Baton Rouge Police Database Hacked In Retaliation For Killing of Alton Sterling (dailydot.com) 393
Patrick O'Neill quotes a report from The Daily Dot: Just days after the fatal shooting of a black man by Baton Rouge police prompted international outrage and a Justice Department investigation, the Baton Rouge city government's servers have been hacked and 50,000 city police records leaked including names, addresses, emails, and phone numbers. A hacker that goes by the name @ox2Taylor claimed responsibility for the breach, which was confirmed by security intelligence analyst at Patch Penguin, Jamie-Luke Woodruff. He told the Daily Dot that the administrators of the website had failed to implement proper security measures. When the hacker first announced the hack, he accompanied the tweet with three hashtags revealing the motivation: #AltonSterling, #Hacked, and #BlackLivesMatters. "The reason i did it is because of what that officer did to alton sterling," Taylor told the Daily Dot in a private message. "i'm sick of seeing police abuse their power and all the killings."
Fascinating (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
if you ever had an rp06 disk drive fall on you, I think you'd realize that death by database was actually possible back in the day...
Re: (Score:2)
Server fell on him, I swear!
there's a major problem... but how does that help? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's targeting 49,900+ people who had little or nothing to do with the event, and the vast majority of whom are most likely sympathetic to the existence of a serious cultural problem that needs to be addressed, and would like to see that problem get better.
There are many potential ways to improve the situation, few of them fast or easy. I fail to see how this is one of those ways. Doxing the front desk lady and the janitor doesn't do much to prevent the next such event. All it does is create an even deeper culture of mutual antagonism and distrust... which is sort of the whole problem to begin with.
Other police forces have been making dents in this problem through increased social contact between the police officers and supervisors, and the local populace. Once you've had a burger with someone, it's a lot harder to shoot them in the back. Once you've sat down to talk to a local store owner about the problems they face running their shop, it's easier to want to help them.
Re:there's a major problem... but how does that he (Score:4, Interesting)
the thin blue line stands together.
they abuse together.
let them hang together.
what goes around, comes around.
I have no sympathy for those that DAILY abuse citizens and get away with it. ZERO.
let them all suffer. maybe then they'll change their act.
its us vs them, and yes, its gotton to that. I could not care less about cop lives.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not clear what the contents of the database were, though. With 50k records, it can't have been a personnel database, no way Baton Rouge has anything like 50k cops.
Re:there's a major problem... but how does that he (Score:5, Insightful)
let them hang together.
Ah yes, collective guilt.
All Muslims are terrorists.
All gun owners are murderers.
All computer gamers are anti-social psychopaths.
It might surprise you to learn that there are plenty of good, non-racist cops just trying to help their local communities. Are there also racist and power-tripping ones? Yes, plenty of them too, and there is a big problem due to the power they wield over the people. But painting everyone with the same brush leads to the kind of racism that leads to these shootings to begin with, or led to lots of very nasty events in human history. It's the same mentality, applied to a different target.
Cops are individuals. There are good ones and bad ones, and they have good days and bad days. Their lives are often at risk. Sometimes they do heroic things, sometimes they do horrific things. You cannot solve problems like this by painting with too wide a brush.
Re:there's a major problem... but how does that he (Score:5, Funny)
It's true - the 99% bad apples spoil it for the other 1% of law enforcers.
Re:there's a major problem... but how does that he (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm sure there are a lot of bad cops. Unfortunately there are also a lot of people like you. Ignorant and full of shit. I'll take my chance with the cops because I know what life would be like without them. Let a city like Baton Rouge have all their cops walk off the job for a week. It'll become a war zone for real.
Re: (Score:2)
In Soviet America, law enforces you!
Re: (Score:3)
OK, but let's talk brass tacks for just a second. Baton Rouge offers new recruits the princely sum of $25K a year, maybe rising to $35-40K after a decade. Your average nice suburb in Louisiana starts at $32-35K and goes up to $50-55K or more.
So you
Re: there's a major problem... but how does that h (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
No. The point is they might think of themselves as good, but if they cover-up for abusing murderers, then they are not. They are accessories after the fact. If they know somebody's planning to commit murder, and they cover-up, they are accessories before the fact, and equally guilty.
I didn't write the laws, but that's the way they read. If only they were honestly enforced.
