Ferguson

[classical_hero]

also lolling at darren wilsons cheerleaders saying proper redress against police should be sought in courts

No cop has ever been convicted in the courts.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

No cop has ever been convicted in the courts.

Not near enough, but I wouldn't say none.

 

[James Stuart]

Yes, because that is exactly the context that I was speaking to.




In the vast overwhelming majority of cases, if you follow a cops instructions, the worst that is going to happen to you is that you go to jail for a night. If a mistake has been made, this will often NOT occur. A supervisor on scene will release you or you will be released from jail after a few hours by a judge or supervisor there.





I won't. Videos are at least somewhat credible. Wikipedia is not a peer reviewed, academic resource. I didn't watch the video because I was well aware before hand that the poster chose an extreme case to attempt to prove a point, which is completely irrelevant to what I have been saying all along.



BOTTOM LINE

There have been a lot of you that seem to want to be intentionally obtuse in order to try and win an argument. If that is the case, then bugger off.

For those that genuinely misunderstand: When I said you should obey the orders of the police, I have clearly and repeatedly stated that I am talking about cases where you feel that the stop is unfair or you have been otherwise mistreated, not cases in which the cop is beating you for no reason. This is a similar situation to what appears to have occurred with Mike Brown, with the exception that he clearly did do something wrong. I have clearly stated that the aim of what I have been saying is to prevent escalation and violence from occurring in the first place by moderating your actions and cooperating, and then pressing your case later, the proper way.

Common sense should prevail, and if you're being beaten senselessly or if the cop is attempting to kill you, I think we can dispense with the rules and slip into survival mode. In the very small fraction of cases where this actually occurs, feel free to disregard my recommendations. In the 99.9 percent of cases where the cop is giving you reasonable instructions, whether you did something wrong or not, simply follow those instructions. If you resist and initiate violent resistance, you WILL catch a beating and rightfully so. If you assault a cop, you risk death, and rightfully so.

Some of you seem to want to argue that because a very small fraction of police encounters end with police abuse, that it gives you the right to resist arrest and assault police officers, if you think you are being treated unfairly. It does not. The police have a dangerous, difficult, and stressful job to do. Follow their (reasonable) instructions, go to jail, if necessary, and pursue redress through the proper channels. If you attack a cop, I support the cop's right to use force to subdue you. You are the same as those trying to argue that we shouldn't wear seat belts because they end up contributing to your death in 0.00000000001% of cases.

Thank you for conclusively proving that you're not worth debating this issue with, and are not actually interested in a discussion, but simply in continually hitting your point that "cops are good, people should always obey them, regardless of the situation." I will no longer waste my time in this thread on you.

 

[classical_hero]

Hey, resist the cops at your own peril.

 

[James Stuart]

Hey, resist the cops at your own peril.

Obviously resisting police is seldom a good idea, and certainly not when their requests are reasonable. But JohnRM's comments in this thread have been inflammatory, at the least, and he's refusing to look at outside sources. That means debating the issue with him is not worth my time.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Obviously resisting police is seldom a good idea, and certainly not when their requests are reasonable. But JohnRM's comments in this thread have been inflammatory, at the least, and he's refusing to look at outside sources. That means debating the issue with him is not worth my time.

Tilting at windmills is a good hobby. I enjoy it anyway.

 

[James Stuart]

Tilting at windmills is a good hobby. I enjoy it anyway.

I have enough stress in my life.

 

[JohnRM]

Obviously resisting police is seldom a good idea, and certainly not when their requests are reasonable. But JohnRM's comments in this thread have been inflammatory, at the least, and he's refusing to look at outside sources. That means debating the issue with him is not worth my time.

Wikipedia is NOT a credible source. YouTube is only somewhat credible.

But frankly, this is all I'm saying. Resisting cops is seldom a good idea. If you do it, I don't feel sorry for you...except in those very rare cases that you have a good reason to. Those are exceedingly rare.

