BART shooting

[Anti-Bunny]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXWSgG-KNng

Maybe he thought it was a taser?

I'm going to go ahead and predict this cop will be awarded 'Policeman of the Year' ..you know, for bravery (http://wcco.com/iteam/swat.team.honored.2.783216.html).

[bago]

Whaddya think this is, Maryland (http://www.progressive.org/mag/mc071708.html)?

[Bad Neighbor]

This is how riots start.

[extarbags]

This is how riots start.

Not these days.

[Anaxagoras]

Oh my God.

Thanks for the link, Anti-Bunny.

[Eric T Cheng]

Details (http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_11369592?source%253Dmost_emailed.26978592730A3B 8C7F471EACE0DA4EF2.html) of the shooting.

[Wallapuctus]

Alex Jones must be all over this.

Am I a cynic for thinking this cop won't go to prison?

[MatthewF]

Prison? That's cop of the year right there.

[Guido Jones]

Maybe he thought it was a taser?


That's about the only thing that makes sense - he went to draw his taser and pulled his service pistol instead.

Maybe making tasers so they look/feel like pistols wasn't such a good idea.

[Wallapuctus]

Why the hell do transit police have weapons anyway? Are they actual, real cops or just glorified security guards?

I've seen MBTA Police in Boston with automatic weapons, it's scary shit. Why do they need submachine guns to guard a fucking bus stop? If a terrorist *does* somehow surface, what are they going to do, unload a clip into the crowd?

[Charles]

That's about the only thing that makes sense - he went to draw his taser and pulled his service pistol instead.

Maybe making tasers so they look/feel like pistols wasn't such a good idea.

Can you actually taser someone being held down by other people without shocking the whole lot of them? My knowledge of electricity seems to indicate no.

[Athryn]

Why the hell do transit police have weapons anyway? Are they actual, real cops or just glorified security guards?

I've seen MBTA Police in Boston with automatic weapons, it's scary shit. Why do they need submachine guns to guard a fucking bus stop? If a terrorist *does* somehow surface, what are they going to do, unload a clip into the crowd?

Yeah, BART police are actual, real police officers with a jurisdiction and everything. From the article linked before your post:

BART's 206 sworn officers attend the same academies and training programs as city police and sheriff's deputies. According to BART's Web site, its requirements go beyond state guidelines, as every officer applicant must have completed at least a year of college.

As to the cop of the year comments, that's not gonna fly in the Bay Area. This guy will go down for sure.

[MikeJ]

Can you actually taser someone being held down by other people without shocking the whole lot of them? My knowledge of electricity seems to indicate no.

AFAIK, a Taser fires two electrodes at someone. The electrodes land close together, so the paths running through other people are going to have much higher resistance than paths that run more directly through the target's body. So I doubt someone holding the person is going to get anything like what the target gets, if they feel anything at all.

[BostonBum0]

Why the hell do transit police have weapons anyway? Are they actual, real cops or just glorified security guards?

I've seen MBTA Police in Boston with automatic weapons, it's scary shit. Why do they need submachine guns to guard a fucking bus stop? If a terrorist *does* somehow surface, what are they going to do, unload a clip into the crowd?
The reason the MBTA police have guns is because when you call 911 on the T they have to dispatch an MBTA cop, because in towns like Quincy the local police don't have jurisdiction there. I live down the street from the MBTA's commissioner of drug enforcement and elsewhere in my town there is a gentleman who works as the head detective of murder related cases. The T cops aren't rent-a-cops, are a real police force and have a HUGE jurisditcion.

Massachusetts_Bay_Transportation_Authority_Police# Unique_Jurisdiction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Bay_Transportation_Authority_Police# Unique_Jurisdiction)

[mystery]

I'm sure Marcus can shed some light on this, but I'm pretty sure cops have tasers holstered on one side of their body, and the gun on the other. Besides, each weapon has a distinctive weight and handling, not to mention the method of firing.

If you watch the video, this was not the Gunfight at the OK Corral. The officer had time to draw, aim, and shoot -- with the kid lying prone on the floor in front of him. There was no urgency.

We still draw and quarter people in public squares, right?

[Alan Dunkin]

From what I understand you can feel the effects of a taser if you're holding on to the tasee, but it's not nearly as profound.

--- Alan

[Mordrak]

I'm sure Marcus can shed some light on this, but I'm pretty sure cops have tasers holstered on one side of their body, and the gun on the other. Besides, each weapon has a distinctive weight and handling, not to mention the method of firing.

If you watch the video, this was not the Gunfight at the OK Corral. The officer had time to draw, aim, and shoot -- with the kid lying prone on the floor in front of him. There was no urgency.

We still draw and quarter people in public squares, right?

Yeah, and in rewatching the video, the other officer didn't fear for his safety until the shooting officer pulled his gun. Once that gun was pulled he jumped backed.

[Tim James]

I'm going to go ahead and predict this cop will be awarded 'Policeman of the Year' ..you know, for bravery (http://wcco.com/iteam/swat.team.honored.2.783216.html).Haha when I first clicked on this I thought it was going to be about the botched drug raid to that mayor's house that was in the news a few months ago where they killed the two family dogs.

Interesting that the guy in this story hit the cops but didn't get ventilated. Good thing he didn't use a rifle.

[Kevin J Baird]

There still doesn't seem to be any information about what exactly happened. No statements about why he pulled the gun, or anything from the other officers either. It's really strange from the video, I've never seen anything like it.

[Tim James]

I can't watch the video at work, but most departments tell their officers to yell "TASER!" if they are using one of those so other officers don't pile on the poor guy with their guns (oops). If he didn't say that, then maybe he really wasn't going for a Taser. *shrug*

[Cubit]

another video w/ interview of witness:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_K0PISpxx4&NR=1

looks like there could have been a riot

shooting happens at 3 min mark, prelude action starts at 2 min 30-45 secs

[MattKeil]

From the SF Gate article (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/05/BAK61540MH.DTL&tsp=1) today:

Don Cameron, a former BART police sergeant and weapons expert who now teaches police officers about proper use of force, said Monday that he had watched footage of Grant's death and was convinced that the officer had meant to fire a Taser - a device that he said BART began using recently.

Footage taken from inside a BART car by a phone camera, first shown by KTVU television, shows officers forcing Grant to the ground and trying to hold him down. One officer appears to try to put cuffs on him before drawing his weapon and firing. In the video, Grant appears to struggle with the officers, though it is unclear exactly what he was doing.

Cameron said he made his conclusion based in part on the officer's stance, and the fact that a second officer moved away from Grant just before he was shot, perhaps trying to avoid a second-hand shock.

If the Tasers were a recent addition to the BART arsenal, a mistaken pull could be the case here. You'd like to think people with deadly force at their disposal would be a bit more aware of what's in their hands.

[Guido Jones]

I'm sure Marcus can shed some light on this, but I'm pretty sure cops have tasers holstered on one side of their body, and the gun on the other. Besides, each weapon has a distinctive weight and handling, not to mention the method of firing.

If you watch the video, this was not the Gunfight at the OK Corral. The officer had time to draw, aim, and shoot -- with the kid lying prone on the floor in front of him. There was no urgency.

We still draw and quarter people in public squares, right?

I'm sure how you have your taser holstered varies from officer to officer. And while they do have a different weight and feel, sometimes in the heat of events (even ones that are relatively as sedate as this) your actions are just automatic.

I'm not defending this guy though - even if it's just a mistake his life should be pretty much over. I give cops a lot of slack - they do a hard job with little thanks. That doesn't excuse them from being reckless.

[Tim James]

To his credit, the Taser might have killed the guy anyway!

[Charles]

AFAIK, a Taser fires two electrodes at someone. The electrodes land close together, so the paths running through other people are going to have much higher resistance than paths that run more directly through the target's body. So I doubt someone holding the person is going to get anything like what the target gets, if they feel anything at all.

Ahh, duh. Yeah, I should've realized that.

[BlueJackalope]

another video w/ interview of witness:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_K0PISpxx4&NR=1

looks like there could have been a riot

shooting happens at 3 min mark, prelude action starts at 2 min 30-45 secs

Sorry no Youtube at work. Was there a riot prior to the shooting or after?

I've only read descriptions of the shooting video, which all sound very damning.

[Wallapuctus]

I'm not buying the taser bit. Don't these sidearms have safety catches? I assume an officer carries his weapons with the safeties on. Does a service pistol and a taser have these safeties in the same place?

I'm calling bullshit. This cop made a conscious decision to shoot this man with his pistol, right in the back while he was on the ground. He should be imprisoned for murder, life sentence.

[Cubit]

there was no riot, but right after the shooting people watching on the train were going nuts and trying to get out of the train. lots of yelling and screaming at the police. some racial slurs being yelled. the girl who took this video says the cops tried to take it from her.

