Some serious bullshit

[TehBanStick]

This isn't really "politics" but I think it should be heard. A few days ago in Albany NY,my county, a innocent man was shot dead on the street. He was killed by a bullet that a cop shot at car that was running away from the police. The bullet hit off the car and killed a Pedestrian. The man that was running away from the cops, in his car, was charged with the murder of the Pedestrian, and the cop go off scotch free, even though the cop opened fire in a highly populated area. Do you think this is right?

[Phineus]

I think i speak for all when I say, "Absolutely not. That is just absurd."

[witeshark]

Thats just wrong plain and simple! It would have been better to let that suspect car go and try to follow it without pressuring the driver and get him later.

[antiklaus]

At 8/20/04 10:22 PM, TCStyle wrote: The man that was running away from the cops, in his car, was charged with the murder of the Pedestrian, and the cop go off scotch free, even though the cop opened fire in a highly populated area. Do you think this is right?

Its like those stupid high-speed car chases through traffic going the wrong way.

You do realize the person who runs from the cops is invariably charged with every car that the police accidentally hit...?

It's utter bullshit, but it's the craptastical interpretation of law.

[bumcheekcity]

At 8/20/04 10:22 PM, TCStyle wrote: The man that was running away from the cops, in his car, was charged with the murder of the Pedestrian, and the cop go off scotch free, even though the cop opened fire in a highly populated area. Do you think this is right?

No, the guy in the car shouldn't be charged. I think the cop should. If you open fire at a car in a crowded public area, you're just asking for trouble...

[mookatpie]

totally. mabye the cop could have tailed him till they got to a less populated place. the cop should be charged

[Et3rna1-B1isS]

Resisting arrest is a crime, and when a perp begins a chase, he's automatically putting the lives of everyone in the area in danger. What if the perp had run someone over on his own? His fault. What if he had taken a swerve to avoid incoming traffic, and the traffic colided with the police cars, perhaps ending with deaths of innocent people and the police? His fault.

So obviously when a police officer tries to bring him down, because from then on he's a threat, and the gunfire accidentally kills a bystander, it's his fault. Tough shit, live with the consequences of breaking the law.

Think of it this way, whiners, if the man would have submitted himself to the police before the chase, there would have been no deaths.

So if you didn't read all that, then: Yeah, it's absolutely freakin right that the perp was charged with that death. He caused it.

[Et3rna1-B1isS]

At 8/20/04 10:22 PM, TCStyle wrote: This isn't really "politics" but I think it should be heard. A few days ago in Albany NY,my county, a innocent man was shot dead on the street. He was killed by a bullet that a cop shot at car that was running away from the police. The bullet hit off the car and killed a Pedestrian. The man that was running away from the cops, in his car, was charged with the murder of the Pedestrian, and the cop go off scotch free, even though the cop opened fire in a highly populated area. Do you think this is right?

You know, you don't give us alot to work with. Give more details; did the perp have weapons or drugs in his car? Was he drunk or stoned? Was the killed man watching the police when it happened, or was he not paying any attention?

[little-bald-kid]

That is bullshit.

That cop should be the one in court for incompentance.

[ZeroAsALimit]

For there to be any order innocent people must suffer. Carry on, my children, humanity.

[specimen56]

At 8/21/04 07:02 AM, ZeroAsALimit wrote: For there to be any order innocent people must suffer.

Excuse me? Am I seeing this correctly? Surely in along with order there must come the lives of innocent people as a priority?

[ZeroAsALimit]

At 8/21/04 07:51 AM, specimen56 wrote:

:Surely in along with order there must come the lives of innocent people as a priority?

Usually, yes. But in any political, social or philisophical system, even if the system is the absence of a sytem, the innocent people will always suffer. It is an unfortunate thing in life.

[ZeroAsALimit]

Seriously, think about it. The laws are there to hold order and to protect the citizens and the state. People who break these laws are to be caught and punished, usually with a jail term. In the persuit of these people sometimes there is a wrongful inmpisonment or an innocent person bites the bullet because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[specimen56]

At 8/21/04 07:56 AM, ZeroAsALimit wrote: Usually, yes. But in any political, social or philisophical system, even if the system is the absence of a sytem, the innocent people will always suffer. It is an unfortunate thing in life.

