[vox_mundi]

... I grew up in New Orleans around a number of cops and saw attitudes ranging from great hesitation to use lethal force to fantasizing about the possibility. Which IMHO is why you should never show any resistance to a cop: you never know what end of the spectrum you're dealing with. And that's speaking from experience that's easy to recall whenever I notice the now faint scars on the back of my left hand. LOL.

From: http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/spl/ca ... #nopd-summ

New Orleans Police Department

On May 15, 2010, we opened an investigation of the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD) pursuant to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Following a comprehensive investigation, on March 17, 2011, we announced our findings. We found that the NOPD has engaged in patterns of misconduct that violate the Constitution and federal law, including a pattern or practice of excessive force, and of illegal stops, searches, and arrests. We found also a pattern or practice of gender discrimination in the Department's under-enforcement and under-investigation of violence against women. We further found strong indications of discriminatory policing based on racial, ethnic, and LGBT bias, as well as a failure to provide critical police services to language minority communities. On July 24, 2012, we reached a settlement resolving our investigation and asked the Court to make our settlement an order enforceable by the Court. The documents here provide more information about the investigation, the Justice Department's findings, settlement, and next steps.

Findings Report: http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/spl/nopd_report.pdf

And many, many more ... http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/spl/fi ... php#police

[Newfie]

ROCMAN,

I normally align with the line of argument you are using, and have used similar arguments recently with regard to the Ferguson case. This is something different. A known homeless guy, they knew what they were getting into.

Even without that, no I would NOT have shot the guy in those circumstances. I hunt, I shoot things, I know what I can and can't do. They had plenty of room. This was uncalled for.

Did you listen to the second video I poseted?

Take a look at this TED Talk. It's pretty fascinating.

Interesting TED talk explaining something of our psychology.

Just wants to make you wanna cry.

http://www.ted.com/talks/philip_zimbard ... anguage=en

Here is a bit about the Milgrqm experiments he references.

The point is, these are not isolated or unusual cases. This is pretty common behaviour amongst humans. Of late our Western culture has turned away from such acts, but lurks beneath our surface.

[ROCKMAN]

newfie - So if you thought a guy might be about to pull out a gun and take a shot at you: you would wait to see if he did? Granted no one can really answer that question because it's only theoretical in this context. Which takes us back to the thought processes of the cops at the time. So do you think (A) the cops didn't seriously fear for their own safety and just took advantage of the situation to shoot the guy? IOW it was just "thrill killing" on their part? Or (B) do you think they mentally went into a panic mode and unjustifiably over reacted? Or (C) did they make a conscious calculation that their lives were in danger and responded as you or I would?

I think those are the only three reasonable possibilities: everyone gets to vote: A, B or C.

As far as NOPD: go back about 40 years and you'll discover the largest burglary ring ever busted in the history of city was a group of cops that were hitting tourist hotels. And it was their cohorts that "investigated" the crimes. And those scars on my hand: took me many years to improve my attitude towards cops as a whole: they were given to me by one of NOPD's finest when I tried to help my grandfather getting beat up by a couple of cops at the orders of a union boss that didn't care for grandpa's position on some of his union's business.

But I have a better approach now: I let each cop I encounter determine my attitude. And those attitudes do cover a very wide range.

[PrestonSturges]

I grew up in New Orleans around a number of cops and saw attitudes ranging from great hesitation to use lethal force to fantasizing about the possibility. Which IMHO is why you should never show any resistance to a cop: you never know what end of the spectrum you're dealing with. And that's speaking from experience that's easy to recall whenever I notice the now faint scars on the back of my left hand. LOL.

There are many cops now in prison for executing (black) people at random after Katrina, particularly the case of the retarded teenager killed on the bridge. Just try to find on the internet examples of articles reporting that NOLA residents were firing at Coast Guard helicopters - those stories were widely reported, but they were later debunked, and they have been scrubbed from the internet.

But there were white people all over America saying that we needed to send in the National Guard and kill a thousand people or so. And no doubt there are many preppers who are convinced NOLA residents were trying to shoot down the Coast Guard, and they are still stockpiling weapons to protect themselves from "those people."

[Newfie]

ROCK,

I think there are other explanations other than what you post. In this case it sounds like he justified it in his mind first.

Given permission people can be pretty brutal. There is far too much evidence of that.

And I still say, that given what I observed in the video, there was no reason to kill him. None.

[ROCKMAN]

Newfie - Sounds like you vote C given the 3 choices. BTW I would tend to agree with you: the risk didn't seem to justify the reaction. But you're a hunter and I'm sure you remember "buck fever" from our younger days. BTW long ago I used to teach personal defense with a firearm. After I interviewed them I probably rejected way more then of the folks that asked. There are a lot of folks that should never be armed. Which is one reason I wasn't very thrilled when they passed the concealed carry law in Texas. Same reason I never cared to hunt with groups and would go out single. A lot safer...if you don't shoot yourself. LOL.

Yes...I was an NRA instructor. But quit them eventually. They made me uncomfortable for other reasons. LOL.

[vox_mundi]

Just some personal experiences with “the Law” out West...

1979 – After stopping for a burger in Holbrook, Arizona I was stopped by the local police as I exited the diner. The officer approached my van with his pistol drawn, aimed at my head, and I was told that I was speeding (40 in a 25 zone - which was an impossibility, because the carburetor on the van was shot and the vehicle was incapable of rapidly accelerating, I was less than 500 ft from the diner parking lot, also my speedometer showed <25 when he turned his lights and siren on). Ends up giving me a ticket – $120.00

OBTW – I had out-of-state plates – easy money.