Re: (Score:3)
Citation required
As far as I can figure, the rationale for becoming a cop falls into three general categories:
1. "A police officer helped me and my family when I was young, so I wanted to do the same."
2. "Hey, it's one of the few remaining living-wage jobs with benefits."
3. "I get to be a bully to everyone I meet and occasionall
Retaliation? (Score:3, Interesting)
Resisting arrest and wrestling with police while possessing a gun is not healthy - this can't be stressed enough.
We have a gun loving culture and as such police having a hair trigger mentality is a survival advantage. A local cop in my area hesitated last year and paid the price, they got great body cam video of the criminal searching his dead body for another weapon.
Re:Retaliation? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course the statistics are asymmetrical. Seriously were you expecting this number to be about equal? What is your point?
Look how many people commit suicide by cop? Further cops are generally better armed, better trained and deal with desperate people who usually have nothing to lose. So I am if anything surprised that the ratio is as it is.
And when you say "shidt all the risk off of themselves and onto the public" What you really mean is the criminal inclined public. Why don't you train to be cop and mayb
better hope for club fed and not the local jail / (Score:2)
better hope for club fed and not the local jail / courts.
Really? A paedophile with a history of violence .. (Score:3, Interesting)
Get real, people. Sterling was a registered sex offender, with a long history of violent crime, spousal abuse, and had tried to disarm a police officer during a previous arrest. This is a guy who broke a wall to steal an old lady's goldfish so he could sell them for $20. Nothing was below him. He was well known to area police, and he's your typical punk thug who thinks that a gun makes him tough.
Waves a gun around threatening to kill someone, the cops show up, he is MOST uncooperative because he's a gangsta with a gun, and don't have to take no shit from nobody, especially da man!
It would have been (and has been) the same outcome if he had been white in Canada with a knife, as opposed to black in the southern US with a gun. You keep asking for it, eventually you'll get it. The world is a better place without him, and all other punk-asses. He doesn't get a pass just because he's black. Reverse discrimination is as bad as outright discrimination.
As for him being shot 4 times, nobody's going to shoot only once and then wait for you to pull out your gun. People are making a big thing about that because carrying a gun is legal there. They seem to forget that making threats while waving a gun around isn't.
This has nothing to do with race, and people shouldn't be giving a perp anything close to a pass just because of their skin colour.
Now all you people who are so bent on being seen as so politically correct and pure that you can't see or think stright, flame on!
And there it is, apologist for murderers. .. (Score:5, Insightful)
None of which justifies his murder by police. Yet another example of unjustified shooting by US police.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The police shot a man that was in no position to fight back.
No, they used force to stop a 6'-4", 300 pound guy that WAS fighting back, and who they did not have under control. And they knew he had a gun. They showed up there BECAUSE he had been threatening people and waving a gun around, and they had to get physical with him because he was fired up and refused to do what they said, they couldn't taze him into submission, and he was fighting with them. While armed. You don't actually know what the word "murder" means.
Re: (Score:2)
First, none of what you said is punishable by death. Second, did you watch the video? The guy is laying on the ground with 2 officers on top of him and another over him, they can't control his hands and instead need to just shoot him several times?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
" they can't control his hands"
Exactly. You said it yourself. And what are hands good for when someone is armed and desperate?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Does not justify summary execution restrained on the ground.
Stop being ignorant.
Re: (Score:2)
... said the anonymous coward.
In this case the shooting appears justified. Grow up. The world is a better, safer place without him. He could have avoided all this by not illegally carrying around a gun and threatening someone at 12:30 at night.
Re: (Score:2)
The cops weren't able to control him, knew he had a gun on him, tazering didn't work, and you would rather they do what - serve tea? BTW, as a convicted felon and repeat offender he knew that he'd be doing time for the gun he illegally had in his possession, so he was highly motivated to not surrender.
As for me, you don't see me going around threatening homeless people with a gun at 12:30 at night (or any time, for that matter). And if I were to be accused of threatening someone, I would let the police han
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
1. He was a thug for his entire adult life. That is justified by his record. You can read 46 pages of his previous activities here [heavy.com] It's at the top of the page, but takes a moment to load since it's from disqus.
2. There is no reason whatsoever that this career criminal wouldn't have continued being a violent thug. Obviously 2-1/2 years of hard labor didn't change him, so jail isn't the answer.
