violent crime, and then gets into a fight with, or resists arrest, they will get hurt!!!!!!!!! why do they not understand this concept??
let me add, this is a serious injustice to law abiding people, all over the world, and the president -ha- and governors should be backing up the police, but they don't....they should say, the base--BASE--problem, is not the police, but kids having kids, the culture of the community, etc where kids grow up to be criminals, unlawful, etc....

 

Is this a question, a statement or just your musings; what reaction are you trying to solicit by posting?

 

Well the police is not the solution to this, first you need to establish the reasons that black people "seem" to be more criminal....

Also if he had a record does not mean he IS still a criminal, maybe he decided to live law abiding since his sentence...

But maybe you post some detail about the case (links)

Btw: I could also tell some stories that the police isn´t completly unpartial sometimes

 

I lived in Madison, WI for 19 years and the police never shot me. Admittedly it's probably because I'm white.

 

Every one of these cases starts with the person committing some offense, maybe a minor one like selling loose cigarettes, but something that justifies the cops stopping them. In every case they argued with and resisted the police. We never see a shooting of someone who did what we all learned when we were kids - stand still, shut up, do what the officer tells you.

A few days ago in Philadelphia a police officer - black - was shot and killed by two thugs - also black, one had served time for armed robbery. No one's holding a parade or protest for him.

 

Exactly. There is a shirt going around to counter the "I Can't Breathe" shirt. It says, "Breathe Easy, Don't Break The Law". That is it. Don't break the law and you won't get shot. If you get stopped by the police, follow all instructions and you won't get shot. Easy Peasy. Just saying.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaaeXIg9kSk

 

Trooper shoots man who quickly ducks back into his car to get something...the trigger pull was probably instinct...if he wanted to shoot this man, he would have just shot him. Under the circumstances I might do the same thing...Im Sure there are plenty of unarmed Anglos, Hispanics, Asians etc who've been shot...sure there's discrimination and maybe a little bit of REAL racism out there, not nearly as much as you or i might think.
A lesson, if I may on discrimination...Something that is a pillar in our survival to date. To explain discrimination I will use a local reference...Two boys are fishing on a bank, having fun. They see a log drifting towards them and watch it for a while, until the logs sinks out of sight and they go on fishing...one boy hooks a Barra and reals him into the bank, bending down he lifts the fish and SNAP! A huge croc leaps out of the water and snaps its jaws around the boys legs and in one movement spins back into the water, the boy manages just a squeal before he sinks with the croc.
The boy's mate sees all of this, right in front of him...
He's just Lost his mate to a croc...from that day forward, if he sees a croc, or even a log, he will steal clear of it...might even throw some rocks at it...this boy doesn't need to be eaten himself to know it could kill him...we are designed, all of us to discriminate "broadly" to try to ensure safety. This boy doesn't think it was just that croc having s bad day...ALL crocs are bad, all crocs must be avoided...there are freshwater crocs that are pretty safe, so you could say that all crocs must be avoided is a over reaction, illogical...but are you going to get close enough to the croc to find out which one it is?

 

So the man did exactly that the cop ordered him to do, get his license.... so you say you get shot if don´t do what he wants and also if you do what he wants?

Also "instinct" is a very poor behaviour for a policeman wouldn´t you say. I would say following LAW is the right behaviour.

 

The problem in this country is that there are no consequences for police mistakes, misbehavior or even outright criminal actions. Police are held to a much lower standard than ordinary citizens. Most of these shootings are justified, but even in cases like the one in post #7, which is obviously criminal, there will be no consequences.
Even if the victims sues in civil court, the local government will be liable and the policeman will not pay a dime.

 

Good points...but surely the extreme difficulty of the job must betaken into account...I make a mistake, it's no biggie, but if a cop makes a mistake, something bad could go down...well...cops are going to make mistakes...(Robo cop was a good movie to explain the rigours)...if we prosecute police too much, we risk no one wanting to be one...

 

I carry a gun every day. If I get into a fender-bender and then shoot somebody because he makes a quick movement, I'm going to jail for the rest of my life. That's the consequences for stupidity, and it's entirely correct. I don't think cops should be held to a lower standard.

With that said, most of these shootings that have made the news recently have been entirely justified. If you attack a cop and get shot, that too is the consequences for stupidity.

 

Yes, well I just remembered that incident in the video re. the topic here, but I realize it is not related to the OPs post. I will wait until the OP provides more info on his case.
However I will add that in the YT vid case the cop in question had no stress or dangerous situation. All was perfectly quiet and under control.
I don´t want to "prosecute" police (to the contrary), but police must make sure to follow rules and don´t make such mistakes, it will hurt them if more of it surfaces.

 

Agree 100%. If you are offensive to cops they are perfectly right to use force on you too. But it must be in the limits. Say I have no weapon and slap a cop in the face and he shoots me for it, not justified. If I have a gun and threaten the man and he shoots me, justified. In the case of my vid no danger for the cop, but let´s wait if in the OPs case the "bad" guy was armed and threatened or attacked the cops.

 

I wish someone would shoot our Tony Robinson...

 

For me, the sad part is always the competent policeman or teacher for that matter(I liken both occupations because they fall victim to the same perceptions publicly) because the policeman that performs day in and day out in dangerous situations without victimizing suspects will rarely or possibly never be recognized for his regular competent behavior. Instead his actions will be brought into suspicion by the acts of the least competent members of his profession. He will suffer all the suspicions and public humiliations that the investigations will bring down upon, and around him. He will be made to practice and show competence time and again because a small number of individuals decided they would act against a criminal element by making an immediate decision to kill instead of take some other action as he may have taken based on all circumstances of the decision. It is the hall mark of the profession to be able to take a correctly based action on the merits of the situation, being a professional he is able to separate himself from being instantaneous judge and jury however obvious the circumstance. That is what professionalism is, the ability to differentiate your job from the job of judge and jury. I think it is only natural that now that we often have cameras in action, that everyday acts that used to be decided in favor of the "professional" will now come into scrutiny when viewed in the new undeniable context of cameras. My concerns are for those that perform day in and day out competently who will suffer perceptions they do not deserve based on their own stellar performances. So often, it will be them and their families that suffer this condition brought on by the incompetent.

 

but his record, along with more criminal activity should make people think that maybe he is the cause of the problem, not the other way around
like I said, investigate to the fullest....but these parents really need to wise up and take responsibility

 

If you strike somebody, cop or not, it is an assault. Under US law (which I agree with) the justification for using deadly force is rather subjective - you must be in fear of death or grave injury - and so, in most cases, no prosecution would follow.

 

Bunde!! yess !! like I said, some are wrong, but the majority seem to be the other way around...put them in jail, like the Oscar Grant shooting...investigate, etc...but remember, Oscar started the problem! should he have been shot? no way!...http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/madison-police-told-tony-robinson-assaulted-2-people-article-1.2141789
and you know what makes it even more ridiculous? just now, like everyday, I go to the local news site, and who's mugshots for crime are on the front page?? just guess...the people protesting that police are harassing them..!