Ahh, sorry, I misunderstood, and unfortunatly I must agree with you.

[bumcheekcity]

At 8/21/04 08:07 AM, ZeroAsALimit wrote: Seriously, think about it. The laws are there to hold order and to protect the citizens and the state. People who break these laws are to be caught and punished, usually with a jail term. In the persuit of these people sometimes there is a wrongful inmpisonment or an innocent person bites the bullet because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Which I'm sure would be your attitude if it was your brother shot there.

The laws aren there to hold order yes. Shooting a car in a public place does nothing of use.

Shouldn't the cops just not chase him, and get the registration number?

[ZeroAsALimit]

At 8/21/04 08:26 AM, bumcheekcity wrote: Which I'm sure would be your attitude if it was your brother shot there.

It would. I don't agree with law and order.

[TheWakingDeath]

At 8/21/04 08:26 AM, bumcheekcity wrote:

At 8/21/04 08:07 AM, ZeroAsALimit wrote: Seriously, think about it. The laws are there to hold order and to protect the citizens and the state. People who break these laws are to be caught and punished, usually with a jail term. In the persuit of these people sometimes there is a wrongful inmpisonment or an innocent person bites the bullet because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Which I'm sure would be your attitude if it was your brother shot there.

Damn you, took the words out of my mouth.

Surely you've all heard the saying "with great power comes great responsibility." Cops are given the right to carry weapons and apprehend anyone who looks suspicious, and now, thanks to the PATRIOT ACT, to arrest anyone without a warrant or even with out a stated cause, indefinately. Whatever happened to the responsibility that should naturally entail all this power? If cops think that they can be absolved of the blame for their actions, no matter how careless, we'll see a lot more innocent bystanders dying at the hands of cowboy cops who don't have their heads in reality.

Being a cop isn't just hunting down crips and taking them out John Wayne style. There are people standing around who are not involved who you have take into concideration. That's why in some states it's actually become illegal for cops to engage in those wonderful high speed chases you see on TV. The cop fired on a car in a crowded area. Car- metal. Don't all cops need at least a minimal background in basic physics. The bullet's course will be redirected, and has a good chance of hitting a civilian. I can't see any reason why arresting one man was more important than not killing another.
The cop is soley at fault for being so irresponsible.

[ZeroAsALimit]

At 8/21/04 09:41 AM, Izuamoto wrote: The cop is soley at fault for being so irresponsible.

So you expect not a single innocent person to be punished in society ?

[antiklaus]

Don't police have an arsenal of nonlethal weapons at their disposal?

I mean if they can get high powered assault-rifles and heavy ballistic armour for SWAT teams...

and rubber bullets and tear gas for riot patrols...

then I have to presume that an average beat cop can at least have access to them.

[Et3rna1-B1isS]

At 8/21/04 10:30 AM, antiklaus wrote: Don't police have an arsenal of nonlethal weapons at their disposal?

I mean if they can get high powered assault-rifles and heavy ballistic armour for SWAT teams...

and rubber bullets and tear gas for riot patrols...

then I have to presume that an average beat cop can at least have access to them.

Yeah, I'm sure a rubber bullet will pierce a moving car's window. Even if it did, you're supposed to take down the man inside. Rubber bullet can't stop a man in a car. Now the man must've had something dangerous like a gun or drugs for the officer to be shooting at him.

[FUNKbrs]

I think the cop should take the fall. He's an expert, and should have known if he was going to hit or not.

Just one more example of the government being too busy covering it's own ass to do it's fucking job.....

Damn beauracracy.

[Kilrathi827]

In general, you would be right about how cops do have access to non-lethal options and means of stopping cars. But a couple things to consider here. First, they can't be used indiscriminatly in high traffic areas....the cops could disable the vehicle of an innocent person, and cause a traffic incident further complicating the chase, and possible costing more innocent civilians their lives. Second, yeah, the cop is probably an excellent shot. But before you criticize the fact that he didn't make the shot in this case, YOU try firing a gun from a moving vehicle at a moving target. When he fired the gun he probably thought he had a clear shot, but whenever the bullet arrived at the other car, the perps vehicle could have shifted position, causing to the bullet to strike something else and ricochet.

