http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/10/us/st-louis-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Quote :

"Protesters took to St. Louis streets for a second night Thursday after an off-duty officer killed a teen who fired at him three times, authorities said."

Is the african american community in St. Louis really up in arms protesting the death of a black teen that started shooting at a police officer????? I'm guessing the cop to show compassion should have ran up to the kid, kindly asked him to drop the weapon and place his hands behind his back so that a proper arrest could be made to let the justice system figure it out...

This is some straight up N*gg*r shit

10/10/2014 9:29:35 AM

Quote :

"One of the parts that's really bothering me is that the officer was off-duty, working another job, in his police uniform, and using that uniform to perform actions in the guise of an on-duty policeman. I don't know what the rules are for police as far as what kind of "police authority" they have while off-duty, so maybe it's legit for this guy to perform arrests and other law-enforcement activities on behalf of the city police department while off-duty, but it seems like he shouldn't be able to do such things while working for another non-city entity, and he sure as fuck shouldn't be wearing his uniform during hours when he is employed by a non-city entity. "

There are mainly two types of off-duty jobs. The first is what is referred to as city/county/state overtime which the government entity pays for the time and you are covered by your benefits. For example, I worked a crime suppression detail at the State Fair last year.

There other kind of off duty is when a third party asks to have an officer present at their function/event/etc. The third party pays the salary and any workman's comp to the officer. They also understand that the officers number one obligation is still to their employer so if there is an emergency, they are bound to respond or take action.

That being said, when you work for a third party, there are rules governing what you can and can't do while working for that entity. The biggest rule is that you can't (for most agencies) enforce the private laws/rules of that entity. For instance, they say no baggy pants at the bar. Cool. You, as a government agent, can't go grab that cat by the neck and toss him out. You let the bouncers do that and if he fights, well now there is a crime.

In an off duty capacity, through the government entity or third party, you still have full police powers. Even if you are 100% off duty (shopping at the mall, in gym clothes), you could still take police action, though most jurisdictions have policy guiding such actions. When I worked for the State, I could pretty much make an arrest anywhere, anytime, no matter what under State law; that being said, I'm not a robot and enjoy my time off.

Quote :

"I really have to question if a normal rent-a-cop is allowed to do a "pedestrian stop" and what obligations a citizen has to comply with such a rent-a-cop. It seems to me that off-duty cop is deriving an implied authority through wearing a police uniform, an authority that he does not actually have at the time. Put more simply, if a rent-a-cop doesn't have the authority to chase down a random person on the street under normal circumstances, then this cop shouldn't be allowed to do the same while on-duty as a rent-a-cop, and his actions should not carry the usual protections afforded to an on-duty LEO. In other words, if you chase a dude down a street and he fires a gun at you, you should still be seen as the instigator, because you were chasing the fucker in the first place."

Lol, wut?

10/10/2014 9:29:49 AM

Quote :

"This is some straight up N*gg*r shit"

smh

10/10/2014 9:34:05 AM

Do some TWWers know the real-life HUR?

10/10/2014 9:46:16 AM

HUR is BobbyDigital alias, guys
Quit falling for his troll








[Edited on October 10, 2014 at 10:07 AM. Reason : I/k]

10/10/2014 10:02:33 AM

^^yes.

10/10/2014 10:05:22 AM

does he talk about "nigger shit" when he shoots the shit with his friends?

10/10/2014 10:08:07 AM

I really like how he calls something "N*gg*r shit" but doesn't quite have the guts to spell out the N-word. I mean...clearly there's no moral justification holding him back from just spelling out "Nigger shit", right? Hey, if you're a racist asshole, own that shit.

10/10/2014 10:26:12 AM

HUR is who he is.

10/10/2014 10:37:43 AM

HUR is an incredibly disruptive user.

which is just what this board needs more of.

10/10/2014 11:32:36 AM

Quote :

"I think that the real issue here, in light of the mike brown shooting as well as other police brutality issues in the lime light recently, is trust between the police and the community. The guy that was shot in this case very well may have been in the wrong...we don't know yet. But when the police have a history of not being transparent with the public, making up any excuse to absolve officers, bullying, provoking, disrespect to the public etc... the community can reasonably distrust the police when something like this happens."

The real issue here is that the news broadcasts all kinds of bullshit hysteria WITHOUT KNOWING who was in the wrong. You are correct - we don't know yet.

