More LEOs behaving badly

Sterilization of the Untermensch? That's very Aryan of you @Ganado (just kidding).

Sterilization for those society deems unfit has been a no-go for almost 100 years in this country..
Buck v. Bell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You never know the details . . . she may have been raped.

 

You miss my point BTPost and once again you go on the attack rather than having a discussion. Completely unacceptable behavior from a moderator. Of you don't like the truth or opinions please put me on ignore.

Please do not continue to make personal attacks.

In nature this woman would have died from off kilter brain chemicals and her child would have died.... Yet we are willing to make Leo's bad guys for a difficult situation with another out of control person. Where did we miss the boat as a society? In letting her get pregnant while in a mental institution? In not forcing her to take her meds?

In my view if you cannot be responsible for your behavior and your actions because of mental problems and you are making problems for the people around you. The YES society has a right to dictate to you if you cannot control yourself. She needs to be prevented from having children until she can be responsible.

Ok I concede sterilization a bit harsh. And if a person is the responsible for their actions and can't comprehend the consequences of their actions then yes we as a society have the right to contain them... And I agree it's a slippery slope.

@CATO I see your point

 

@BTPost PLEASE do not attack me personally. I understand you are passionate about this and once again I am respectfully requesting that you not attack me personally. Instead please have a discussion.

I too believe people should have free choice. And with free choice comes responsibility. Responsibility is the ability to RESPOND not REACT.

This woman.... made a choice to endanger her child and herself. The man who shot her now has to live with the fact that he shot her and her unborn child and regardless of 'he was doing his job' and his training, this will haunt him the rest of his life. This woman was not a responsible adult. Yet the media wants to pull out all the stops for the horror of an LEO shooting a mother and an unborn child with no discussion of her responsibility in this matter. Really? we should let unbalanced people do whatever they want regardless of the consequences?

Respectfully we will have to agree to disagree. I believe some people should not have children. How that is achieved is another debate.

 

just an fyi @BTPost you know online, that caps lock is considered yelling? just a bit of etiquette that its good to know as a forum moderator.

 

Smile when you you pull out dem cap locks pardner =)

 

Ganado - She can't be charged with murder as she is dead.

BT - Settle down man, seriously. You are trying to make a point and instead coming across as...someone more than just trying to make a point. Your initial post, regardless of how you "meant" it really did come across as an attack on Ganado directly. And I quote "and just who Granted YOU, Queen of the Universe Status, to make such Judgements".

Yes, there's a world of difference between a person and their stance. Okay, take a breath, look around, and try to make sure you are clearly attacking an idea or a stance and not an individual because it's not coming across as the former and looks, sounds & smells like (a duck) you are attacking someone and not something.

 

I can see part of Ganado's point, and it is an issue that comes up after a lot of shootings; both police involved shootings and civilian on civilian shootings. The big common denominator in many of these shootings is - Mental Illness. We have thousands upon thousands of mentally ill individuals roaming our streets and filling our prisons. We as a nation are covering our eyes and ears, and hoping the problem will go away. The earlier attempts in this country to institutionalize and manage the mentally ill were full of horrid injustices, and it has caused us, as a society, to shy away from the subject all together. But what we are doing currently, isn't working. If it was, our prisons wouldn't be overflowing with the mentally ill. The moment you mention the subject of institutionalization, you get the question - "Who gets to decide who gets locked up?" And the inference that the system will obviously be abused, and anyone that the government doesn't like will get locked up along with the mentally ill. I find that a little paranoid and sad, and not a reasonable justification to avoid talking about the 500 pound gorilla sitting in the middle of the room.

I watched the video of this incident, and it is not exactly as portrayed in the overly subjective article which started this discussion. Video:
Idaho police shoot pregnant woman, in 15 seconds, with an AR-15 rifle – video | US news | The Guardian
The officers responded to a call of a dangerous, knife-wielding individual threatening people with a deadly weapon. They approached the woman with guns drawn, as policy, and common sense, would dictate; and when they were able to get a direct line of sight with the woman, she was eight feet away, between two cars. They weren't standing twenty-five feet away, with plenty of time to consider their options. When they told her to drop the knife, she immediately charged them. They had a half a second to react. If fact, both officers immediately started back-peddling before they opened fire.

I'm not saying they did everything correct, but I am saying that they had very little time to consider their options. Immediately after the shots, one officer is heard saying "Oh Sh!t." Obviously, he wasn't pleased with what had just transpired.

Police department policy and training may be at fault. State and federal criminal law may be at fault. The officers are probably functioning under law and policy that demands that lethal threat be met with lethal threat. I've had an officer tell me that if I have to shoot someone, don't ever just try to wound him; and that if I did, to claim that I missed and was trying to kill him. He told me that I could face criminal prosecution for admitting to trying to wound a person, as he also would face prosecution for that very thing. If you don't need to kill someone, you are in a legally vulnerable position if you use deadly force. Its the same as firing a warning shot. If you pull that trigger, and deadly force is not required, you're quite possibly going to jail. If deadly force is required, then there should be a corpse in front of you after you pull that trigger. Maybe that isn't right, but that is the way that the law is interpreted in most locales. I was taught the same thing in the Marine Corps. We were told that if on guard duty, and fired a warning shot or shot to wound an individual, we were going to the brig. If deadly force was required, we should use it. Firing a warning shot, or shooting to wound is a self admission that deadly force was not, in fact, required.