3. There is absolutely zero objective evidence that the world would be a safer place with him, but there's plenty t
Re: (Score:3)
Obviously you are willing to ignore that Sterling was armed, that he had threatened someone, that he had resisted arrest, that tazing him didn't work, and that (from the second video) the cops knew he was armed at the time because they didn't have to frisk him to find the gun - they immediately took it from his pocket.
This has nothing to do with race and everything to do with the guy's actions. At that point the cops were acting in self-defence, and you would have shot too, unless you're even more of an id
Re: (Score:2)
the cops knew he was armed at the time because they didn't have to frisk him to find the gun - they immediately took it from his pocket.
Just so we are clear here, the point at which it is okay to kill a suspect in self defence is when they are being uncooperative and you are fairly sure he has a gun, even if he hasn't actually removed it from his pocket yet?
I'm sorry, I know being a police officer is often dangerous, but I'm not willing to accept that. We have had similar incidents in the UK where the police have killed people they thought were probably armed, but it later turned out they were not. I think at least waiting for the suspect t
I was just thinking of this today (Score:2)
Born in Lake Charles; Grew up in BR. I say Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
When you wipe your ass with the constitution.
When your police fail to police the police.
When you subvert the media to the point that the public doesn't recognize the concept much less the term "fifth estate"
You have forfeited your legal mandate.
You have demanded the public no longer trust you.
You have asked each of us to take it upon ourselves to expose your crimes against the public trust.
And some of are willing to take up the work.
If we don't hold their feet to the fire it's only going to get worse.
Look to Russia to see where we're headed.
A kleptocracy controlled by thugs.
How I would fix the police malpractice problem (Score:2)
Let every legal settlement in these cases come directly out of the police pension fund. We would see the bad cops being fragged by the good ones.
Experience with Government & Police Computers (Score:2)
I don't know enough about this particular event to have a full opinion, the initial video did not show the whole story, the second video doesn't tell the whole story. Apparently, Alton flashed a gun and threatened a homeless man, police were called and Alton was armed. Alton resisted arrest and while wrestling with him still resisting, Alton reached for the concealed firearm and was subsequently shot dead. I watched both videos, Alton was clearly not cooperating and although he was on his back both offic
Re:Experience with Government & Police Compute (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know enough about this particular event to have a full opinion, the initial video did not show the whole story, the second video doesn't tell the whole story. Apparently, Alton flashed a gun and threatened a homeless man, police were called and Alton was armed. Alton resisted arrest and while wrestling with him still resisting, Alton reached for the concealed firearm and was subsequently shot dead. I watched both videos, Alton was clearly not cooperating and although he was on his back both officers (not small men by any standard) were struggling to get him rolled over and cuffed and Alton was not having any part of it.
Perhaps you should watch the videos again. From the second one, the officer that's closer to the camera - the same officer that pulled his gun, pointed it at Alton's chest, and shot him at point blank range - was kneeling on Alton's left arm. You can see Alton's left hand past the officer, fingers spread.
Now let me just ask you an objective question: when one officer is kneeling on his arm so that he can't move how is it Alton's fault that he can't roll over?
As a follow-up question, shouldn't the officer kneeling on his arm realize that he's kneeling on his arm (it was clearly intentional), and therefore not shoot him for "not having any part" of being rolled over?
You'll notice, I hope, that these two questions can be answered with a simple understanding of physics, and not require any inferences about whether he was "clearly" cooperating or not.
All Alton had to do was kneel and put his hands on his head and keep his mouth shut. Tell the officers he is indeed armed and where the firearm is located. Allow the officers to cuff him and remove the firearm for the officers own safety. If Alton is a legal concealed carry permit holder he would know these things.
A legal concealed carry permit holder tried that in Minnesota last night. He's dead now. [cnn.com] Need it also be mentioned that he was black?
The other recent shooting in Minneapolis was due to a frightened officer who panic'd. That was a truly tragic event, it never should have happened. The car was pulled over for a broken tail light. The driver was asked to produce his license and registration which is standard procedure. He correctly informed the officer that he was a concealed carry permit holder and he was armed. At this point the officer drew his weapon, again, standard operating procedure. What happened next is the bad part. The victim was complying but there was some form of communication breakdown and he reached to get his wallet and the officer shot him four times. This all took place in mere seconds. You never ever take your hands off the steering wheel and do not make any sudden movements!