10/10/2014 11:44:59 AM

what bullshit hysteria have they reported in regards to this case?

10/10/2014 11:46:41 AM

There are people shot every day in this country. There are people shot by cops every day in this country. But because of the incident in Missurah earlier this year, now EVERY single time there is a cop shooting it gets blasted on the front page along with video footage of rioting and all kinds of other shit. Then they send their little CNN journalists into the area and have them fan out asking every single person they can find about their opinions on cops shooting people. Not their opinions on law enforcement or on criminals or on crime prevention-their opinions on cops shooting people.

Then those opinions get broken down into 15 second sound bytes and after the fact those idiots like Wolf Blitzer sit on TV for an hour talking about police tactics and all kinds of other shit they have no experience with.

In other words, they are making it seem like the cops have banded together and have decided to play cowboys and indians in the ghetto.

Without knowing any of the information surrounding any particular incident, these incidents should 1) not be front page news 2) not be blasted in font 72 on the front page and 3) be a one liner along the lines of this:

"Human being shot by cop. We will report the full story WHEN WE HAVE ALL OF THE INFORMATION."

I also found this slightly interesting. Scroll through the graphics: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/14/police-killings-data/14060357/


[Edited on October 10, 2014 at 11:52 AM. Reason : jank]



[Edited on October 10, 2014 at 11:54 AM. Reason : sdf]

10/10/2014 11:50:41 AM

Quote :

"But because of the incident in Missurah earlier this year, now EVERY single time there is a cop shooting it gets blasted on the front page"

and they should be

it's how things get fixed. I'd like to think we'd all like to live in a country where cops didn't have free range to shoot and kill whoever they wanted, for whatever reason they wanted

I'll happily take dumb amounts of noise as long as it puts focus on police accountability, which is exactly what is happening

10/10/2014 11:55:36 AM

People as diverse as Lynyrd Skynrd and Ice Cube know there's some problems in the ghetto

Either you don't know, don't show, or don't care about what's going on in the hood.


Have you ever lived down in the ghetto?
Have you ever felt the cold wind blow?
If you don't know what I mean
Won't you stand up and scream
'Cause there's things goin' on that you don't know

Ask them why they spend lives across the ocean
Ask them why they spend millions on the moon
Well, until they make things right
Lots of people gonna be uptight
They better make some changes pretty soon

10/10/2014 11:57:29 AM

Quote :

"I'd like to think we'd all like to live in a country where cops didn't have free range to shoot and kill whoever they wanted, for whatever reason they wanted"

They don't have free range to shoot and kill whomever they want for whatever reason suits them. I dare say Restricted will back me up on that. Hell one anecdote of proof attesting to that is the fact that tasers are being used a hell of a lot more now.

As for the putting up with noise, reasonably intelligent people such as you and I can put up with it without a problem. Reasonably intelligent people don't riot over news headlines. But if you think the way news is reported doesn't shape national opinion then you're ignoring how our country has operated since the American Revolution and you're also ignoring how every single political race operates.

[Edited on October 10, 2014 at 12:00 PM. Reason : asdf]

[Edited on October 10, 2014 at 12:01 PM. Reason : asdf]

10/10/2014 11:59:35 AM

protests aren't riots

10/10/2014 12:02:17 PM

Well I'd like to see the news showing more footage of protests then, because every single video being shown has people kicking cars, cops launching tear gas, etc.

Tangentially related, obviously the authorities can be extremely fucked up too. Check this out: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/10/gary-webb-dark-alliance_n_5961748.html

[Edited on October 10, 2014 at 12:05 PM. Reason : asdf]

10/10/2014 12:03:50 PM

Imagine that, the nigger conspiracy (i hope it's apparent that i'm being sarcastic) that the u.s. government was supplying the ghetto with crack had some truth behind it.

10/10/2014 12:14:00 PM

I think that we are getting back to this trust issue. The communities we are seeing on the news have very little reason, based on their own experiences, to trust the police to do the right thing without public oversight by way of 1) policing, and 2) investigating crimes (especially ones potentially committed by their own).

So what? These issues are getting news coverage now. That is usually the only vehicle for getting the public to realize there really is a problem that needs to be addressed. Else, the majority of the public is happy to remain ignorant.

10/10/2014 12:17:53 PM

You're 100% correct about people being happy to remain ignorant. But I mean there hasn't even been any real information to come out of the original Missurah shooting and yet the news has framed the public's opinion in such a manner as to GUARANTEE it was evil doing on the part of police. We simply do not know.