[Tyjenks]

I'm calling bullshit. This cop made a conscious decision to shoot this man with his pistol, right in the back while he was on the ground. He should be imprisoned for murder, life sentence.
I guess that decides it, then.

[Drastic]

I'm not buying the taser bit. Don't these sidearms have safety catches? I assume an officer carries his weapons with the safeties on. Does a service pistol and a taser have these safeties in the same place?

It's my understanding that the sidearm carried and used was a Glock, which don't use traditional manual safeties.

[Charles]

It's my understanding that the sidearm carried and used was a Glock, which don't use traditional manual safeties.

Yeah but you simply don't put your finger on the trigger unless you are intending to fire. And Glocks won't fire until the trigger is fully depressed. It's not a hair trigger you can't jostle the trigger and 'accidentally' fire. You have to squeeze, all the way to the end.

[Matt Perkins]

Unless this was a Glock Taser™, that's a silly argument.

If you're a dumb enough person to pull a gun and think it's a taser, you shouldn't have made it through whatever training they needed to go through...


This guy, for whatever reason, calmly stood back, drew his weapon and fired.

[Cubit]

From an msnbc (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28521292/) article:

BART spokesman Jim Allison has said the officer's gun went off while police were trying to restrain Grant and that Grant was not cuffed.

I guess Jim hasn't seen the video...

yeah, the gun "went off" all right

[Drastic]

Unless this was a Glock Taser™, that's a silly argument.

I'm pretty sure the only argument I'm making is that Glocks don't have a safety catch in the sense most people think of. Which they don't. I can't attest to the length or difficulty of trigger pull, but I'm sure it's much less when carried with round chambered and weapon cocked and ready. Which, being a dumbass, he certainly was, probably in preparation for when he expected to be jumped at the OK Corral.

But yes, the cop should be charged. He won't be, of course. If it hadn't been filmed, and publicized, he probably would get a medal for heroically saving his fellow officers when the suspect reached for a weapon. (The weapons suspects reach for sometimes vanish into thin air when observed by civillian video cameras; it's like psychic powers in a controlled lab.)

[Charles]

I'm pretty sure the only argument I'm making is that Glocks don't have a safety catch in the sense most people think of. Which they don't. I can't attest to the length or difficulty of trigger pull, but I'm sure it's much less when carried with round chambered and weapon cocked and ready. Which, being a dumbass, he certainly was, probably in preparation for when he expected to be jumped at the OK Corral.

You can't accidentally fire a Glock. There's a reasonable pull to the trigger and you have to use not-insignificant force in order to pull it back far enough to fire. That gun wasn't accidentally fired unless he argues that he had his finger on the trigger when a seizure or ass itch or something caused him to clench his hand.

[Union Carbide]

In the opinion of this poster, it's all the violent video games and gansta rap that's desensitising the cops to violence.

[Tim James]

The safety in this situation is whether the holsters have the same release mechanism, whether it's pushing down and twisting slightly, or a finger/thumb button release, or whatever.

Oops, didn't see the second page. It's quite easy to accidentally fire any gun under stress, which is why the Third Rule of Gun Safety is to not put your booger-picking finger-banging finger into the trigger guard until you are ready to shoot. I'm assuming BART trains their cops to these fundamental basics and don't require them to rely on learning from the pathetic gun handling they see on TV.

[Charles]

The safety in this situation is whether the holsters have the same release mechanism, whether it's pushing down and twisting slightly, or a finger/thumb button release, or whatever.

Well, in the video, you can see that he struggles to pull his gun out. So the holster safety was definitely there.

[Drastic]

You can't accidentally fire a Glock.
I'm pretty sure I can't (and thank you, I don't think you could either--probably most of Qt3 couldn't, when you get right down to it). But cops, on the other hand... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=am-Qdx6vky0)some of those guys commit fraud by walking around upright and having opposable thumbs.

[Tim James]

Well, in the video, you can see that he struggles to pull his gun out. So the holster safety was definitely there.Sorry, I forgot to quote what I was replying to because I didn't realize we had moved to the second page. I was responding to the guy that wondered if the Taser and firearm have different types of safeties to indicate to the cop he had the wrong weapon. I'm curious myself if the holsters are designed to release differently. Sounds like it may be moot if it turns out the gun draw was intentional and the shot was not.

[MatthewF]

http://i43.tinypic.com/2na0g47.jpg

[BlueJackalope]

there was no riot, but right after the shooting people watching on the train were going nuts and trying to get out of the train. lots of yelling and screaming at the police. some racial slurs being yelled. the girl who took this video says the cops tried to take it from her.

Managed to catch a couple of videos. The videos remain damning. There was some yelling on the platform but there wasn't a riot. The shooter in particular has cops surrounding him and is in no apparent danger. More to the point a few seconds before he is shot Grant is on his knees with his hands turned up and out. I've seen enough COPS episodes to know the how difficult it is for the cops and a suspect, even one who is attempting to co-operate, to navigate handcuffing without some scuffling, but there was no call for the Officer to even have his Taser out.

The lack of explanation from BART may mean that there isn't one.

[Jon Rowe]

It is possible that his finger slipped...

Why the hell would you struggle on the ground with cops if you are innocent though?

Just let them cuff you and haul you off... if you are innocent, you will be let go at the station.

That video evidence is pretty concrete... you see him pull out.. aim, and then fire. No doubt about that.

[Houngan]

I'm not buying the taser bit. Don't these sidearms have safety catches? I assume an officer carries his weapons with the safeties on. Does a service pistol and a taser have these safeties in the same place?

I'm calling bullshit. This cop made a conscious decision to shoot this man with his pistol, right in the back while he was on the ground. He should be imprisoned for murder, life sentence.

Here's a good example of the problem. You're calling bullshit, then you start asking questions that would appear to bear on your decision, then indicate that you're recommending a life sentence based on ignorance. Slow down.

H.

[jeffd]

I'm not buying the taser bit. Don't these sidearms have safety catches? I assume an officer carries his weapons with the safeties on. Does a service pistol and a taser have these safeties in the same place?

I'm calling bullshit. This cop made a conscious decision to shoot this man with his pistol, right in the back while he was on the ground. He should be imprisoned for murder, life sentence.

Safeties, plus (assuming it's an automatic) you have to chamber around. I don't know if it's standard procedure for cops to walk around with rounds chambered, though. From what gun safety i've been taught, accidently firing a gun is pretty hard unless you're careless and/or stupid.

[jeffd]

Actually Houngan can probably speak to this better than anyone. What exactly would have to go into accidently firing a gun in this kind of scenario, Houngan?

[Wallapuctus]

Here's a good example of the problem. You're calling bullshit, then you start asking questions that would appear to bear on your decision, then indicate that you're recommending a life sentence based on ignorance. Slow down.

H.

Good thing I'm just a guy on the internet and not on the jury! Assuming this even goes to trial...

But seriously, based on that video do you really buy the "I thought I was firing my taser" excuse? The guy was already down anyway what need was there to taser him?

[Drastic]

Why the hell would you struggle on the ground with cops if you are innocent though?
Pain, fear, and multiple guys flying high on adrenaline yanking your body in various directions while pinning you and yelling things at you in the middle of a lot of crowd noise probably--I'm guessing here--makes it sort of difficult to just relax and go limp, even if all you're worried about is imminently finding out what being tased feels like, and just how many times you might "bump your head" when getting loaded into the car.

[BlueJackalope]

It is possible that his finger slipped...

Why the hell would you struggle on the ground with cops if you are innocent though?

Just let them cuff you and haul you off... if you are innocent, you will be let go at the station.

That video evidence is pretty concrete... you see him pull out.. aim, and then fire. No doubt about that.

Watch a few episodes of COPS - even suspects who are cooperating struggle a bit when their arms are reefed back and a knee is planted on the side of their head. I understand why cops are aggressive when cuffing someone, but Grant didn't seem to be particularly uncooperative. The Video I have seen is pretty muddy though.

Given that witnesses said Grant was pleading not to be Tased, the cops might have been threatening just that, which might have led to Grant panicking. And then the cop...shoots him.

[Anaxagoras]

I guess that decides it, then.

Good thing you're here to make snide comments. We certainly wouldn't want people to post their reactions to the shooting in this thread.

Way to keep on top of things! I knew we could count on you!

[Hugin]

Just let them cuff you and haul you off... if you are innocent, you will be let go at the station.

The world you live in sounds awesome.

