The Trial of Derek Chauvin

[Bamspeedy]

A tazer is significantly different from a gun, feels different to a gun, and weighs differently to a gun. The only way a professional could confuse the two is if they were completely incompetent at their job.

Also, notably, the reverse never seems to happen. We don't see "whoops tazered someone we meant to shoot, our bad".

Maybe the reverse would happen if the taser was closest to the dominant hand.

 

[Gorbles]

Maybe the reverse would happen if the taser was closest to the dominant hand.

Which again is pure incompetence and the belief that they have the implicit right to shoot people reflexively for the smallest of misdemeanours.

But you're speculating, anyway.

 

[Bamspeedy]

You got a split second to reach for a weapon, instinctively your going to use your dominant hand. Officers spend more time practicing drawing their handgun than their taser.

Sure, training police other techniques than reaching for tazer/gun is best, but if they are going to reach for a weapon, the tazer should be first option.

 

[Samson]

if they are going to reach for a weapon, the tazer should be first option

I am not convinced, and I think this just builds the narrative that lethal force (even "less lethal" as tasers as referred to) should be used other than when there is is imminent threat to life.

 

[Bamspeedy]

Sure, leave out where I specifically said not using a weapon at all is the best option.

While police will continue to reach for their guns before their tazers.

 

[Samson]

Sure, leave out where I specifically said not using a weapon at all is the best option.

While police will continue to reach for their guns before their tazers.

Sorry if my trimming is construed to be mischaracterizing your response as pro police violence, that was not my intention. I trimmed to show what bit I was referring to.

My point is that perhaps they SHOULD be "reach[ing] for their guns before their tazers", not because they should be shooting more people but because they should only be reaching for a weapon when there is imminent risk to life, and most of the time there is imminent risk to life a gun will be more appropriate.

I would interpret "they should use a taser more than a gun" to mean "most of the time they use lethal force they should not be in imminent danger", which I think is the most dangerous idea.

Presumably this is a change that could be made from the top quite easily, at least to make it clear that the use of lethal force to prevent a non-violent offender escaping is not legal. It does not seem that is would be particularly unpopular either.

I found this that says much the same thing:

Black Americans die at higher rate when police use Tasers

Reuters documented 1,081 cases through the end of 2018 in which people died after being shocked by police with a Taser, the vast majority of them after 2000. At least 32 percent of those who died were Black, and at least 29 percent were white.​

 

[J-man]

It's clear from the video, the officer thought she was using a tazer and not her gun. Doesn't mean she doesn't deserve prison time.

Perhaps the tazer should be the side of the belt with the officer's dominant hand, and not the gun. So, reflexively, the officer is grabbing the tazer first, and not the gun. And switching the gun from the non-dominant hand to the dominant hand would be another thought process that hopefully would register in the officer's brain that they have a gun in their hands and not a tazer.

I think under stress it's easy to mistake your gun for a taser, or vice versa. Switching the taser and gun around the belt will not prevent it. The cause of the error is that the officer didn't keep a cool head. Why didn't officer keep a cool head? This situation wasn't life threatening and a suspect which is not cooperating probably isn't unusual. Might have been a lack of training.

 

[Bamspeedy]

And when you dont have a cool head you do stuff instinctively. And instinctively you use your dominant hand, and practicing drawing your gun more instead of tazer makes drawing your gun more instinctive than the tazer.

But, switching the spots on a belt now, with the million+ officers previously trained the opposite way, might just cause more problems than it prevents.

 

[stinkubus]

Most police officers shouldn't be carrying weapons in the first place. If an ordinary beat cop gets into a jam that they can't deescalate have them retreat and call for back up. Having thousands upon thousands of people who think they're Judge Dredd roaming the streets is not a good idea.

 

[Samson]

In the US, do the police have to give a reason to detain you? This is in reference to this bit:

Daunte said, 'Why?' And he said, 'We'll explain to you when you get out of the car,'
​

In the UK they can request actions only in very specific circumstances, and would have to name a specific crime in these cases.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Most police officers shouldn't be carrying weapons in the first place. If an ordinary beat cop gets into a jam that they can't deescalate have them retreat and call for back up. Having thousands upon thousands of people who think they're Judge Dredd roaming the streets is not a good idea.

As I understand it, a lot of police officers are taught to approach every single interaction with a civilian as a potentially fatal encounter, and to be prepared to kill or die at all times. I don't think policing is a job that naturally attracts terrified people, I think it's drilled into them that they're effectively in a war zone at all times. They act like Judge Dredd because they're taught to believe that any person they meet could be The Terminator.

The joke street sign posted above - "Twin Cities police easily startled" - comes from before the deaths of George Floyd and Daunte Wright, it was the fatal shooting of Justine Diamond in 2017. She had called 911 about hearing a woman screaming, and when the police arrived they found nothing. As the police were preparing to leave, Diamond approached the car. The officers "heard a loud sound" and one of them reflexively returned fire, on the assumption - again, drilled into him from the day he started training at the academy - that he was being fired upon. He shot her in the stomach and killed her. The hypothesis is that Diamond was trying to get the officers' attention before they drove off, and banged her hand on the car's hood or roof.

In 2014, in New York City, a pair of officers were doing a "vertical patrol" in the stairwell of an apartment block, when Akai Gurley exited his apartment and slammed the door shut. One of the officers drew his gun and 'returned fire' on what he must have assumed was someone just randomly shooting at him, and killed Gurley, literally because he closed his own front door too forcefully.