I see... On the one hand, it was the victim's fault for not complying. On the other hand, it was the victim's fault for complying too quickly. Regardless, it never is the police's fault - either they were acting properly, or it was a "truly tragic event (that was still the victim's fault)".
I don't need to delve into your masturbatory fantasy about how traffic stops go for white people, but I do want to address this:
It's about respect not about an officers authority.
Your badge does not entitle you to free respect. In fact, nothing entitles you to free respect. And if you feel that someone is being "disrespectful" to you, so therefore you should get to kill them with impunity, then you are the one who should be sucking on that barrel, not them. We have the right, as Americans, to tell the officer to give us the ticket or whatever else they want and then fuck off back to the fuckstation and eat their glazed fucknoughts with their fuckbuddies in blue. Disrespectful? Sure. A crime worthy of instant execution? Fuck you.
Re: (Score:2)
Now let me just ask you an objective question: when one officer is kneeling on his arm so that he can't move how is it Alton's fault that he can't roll over?
As a follow-up question, shouldn't the officer kneeling on his arm realize that he's kneeling on his arm (it was clearly intentional), and therefore not shoot him for "not having any part" of being rolled over?
GP was not saying "he did not roll over, so he was shot". In reality he was shot because he was reaching for his gun with his right hand. Objectively it was stupid, and dangerous.
A legal concealed carry permit holder tried that in Minnesota last night. He's dead now. [cnn.com] Need it also be mentioned that he was black?
And do you know in this case, he was felon, and he cannot legally carry guns, let alone get a concealed permit.
I see... On the one hand, it was the victim's fault for not complying. On the other hand, it was the victim's fault for complying too quickly. Regardless, it never is the police's fault - either they were acting properly, or it was a "truly tragic event (that was still the victim's fault)".
It was the "victim's" fault for not complying from the beginning. You dont carry a gun illegally, and then refuse to comply.
I am not even going to bother with the rest of the comment.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, the police should put someone face down in the dirt and cuff them just to talk to them? No.
It was a tragic accident
I call it murder.
Re:karma's a bitch (Score:5, Insightful)
This problem has a few pieces. First cops have the us versus them mentality. Everyone other than a cop is just a person who hasn't committed a crime yet. Second cops are taught to maintain control of the situation to matter what. Tell a cop knocking on your door that he can't come in and what him flip out, kick the door in and pull a gun on you. Third the unions and legal system ensure cops rarely do jail time. Why do cops get trials where a judge decides? How can an average citizen get those privileges?
Re: karma's a bitch (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone can waive the right to a jury trial and have a judge instead. Read a fucking book.
Re: karma's a bitch (Score:3, Insightful)
Cops go for bench trails because they only consider other cops as their "peers". No way to get a jury of only law enforcers so the judge is the next best thing. In my experience, most cops do not relate to their fellow man very well, and if they do they are not in the field for long.
Re: (Score:3)
Why do cops get trials where a judge decides? How can an average citizen get those privileges?
Generally, defendants can waive their right to a trial by jury, and have their case heard just by the judge (a "bench trial"). Technically, the prosecution has to consent, but it almost always does, since to decline to do so is opening up grounds for an appeal.
Defendants usually go for bench trials when their lawyers believe that the law is on their side, but the defendant isn't sympathetic.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do cops get trials where a judge decides?
Everyone gets this. The right to a jury trial is something a criminal defendant has and can waive. There are rare cases where an average citizen thinks he'll get a fairer shot at acquittal from a judge than a jury and waives the right to jury trial. Usually, this happens if the accused thinks that a jury will hold a particular prejudice against him for matters unrelated to the crime which the prosecutor has a way of putting in front of the jury. For them, it's
Re: (Score:3)
Cops get trials where the judge decides, because that is in the best interest of the cop, and the cop chooses to forgo a jury trial. It is their right (as is yours as well). Most of the time, you WANT a jury trial, cops are one of the exceptions where judge tends to be more dispassionate.