[Kevin J Baird]

The video is grainy and hard to judge but it looks like it did go off by accident. If you watch it and blow it up, he draws the gun (Probably to threaten with it) and is in the process of standing up when the gun goes off. His other hand barely reaches the gun as it fires. A one handed shot while in the process of standing up straight is odd. Not that you couldn't do that, but I think this bozo pulled his gun to threaten with it, was standing up and aiming and pulled the trigger on accident.

But I'm pretty certain they are always trained to have their finger off the trigger, and it's about impossible to see if that was the case here.

I say he's gonna get hit with involuntary manslaughter. If they go for murder they'll probably lose. Too many cops there will say that the guy used proper procedure, etc. But they could win a manslaughter charge on this. There was no good reason for him to draw his weapon as his life clearly wasn't in any danger.

[noun]

Whatever your opinion may be, just imagine what would have happened if this incident wasn't captured on video.

[Tyjenks]

I guess that decides it, then.

Good thing you're here to make snide comments. We certainly wouldn't want people to post their reactions to the shooting in this thread.

Way to keep on top of things! I knew we could count on you!

Well, my comment was supposed to be an indictment of his assessment that the guy should go away for life after watching one hazy video.

So for you I will interpret:

I'm calling bullshit. This cop made a conscious decision to shoot this man with his pistol, right in the back while he was on the ground. He should be imprisoned for murder, life sentence.


I think a verdict of him being guilty of murder is a bit hasty based on the incomplete evidence we have been shown.

[Athryn]

Good thing you're here to make snide comments. We certainly wouldn't want people to post their reactions to the shooting in this thread.

Way to keep on top of things! I knew we could count on you!

Yeah god forbid someone horns in on your snide comment monopoly! ^_^

[Houngan]

Actually Houngan can probably speak to this better than anyone. What exactly would have to go into accidently firing a gun in this kind of scenario, Houngan?

The only way to accidentally fire a gun these days, Glocks included (I own six, and do my own trigger jobs) is to get something caught in the trigger guard, or give it one hell of a jar in exactly the right spot, perhaps dropping it from twenty feet onto concrete. The glock has three safeties, one in the trigger, one that prevents the striker from moving forward without the trigger being pressed, and one that prevents the sear from releasing the striker unless the trigger is pressed. In a duty weapon, all three of these would be functional.

As Tim said, first and foremost finger off the trigger. If your finger is on the trigger and the gun goes off, guess what you just did? You pulled the trigger. The suggestion that the gun "went off" is laughable these days. It just doesn't happen without modification.

Also, any officer carries with a round chambered, that's not debatable, it's 100% among every policeman in the country. Long and short, without watching the video, somebody pulled a trigger. I can't comment on intent.

H.

[Kevin J Baird]

I think at this point the question is intent. Did he get flustered, stand up and shoot the guy on purpose with or without thinking. Or did he pull the trigger on accident. If the gun was cocked (Dunno why it would be) the pull is very easy. If your finger is on the trigger and the gun slips in your hand, it can fire with just the weight of the gun. But if it wasn't cocked, it takes a pretty deliberate pull to force the double action.

No way does the bullet just go off on its own though. That's hogwash.

[Morkilus]

The video is grainy and hard to judge but it looks like it did go off by accident. If you watch it and blow it up, he draws the gun (Probably to threaten with it) and is in the process of standing up when the gun goes off. His other hand barely reaches the gun as it fires...

Anyone know if cops are taught to threaten people with drawn and aimed lethal weapons? I was always taught that you never point a gun at anything you aren't intending to kill.

[jpinard]

My reading on this - the guy is an idiot and also may have had insufficient training. Anyone that's spent significant time on the shooting range can instantly tell the difference between handling a Glock vs. a Taser.

If he can't tell the difference by holding it, maybe he shouldn't be a cop. He may have been too excited to get to use his taser the first time too. I feel bad for both their families though.

[Cubit]

I keep watching that video, and I keep thinking that it can't be an accident. The cop stood up and got in a firing position before the gun went off.

[Tim James]

I think at this point the question is intent. Did he get flustered, stand up and shoot the guy on purpose with or without thinking. Or did he pull the trigger on accident. If the gun was cocked (Dunno why it would be) the pull is very easy. If your finger is on the trigger and the gun slips in your hand, it can fire with just the weight of the gun. But if it wasn't cocked, it takes a pretty deliberate pull to force the double action.No, Glocks have the same trigger pull every time. In the modern era that's okay if you keep your finger out of the trigger guard.

Anyone know if cops are taught to threaten people with drawn and aimed lethal weapons? I was always taught that you never point a gun at anything you aren't intending to kill.Use of force law is different between police for compliance and citizens in self-defense situations. Don't know what this department has decided warrants a cop to cover someone with a gun.

[Kevin J Baird]

Oh we know it's a Glock? Some Glocks are hair triggers. You don't have to pull a hammer back, so that would make it more likely the thing went off by accident, assuming the safety was off.

[Kevin J Baird]

I keep watching that video, and I keep thinking that it can't be an accident. The cop stood up and got in a firing position before the gun went off.

He doesn't get into a firing position. Watch it full screen. He starts to stand up and his other hand barely reaches the gun before it goes off. A one handed shot with bent knees rising up isn't a firing position. At least not a normal one. Obviously you could shoot anyone however you like if that is your intention. But he doesn't stand up aim with two hands and fire. Watch the video again.

[Hugin]

I'm perfectly willing to believe it's an accidental shooting.


But if he thought he was pulling a taser and really pulled his gun and shot a guy to death, he's made a monstrous fucking error and needs to be off the force and in jail for a while.

If he pulled his gun deliberately on a guy face down on the ground with another officer practically sitting on him and another officer or two nearby, then accidentally discharged the firearm and killed a guy, he's made a monstrous fucking error and needs to be off the force and in jail for a while

And you know, in the alternate universe where he really did just pull a taser, jesus, the guy is face down on the ground with another cops knee pinning him, I'd call a tasering in that situation uncalled for as well.

[Hugin]

Oh we know it's a Glock? Some Glocks are hair triggers. You don't have to pull a hammer back, so that would make it more likely the thing went off by accident, assuming the safety was off.

Do any mainstream police departments issue Glocks that don't have a stiffer trigger, the whole "New York trigger" or something equivalent? I'd be interested to know how the BART pieces are set up, what the policies are for modification, etc.

[MikeSofaer]

I don't believe you could fire a Glock and think it was a Taser.

The most exculpatory reasonable situation is that he meant to threaten with the gun, neglected to keep his finger out of the guard, and squeezed the trigger accidentally as a side effect of gripping hard under adrenaline.

[Tim James]

I'm only guessing, but I believe most departments do not use the heavier NY style triggers. They are pretty archaic due to modern training and gunhandling, notwithstanding occasional boneheaded accidents like this one. The problem is departments really need to stop reaching for the fucking guns and Tasers at the drop of a hat.

Some Glocks are hair triggers. You don't have to pull a hammer back, so that would make it more likely the thing went off by accident, assuming the safety was off.Please just stop. You're causing some of us physical pain here. :)

[Hawkeye Fierce]

A friend and I were talking about this, and he commented that a thing to take away from this is that a closed-circuit TV society is scary, but a cell-phone one has some real benefits.

[Houngan]

Anyone know if cops are taught to threaten people with drawn and aimed lethal weapons? I was always taught that you never point a gun at anything you aren't intending to kill.

Absolutely, haven't you ever watched COPS? Shit starts getting a bit weird they get a gun in their hand immediately.

As to the whole trigger thing, you're mistaking single actions like the 1911 (which still come from the factory with 4 lb. triggers or so) with striker fired "double action only" triggers like the Glock. Standard is around 6lbs of pull, 6mm of travel to fire. Competition from the factory is 4.5lbs, with a trigger job you can get it down to 2#, but there is a limited amount that can be done about the length of pull while keeping all of the safeties intact.

H.

[Houngan]

But if he thought he was pulling a taser and really pulled his gun and shot a guy to death, he's made a monstrous fucking error and needs to be off the force and in jail for a while.

If he pulled his gun deliberately on a guy face down on the ground with another officer practically sitting on him and another officer or two nearby, then accidentally discharged the firearm and killed a guy, he's made a monstrous fucking error and needs to be off the force and in jail for a while



I tend to believe that jail should be reserved for intent, not necessarily scope. Unless the officer did something grossly out of regs (besides the shooting) then I don't think removal from society is necessary. Removal from the force, yes.

H.

[MatthewF]

He killed a man.

1. A driver accidentally looks down at his radio as someone steps off a sidewalk. He doesn't intend to kill anyone. He runs them over, they die. He goes to jail. Involuntary manslaughter.
2. A hunter is in the woods. He sees movement out of the corner of his eye, on reflex he accidentally shoots another hunter in the head and kills him. He goes to jail. Involuntary manslaughter.
3. Two friends are horsing around on a balcony. One friend pushes the other and he goes over the edge to his death. He didn't mean to kill him, but he goes to jail. Involuntary manslaughter.
4. A cop trains a gun on a suspect and accidentally pulls the trigger, killing him. He didn't mean to shoot him, but he does. He does not go to jail. Involuntary manslaughter.