In 2018, Sacramento police officers looking for "a tall black man in a hoodie" who was suspected of breaking into some parked cars shot and killed Stephon Clark in his grandmother's backyard because he had a cellphone in his hand. Again, an instantaneous reaction to regard ANYONE they encounter as a lethal attacker bent on their deaths and shoot him multiple times.

When Lt. Nazario drove to a well-lit gas station before stopping his car, and then was reluctant to get out of his car, he was being completely rational.

In the US, do the police have to give a reason to detain you? This is in reference to this bit:

Daunte said, 'Why?' And he said, 'We'll explain to you when you get out of the car,'
​

In the UK they can request actions only in very specific circumstances, and would have to name a specific crime in these cases.

There's "probable cause" and then there's "reasonable suspicion." But police have demonstrated that they can't make these judgments to the degree that the Massachusetts Superior Court acknowledged that Black people deliberately avoiding contact with police is reasonable because of continual maltreatment. Police were investigating a report - again, looking for "a black man in a hoodie" - and detained one guy who turned and walked away when they approached him. The Court decided that merely walking away from an officer does not count as "reasonable suspicion" because walking away from a cop is totally reasonable and isn't indicative of any guilt. In this case, the guy wasn't necessarily acting out of fear for his life, he just thought cops are [flippin'] [tools] and he didn't want to deal with them.

 

[Ajidica]

The joke street sign posted above - "Twin Cities police easily startled" - comes from before the deaths of George Floyd and Daunte Wright, it was the fatal shooting of Justine Diamond in 2017.

I think it actually comes from the Philando Castille shooting, where the officer shot him as Castille was telling the officer he was lawfully possessing a handgun in his car. And I'm pretty sure there was another 'whoopsie' fatal shooting after the cop in Michael Brown case was not indicted by a Grand Jury.

 

[stinkubus]

As I understand it, a lot of police officers are taught to approach every single interaction with a civilian as a potentially fatal encounter, and to be prepared to kill or die at all times. I don't think policing is a job that naturally attracts terrified people, I think it's drilled into them that they're effectively in a war zone at all times. They act like Judge Dredd because they're taught to believe that any person they meet could be The Terminator.

The institutional pressures work both ways. These sorts of institutions are only going to attract violence seeking cowboys because anyone with decency will be weeded out.

 

[EgonSpengler]

I think it actually comes from the Philando Castille shooting, where the officer shot him as Castille was telling the officer he was lawfully possessing a handgun in his car. And I'm pretty sure there was another 'whoopsie' fatal shooting after the cop in Michael Brown case was not indicted by a Grand Jury.

Right, Minneapolis-area police have a history.

The institutional pressures work both ways. These sorts of institutions are only going to attract violence seeking cowboys because anyone with decency will be weeded out.

Yes, definitely. There was one instance I can remember reading about, a police officer who was a veteran encountered a fellow vet who was trying to commit "suicide by cop." The officer managed to talk the guy down and take him into custody without shooting him. He was fired. For not shooting the guy. I believe he filed a lawsuit and won, and was reinstated. Still, it goes to show that lethal violence - without taking the situation into account or trying to talk to the person deemed a threat - is mandated policy, for at least some police departments. People like Derek Chauvin and Jason Van Dyke and Michael Slager are (probably) psychopaths who need to be put away, but that doesn't explain Kim Potter, Amber Guyger, Mohammed Noor, or Peter Liang.

Incidentally, I just heard on the radio that Kim Potter has been arrested on 2nd-degree manslaughter for killing Daunte Wright.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Yes, definitely. There was one instance I can remember reading about, a police officer who was a veteran encountered a fellow vet who was trying to commit "suicide by cop." The officer managed to talk the guy down and take him into custody without shooting him. He was fired.

Literally moments after I typed this, the radio program I'm listening to started interviewing a police officer who was fired after she tried to stop a colleague from choking a suspect they'd apprehended. She said when she tried to get the other officer to stop, he took a swing at her and other officers had to break up their fight. Again, she was the one who was fired. She noted that some time after that, the officer she got into a fight with was also fired, for beating up (more) suspects and getting into fights with (more of) his colleagues. She recently got her pension back.

 

[Kyriakos]

On a related issue, the government didn't even bother to provide the name of the officer who shot that female protester/rioter at the (edit) Capitol and killed her. No charges either, of course.

 

[Bamspeedy]

On a related issue, the government didn't even bother to provide the name of the officer who shot that female protester/rioter at the Pentagon and killed her. No charges either, of course.

You mean the capitol and not the pentagon?

The Jan. 6th capitol riot shooting was justified, IMO.

 

[Samson]

You mean the capitol and not the pentagon?

The Jan. 6th capitol riot shooting was justified, IMO.

I do not know. Just because the victim is someone on the opposite side of the debate to me, I am not willing to assume this is the one justified act of police violence all year.

 

[Bamspeedy]

I do not know. Just because the victim is someone on the opposite side of the debate to me, I am not willing to assume this is the one justified act of police violence all year.

Good grief. Is it ever possible someone can have seen video of a shooting and have an opinion without it being motivated by race politics?

You disagree with my opinion on the justification for the shooting? Great! Dont need to hypothesize about other people's motivations.

 

[Samson]

Good grief. Is it ever possible someone can have seen video of a shooting and have an opinion without it being motivated by race politics?

You disagree with my opinion on the justification for the shooting? Great! Dont need to hypothesize about other people's motivations.

I very specifically referred to myself. I am not saying anything about yours. I do see that it could be read that way.