Jump to content
Paulding.com
Sign in to follow this  
Foxmeister

Who Wants to Call This Police Brutality?

Recommended Posts

First douchebag cop that walks up on the left and immediately starts touching, pushing and grabbing people probably did not help the situation.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'll take the "bait". What's your point? Are you trying to illustrate the disparity of the level of restraint police officers show black people as opposed to white people? After an extended scuffle the person who was shot was only shot once. They didn't empty the gun on any of the alleged perps. Whether there is a disparity in sentencing upon any conviction remains to be seen.

 

The police officer on the ground was struck by fellow officers at least twice by accident. Once he was kicked in the face and another time he was clubbed in the head.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a news story about it.

 

I stand corrected. 2 were shot and 1 was killed.

 

To answer your question. Hell yes, it was police brutality. The officers' approach was completely wrong from the outset. Especially with the welfare of children at stake. I think the entire situation was mishandled and could have been resolved without escalating into chaos. Because excessive force was used upon arrival, someone is dead and children's lives were put at risk. These days, too many police officers have no understanding of how to assertively finesse compliance. Everything is always a show of brute force.

 

Firemen don't bring torches to clean up a gasoline spill when a tanker overturns do they?

Edited by COWA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I stand corrected. 2 were shot and 1 was killed.

 

To answer your question. Hell yes, it was police brutality. The officers' approach was completely wrong from the outset. Especially with the welfare of children at stake. I think the entire situation was mishandled and could have been resolved without escalating into chaos. Because excessive force was used upon arrival, someone is dead and children's lives were put at risk. These days, too many police officers have no understanding of how to assertively finesse compliance. Everything is always a show of brute force.

 

Firemen don't bring torches to clean up a spill gasoline spill when a tanker overturns do they?

Look at the video again. They were not the first police officers there. The fighting had actually started before the second two arrived.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is also obvious that the first two officers were waiting on backup.

 

What were they dealing with?

 

I think this story expands the understanding: (From Rawstory)

 

 

Police have released footage of a deadly shootout between police officers and a family of Christian musicians in a Cottonwood, Arizona Walmart parking lot. The melee took place after police showed up in response to reports that a woman had been assaulted by multiple people in the Walmart bathroom.

 

The Gaver family, who make up a Christian band called Matthew 24, was decidedly uncooperative when authorities arrived. Police footage of the incident, broadcast today on CNN, shows members of the Gaver family repeatedly attacking officers.

 

The police investigation into the Arizona Walmart gun fight remains ongoing, but it is clear that an officer was shot and wounded, one member of the Gaver family was shot and wounded, and another member of the Gaver family was shot and killed.

 

According to the Matthew 24 Facebook page, the family of buskers has been singing the Christian word in the streets of Boise, Idaho for several years. Although, the most recent posts on the page are from 2014, well before the Gavers became embroiled in their current (and literal) legal battles. Matthew 24′s last piece of wisdom, which was posted August 9, 2014: “For those who are mind controlled: who don’t own their own mind/soul any longer: there is only one hope! 5) Trust in Yahweh with all your heart, and don’t lean on your own understanding. 6) In all your ways acknowledge Him, and He will make your paths straight. Proverbs 3:5,6″

Notably, in the Bible, Matthew 24 is the section where Jesus describes the coming of violent end times to his disciples.

 

I think that a more deft hand on the part of the police would have avoided a direct confrontation and the resulting shoot out.

 

I wonder if the group had been recognized as open carry advocates (I understand one or more were from the fact they were armed) and a Christian family band, whether the choice to push for taking one of the group to jail immediately.

 

Would the officers been any less aggressive if the group had been a group of open carry advocates instead of a Christian Family band?

 

I'm pretty sure that the Christian Family Band did not expect the aggressiveness aimed toward them and acted, well, quite human. I don't think they have a long rap sheet and may have even thought their position with the Lord was a protection from such aggressive treatment.

 

Is this possibly proof that that regular God Fearing folks are just human and react to aggressiveness with aggressiveness and not utter submission when confronted by LEO?

 

Did the fact the members of the band were carrying (I suspect legally) gave them some expectation of 'respect' in a confrontation with LEO ... that combined with their numbers.

 

What is the difference between this confrontation (an armed group of people) and the confrontation of the BLM in Nevada at the Bundy Ranch - except in Nevada, the BLM backed down and retreated.

 

Given the group was holding weapons and were obviously not compliant, would it have been appropriate to treat the situation like a standoff with officers withdrawing behind their cars, establishing a cordon and demanding surrender or else they would open fire at the first hint of aggression?

 

I suspect the officers were hoping their aggressiveness would invoke submission but the reaction of Christians who carry may have been hyped a bit by the perception of aggression toward minorities and their reaction was more like the militias that defended the Bundy Ranch.

 

It was a tragedy and whether incidents like this will lead LEO to adopt less aggressive tactics or more aggressive ones is the question that I ponder.