One of these is not like the other?

If his finger was on that trigger, it shouldn't have been. He's trained to know better.

[Wallapuctus]

Pulling a gun or taser on a man laying on his stomach with another cop on top of him is totally unnecessary and stupid. He intended to scare the guy with his weapon, let's say, and it "accidentally" went off. That's exactly why you don't pull your weapon in the first place unless there is cause to use it. I don't see any reason to shoot this guy with a glock or a taser based on that video.

Removal from society is the proper punishment, imo, because this cop is a spaz and dangerous.

[Anti-Bunny]

Is it cynical of me to think this cop will be back on the job in a few weeks?

[tronnc]

The BART situation looks identical to this one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ez34Kg86AU
except the BART cop actually hit the guy.

Another accident where the cop should never have pulled the gun in the first place.

[Houngan]

He killed a man.

1. A driver accidentally looks down at his radio as someone steps off a sidewalk. He doesn't intend to kill anyone. He runs them over, they die. He goes to jail. Involuntary manslaughter.
2. A hunter is in the woods. He sees movement out of the corner of his eye, on reflex he accidentally shoots another hunter in the head and kills him. He goes to jail. Involuntary manslaughter.
3. Two friends are horsing around on a balcony. One friend pushes the other and he goes over the edge to his death. He didn't mean to kill him, but he goes to jail. Involuntary manslaughter.
4. A cop trains a gun on a suspect and accidentally pulls the trigger, killing him. He didn't mean to shoot him, but he does. He does not go to jail. Involuntary manslaughter.

One of these is not like the other?

If his finger was on that trigger, it shouldn't have been. He's trained to know better.

Call me crazy, but I don't think any of those warrant jail, except perhaps the fourth. Training and the umbrella of enhanced responsibility that is law enforcement implies more culpability in the situation, but I still argue intent is what should determine imprisonment. In the first three cases, especially the third, you've implied that there was no intent to harm. In #1 and #3, the death is entirely accidental, unless the pedestrian was at a crosswalk or red light.

H.

[MatthewF]

Assuming #1 is at a crosswalk. #3 I'll give you, since both people on that balcony would have been responsible.

edit: I argue that intent should not be the only reason. Bad judgment and recklessness should be punished as well.

[Houngan]

Punished, or prevented? They're different things, and prison is not a "time-out." It's something that will probably ruin your life until you die, doubly so for an ex-cop. There are a dozen ways to be punitive that won't destroy another life in the process, I still maintain that prison should be reserved for those who are threats to society, and not much else.

H.

[Kevin J Baird]

Please just stop. You're causing some of us physical pain here. :)

My bad on the safety. I own 4 guns, none of which are Glocks. (I've been licensed for over 5 years to carry a conceal weapon) So can someone who IS experienced with Glocks tell us what the trigger pull is like on one? My Ruger p89 has a heavy pull on the first action, but once the hammer is back it's a very easy pull. Since Glocks supposedly don't have a first action (You pull the slide first) I am curious how heavy the pull is in comparison to a true double-action. Is it light?

I ask more out of curiosity than it having anything to do with the cop shooting.

That's something I don't like about semi-autos in general, as I don't like to keep the bullet in the chamber, but then I can't draw and fire if needed. I prefer a revolver to carry since it's a simple aim-fire gun. The pull being heavy is safety enough. And I leave the semi-auto chambered but in the lock box at home.

[Houngan]

My bad on the safety. I own 4 guns, none of which are Glocks. (I've been licensed for over 5 years to carry a conceal weapon) So can someone who IS experienced with Glocks tell us what the trigger pull is like on one? My Ruger p89 has a heavy pull on the first action, but once the hammer is back it's a very easy pull. Since Glocks supposedly don't have a first action (You pull the slide first) I am curious how heavy the pull is in comparison to a true double-action. Is it light?


Post 69 above. Less than the first pull on a DA/SA, but much more than SA.

H.

[Kevin J Baird]

Thanks Houngan.

[Oghier]

I still maintain that prison should be reserved for those who are threats to society, and not much else.

H.

I agree with you. However, I think a fair number of people, myself included, would consider this officer to be a threat to society. Society has a right to expect they can ride a train without getting pinned to the ground and shot in the back.

[Tim James]

That's something I don't like about semi-autos in general, as I don't like to keep the bullet in the chamber, but then I can't draw and fire if needed. I prefer a revolver to carry since it's a simple aim-fire gun. The pull being heavy is safety enough. And I leave the semi-auto chambered but in the lock box at home.That's perfectly reasonable for you to decide that for yourself, but there's no need to spread more FUD around people that may not be able to make that judgment for themselves, and now think Glocks are going to start going off at random with their hair triggers. Already way too much ignorance about firearms in modern society, especially from our government fathers!

I agree with you. However, I think a fair number of people, myself included, would consider this officer to be a threat to society. Society has a right to expect they can ride a train without getting pinned to the ground and shot in the back.Crime and punishment is a whole 'nother extremely challenging issue. What is really important is that police departments do better about drilling the Four Rules of Gun Safety into officers, and tell them to keep their dicks in their holsters more often!

[MatthewF]

Punished, or prevented? They're different things, and prison is not a "time-out." It's something that will probably ruin your life until you die, doubly so for an ex-cop. There are a dozen ways to be punitive that won't destroy another life in the process, I still maintain that prison should be reserved for those who are threats to society, and not much else.

H.

I agree with you. However, when exhibiting bad judgment or recklessness causes the death of someone, there is no second chance. You can't say "I'll do better next time" because someone is dead. They are not coming back. Prevention won't change this.

I might be willing to compromise with you here, however. A punishment sufficient enough where the officer could not possibly cause this to happen again would suffice for me: county probation for 48 months, barred from possession of firearms during this period, and permanent removal from police duty. And when he wants his firearms license back, he needs to take a minimum of 4 weekend gun safety training courses and must pass them.

The penalty for people who involuntarily kill someone with their car is stiffer than that.

[Houngan]

I agree with you. However, I think a fair number of people, myself included, would consider this officer to be a threat to society. Society has a right to expect they can ride a train without getting pinned to the ground and shot in the back.


Right, but Scry's recommendation would remove the threat that this person, who we'll label "panicky idiot," presents. There's no indication that this person, after being stripped of officer status, fined, educated, etc. will go on to be a vigilante pinning people in subways and accidentally shooting them. Shit, even as bad as this, happens. I'm all for everything short of prison.

H.

[Tim James]

The penalty for people who involuntarily kill someone with their car is stiffer than that.In these cases it's often better to ask why regular citizens have to do the jail time for accidents than request that cops are brought up to the same level of punishment, but again, that's another thread.

Your case about the hunter is definitely negligence from breaking a fundamental rule of gun safety (typically noted as #4). I wouldn't throw a father in jail for accidentally shooting his son on a hunting trip, but at the same time there is no reason for that to ever happen if you follow some basic guidelines (even if "shit happens," as mentioned above! :)

[Houngan]

Crime and punishment is a whole 'nother extremely challenging issue. What is really important is that police departments do better about drilling the Four Rules of Gun Safety into officers, and tell them to keep their dicks in their holsters more often!

It can't work that way, they pretty much are required to point their weapons at people without total intent to shoot them. Absolutely right on trigger control, however.

H.

[Tim James]

It can't work that way, they pretty much are required to point their weapons at people without total intent to shoot them.I hear ya. I believe it's necessary, but I'm willing to bet it's done a little too often. Need to recalibrate the ramp on the use of force curve perhaps.

[Houngan]

In these cases it's often better to ask why regular citizens have to do the jail time for accidents than request that cops are brought up to the same level of punishment, but again, that's another thread.

Your case about the hunter is definitely negligence from breaking a fundamental rule of gun safety (typically noted as #4). I wouldn't throw a father in jail for accidentally shooting his son on a hunting trip, but at the same time there is no reason for that to ever happen if you follow some basic guidelines (even if "shit happens," as mentioned above! :)


In both cases I would lean towards permanent loss of vehicle privileges and permanent loss of gun ownership rights. If they are ever caught driving or with a gun after that, then off to prison they go, and I won't shed a tear. I guess I'm just big on everyone getting a chance to non-maliciously screw up, within certain bounds. I would even be for a lifetime of service to the community, just not prison, which effectively throws away the person's life and is a drain on society. That, and I've been reading Walter Mosely recently, so I might be a bit biased.

H.

