Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Yousoggyyojimbo t1_j8f5d8t wrote

Cops straight up should never be allowed to shoot somebody for fleeing without extreme cause to believe that someone else is going to be hurt or killed as a result.

It should always be regarded as murder, otherwise.

232

mohammedibnakar t1_j8fa7fy wrote

> Cops straight up should never be allowed to shoot somebody for fleeing without extreme cause to believe that someone else is going to be hurt or killed as a result.

They aren't allowed to. Tennessee v Garner settled the matter already. It's illegal, period. Our institutions are simply abdicating their authority and refusing to uphold the law and hold these people accountable.

/r/PoliceAccountability

217

Most_Ruin_3005 t1_j8i8c87 wrote

Then it is the duty of the people to yield that abdicated authority. The police don't get to be vigilantes, exacting death sentences on whomever they choose -- if they want to act like outlaws, then we must treat them as outlaws and turn to policing and protecting ourselves from them.

14

amibeingadick420 t1_j8icb51 wrote

Our courts have shown that they will do whatever legal gymnastics they need to in order to protect their armed enforcers.

In order for them to be held accountable, it will take armed citizens conducting citizens’ arrests of cops, and escalating force if they resist or “act aggressively.” Dirty cops, and all of the other dirty cops that protect them as accomplices, will have to be tried and sentenced by “citizen courts.”

9

Ignorantsloth t1_j8fawst wrote

The problem with this is that they can just say they think that person was going to be a harm to others. Now they are justified in being an executioner.

30

Yousoggyyojimbo t1_j8fcap0 wrote

When I say they need cause, they need provable cause.

You need a solid justifiable reason and a solid explanation for why you thought it was possible. You can't just say well, he was running and maybe he was gonna do something bad. Unless that guy was shouting that he was going to go kill somebody, specifically charging another person, something like that, they've got no actual cause.

If a cop can't figure out that a guy just running away to get away isn't probable cause to murder him, they shouldn't be a cop.

30

Ignorantsloth t1_j8fesf3 wrote

This is the system we have now though. The problem is cops aren't actually held accountable for their actions.

Who is going to investigate the cops killing someone. Other cops? "We have investigated ourselves and found that we have done nothing wrong."

21

Yousoggyyojimbo t1_j8fft0e wrote

If they get to do this all the time without repercussions, it's not actually the system we have now.

Very clearly there needs to be another judicial/investigative body that investigates the police. I don't think anybody has doubted that for the last 50 years

5

Ignorantsloth t1_j8fh18b wrote

What would guarantee those that the other body could not be corrupted or for any other reason be swayed to be in favor of the state? I think that this would just be the same situation we have now but with more steps and even less responsibility for the police.

Reforming the system to remove any opportunity for police to behave this way is what I think makes most sense.

4

Yousoggyyojimbo t1_j8fhbtr wrote

If we assume nothing will ever possibly work then we may as well just never talk about any problems. The way you are leading this means that literally no solution is good if human beings are involved in any capacity. You can apply it to literally any situation.

This is making the mistakes of letting perfect be the enemy of good.

7

mybreakfastiscold t1_j8g7k6h wrote

Thinking. Ha, thats a good one.

This cop was amped up on adrenaline and probably steroids. Heightened heart rate from running. Big ego. Not a single valid thought flowed through that brain of his

2

Ignorantsloth t1_j8gmzpd wrote

I think underestimating cops intelligence is dangerous. I think it is an easy scapegoat and helps remove responsibility for these people.

−1

[deleted] t1_j8gsjnt wrote

[deleted]

−2

Ignorantsloth t1_j8hping wrote

Let's not give them too much credit here. I mean you can't think that they aren't actively making these choices to kill people. Putting the blame just on poor training and heightened alerted states is helping to remove the responsibility they should have for these murders.

2

Kharnsjockstrap t1_j8g4jfl wrote

To be fair it can be quite vague in a lot of cases. For example if someone is accused of a violent assault and then flees toward a group of people when police approach them is it reasonable or unreasonable to think he could harm someone if he’s able to reach the group. Or if someone is wanted for murder and flees police should police be held accountable for another murder they commit after escaping when they could have shot the person while they were fleeing?

This all hinges on reasonable belief and of course this calculus changes if it’s drug related and no weapon is involved or something but personally when it comes to fleeing felon type rules there’s reasonable arguments in both directions.

−5

Tomburgerstand t1_j8fbjku wrote

Didn't you hear? They feared for their lives. It's a wonderful catch all for any situation where they choose murder over de-escalation

24

HappyFunNorm t1_j8fguff wrote

It's time to take guns away from the police, IMO.

5

[deleted] t1_j8fulyl wrote

Honestly gonna be pretty hard to get people to wanna be cops if there’s still more guns than people in the country.

8

shakuyi t1_j8fiw2k wrote

the problem with that is then the gangs and other bad actors will take advantage of things more, there needs to be a balance

3

Ignorantsloth t1_j8gnco4 wrote

This is where welfare systems help. Most crime happens because of the system we live in and people's needs not being met. If people didn't have trouble affording food or homes we would already have much less crime and that's just the beginning.

−6

Ignorantsloth t1_j8gn5o8 wrote

They did plenty of damage with fists and clubs not too long ago.

0

Dogsikay t1_j8gd4ll wrote

They shouldn’t be allowed to shoot unless they happen upon a capital offense in progress.

Why are so many people ok with cops carrying out the death penalty on a suspect, pretrial?

−10

Yousoggyyojimbo t1_j8gdlg5 wrote

It should be acceptable to use deadly force when either protecting your life or someone else's. That's what I'm getting at, and murder is a capital offense where they do executions, so... Do we need a map?

3

Dogsikay t1_j8gf16c wrote

Pretty much. Personally I think cops should mostly be disarmed, but I’m pretty sure that’s a super unpopular opinion.

−6

Yousoggyyojimbo t1_j8gfbg1 wrote

I agree with that.

If they weren't armed to the teeth all day every day they might have to learn to approach incidents like human beings.

−2

Ignorantsloth t1_j8gnez8 wrote

Cops have framed innocent people for a long time. What would stop them from continuing that?

3