And you're right, cops don't like to lose control. But the moment THEY lose control, they've already lost. Having been arrested by a pair of cops who "lost control" (verbal, not physical) I can assure you, I have no loss of
Re:karma's a bitch (Score:4, Insightful)
ha!
they do NOT protect NOR do they serve. not us, anyway.
the courts ruled that cops have no obligation to PROTECT you.
sleep well, america.
Re: karma's a bitch (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Too many people think that their local neighborhood is what everyone else must also live in and haven't seen anything that could be described as a bad neigh
Re: (Score:2)
Of course they say so, they're playing for the camera. Would you want to admit on national television that the pothead you just arrested was not a threat to anyone?
The problem is, pretending to be the chosen hero fighting against the forces of darkness can be addictive. The sorry state of our political system is a good example of that. And then you forget it's
Re: karma's a bitch (Score:2, Insightful)
Raids are the wrong way to get safety.
You get a warrant and arrest the perps outside after a low key stakeout. No worries about them suddenly flushing the evidence, no letting them get an AK47 from the basement, etc.
The raids are just adrenaline junky machismo bullshit.
Re: karma's a bitch (Score:2)
I don't think the motto has all that much of an effect. In Canada, the RCMP has "Maintiens le droit." Which means "Uphold the law." Or, more poetically "Uphold the right."
Doesn't stop them from shooting a prisoner in the back of the head in self defence.
Re: (Score:2)
This problem has a few pieces. First cops have the us versus them mentality. Everyone other than a cop is just a person who hasn't committed a crime yet.
Sadly, this is all too true. They've also gotten kitted up in the last few years so they all look like extras from Robocop.
The average cop cop carries a gun (often 2 guns), a Taser, military-grade pepper spray, a baton, and a knife. He or she wears a bullet-resistant vest, steel-toed shoes or boots, and has handcuffs and a radio with which to call for help.
And yet despite being armed to the teeth, he or she is terrified, simply terrified of a person in a t-shirt and shorts with a camera, or some dude who mi
Re: (Score:2)
And yet despite being armed to the teeth, he or she is terrified, simply terrified of a person in a t-shirt and shorts with a camera, or some dude who might be selling CD or single cigarettes.
That's because they have a "Bully" mindset.
And ya know whatcha see underneath when you scratch the surface of a Bully?
A scared little child.
Explains a lot, doesn't it?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
. First cops have the us versus them mentality
I wonder why. [cnn.com]
Second cops are taught to maintain control of the situation to matter what.
Must be that whole law and order thing, huh? Would you really want law enforcement not be able to maintain control of a situation they are responsible for?
Tell a cop knocking on your door that he can't come in and what him flip out, kick the door in and pull a gun on you.
Have you tried this? I will bet you haven't. If you don't know what your rights are or what the police can do that is really your problem.
Why do cops get trials where a judge decides?
You do realize you can opt to waive your trial by jury for a bench trial? So, you mean to tell me that a cop, much like the tax collector who is disliked by most, wouldn't want to be judged by a random b
Re: (Score:3)
Because they have tachyon vision and thus effect can precede cause for them? Because I have a hard time seeing how else the reaction to police brutality could possibly be its cause.
But hey, kicking a dog and then playing the victim when it finally bites you back certainly deserves plenty of respect, amirite?
Remember that (Score:5, Insightful)
How many of the people impacted by the dump are Black? How much redaction was done to protect the innocent?
Yeah, I hope Karma comes knocking.
I do find it interesting that many of the same people claiming the police are corrupt want to take away the 2nd amendment. The same people claiming certain groups need protection are fine to oppress other groups. The same groups yelling "listen to me" also attempt to prevent opinions they disagree with.
Karma - cares about right and wrong, not about personal hypocrisy.
Not necessarily directed at you, but if the shoe fits give it a good sniff.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
2nd ammendment is a train that has long left the station.
our little pee shooters are no match for the goverment's toys.
what we have can't even stop the mafia (they still exist, right?).
a well regulated militia was meant to protect the people against a rogue government, which, sadly is EXACTLY what we have now.
but over time, we reduced our own rights to own 'serious' armor and so our ability to keep balance of power is now zero.
I wish we could keep the government honest. if they feared us, they'd respect us
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
a well regulated militia was meant to protect the people against a rogue government
God DAMN it, I wish this bullshit would stop getting thrown around. That is not why the second amendment exists. It exists because the founders of this country were massively distrustful of a standing army (with good reason), and militias were (and I do mean were) an alternative way to have a reasonable early response to an invading force.