[BigSlowTarget]

When DC made the switch from .38s to the Glock 17 we had a few accidental discharges from officers used to the revolver. Most of them happened while the officer were drawing or holstering their weapons. Given that I would say someone not used to the Glock might have a higher chance of accidentally firing the weapon, particularly in a high stress situation.

That said, after watching the video I have to say I just don't see how this was accidental. I also don't buy that he confused his weapon for his taser. Really it doesn't matter. Some people just shouldn't be cops, and this video is a perfect example of why. Even giving him the benefit of the doubt, there was no need to draw his taser or his weapon in this situation.

One thing that is clear, he was negligent, and he needs to go. Hopefully he will be fired, and any other agency will turn this guy away should he be lucky enough to escape jail time.

[Houngan]

I hear ya. I believe it's necessary, but I'm willing to bet it's done a little too often. Need to recalibrate the ramp on the use of force curve perhaps.

Oh hell yes. I think they're so scared to tussle with people for legal and safety reasons, they have to exhaust their nonlethal arsenal for the smallest things, which includes threatening with firearms. But the old idea (which was probably rarely valid) of the toughest guy in the county being the sheriff is dead and gone.

H.

[Houngan]

When DC made the switch from .38s to the Glock 17 we had a few accidental discharges from officers used to the revolver. Most of them happened while the officer were drawing or holstering their weapons. Given that I would say someone not used to the Glock might have a higher chance of accidentally firing the weapon, particularly in a high stress situation.

That said, after watching the video I have to say I just don't see how this was accidental. I also don't buy that he confused his weapon for his taser. Really it doesn't matter. Some people just shouldn't be cops, and this video is a perfect example of why. Even giving him the benefit of the doubt, there was no need to draw his taser or his weapon in this situation.

One thing that is clear, he was negligent, and he needs to go. Hopefully he will be fired, and any other agency will turn this guy away should he be lucky enough to escape jail time.

Re: the .38 vs Glock point, that's only valid for people who were used to factory-sprung revolvers, and even then they were screwing up by having their finger on the trigger. A revolver has such a long and heavy DA pull that it is easy to develop a habit of gripping with the trigger finger, I occasionally catch myself doing it on reloads.

As for being fired, I absolutely agree that this person should never, ever be allowed into any armed position again, and should be ejected from his current job immediately.

H.

[Wallapuctus]

Didn't Plaxico Burress have a Glock in his pants? I don't think he meant to shoot himself in the leg.

Still, I maintain there was no reason to draw a weapon in the first place, and that cop is a dangerous man.

[Houngan]

Didn't Plaxico Burress have a Glock in his pants? I don't think he meant to shoot himself in the leg.

Still, I maintain there was no reason to draw a weapon in the first place, and that cop is a dangerous man.

Yes, which is why you never carry a gun without a proper holster, especially a Glock. It won't fire without the trigger being pulled, but there's nothing stopping the trigger from being pulled, as opposed to a manual-safety gun.

As for the drawing, I would lean towards your side, except we can't say if he was going for the Taser or not. Intent plays into it again.

H.

[Tim James]

When DC made the switch from .38s to the Glock 17 we had a few accidental discharges from officers used to the revolver. Most of them happened while the officer were drawing or holstering their weapons.Again, modern technique deals with this and I'm sure there was a difficult transition period. It's not necessarily an inherent problem with the different firing system, as long as a few simple fundamentals are respected.

[Tim James]

Also, I'm not sure how well the sound is synced on my PC, but what's up with the victim's arm swinging toward the cop right before the shot? I wouldn't be surprised if the official story is that he thought the victim was going for his gun (which we argue shouldn't have been out of the holster). Cops are trained to handle takeaway attempts (though they're still often unsuccessful) but maybe he got spooked. Wish there were some damn details!

[Kevin J Baird]

That's perfectly reasonable for you to decide that for yourself, but there's no need to spread more FUD around people that may not be able to make that judgment for themselves, and now think Glocks are going to start going off at random with their hair triggers. Already way too much ignorance about firearms in modern society, especially from our government fathers!

I didn't say the gun went off randomly Tim. I said they are known to have hair triggers. Glock has been sued over 50 times over the design and light pull of the gun. Do some cursory Google searches. In one case, a police officer was shot in the back by his three year old son who picked up the gun and squeezed the trigger. He contended (And lost) that the safety design was poor and the trigger was too light. In most cases it appears Glock settles.

If you're going to complain about misinformation, try not to add to it with your own words.

[Houngan]

To be fair, the stock glock trigger is heavy by any standard in the industry, there's nothing "hair" about them. I would imagine Glock settles because juries would be too easily manipulated.

H.

[Kevin J Baird]

Fair enough, I'm not trying to argue, I've already admitted ignorance to the Glock. I just don't appreciate the addition of words I didn't say as its unnecessary. I'm a gun owner and one of few individuals in Ohio who have a CCW and actively carry. There ARE a lot of lawsuits around the Glock guns that cops carry, but then it's also probably because it's the gun cops carry. If they were carrying .22 target pistols they'd get sued over that. But the lawsuits in this case are specific to the ease at which the gun can be fired. Seems reasonable to discuss based on the incident at hand. But you guys own the guns, so I'll bow to your knowledge, even though I'm still not sure how we know for sure that he had a Glock. If I was in the jury for this court case, that'd be an important piece of information. You can't pull a p89 and discharge it without flipping up the safety even if you squeeze the trigger or drop the hammer. So if he had a gun like that, it'd be very hard to believe that the gun went off by accident. But if it's a Glock and he just squeezed the trigger, it's more believable and I could see someone doing that, as stupid as it is.

It's probably the difference between 20 years behind bars.

[Houngan]

No bowing necessary, I assure you. The "ease" refers to the lack of external safeties, not the weight or length of the trigger pull, that's all. Which also holds true for several of the latest polymer offerings, the S&W M&P, the Springfield XD, etc. They all have different schemes, but without manual safeties that need to be actuated to fire.

H.

[Tim James]

So if he had a gun like that, it'd be very hard to believe that the gun went off by accident. But if it's a Glock and he just squeezed the trigger, it's more believable and I could see someone doing that, as stupid as it is.Please don't be so sensitive. This is what I was referring to about guns randomly going off. I guess I was applying the media's typical view of what happens when someone accidentally pulls a trigger. Sorry, and relax.

And again, please stop posting declarative facts if you are ignorant of things. Glocks are not "known" to have "hair triggers" because a few civil attorneys breathlessly assert they do. Misinformation leads to prejudice and bad laws.

[Anti-Bunny]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/07/MN2N155CN1.DTL&tsp=1

This article is so hilariously stupid. God I am so glad I left Oakland.

Protesters smashed the storefronts of McDonald's as well as stores called Creative African Braids and Oakland Yoon's Pharmacy. Cars along 14th Street were smashed, and some were set ablaze.

A woman walked out of Creative African Braids holding a baby in her arms.

"This is our business," she shouted. "This is our shop. This is what you call a protest?"

Nia Sykes, 24, of San Francisco, a protester who was with the group, said, "I feel like the night is going great. I feel like Oakland should make some noise. This is how we need to fight back.

"It's for the murder of a black male," said Sykes, who is black. The demonstration "is totally appropriate."

Sykes had little sympathy for the owner of Creative African Braids.

"She should be glad she just lost her business and not her life," Sykes said. She added that she did have one worry for the night: "I just hope nobody gets shot or killed."

Yah, fuck you and your baby!

[jpinard]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/07/MN2N155CN1.DTL&tsp=1

This article is so hilariously stupid. God I am so glad I left Oakland.



Yah, fuck you and your baby!

What horrible scum. Unbelievable.

[Pogo]

Every time a polack dies due to injustice, I light my bedroom on fire.

[Andrew Mayer]

To quote a local boy:

Tomorrow you're homeless
Tonight it's a blast

[Anders Hallin]

That's just stupid. Say what you will about the Rodney King riots, but those at least occurred after a perceived miscarriage of justice, rather than an individual's wrongdoing.

[cesare]

That's just stupid. Say what you will about the Rodney King riots, but those at least occurred after a perceived miscarriage of justice, rather than an individual's wrongdoing.

Yes yes yes, that's the real issue here, what this Nia Sykes has to say about rioting. Not the fact that a cop just straight up EXECUTED someone in plain sight. Let's keep our priorities straight..

[Anders Hallin]

I think the real issue with these riots is that they overshadow the peaceful and righteous protests that took place earlier, feed a bullshit media narrative that the media loves to hawk and makes the idiots who would defend this shooting feel justified.