 

pubby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at the video again. They were not the first police officers there. The fighting had actually started before the second two arrived.

When the back up arrived the mele began. When a superivisor arrives things are supposed to be handled better not worse. Why would the car with the camera be moved only to park it where the action is then off camera?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the back up arrived the mele began. When a superivisor arrives things are supposed to be handled better not worse. Why would the car with the camera be moved only to park it where the action is then off camera?

The video I posted was from a patrol car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks to me like the poor victims of police abuse fighting back. Since they feel justified they just keep fighting back against men that have wives and children at home. Of course since the cops had no alternative but to fight to subdue them they are the bad guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On one hand, you’re routinely harassed by gangs when you enter the “exclusion areas“. It can be simple routine things like spitting, hurled insults and scratched patrol cars to being pelted with rocks or attempts to blind you with green lasers while driving.

While outright attacks like the one in Landskrona last year are rare (a crowd of 50+ thugs had two officers cornered — and the police commander didn’t dare send in backup, fearing “escalation”) the severity and frequency of these incidents increase as the gangs grow larger and ever bolder.

On the other hand, there’s the mainstream media standing by, ready to document the slightest misstep on the officers’ part while simultaneously providing an endless well of excuses and sob-stories for the REAL victims: the gang members. What can you expect from a journalist that in all seriousness argues that store looting is taking a noble stance for “democracy” and wishes she could participate?

 

Edited by yathink?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in favor of a 'do not respond' list. Sign up in each county where you don't want the police to respond to your home, car or business. Yes, your tax dollars will still fund the police, but we all pay for things we don't use, so don't use that as an excuse. Anti-gun ownership, anti-police, and you liberals are screwed. But, hey you can call Sharpton for help, if you're still breathing. Sharpton will still be breathing as he has his own little brigade of thugs with guns protecting him. Good luck.

 

It's kinda funny how the peon liberals cheer and follow the words of those who have what they're telling you that you don't need.

Edited by yathink?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always found it ironic and a little sad that the liberal peons are expected, and sadly do so, to follow the talking points from the elite liberals, that are protected by armed security, be it elected officials or the Hollywood snobs, that you are not worthy enough to do as they do. They are the adults in the room and they look on you as their little kids without a clue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only bad guys are the disrespectful ones, no matter who has the badge.

 

There is a time to defend oneself, regardless of the circumstances.

 

If you are standing in line, at a grocery store, and someone starts swinging left hooks, and punching you with right jabs; guess what? You are in a fight.

Edited by The Postman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate the video cowa but do know that the fact the encounter was being videoed by the nunya beeswax character was one factor. They may have also been aware of the guy and they may have seen the guy at an oathkeepers or tea party rally.

 

I did see the officers being provocative to a degree ... the hand resting on the weapon that caught the eye of the rifle-toting beeswax guy was an assertion of control. That the beeswax guy was carrying a rifle and the officers had a definitive advantage with hand guns in close quarters, meant that action was a warning to the gun rights guy to not make any provocative moves.

 

That the officers didn't have direct evidence that the man was on school grounds - they obviously didn't directly observe him - gave them the discretion to not make an arrest.

 

I think the geography might have played a part. Had the incident taken place near Sandy Hook elementary, they police may have been more aggressive in regard the zero-tolerance laws regarding weapons on school grounds.

 

Still, I suspect that there existed a bit of a tribal connection between the officers and the man in this case. It maybe as basic a connection that exists between some dogs and some strangers - i.e. a sensing of fear or lack thereof. (You do know if you express with confidence your knowledge that you belong in a place, often that will quiet what appears to be an aggressive dog - I.e. I've successfully barked to a yapping dog that they should shut up because I belong here ... and it works because it lets you put the dog oin their place..) The beeswax character didn't show fear and barked he had the right to be there with the weapon putting the cops on the defensive.

 

Sometimes that strategy works and other times, it provokes a fight (like amongst the Christian family musical act.).

 

pubby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yes according to the story it was a supervising officer. What's your point? The vehicle should have moved away from filiming the action to filming a tree?

 

 

Look at the video I posted and turn the sound up. As the two backup officers arrived, an officer that was already there says they need to separate them and talk to them. One of the perps says no they will not be separated and moves in on an officer. Then one of the perps punches an officer and another perp goes for an officer. The physical confrontation was not started by the police, but by the nut cases.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks to me like the poor victims of police abuse fighting back. Since they feel justified they just keep fighting back against men that have wives and children at home. Of course since the cops had no alternative but to fight to subdue them they are the bad guys.

 

 

Look at the video I posted and turn the sound up. As the two backup officers arrived, an officer that was already there says they need to separate them and talk to them. One of the perps says no they will not be separated and moves in on an officer. Then one of the perps punches an officer and another perp goes for an officer. The physical confrontation was not started by the police, but by the nut cases.

 

 

Separation of suspects before asking questions is what a policeman is supposed to do, the police were just starting to investigate to see if there was a problem and whom was telling the truth when they were assaulted by that family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...