Autistic boy sitting in the streets with a toy car. Therapist (black, since this seems to be a sure way to aggravate police) tries to persuade autistic boy to move back to the sidewalk. Someone dials 911. What they said is unknown, I give you that. Police shows up and immediately draws. Therapist shouts to not shoot, it's just a toy car. Therapist gets shot.

These are the facts. Might be more to the story, though I fail to see what, given that the therapist was unarmed and so was the boy.

It's the easiest thing in the world, RR, not to shoot someone.  Have you ever shot someone?  How hard have you found it to be?  Perhaps you should google the terms or something...to see what they mean?  No, no...I'll just translate...from english... to english, for you.

A capital offense is something thought to be so terrible that it is punishable by death.  A summary execution is when a person is killed for some offense, without the hassle of a trial. If "resisting" is thought to be so terrible that it justifies being shot on the scene, then those instances in which a cop guns down a suspect for the offense of resisting.....are summary executions.

You don't like the way it -sounds-...but you're sure as hell okay with it being done. You've spent a considerable amount of time with me, today, coming up with reasons to justify it. Ranging from "benefit of the doubt" to "autism" to, in effect..."cop is nervous".

(July 21, 2016 at 5:04 pm)Rhythm Wrote: It's the easiest thing in the world, RR, not to shoot someone.  Have you ever shot someone?  How hard have you found it to be?  Perhaps you should google the terms or something...to see what they mean?  No, no...I'll just translate...from english... to english, for you.

A capital offense is something thought to be so terrible that it is punishable by death.  A summary execution is when a person is killed for some offense, without the hassle of a trial.  If "resisting" is thought to be so terrible that it justifies being shot on the scene, then those instances in which a cop guns down a suspect for the offense of resisting.....are summary executions.

You don't like the way it -sounds-...but you're sure as hell okay with it being done.  You've spent a considerable amount of time with me, today, coming up with reasons to justify it.  Ranging from "benefit of the doubt" to "autism" to, in effect..."cop is nervous".

Ok... so person is jay walking and steps in front of a bus and is killed.... jay walking is a capital offense worthy of summary execution.... I get the way you think now!

(July 21, 2016 at 5:12 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:

(July 21, 2016 at 5:04 pm)Rhythm Wrote: It's the easiest thing in the world, RR, not to shoot someone.  Have you ever shot someone?  How hard have you found it to be?  Perhaps you should google the terms or something...to see what they mean?  No, no...I'll just translate...from english... to english, for you.

A capital offense is something thought to be so terrible that it is punishable by death.  A summary execution is when a person is killed for some offense, without the hassle of a trial.  If "resisting" is thought to be so terrible that it justifies being shot on the scene, then those instances in which a cop guns down a suspect for the offense of resisting.....are summary executions.

You don't like the way it -sounds-...but you're sure as hell okay with it being done.  You've spent a considerable amount of time with me, today, coming up with reasons to justify it.  Ranging from "benefit of the doubt" to "autism" to, in effect..."cop is nervous".

Ok... so person is jay walking and steps in front of a bus and is killed.... jay walking is a capital offense worthy of summary execution.... I get the way you think now!

Intent matters just a tiny bit, don't you think? Can it possibly exist in the hypothetical you're presenting for consideration?

Now you're retreating into poor logic because you realize you didn't understand the words, but decided to insult me for using them regardless.  

Is jaywalking thought to be so terrible that it justifies being killed on the spot, as "resisting" is?  No, no it's not.  

Did the bus driver hit them with a bus -for the offense of jaywalking- as the officer shot the man for the offense of resisting?  No, no he did not.

Now, are you sure you just made some comment on the way -I- think?

Can we call them "extrajudicial killings" instead? Seems fair, considering that the vast majority of them are never going to be adjudicated in the same way that a civilian-involved shooting would.

The point here is RR, that there is the appearance that cops essentially have carte blanche to shoot black people with impunity. You may not agree with Rhythm's use of rhetoric, but the fact remains that people are being unjustly, unreasonably killed and the system has little recourse for the victims and their families.

This is not what rule of law looks like.

(July 21, 2016 at 5:01 pm)abaris Wrote: Autistic boy sitting in the streets with a toy car. Therapist (black, since this seems to be a sure way to aggravate police) tries to persuade autistic boy to move back to the sidewalk. Someone dials 911. What they said is unknown, I give you that. Police shows up and immediately draws. Therapist shouts to not shoot, it's just a toy car. Therapist gets shot.

These are the facts. Might be more to the story, though I fail to see what, given that the therapist was unarmed and so was the boy.

There is. The therapist was on his back with his open hands in the air when he was shot. The patient was sitting in a non-threatening posture. The cop apparently has no idea why he shot the guy. I suppose we have that in common - I don't either.

I could run with that.  I;d say that it should be plainly obvious that as soon as we have extrajudicial killings the idea of our nation as one under rule of law goes entirely out the window, by definition.  

It only adds insult to injury, when those extra judicial killings are racially weighted...and carried out -by- officers of the law who have sworn to serve, and protect. It seems as if we can always be counted on to find a way to make a shitty thing even shittier.

(July 21, 2016 at 5:01 pm)abaris Wrote: Autistic boy sitting in the streets with a toy car. Therapist (black, since this seems to be a sure way to aggravate police) tries to persuade autistic boy to move back to the sidewalk. Someone dials 911. What they said is unknown, I give you that. Police shows up and immediately draws. Therapist shouts to not shoot, it's just a toy car. Therapist gets shot.

These are the facts. Might be more to the story, though I fail to see what, given that the therapist was unarmed and so was the boy.

Sounds vaguely familiar, somehow...

Boru

(July 21, 2016 at 5:17 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(July 21, 2016 at 5:12 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: Ok... so person is jay walking and steps in front of a bus and is killed.... jay walking is a capital offense worthy of summary execution.... I get the way you think now!

Intent matters just a tiny bit, don't you think?  Can it possibly exist in the hypothetical you're presenting for consideration?

I agree, that intent matters...   and if you could show, that the intent of the cop was to go to work today and  shoot an unarmed person, then I say lock them up.  And the easiest way, that I know of to show intent is to have a camera on the officer recording the event, and the one being arrested to comply with the authority given to the cop.  If they are making sudden moves towards what could be a gun or weapon I don't expect the officer to wait until someone is actually harmed or killed to find out what the intentions are of the suspect. 

Also just to note, in the recent crisis at the night club in Florida, I would not call the decision to shoot the perpetrator a "summary execution" for a "capital offense".    It's not within their authority to make that judgment.   However they are permitted to use lethal force to protect others and themselves.   Which is sometimes going to be a quick and difficult decision (and yes mistakes may be made).  

My answer is to have people submit to the authorities for arrest (and nobody get shot in the process).  Your's appears to be to walk up and give the potentially armed suspect a hug (or maybe a stern look if it's really bad) or to stand down until a couple people are killed, and then call in and wait for lethal force. 

I don't know that we are going to agree on this, but it was productive, in that I confirmed quite a bit I suspected in the way you think and discuss things.


(edit to add)... oops didn't realize I was responding to someone else, the last comments may not apply to you CTH