[Anti-Bunny]

I think the real issue with these riots is that they overshadow the peaceful and righteous protests that took place earlier, feed a bullshit media narrative that the media loves to hawk and makes the idiots who would defend this shooting feel justified.
uh.. I don't think anyone anywhere that saw the video thinks the shooting is not just an accident but purposeful and 'justified'.

[Anders Hallin]

uh.. I don't think anyone anywhere that saw the video thinks the shooting is not just an accident but purposeful and 'justified'.
I'm not talking about anyone here. Granted, the people who would defend it (and there are such people) would probably find their justification anyway, but that doesn't really make wrecking shit less stupid. And it's not even government shit!

[cesare]

I think the real issue with these riots is that they overshadow the peaceful and righteous protests that took place earlier, feed a bullshit media narrative that the media loves to hawk and makes the idiots who would defend this shooting feel justified.

I don't disagree with that statement, I'm just wary of the very soft media narrative that's still being massaged and crafted. For example, CNN has covered this issue front page, Google news and Drudge have been completely quiet, and political forums and blogs are a mixed bag (this is one of the more robust discussions I've seen on forums).

I'd like to hope and trust that most people exposed to the, "OMG small groups of rioters are irrational and threatening!" facet are equally aware that some cop just straight up shot some dude, but sometimes it gets lost in the noise. And I know where Drudge and other trash-level media are going as soon as the story can plausibly shift from "cop executes suspect" to "negroes are rioting". So I guess I'm pulling some third grade "two wrongs don't make a right" bullshit: The fact that some dumb fuckers are rioting doesn't mean we can forget that this cop just executed somebody.

[cesare]

uh.. I don't think anyone anywhere that saw the video thinks the shooting is not just an accident but purposeful and 'justified'.

What? Are you for serious or are you just putting too many negatives in your hastily written responses?

[wumpus]

are equally aware that some cop just straight up shot some dude
Honestly, it looks accidental to me from the video. I'm not saying that makes it right, but there's no premeditated intent to kill.

Sort of a big difference..

[Mordrak]

Honestly, it looks accidental to me from the video. I'm not saying that makes it right, but there's no premeditated intent to kill.

Sort of a big difference..

Accidental? Is there a new video? There's nothing in the original video to suggest motive or the state of mind of the cop.

[Ben Sones]

"She should be glad she just lost her business and not her life," Sykes said. She added that she did have one worry for the night: "I just hope nobody gets shot or killed."

Because then they will really look like a bunch of fucking idiots. I mean, they do already, but protesting a wrongful killing by killing random people would take the whole thing to new levels of idiotic.

[Anti-Bunny]

Accidental? Is there a new video? There's nothing in the original video to suggest motive or the state of mind of the cop.

The way his hands go up immediately after firing would make me think it was a negligent discharge. That he meant to reach for a taser (http://www.policeone.com/police-products/less-lethal/taser/articles/1772254-BART-shooting-raises-issue-of-TASER-confusion/) seems more likely.

Also, it just doesn't make any sense. Unless there's some history and the cop actually knows who the victim is, I don't think it's likely a cop would just straight up murder a random dude.

BTW, it looks like the officer resigned.

[Houngan]

nah, too dickhead.

[Tim James]

I don't think it's likely a cop would just straight up murder a random dude.No, he totally would. Let's riot!!

Maybe people watch too much TV.

[MatthewF]

Let's start a riot.

A riot.

[Hugin]

Also, it just doesn't make any sense. Unless there's some history and the cop actually knows who the victim is, I don't think it's likely a cop would just straight up murder a random dude.


I personally believe it was an accidental firing. I have some question as to whether he really meant to draw a gun or a taser, and if drawing any weapon was really justified at that moment. I reckon they'll figure that out.

However, I think the history of law enforcement in the country shows us that, yes, sometimes a cop or group of cops will "straight up murder a random dude".

Because some cops are racist. Some cops are bullies. Some cops have anger issues or PTSD. Some cops are corrupt. Some cops have or come to develop a real contempt or hatred for the citizens in the communities where they work, he same way I reckon some tech support people might come to hate callers or car salemen may develop contempt for naive car buyers, but of course cops have guns and tasers and pepper spray and whatnot.

[Houngan]

I personally believe it was an accidental firing. I have some question as to whether he really meant to draw a gun or a taser, and if drawing any weapon was really justified at that moment. I reckon they'll figure that out.

However, I think the history of law enforcement in the country shows us that, yes, sometimes a cop or group of cops will "straight up murder a random dude".

Because some cops are racist. Some cops are bullies. Some cops have anger issues or PTSD. Some cops are corrupt. Some cops have or come to develop a real contempt or hatred for the citizens in the communities where they work, he same way I reckon some tech support people might come to hate callers or car salemen may develop contempt for naive car buyers, but of course cops have guns and tasers and pepper spray and whatnot.

I don't think anyone would disagree with you, except that they probably wouldn't do it in a public place with cameras rolling and a lot of other cops around them.

*remembers the broomstick raping incident*

Nevermind.

H.

[Anti-Bunny]

*remembers the broomstick raping incident*

Nevermind.

H.

Yeah, uh, also...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdP570qXe5g

hmm..

[Anaxagoras]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/07/MN2N155CN1.DTL&tsp=1

This article is so hilariously stupid. God I am so glad I left Oakland.


The article seemed pretty decent to me. The events it describes seem stupid. Is that what you meant?

(I'm not trying to be pedantic. I'm just a bit confused by your post.)

Anyways... I have to say I don't get the rioters. Shouldn't they at least wait until the process fails before getting all mob-by?

[Tim James]

Hugin, you're right. The problem is some less-intelligent individuals take that qualification and run with it as fact, destroying property and hurting people. I think everyone here is open-minded enough to wait for the facts before they burn police cars and such.

[Cubit]

Hugin, you're right. The problem is some less-intelligent individuals take that qualification and run with it as fact, destroying property and hurting people. I think everyone here is open-minded enough to wait for the facts before they burn police cars and such.

Yeah, i'm a fan of a good ol' peaceful protest, but those rioters interviewed were fucking morons. They scare me about as much as the cop.

[Tyjenks]

I am afraid the plain fact is that there are A LOT of morons out there.

[MatthewF]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/01/08/BART.shooting/index.html

District Attorney Tom Orloff told CNN on Wednesday the incident is a "pretty clear" homicide and his office will focus primarily on Mehserle's mental state before the shooting.

Whoa. That's not what I was expecting at all.

[KWhit]

Wow x2.

[Cubit]

That changes things a bit.

[Anti-Bunny]

Yeah, i'm a fan of a good ol' peaceful protest/riot
what.

[Cubit]

what.

haha, yeah nevermind. a riot could be described as a non-peaceful protest. i'll fix that.

[Anaxagoras]

I love the Bay Area. It's one of the few sane places in this country.

It's so sad that the DA calling a homicide by its proper name elicited surprise.

[Telefrog]

It's so sad that the DA calling a homicide by its proper name elicited surprise.

I'm pretty sure people were trying to give the cop the benefit of the doubt with the info they had.

[Anaxagoras]

I'm pretty sure people were trying to give the cop the benefit of the doubt with the info they had.

I believe the definition of "homicide" is when one person kills another in a non-war setting. So no matter how much benefit of the doubt you give the cop, his actions qualify as "homicide".

The DA was just calling a spade a spade, and yet people were surprised. And they weren't being unreasonable.

[MatthewF]

You can kill someone without it being homicide. Ever heard of manslaughter?

I was surprised because it seemed to me to be recklessness that resulted in someone's death. Perhaps voluntary manslaughter at most. I didn't think a DA would be saying it was "pretty clearly homicide."

[Anaxagoras]

You can kill someone without it being homicide. Ever heard of manslaughter?

Yes. I have. Manslaughter is a form of homicide.

Homicide is the generic term. Manslaughter & murder are the more specific terms to indicate how culpable the killer is.

That's why police call uninvestigated murders "homicides". They haven't determined the more specific term yet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homicide

Homicide (Latin homicidium, homo human being + caedere to cut, kill) refers to the act of killing another human being.[1] It can also describe a person who has committed such an act, though this use is rare in modern English. Homicide is not always an illegal act.

So to directly address your post: no, you can't kill someone & not have it be homicide. But kudos to the DA for calling it what it is rather than "an error in judgement" or some other bullshit whitewashed term.

[MatthewF]

Nevermind, I confused homicide with murder.

edit: damn, beaten!

[Anaxagoras]

Nevermind, I confused homicide with murder.

edit: damn, beaten!

Face the power of me being super bored at work!

Alright... I better stop posting & actually, like, produce something.

[Anti-Bunny]

Oh look at that
It was 2 a.m. on December 31 when Tolan and his cousin, Anthony Cooper, were confronted in the driveway of their home by Bellaire, Texas, police officers. Police officials say the officers suspected the two young men were driving a stolen car.