It happens. It IS unfortunate that the innocent suffer in the maintenance of law and order. But it does happen, every day. And yes, I am in the camp that believes the perp should be tried for that death. Even if he did not pull the trigger it can be laid at his doorstep because he ran. If he had not set up the situation in which he had to be apprehended, the gentleman would not have died.

We live in a society governed by a social contract. We live by the law, and for the most part the government leaves us alone. But it is also an imperfect world, and when some people violate that contract, innocent people will inevitably be hurt.

[MuShrOomBastard]

There's something very wrong when killing innocent people can be justified.

[TehBanStick]

At 8/21/04 06:40 AM, Et3rna1_B1isS wrote: You know, you don't give us alot to work with. Give more details; did the perp have weapons or drugs in his car? Was he drunk or stoned? Was the killed man watching the police when it happened, or was he not paying any attention?

The perp had no drugs, or weapons in the car, of any kind. Also, I'd like to add that this isn't the first time an incidentlike this has occured. Last New Years Eve, in Downtown Albany, in the mist of all the celebration, a cop opened fire at a stolen car, because "it was aggressivly coming toward him". Needless to say the cop missed and killed a man, leaving behind a wife and two childern. The cop was not charged with murder, or even manslaughter. Albany is overwhelmed with people on a normal day, and on holidays its even crazier, how could anyone justify his actions?

[Et3rna1-B1isS]

At 8/21/04 11:46 AM, TCStyle wrote:

At 8/21/04 06:40 AM, Et3rna1_B1isS wrote: You know, you don't give us alot to work with. Give more details; did the perp have weapons or drugs in his car? Was he drunk or stoned? Was the killed man watching the police when it happened, or was he not paying any attention?

I'd like to add that this isn't the first time an incidentlike this has occured. Last New Years Eve, in Downtown Albany, in the mist of all the celebration, a cop opened fire at a stolen car, because "it was aggressivly coming toward him". Needless to say the cop missed and killed a man, leaving behind a wife and two childern.

Hahahahahahhahahahahahahahahaha

heheh... funny. I'll have to get that off Faces of Death sometime.

[TheWakingDeath]

At 8/21/04 09:43 AM, ZeroAsALimit wrote:

So you expect not a single innocent person to be punished in society ?

That, ideally, is the goal. It doesn't happen, but it is strived for. When an innocent is harmed because of recklessness and negligence, it is the fault of the officer. Such outcomes are to be avoided if possible.

[ZeroAsALimit]

At 8/21/04 12:25 PM, Izuamoto wrote:

At 8/21/04 09:43 AM, ZeroAsALimit wrote: So you expect not a single innocent person to be punished in society ?

That, ideally, is the goal. It doesn't happen, but it is strived for.

That's my point, but unlike most "Nihilists" I am fairly open to allow for others beliefs.

[mrpopenfresh]

From a technical standpoint, its the car drivers fault because if he wasn't running away, the cop wouldn't have shot. But from an intelligence standpoint, the cop is damm stupid for opening fire in a populated area. Any word on why the guy was running from the cops?

[TheWakingDeath]

At 8/21/04 11:06 AM, Kilrathi827 wrote: some inane crap defending the officer

In this instance the cops would have been better off not firing at the perp. That would just be common sense. Since when is arresting a criminal more important than protecting the lives around you.
I believe firmly that the perp should not be held responsible for this death. I believe even more firmly that the officer is at fault for endangering the lives of innocent bystanders by reckless use of deadly force.

We live in a society governed by a social contract. We live by the law, and for the most part the government leaves us alone. But it is also an imperfect world, and when some people violate that contract, innocent people will inevitably be hurt.

The fact remains that this persons death could have been avoided had the officer been more responsible. Of course innocent people die, from many causes. But it is in the interest of society that when these causes can be avoided they are. How can I make this anymore plain to you? There is not excuse for the officer's negligence.

[antiklaus]

Yeah, I'm sure a rubber bullet will pierce a moving car's window. Even if it did, you're supposed to take down the man inside. Rubber bullet can't stop a man in a car. Now the man must've had something dangerous like a gun or drugs for the officer to be shooting at him.

Cops have radios - radio waves travel faster than cars. They have lisence plate tracking services, and they also have helicopters, and foam that immobilizes vehicles as well as criminals...

my point is that nonlethal measures exist. and they are often cheaper, and almost always safer than spraying bullets around.