10/10/2014 12:34:31 PM

maybe HUR just likes to be devils advocate

10/10/2014 12:41:29 PM

Quote :

"maybe HUR just likes to be devils advocate "

Nah...that dude is racist as fuck.

10/10/2014 1:03:38 PM

fuck that rases shit clint!

10/10/2014 1:36:22 PM

y'all trolls postin in a nigger thread

10/10/2014 1:53:10 PM

10/10/2014 2:15:48 PM

Hey, I wonder if some of those new-fangled body cameras could provide some clarity here? I've heard they have those now. Anybody else here about those, cause they're a thing apparently... for the last decade.

10/10/2014 6:27:39 PM

Quote :

"maybe HUR just likes to be devils advocate"

Naw bro, him and his butt buddy Førte are simply ignorant racists

[Edited on October 10, 2014 at 6:32 PM. Reason : ^ you're gonna have to elaborate on "they're a thing." i mean sure, they exist...]

10/10/2014 6:29:55 PM

If they're anything like the body cameras that the DC police are supposed to wear, they can still be switched off in order to protect witnesses who wish not to be identified, or to protect police when they know they're going to be doing shady shit

10/10/2014 6:32:52 PM

Sure, but they usually have to answer as to why they turned them off.

More pertinent to my point, what small percentage of US police forces use them?

10/10/2014 6:39:22 PM

It is indeed a very small percentage but growing. In the few places they've been in use it's been almost nothing but positives. Decreases in police brutality claims, better and more professional interaction with the public, fewer uses of force in general, etc.

http://www.policefoundation.org/content/body-worn-cameras-police-use-force

Pretty much exactly what you'd expect. People behave much better when they know they're being watched. It's also a potential for the development of an even more obvious surveillance state, but I'll take that over the police state we currently exist in.

I'll repeat that, we are in a police state. Just think about this, do you feel safer or do you get nervous and worried when you see a cop driving up behind you or approaching you on foot?

[Edited on October 10, 2014 at 6:45 PM. Reason : ukjh]

[Edited on October 10, 2014 at 6:47 PM. Reason : sdfsdf]

10/10/2014 6:44:28 PM

^ and we're white

10/10/2014 6:55:01 PM

Yeah, as a straight white male with zero record (not even speeding tickets, had all those reduced to non-moving violations), a nice car, and no reason to worry about the police I still fucking hate interacting with them and worry that I'm going to have my civil rights vigorously violated.

It's the same way I feel about the TSA or going through a "DWI" checkpoint, it's all just an excuse for the government to remind the public that they've got us under their thumb. The motto of the police should be changed from "To Protect and Serve" to "Fuck You, That's Why."

10/10/2014 7:03:52 PM

I'm big supporter of them, but when not even all police agencies use dash cams (I think that percentage was surprisingly low), I figure most PDs aren't going to start using body cameras unless mandated.

10/10/2014 7:04:53 PM

A quick google search shows that a lot of the major ones are doing it now or at least running pilot programs on them. It's somewhat encouraging, but a lot of work needs to be done to ensure that they don't become just another extension of the surveillance state. There need to be strict laws enacted to force proper storage, timely deletion, strict definitions of what they can be used for, etc.

They should not become tools to allow cops to go through and review every license plate they see, write after the fact jay walking tickets, scroll video for code violations, etc.

It's also time for some real judicial, or even better, legislative activism to get rid of the precedent set where the cops word is taken over the word of a private citizen. Barring video or audio evidence when audio or video evidence is possible the private citizen's word should carry more weight. So, if a cop "forgets" to turn on his camera, or "accidentally" shuts it off they get no benefit of the doubt and are assumed to have no credible evidence to back up the veracity of their statements.

Sadly, we've gone so far the other way (look at how much latitude police dogs who don't have any universal training standards or acceptable/consistent success rate get) that it will take decades to get back to even, if that.

10/10/2014 7:13:07 PM

Rain has stopped, getting started again. Ferguson has once again set up a command post in anticipation.

[Edited on October 10, 2014 at 10:14 PM. Reason : crowd sounds angry tonight]

[Edited on October 10, 2014 at 10:23 PM. Reason : blocking the street now]

10/10/2014 10:09:14 PM

It's all white kids with cell phones in the air tonight.

10/11/2014 10:35:00 PM