Bellaire is a prominent, mostly white suburb in southwest Houston.

[...]

Tolan’s relatives say the two young men had just arrived from a late-night run to a Jack-in-the-Box fast food restaurant.

As they walked up the driveway to their home, Anthony Cooper said an unidentified man emerged from the darkness with a flashlight and a gun pointed at them.

“We did not know it was a police officer,” said Cooper. “He said, ‘Stop. Stop.’ And we were like, ‘Why? Who are you?’”

The officers ordered both men to lie down on the ground. Tolan’s parents heard the commotion and came outside. Police will only say an “altercation” took place. Tolan’s family say it involved his mother.

“The cop pushed her against the wall,” said Tolan’s uncle, Mike Morris.

Relatives say Tolan started to lean up from the ground to ask the officer what he was doing to his mother. That’s when the family says Tolan was shot in the chest, the bullet piercing his lung and then lodging in his liver.

But Tolan’s SUV wasn’t stolen. Both men were unarmed and relatives say they were hardly a threat to the police officer.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/01/08/baseballer.shot/index.html

wtf seriously

[wumpus]

One word: Texas

http://2008central.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/yosemitesam.jpg

[bago]

I always thought Yosemite was in Wyoming. Though that might explain Dick Cheney.

[Houngan]

That one is worse than the BART shooting, in my mind. It's clearly a conscious shooting by the officer without threat.

H.

[Athryn]

I always thought Yosemite was in Wyoming. Though that might explain Dick Cheney.

Yosemite is actually in California. :P You know, Half Dome and all that?

[Anti-Bunny]

Yosemite is actually in California. :P You know, Half Dome and all that?

Don't worry, I'm sure there's some other stereotype we can use for Texans.

I've heard everyone has an oil drill in their backyard there. Also, you shouldn't mess with them.

[Anti-Bunny]

BTW, it looks like the officer resigned.

More on that:
Mehserle's resignation was effective immediately. Christopher Miller, an attorney for the officer, declined to say what Mehserle's explanation was for shooting Grant or why he had quit. He said Mehserle's defense would continue to be paid for by a statewide fund for police officers.
So, basically, Oscar Grant is posthumously paying for his murder's defense.

[Mike O'Malley]

Did he contribute to the fund?

[Anti-Bunny]

Did he contribute to the fund?

My bad, apparently it's a private fund (http://www.poracldf.com/Default.htm).

[Lunch of Kong]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/01/08/baseballer.shot/index.html
wtf seriously

It's either because they were black or because the car was reported stolen.

I know that most police officers aren't very good shots, but it still surprised me to read that the officer fired at least three times, hitting a stationery target feet away from him only once. WTF, seriously.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6195571.html

[Hugin]

It's either because they were black or because the car was reported stolen.

I know that most police officers aren't very good shots, but it still surprised me to read that the officer fired at least three times, hitting a stationery target feet away from him only once. WTF, seriously.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6195571.html

Most of the bullets fired in history missed. FBI stats consistently show even semi-automatic fire at close range (not machine guns spraying all over the place or blind fire into woods) misses.

[RyanMichael]

Most of the bullets fired in history missed. FBI stats consistently show even semi-automatic fire at close range (not machine guns spraying all over the place or blind fire into woods) misses.

This man speaks the truth. If there's one thing I learned from my Far Cry 2 murder simulator, it's that even when I'm popping off suckers left and right, that's still only a 38% accuracy rating.

[Tim James]

This man speaks the truth. If there's one thing I learned from my Far Cry 2 murder simulator, it's that even when I'm popping off suckers left and right, that's still only a 38% accuracy rating.You should consider instructing for police firearms training.

[DragonPup]

The plot thickens as Johannes Mehserle was arrested in Nevada on a fugitive warrant (http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/01/14/BART.shooting.arrest/index.html).

[MatthewF]

Man, this shit is just getting weirder and weirder.

[Tim James]

Okay, I think now we've reached the point where this is looking very fishy. :)

Idiots of the city, you may now commence rioting.

[Cubit]

Idiots of the city, you may now commence rioting.

Tim, you need to be that guy who rides along in the helicopter with the loudspeaker. :)

[Kevin J Baird]

I think a fugitive warrant is standard practice when you want to arrest someone and they are out of state. Since he wasn't under arrest at the time, and left the state of California, they had to issue a fugitive warrant to get him picked up.

They charged him with murder. That means they have to prove intent to a full jury without reasonable doubt. Man, that's gonna be a tough sell. They should have went with manslaughter. Now this guy will get off and then the real riots will start.

[John Many Jars]

Yeah, manslaughter seems right.

Meanwhile, the flame of lawlessness burns unabated in SF. (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/14/BAJE15A6SC.DTL&tsp=1)

[DragonPup]

Murder charges (http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/01/14/BART.shooting.arrest/index.html?iref=topnews).

[rossm]

Murder charges (http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/01/14/BART.shooting.arrest/index.html?iref=topnews).
Somebody (http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/member.php?u=5818) linked (http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/showpost.php?p=1600652&postcount=151) to that article already.

[Jeff Green]

Yeah, manslaughter seems right.

Meanwhile, the flame of lawlessness burns unabated in SF. (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/14/BAJE15A6SC.DTL&tsp=1)

My legal knowledge is pretty much limited to, err, I dunno, L.A. Law or something, but as far as I knoW:

The charge is actually homicide, not murder. Doesn't that therefore mean that he could still be found guilty of murder OR manslaughter?

EDIT: hmmm, I'm seeing different accounts now on the actual charges filed...

[Mordrak]

They charged him with murder. That means they have to prove intent to a full jury without reasonable doubt. Man, that's gonna be a tough sell. They should have went with manslaughter. Now this guy will get off and then the real riots will start.

Maybe they are charging him with something that he's unlikely to be convicted of to get him off the hook. The public gets its trial and he gets to move on. Of course, like you said, if they charge him with murder and don't get a conviction, there will likely be problems.

[Kyle Wilson]

A man wanted for violating his parole killed three police officers and gravely wounded another in two shootings Saturday, the first after a routine traffic stop and the second after a massive manhunt ended in gunfire, authorities said.

...

People lingered at the scene of the first shooting. About 20 bystanders taunted police.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gd2xGykkCnfLhKopnaeC8-qYjWEAD972T78G0

Way to go, Oakland. Keep it classy.

[frank austin]

It's just how we do.

I live not terribly far from here; I heard sirens all afternoon and wondered what the hell was going on. CHP was racing by my house on the freeway for a good long while.

You wouldn't believe the tacky myspace bulletins I've been seeing today from my more "hella punk" friends.

[cesare]

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gd2xGykkCnfLhKopnaeC8-qYjWEAD972T78G0

Way to go, Oakland. Keep it classy.

By the thread bump should we assume the two cases are related? What exactly is your point?

Actually, nevermind. I know what your point is.

[charmtrap]

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gd2xGykkCnfLhKopnaeC8-qYjWEAD972T78G0

Way to go, Oakland. Keep it classy.

The relationship between the OPD and certain segments of the Oakland citizenry is outright hostile and probably irreparable at this point. It's understandable, if in poor taste.

[Tim James]

CHP was racing by my house on the freeway for a good long while.They pull out all the stops to find cop killers!

[MattKeil]

They pull out all the stops to find cop killers!

Is that a bad thing?

[Tim James]

Nope, I just remember driving across the state one night when they were looking for some guy and there was another car on the side of the road or helicopter every quarter mile!

[Funkula]

I think it's a bit unprofessional of them to focus so much more attention on crimes committed against "their own people" than they do on crimes against the civilians that it's their job to protect. I understand why it's personal, because a dead or wounded cop is a friend and brother, while a dead or wounded civilian is just some faceless schmoe, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't try to present an image of impartiality.

I'm not saying that they shouldn't invest effort in stopping/punishing anti-cop violence, but for it to be orders of magnitude more important than any other duty seems like a bad idea to me.

[Tim James]

Whether it's a bad idea depends on how much you like the police [EDIT] as an institution. If they didn't do it, I'd imagine the whole house of cards would probably crumble. Low morale, fewer people joining the force, more people taking shots at cops than they already do, etc.

[Anaxagoras]

By the thread bump should we assume the two cases are related? What exactly is your point?

Actually, nevermind. I know what your point is.


I'm curious, actually. What was his point?

[cesare]

I'm curious, actually. What was his point?

His point was to say, “..but see what kind of savages these cops have to deal with?” without actually coming out and saying it. Some subconscious, knee-jerk part of his brain probably feels that somehow, in some vague and unspecified way, this incident justifies the BART shooting, but the rational part of his brain realizes that opinion is batshit insane. So he just sorta mildly tries to connect the two in hopes that some people come to the same conclusion as him.