This lady who lost her life had a troubled life, and had never been a properly functioning individual. She had stabbed one ex-husband in the back with a knife, and was listed as a chronic domestic violence victim as well as assailant, and substance abuser. She was a ticking time bomb wandering the streets. It is a sad situation that in our country, that the mentally ill have few options. They struggle along until they do something bad enough to be locked up for a long time, or they die from substance abuse, or they are killed. Ours is not a humane solution.

 

While it may come across that way to YOU, it appeared to me that any attack was on the statements made and the seriously dangerous and anti-liberty attitudes demonstrated by them.

When one starts deciding that another isn't "right" and needs to be put down or, at least, prevented from breeding I think such a question (note "question", not "statement") as the one you quote is perfectly reasonable.

 

So what is your solution?

I don't mind if others disagree with me and I appreciate solutions. I'm not saying mine is the right solution... It's one alternative to what we are doing now.

I would really be interested in what you suggest.

 

I have neither a solution for mental illness nor a great interest in finding one...I am just a broke d*** retired fed...not a psychiatrist.

I do know that sterilizing people because they do not fit the norm is not an answer that I will accept.

I am a proponent of capital punishment for people who harm others and won't stop doing it...regardless of their mental state or age. Not just murderers, but 3rd offense of such crimes as armed robbery, home invasion, drunk driving...basically a pattern that shows they are not going to stop and will eventually kill someone if left among humans. Heck...I'll go with first offense on rape, child molestation and the like with certain types of evidence...however, the sterilization of a person who has psychiatric issues and does not represent the norm as defined by another is a whole different ballgame. Most psychological problems are not even inherited, and none to my knowledge are always (or even normally) inherited, so I am not even sure where you would find justification for it.

This woman's murder (and that is what it was, whether committed by police or the junkie down the street) was unnecessary. The non lethal options that were neglected are so numerous one could probably fill the entire page with them. When we allow these murders to take place and go unpunished, we sacrifice the order and security of a society of law. If we are going to allow this kind of summary "justice" by those who are supposedly paid to protect we eventually reach a point where Brokor's points seem almost correct, and that is a world I would rather not see.

 

These P'sOS don't like being held accountable for their actions. He, and those like him who see regular citizenry beneath them are getting to be worse than the pukes they're supposed to be protecting the sheeple from.

Officials Investigating After U.S. Marshal Rips Phone From Hands Of Recording Bystander

Officials Investigating After U.S. Marshal Rips Phone From Hands Of Recording Bystander
The Huffington Post | By Nick Visser

• Posted: 04/21/2015 12:47 pm EDT Updated: 04/21/2015 12:59 pm EDT

Officials are investigating a shocking video that purports to show a U.S. marshal destroying the phone of a recording bystander.

The video was uploaded to YouTube on April 19 in South Gate, California, within Los Angeles County. In the clip, recorded from a building across the street, a bystander appears to be filming and talking to uniformed officials responding to a report of a biker gang meeting. A man wearing a bulletproof vest and carrying a weapon then grabs her phone, slamming it to the ground before kicking it down the street.

The U.S. Marshals Service identified the man as a U.S. marshal, but his name has not been released.

“The U.S. Marshals Service is aware of video footage of an incident that took place Sunday in Los Angeles County involving a Deputy U.S. Marshal," a spokesperson for the Marshals Central District of California office told The Huffington Post in an emailed statement. "The agency is currently reviewing the incident."

It's unclear whether the individual recording was affiliated with six people arrested during the police response, according to NBC Los Angeles. But it's perfectly legal to film officers in all 50 states as long as you don't interfere with their work.

“There are First Amendment protections for people photographing and recording in public,” Mickey Osterreicher, an attorney with the National Press Photographers Association, told HuffPost after several journalists were arrested during last year's Ferguson protests.

Intentionally blocking or ordering an individual to cease recording constitutes a First Amendment violation.

Help us spread the truth about recoding the police by sharing the image below:

 

That was a weird uniform so I am not completely convinced of the agency...regardless, he should have known better in spite of what might have been said or his state of mind. If he is a DUSM, I foresee a transfer to JPATS (prisoner transfers)...where one doesn't come into contact with real people.

EDIT: hadn't registered the part about USMS verifying his agency.

 

Wow that was way of line as she was backing up like they told her too.

and did you notice she never shut up and was harassing them the whole time?

 

No, Sharpstown, Texas, Did Not Fire its Police Force and Bring About a Huge Drop in Crime | Texas Monthly