 

[onejayhawk]

I assume you mean that you stand in a way that minimises the recoil rather than bracing against it per se, then. Leaning forward is a bit of a controversial one; some military shooters are taught to lean quite pronouncedly. I've never done that, but I do stand pretty much side-on and on the balls of the feet, as you say, but I certainly don't rock backwards when I fire. Shotgun and gallery rifle shooters often stand pretty much square to the target, and standing target rifle shooters actually lean back slightly so as to rest the left elbow on their body. As for trigger release, the goal is to apply a uniform pressure and not make any reaction when it fires - not to be surprised by the shot going off! There are cases when precise shot timing is an advantage, especially when shooting one-handed pistol or a reasonably heavy rifle in the standing position, because the sights are moving around the target. I've heard that some prone rifle shooters fire between heartbeats, but I've never done that, either in military sniper rifle shooting or civilian match rifle. In the latter discipline, though, precise timing is essential so that you can keep on top of the wind - which means that you have to know when it's going to go off!

In a sense. Because the body mass is large in comparison to the force, recoil in this case, it is easy to absorb. Stances are structured to spread the force through several vectors, without conscious adjustment. However, if the same force is vectored in the opposite direction, the stance serves to destabilize the balance. An example would be taking a round in the rear plate of the armor. A person would not have to be leaning forward to be knocked off balance.

J

 

[James Stuart]

Wikipedia is NOT a credible source. YouTube is only somewhat credible.

But frankly, this is all I'm saying. Resisting cops is seldom a good idea. If you do it, I don't feel sorry for you...except in those very rare cases that you have a good reason to. Those are exceedingly rare.

I was posting a link to a Wiki article on psychological biases. I was unaware that this site was an academic journal.

 

[Harv]

This is the internet so we don't need to conduct any experiments, there are enough gruesome videos you can find of real shots to the head. Obviously we can't post them here.

Three I looked up. One was a robber shot in the face by a store clerk, the robber was leaning forward over the counter. Yes, he landed on his back but it doesn't appear it was from the force of the bullet, but his legs kicking forward. Like he was falling straight down and the counter did not offer any support (the counter appeared as solid as a folding table, not bolted to the floor or anything).

Another guy sitting in an interrogation room, shoots himself in the head on his left side with a .45. His head barely moves before slumping to his left, where the bullet came from.

Another man standing up took about 5 shots to the head before slumping forward.

But this defies all the laws of physics we understand from Holly-World.

What is the mass of the said bullet? 0.013 kilograms? How fast is it travelling? 400 meters per second? The momentum would be 5.2 kilogram-meters per second. What was this kid's mass? 130 kilograms? How fast was he running? 5 meters per second? His forward momentum would be 650 kilogram-meters per second, or 125 times more than the momentum of the bullet.

So forward is the direction he would drop.

What is the mass of his head? 5 kilograms? The forward momentum of his head would then be 25 kilogram-meters per second, or almost 4.8 times as much as the bullet.

 

[MobBoss]

But this defies all the laws of physics we understand from Holly-World.

What is the mass of the said bullet? 0.013 kilograms? How fast is it travelling? 400 meters per second? The momentum would be 5.2 kilogram-meters per second. What was this kid's mass? 130 kilograms? How fast was he running? 5 meters per second? His forward momentum would be 650 kilogram-meters per second, or 125 times more than the momentum of the bullet.

So forward is the direction he would drop.

What is the mass of his head? 5 kilograms? The forward momentum of his head would then be 25 kilogram-meters per second, or almost 4.8 times as much as the bullet.

I don't think there was any question he would fall forward if running forward, then shot. I think the argument was if he were standing still surrendering then shot would he fall backward or forward from being shot in the head.

 

[Berzerker]

his head was practically pointing at Wilson for the last shot, he was already running at him or falling forward

 

[MobBoss]

his head was practically pointing at Wilson for the last shot, he was already running at him or falling forward

As opposed to some testimony that said his arms were up and he was simply standing surrendering.

 

[James Stuart]

As opposed to some testimony that said his arms were up and he was simply standing surrendering.