[frank austin]

Or, and I know I'm reaching here, maybe his point was that taunting cops isn't a classy thing to do when other cops get killed? Maybe they're connected because they happened in the same community, and you're just filling in the rest yourself?

Though, maybe you're connecting this to some other posts of his and I don't get it.

[MikeJ]

If they didn't do it, I'd imagine the whole house of cards would probably crumble. Low morale, fewer people joining the force, more people taking shots at cops than they already do, etc.

I think this is correct. Shooting police officers is more serious because it represents a threat to the law enforcement system itself. It's not hard to see a sort of positive feedback loop that would ruin for the force's effectiveness. People may not have warm feelings for cops, but they probably don't want anarchy and/or an OCP takeover either.

[Anaxagoras]

Or, and I know I'm reaching here, maybe his point was that taunting cops isn't a classy thing to do when other cops get killed?

Cesare's explanation made sense to me, but yours kinda confuses me. If the cops are the enemy, taunting them when some of their members die seems reasonable. It's a way of expressing your contempt for their suffering. Is it considered "unclassy" to be honest with your enemies? Or is the populace's hostility to cops completely undeserved? (Honest question: I don't know much about the Oakland PD)

[Kyle Wilson]

His point was to say, “..but see what kind of savages these cops have to deal with?” without actually coming out and saying it.

My point, as much as I had one, is that mocking murder victims is appallingly rude behavior. I didn't expect that to be controversial. I'm actually kind of dumbfounded that people seem to think it's fine.

I posted this in the BART shooting thread only because I assume that the taunters are angry because of the BART shooting, so it seemed like the appropriate place.

Can't we all just get along?

[frank austin]

Cesare's explanation made sense to me, but yours kinda confuses me. If the cops are the enemy, taunting them when some of their members die seems reasonable. It's a way of expressing your contempt for their suffering. Is it considered "unclassy" to be honest with your enemies? Or is the populace's hostility to cops completely undeserved? (Honest question: I don't know much about the Oakland PD)

Like the man just said, his point was that it's "appallingly rude behavior" to taunt cops when cops get killed. cesare was implying that he was defending the original BART shooting incident by pointing out how ridiculous the civs in Oakland are.

[cesare]

My point, as much as I had one, is that mocking murder victims is appallingly rude behavior. I didn't expect that to be controversial. I'm actually kind of dumbfounded that people seem to think it's fine.

I find it weird that a single sentence in that article is what drew your ire. When I saw the link posted here I assumed that the cop shootings were explicitly a result of the BART incident. When I read the article and that turned out not to be the case, the next assumption was that you have an agenda. "Yeah, but look at what these people did" apologism.

[Funkula]

If they didn't do it, I'd imagine the whole house of cards would probably crumble. Low morale, fewer people joining the force, more people taking shots at cops than they already do, etc.

Fair enough, I just worry that it contributes even more to an us vs. them tribal mentality among the police.

[CheesyPoof]

I think it's a bit unprofessional of them to focus so much more attention on crimes committed against "their own people" than they do on crimes against the civilians that it's their job to protect. I understand why it's personal, because a dead or wounded cop is a friend and brother, while a dead or wounded civilian is just some faceless schmoe, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't try to present an image of impartiality.

I'm not saying that they shouldn't invest effort in stopping/punishing anti-cop violence, but for it to be orders of magnitude more important than any other duty seems like a bad idea to me.

I'd argue that someone that wantonly kills or shoots at police officers (i.e. someone with nothing to lose) represents a much larger threat to the community than a 'routine' homicide case.

[John Many Jars]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/25/MNJP16MF1U.DTL

[Cubit]

time for your daily dose of police brutality!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/13/police-brutality-cops-pun_n_203245.html

[Tim James]

Where do these journalist clowns come up with these terms -- "punt" him in the head?

How about assault or the cop kicked his face in?

[frank austin]

Holy shit. I wasn't expecting that, at all. When he went to the ground I was like "Wow, I can't believe he's going to resist a little after going to the... oh."

[extarbags]

time for your daily dose of police brutality!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/13/police-brutality-cops-pun_n_203245.html

Justify this one, head-punting apologists.

[Ezdaar]

Clearly by his open arms and ground position he was attempting to trip the officer and steal his gun. Also we should wait for all the facts to come in before passing judgment, it is possible that he said some mean things to the officers or made rude gestures previously.

[Lunch of Kong]

that was awesome.. BOOM, HEADSHOT! Then knee to the back and KIDNEY SHOT!

Apparently, cops don't like it if you make them run.

[frank austin]

Clearly by his open arms and ground position he was attempting to trip the officer and steal his gun. Also we should wait for all the facts to come in before passing judgment, it is possible that he said some mean things to the officers or made rude gestures previously.

Let's not forget that these brave men and women are clearly putting their lives on the line against such ruthless suspects every day. The stress of arresting a completely prone subject could drive any one of us to do things we'd later regret!

[Anti-Bunny]

FYI, hitting a perp who had previously tried to escape with a haymaker, even after he is apparently giving up, is literally the standard operating procedure for cops.

To quote Will Smith: "NYPD means I will 'Nock Yo Punk-ass Down!"

Seriously, go look up any car chase on youtube where the purp crashes his car and tries to give up.. The first thing the cops do is practically dive at the guy with their fists.

[frank austin]

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/us_world/CHP-Pursues-Pickup-in-Diamond-Bar-Area-.html

"I worked internal affairs for four years and I have learned that you do not make a decision in a vacuum," El Monte Police Chief Tom Armstrong said Wednesday. "I do not know what was in the mind of that officer, as to why he did that. I saw the individual turn his head toward the officer."

As for the officer with a flashlight seen striking the suspect in the video, Armstrong said, "...it appears (the suspect) had his arm underneath his body. You cannot see what was in his hand."

That officer has not been reassigned during the investigations, Alva said Thursday.

What a bunch of ridiculous bullshit. He has his hand underneath his body because he's reacting to being beaten to a fucking pulp. This is some serious Army of Two fistbump bullshit, but it's happening in real life.

[malchior]

What a bunch of ridiculous bullshit. He has his hand underneath his body because he's reacting to being beaten to a fucking pulp. This is some serious Army of Two fistbump bullshit, but it's happening in real life.+1. He turned his head towards the officer. What was he going to do? Shoot him with his mutant eye beams?!? I don't care if he was yelling at the officer about banging his wife as he approached; that is a clear assault. The facts are this guy was completely prone, and the professional officer ran up and kicked him straight on in the face -- unacceptable in any circumstances.

[malchior]

http://www.whittierdailynews.com/crime/ci_12375430

Dieter Dammeier, an attorney representing the El Monte Police Officers Association, said Thursday the actions were justified.

"When you're going to have to take a bad guy into custody physically, it is sometimes going to be aggressive and the cops are there to win," Dammeier said.

The officer's kick was what is called a "distraction blow," Dammeier said, and is not designed to harm people.

"(Richard Rodriguez) obviously hadn't been searched yet," Dammeier said. "The fear is this guy had weapons on him. Better safe than sorry."

Dammeier also said the high-five had nothing to do with the force used, but was a celebration by cops who just spent 30 minutes on a dangerous pursuit to get a "bad guy" off the streets.

Looks like there will be a criminal probe by an outside agency, which is a good thing since the Chief of Police doesn't seem to want to man up and discipline his officers. That attorney isn't doing anyone any favors with those ridiculous statements though. A kick to the face is a 'distraction blow'. Come on. A distraction blow is a technical term for a strike when a suspect is struggling. He clearly wasn't. Tip to officers trying to win the PR war -- don't roll out the fourth string lawyer.

[zengonzo]

We found the suspect on the ground, hands behind his back - but he'd had his face turned toward us, so we fired two distraction shots into his forehead.

We believe the suspect died shortly thereafter due to injuries sustained while resisting arrest.

[Tim James]

Continuing the El Monte subthread: this cannot be real (http://www.sgvtribune.com/news/ci_12373174).
[Kick-happy cop] Fierro is listed as the owner of Torcido Clothing (www.torcidoclothing.com) of El Monte, according to records at El Monte City Hall. "Torcido" is slang for being imprisoned.

The Torcido Clothing company "features some of the hardest authentic jail house threads for the streets. Straight from East L.A., Califas ..." according to its Web site.
Also, I enjoyed this chuckler from some poor journalism grad:
EL MONTE - The police officer who sources inside City Hall say kicked a gang member in the head after a long car chase Wednesday...I'm pretty sure we've all seen the video. And before Hawkeye Fierce accuses me of not treating people innocent until guilty, they could at least write "everyone who has seen the publicly available video" instead of secret City Hall sources. :)