If you want a good example of why the second amendment exists, look at what happened to the British army at the Battle of Baltimore during the War of 1812. It was not writ
Re: (Score:2)
"our little pee shooters are no match for the goverment's toys."
YOURS might not be. I know plenty of guys (mostly rednecks) with gun cabinets that have enough weaponry to knock out most any police station.
Re: (Score:2)
I know plenty of guys (mostly rednecks) with gun cabinets that have enough weaponry to knock out most any police station.
I bet Noriega's guys were better armed than your redneck acquaintances. Didn't help him much.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So you think the federal government is going to use tanks and guided missiles to put down an armed revolt in the US?
Aside from the posse comitatus implications, the people actually doing the driving/shooting for the government aren't just mindless drones imported from a cloning facility... they are our neighbors, our friends,
Re: (Score:2)
So you think the federal government is going to use tanks and guided missiles to put down an armed revolt in the US?
The US has used the military once before to put down an armed revolt.
Just pointing it out.
Re: (Score:2)
So you think the federal government is going to use tanks and guided missiles to put down an armed revolt in the US?
A more likely scenario is that the federal government will round up citizens and put them in concentration camps, and most gun owners will turn a blind eye or cheer the government on as they do it. Not that likely a scenario, of course, but it did happen in 1942.
Re: (Score:3)
So you think the federal government is going to use tanks
Oh! how quickly we forget [youtube.com]...
Wrong on most accounts (Score:2)
2nd ammendment is a train that has long left the station.
Nope, while there are surely some restrictions most law abiding citizens can own a gun in most States. Exceptions are not the rule.
our little pee shooters are no match for the goverment's toys.
200 million people with small arms can put up a hell of a fight. You are also omitting the fact that if there is a civil military action mandating killing citizens, a good number of military people would jump ship and join militias with their government toy. Also, and at least as important: You don't have to kill everyone currently holding power to have a successful revolt.
Re: (Score:2)
200 million people would need to agree that the government needs to be replaced to put up any kind of fight at all. And if they do, they can simply vote it out.
Unless, of course, we're not actually talking about a popular uprising of the masses, but about a bunch of guerillas "correcting" political decisions they don't like.
Re:Remember that (Score:5, Interesting)
Agreed. What people don't seem to understand is that pro-2nd amendment people do not think that their AR-15s (by the way, not an "assault rifle") will be able to hold off the military. The military has tanks, drones, and nukes. However, they're not going to use that stuff on their own soil unless the shit really hit the fan. If they did that, there would be little to nothing left for a tyrannical government to govern.
What the 2nd does do, is keep things like police-state door-to-door roundups and executions from happening. They won't do that if they know people can and will shoot back. We've already seen in the middle east (and before) how a giant and well-armed military can be held back by a small and determined group of fighters. At the end of the day, even for all the technology, wars are still won by men on the ground with rifles. (Shotguns and handguns don't cut it, they aren't effective over long distances, and most real life battles take place over 100+ yards, not in Call of Duty-esq tiny maps.)
On another note, I find it interesting that we keep hearing in the news about this previously convicted sex offender who was illegally armed, had drugs, and was resisting arrest. Yet we don't hear so much about this poor fellow. [cbslocal.com] Probably because he had his CC license and legal gun, and was lawfully exercising his constitutional right. If you ask me, this instance is much more indicative of racism in the police than Alton Sterling. Curious that the media drums up sympathy for the black criminal, but not the black responsibly and legally armed citizen.
Re: (Score:2)
What the 2nd does do, is keep things like police-state door-to-door roundups and executions from happening.
No it doesn't. Ask any American citizen of Japanese descent who was around in 1942.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably very few, given that they were Japanese (a place with extremely tight gun control).
They were Americans. But okay, let's play along for the sake of argument. How it might have played out if they were armed and tried to defend themselves?
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, it gives SWAT teams an excuse to go in guns blazing. So, epic fail.
Re: (Score:2)
What the 2nd does do, is keep things like police-state door-to-door roundups and executions from happening.
rofl
We've already seen in the middle east (and before) how a giant and well-armed military can be held back by a small and determined group of fighters.
they didn't "hold back" anything.
that's not how insurgencies work.
they blend into the local populace, they hit and fade.
they don't stand and hold anything back.