Devil's Advocate: If he was standing still, couldn't a bullet that hit at the right angle cause him to fall forward, where the final bullet would hit him atop the skull?

 

[Bamspeedy]

As opposed to some testimony that said his arms were up and he was simply standing surrendering.

I would hope nobody still believes the shot to the top of the head was while standing up. I believe the argument is he had his hands up when the shot(s) prior to the final shot was made.

I agree with you that Wilson was likely justified in the shooting, I just disagree that it would be guaranteed he would fall backwards if shot while standing up. I think he would fall in a random direction, or forwards because of already being wounded and tired from running, one would likely be leaning a bit forward (hunched forward, catching his breath, etc.), even if he's not obviously leaning forward, he could be leaning forward ever so slightly.

 

[Angst]

That all depends on the orders and your version of unreasonable. Provided that the orders are causing you real harm, just follow the orders and file a complaint and lawsuit later. If the cop is ordering you to put your cigarette out on your eyeball, feel free resist.

How hard is this to understand?

If a cop gives you an order, you don't have to agree that he is justified or right to do so. All I am saying is that if you plan to resist, plan to get beat and/or shot. It is only common sense.

The police shouldn't have have the right to beat you or shoot you simply because you resist an order; this should be up to the nature of the order, and it should be up to the police's discretion to measure when to use violence or not. The tension of the situation shouldn't legitimize violence, either. A parking ticket is a parking ticket. It seems like you are very pragmatic about this (that one should, in the current climate, follow orders because the police is irrationally and impractically violent) but we are arguing for the police not to be those things. Are you aware of this?

Additionally, you ignore that when threatened on one's life, one may or may not act irrationally. This is up to the police to control. There should not be a default threat of beatings or shots just for not following orders. That is not the way things should work. If so, the suspect is always threatened on his life when being approached by the police and I just noted to you that threatened people act irrationally and that it is the police's moral burden to contain the tension of such a situation. Your moral imperative, while pragmatic in the current status quo, is a wrong state of things and should be changed.

The police is able to work properly in Denmark, why aren't they able to in the US? Explaining this with American civic culture isn't a legitimate argument, because the whole point is to change this culture. The status quo should be changed.

And if it's a gun problem, limit the accessibility to guns.

 

[Angst]

Wikipedia is NOT a credible source. YouTube is only somewhat credible.

It's a better source than any you provided, innit?

 

[Traitorfish]

JohnRM is defending arbitrary police authority.

While using a Darth Vader avatar.

It's true, irony is dead.

 

[James Stuart]

Additionally, you ignore that when threatened on one's life, one may or may not act irrationally. This is up to the police to control. There should not be a default threat of beatings or shots just for not following orders. That is not the way things should work. If so, the suspect is always threatened on his life when being approached by the police and I just noted to you that threatened people act irrationally and that it is the police's moral burden to contain the tension of such a situation. Your moral imperative, while pragmatic in the current status quo, is a wrong state of things and should be changed.

This, so hard. I once had a fake gun pointed at me by a childhood friend, when we were in high school. My response was to slap it out of his hand and throw him across a desk and out a window. I then picked up the fake gun and swung it on the teacher that was sprinting over to break up this sudden fight. Oops.

That was completely on instinct, before I underwent martial arts training starting at 17, so apparently my brain snaps into survival mode on a whim. Considering my friend told me to "check out what I made in metalwork" two seconds before he pulled out his masterpiece, my behaviour was far from rational, but I reacted.

Now imagine I did that to a cop. I'm a dead man, and not just because a cop is far less likely to get his butt whipped that conclusively, and instead of a teacher sprinting to the back of a room, it's a cop with a gun and the training to use it.

You should never threaten a person's life unless they are threatening your life or someone else's. Unless, of course, you want an excuse to kill them. Which may well be the case in some police shootings.

JohnRM is defending arbitrary police authority.

While using a Darth Vader avatar.

It's true, irony is dead.

I hear it made threatening gestures at some police officers and was shot in self-defence.