Re: Remember that (Score:5, Informative)
The AR-15 isn't an assault rifle? What do you think the AR stands for, Einstein? Assault Rifle model 15 is what it stands for but don't let names screw with ya. I'm 100% certain that you didn't comment in any of the Tesla threads bitching about them using the name "autopilot", now did you? Unpossible!
On the off chance that this isn't a troll, Google is your friend, I am not. The AR stands for Armalite, the company that designed the rifle. The 15 is just the type. There is also an AR-5 (smaller caliber), AR-17 (shotgun), and an AR-23 (pistol). If AR stood for "assault rifle", why would it be used in the case of the AR-17/23 which are not rifles? Do some research, you sub-average cretin.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't be a criminal and you won't have to worry about police shooting you.*
*I'm not making a judgement about this particular case since the facts are not yet known. But when it comes to criminals like Michael Brown who attack police, they shouldn't expect to be treated with velvet gloves.
Re: (Score:2)
So what's the rue for Philando Castile - the man who was shot when he reached for his wallet during a traffic stop? He had a legal concealed carry permit and wasn't a criminal. How could he have prevented being shot? "Don't get stopped by the police if you're black? Don't be armed if you're not white?"
Re: (Score:2)
So you don't know the facts but do know the conclusion?
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
No doubt George Zimmerman agrees... only in his case he was able to draw his weapon and fend off an unlawful attacker who had him pinned to the ground.
The difference is that in this case, like it or not the cops did have the right to talk to the person (though they don't have to respond), even to detain him... and if you do end up resisting/fighting with police... bad things may end up happening, doubly so if you appear to be
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, George Zimmerman was the unlawful attacker who instigated the fight.
Re:karma's a bitch (Score:5, Informative)
This officer is guilty of 1st degree murder, plain and simple.
You don't actually know what 1st degree murder is, plain and simple.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, a second is considered long enough for 'pre-meditation'.
Citation, and actual examples of any judge or jury ever convicting on 1st on that basis, needed.
... I'd like to see you be in that position (on
Regardless, cops showing up to a complaint of a 6'-4" 300 pound guy threatening people and waving a gun around, and having it go south when he won't simply do what they say, and then when he's combative, being unable to alter his behavior with multiple taser hits, and then having him wrestling on the ground with his hands still free while you know he's got a gun
Re:karma's a bitch (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course you know all of this. And if that same guy was waving a gun around in front of your place of business, you'd ALSO call the cops and be glad they were willing to roll up and risk their lives as they do every single day.
Re: (Score:2)
" There is pretty much no way you can misinterpret that video"
Looks like you did. How do you know what Sterling is doing with his other hand that you can't see? If he was resisting arrest, and continued to go for his gun this was justifiable. A token fight eh? It only takes a small movement and trigger pull to kill either cop who are trying to subdue Sterling. You do not resist arrest while carrying a weapon...
Re:karma's a bitch (Score:5, Informative)
The man was pinned to the ground and incapable of anything more than a token fight.
I disagree.
If you read the story, Mr. Sterling had been stunned twice and *was still standing.* Wow! That guy is a tank! So the officers physically took him down. One officer pinned Mr. Sterling's left arm, while the other officer was unable to pin his right arm because of the car in the way. From the store's video camera view, we see that Mr. Sterling's right arm was reaching down to his side. After the shooting, the police remove a gun from his right side.
So I see:
* Man refuses to stand down when verbally asked.
* Man stands-up to two stuns.
* Man is still struggling after being pinned to the ground.
We can stop here: at this point, they might well legally be able to shoot him. They have exhausted all other options. What else could they do? Stun him 50 more times? Hope another officer arrives and that 3 people can take him down? I'm seriously interested in hearing what the next escalation level is that doesn't involve a gun.
* Man has a gun.
I am no lawyer, but I am pretty confident that NOW they can shoot him. At this point, even if he laughed and said "Sorry guys, I just was messing around, let me up and we can chat about this" they might still be room to shoot him. He demonstrated that he is willing to use force, that he is strong as hell, and he isn't giving up. Now he has a deadly weapon too?
* Man is reaching for a gun.
No brainer. Done.
Re: (Score:2)
We've been told by the NRA and others that "the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun." This goes along with a push from some people to arm more people and let them conceal carry their weapons. If we have more people carrying guns with them, would this result in more of these "pinned down by the police" turning into "shot by the police" because the person reached for what the officer assumed was a weapon?
We have the Alton Sterling shooting and, a day later, the Philando Castile shoo
Re: (Score:2)
and then you get idiots and like Sean Hannity saying "well the thing I always do when confronted by police is show them my gun so they know I'm carrying".
must be nice to be white and rich and that delusional.
Re: (Score:3)
Personally I don't think they had to shoot him. I'm with you on the fact he was actively resisting and it looked as if he might have been trying to reach for something with his free hand but I'd simply have pistol whipped his ass into submission. If two big ass cops can't handle a guy they're sitting on then they're fucking useless. They'll never get them for 1st degree murder as it's obvious they were in a struggle before they shot him but it's possible a jury might get them for manslaughter. But then
Re: (Score:2)
What legal basis to shoot him? Because the guy was struggling against an arrest? That gives no rights to kill someone. He had as much right to live as the police officer did.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In the UK that's murder. The police escalated the level of violence; unless and until Sterling drew his firearm he was not threatening their lives.
In the US you have different laws though.
Re: (Score:3)
The police did not at that point need to escalate the situation. They were in a ground struggle with the two of them on top. Sterlings left arm was completely immobilized and pinned by the officers legs. That left the officer physically on top of him with two free hands to deal with the other arm. At that point it should be impossible for Sterling to draw his firearm let alone actually point it at anyone. All they had to do at that point was continue to restrain Sterling, instead they jumped up the escalati
Re: (Score:2)
What do you think a 300lb felon with a gun in his pocket resisting arrest can do to an officer ? This isn't the movies where the good guy can disarm the bad guy with his bear hands.
The sex offender Sterling caused his own death. Yes I scene both videos and it could have easily been officer shot and killed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:karma's a bitch (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh yes, let's blame the victim. Yay. Whoooo.
"...used a gun to threaten someone outside a convenience store."
The murder victim had been robbed several times, and it was a rough neighborhood. A homeless man came up and asked him for money, but the murder victim declined. When the beggar persisted, and continued to molest the murder victim, they allegedly presented their firearm in a non-threatening manner to warn them off. (Showed the assailant they had a gun in their pocket.)
"... violent offenses..."
Resisting arrest, obstruction of an officer, disturbing the peace. Gosh. Such violence. Wow. Those are like, consolation prizes in the game of Living While Black.
"...possession of a controlled substance."
Weed. A dimebag of weed. Less an ounce, maybe a few grams. But hey, I guess you already know that Louisiana has an absolute zero-tolerance policy to *any* amount of cannabis? At least, prior to 2015, anyway.
So yeah. Take your KKK-brand dogwhistle and head for the door.
Re: (Score:3)
Resisting arrest can come about if the officers say to put your hands behind your head and you don't do it as fast as they want you to.
Also, we have to take into account that the officers likely didn't know Sterling's record right then and there. They were dealing in the moment and made decisions (good or bad) based on what they saw at the moment. So it's disingenuous to say "well, the guy had these past offenses and so the officers were justified in doing this."
Re: (Score:2)
People always dredge up "facts" that the victim wasn't saintly as an excuse to justify the killing, support the cops, or to just be contrarian.
Maybe there's some fear that causes this reaction, worries that if the police don't shoot the black people then who's going to protect decent citizens from the black people...
Re: (Score:2)
Fucking idiot. Did you even look at the shit?
It's a list of businesses.
887582 BURKHART DENTAL SUPPLY CO 10 453000 7/23/2010 BURKHART DENTAL SUPPLY CO 2502 S 78TH ST TACOMA WA 98409 8409 2502 S 78TH ST TACOMA WA 98409 8409 2532124865 8669470713 2532124865 KUDBYE@BURKHARTDENTAL.COM BURKHART DENTAL SUPPLY CO OWNER 2532124865 0 2502 S 78TH ST TACOMA WA 98409 0 LORI ISBELL PRES 2532124865 0 2502 S 78TH ST TACOMA WA 98409 8409 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 7/27/2010 12:00:00AM J:\Reports\Sheriff Data.rpt