A month earlier, in Flagstaff, AZ , a newlywed couple were stopped at a police roadblock after their wedding reception. A trigger happy Deputy ended up shooting the grooms face off with a shotgun because he couldn't get his driver’s side window down fast enough.

1984-Walking from my apartment in Tempe, AZ at night to get something to eat. The street was dimly lit by 2 streelights about 300 ft from me. Out of the unlit field I was walking along, comes a Deputy with pistol drawn. The deputy tells me to kneel on the ground with my hands over my head. This is 2 months after ACL surgery. I’m asked by the deputy, “Why was I running?” For starters – I wasn’t running. I have a heart condition and a bad knee –I can’t Run- Period.

Apparently, a woman was raped in her college dorm a half mile away. They drove her by. I didn’t even match the description. Wrong skin color.

Oh, and I was unarmed on both occasions. I'd probably be dead, if I'd shown any sort of attitude back then.

Just sayin’

[Newfie]

Rock,

If pressed to guess, not a good thing, I expect that they talked themselves into a state where it "seemed like a good idea at the time." They fluffed themselves up and talked shit and got all high and mighty. They got into a dangerous state of mind.

It is the extraordinarily rare person who wakes up in the morning and says " I'm gonna go out and kill that SOB today." What they do is talk themselves into a state of mind where the inevitable happens. Solely, by fits and starts, work themselves into a state of righteous indignation fed by the permission from above and lack of reasonable oversight to ground them.

That trooper he talked to, he was more grounded, looking for, suggesting, some less than lethal solution. The officer failed, was failed, by not having some mechanism by which he could check his perspective, resented himself.

Or, he was just an a**hole.

[vox_mundi]

Officers face murder charges in 2014 Albuquerque homeless man's shooting

Albuquerque, New Mexico (CNN) Two Albuquerque, New Mexico, police officers will face first-degree murder charges in last year's shooting of a homeless man in the hills above the city, a prosecutor announced Monday.

Keith Sandy and Dominique Perez were ordered to appear at a preliminary hearing, the date of which has not yet been set, said District Attorney Kari Brandenburg of New Mexico's Second Judicial Circuit.

Sandy and Perez are accused of killing James Boyd in March. The 38-year-old homeless man spent the night before his shooting in a shelter, but when the shelter closed for the winter, Boyd tried to camp in the hills above the city, officials said.

Overnight camping in the hills is illegal.

Helmet and body cameras worn by dozens of city police who converged on the campsite showed Boyd with two small camping knives in his hands.

Over several hours, Boyd talked with officers, at one point claiming to be "the Department of Defense."

The cameras captured officers converging on a small nest of rocks on the hillside. At one point, Boyd turned his back to the officers and they began firing.

Officers fired a shotgun and nonlethal beanbag pellets at Boyd, while other officers were caught on camera throwing flash-bang grenades. The video also shows one officer unleashing his K-9 German shepherd against Boyd.

The helmet cameras show Boyd wheezing for breath after the attack. He died later at a local hospital.

Do police videos tell the whole truth?

Sandy retired from the department in December of 2014, an Albuquerque police spokesman said. It's unclear if Perez is still on the force.

Local activists have demonstrated for months, protesting not only the Boyd shooting, but other shootings by city police officers since 2010.

Records show that 26 civilians have been shot, a dozen of them fatally, by city police since 2010. Before Monday, no officer had been charged in connection with any shootings.

The Justice Department in April 2014 found that "there is reason to believe" the city's Police Department had a "pattern and practice" of excessive force. The city has since agreed to a memorandum of understanding allowing the Department of Justice to monitor the department.

[KaiserJeep]

The FBI keeps statistics:





From which I conclude that:

1) The 1970s were a bloodbath compared to today.
2) Police training is more effective at reducing civilian deaths than ever before.
3) Things are still improving.
4) Don't resist them, don't give them any lip, and respond through a lawyer if they cross the line.
5) The Press has a necessary role, but there really isn't a story here. This is an exception event, and the incident has been investigated and they have been charged. They stand a good chance of getting off, given the overwhelming police support by juries.

[vox_mundi]

The FBI keeps records

From which I conclude that:
...

KJ -

Are you deliberately trying to mis-represent data.

Those are NOT National FBI figures (which are the only figures the FBI would be responsible for - but they are not responsible - the individual jurisdiction monitor - or not).

They are from New York City NYPD Annual Firearms Discharge Report
NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT - NYC.gov
//www.nyc.gov/.../nypd_annual_firearms_discharge_report_2011.pdf‎

2011 report link: http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www. ... DYcL9cJvhg

2012 report link: http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www. ... gGS0Va1IAg

2013 report link: http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www. ... ank9_weFpQ

pgs 62-69

National figures are over 100x higher than the cities figures.

[KaiserJeep]

Correction noted - the blog that I got the links from misidentified the source, but I should have verified before propagating the error.

However NYPD is the biggest PD in the world and the one under current acute scrutiny - and my observations were correct.

[PrestonSturges]

From which I conclude that:
1) The 1970s were a bloodbath compared to today.

And yet in the late 70s all of us had stories of smoking weed with the cops, or maybe that just applied to us long hair stoner types.

[Cid_Yama]

The 1970's were paradise compared to the Fascist utopia we have today. You weren't there, you don't have a clue. Today we see only moronic children with simplistic concepts of law and order. More like oppression of the masses.

See Kohlberg's stages of development.

The world is over right on time.

[vox_mundi]

Welcome to Utopia ...

US senators call for mandatory reporting of police killings

A plan to force all American law enforcement agencies to report killings by their officers was unveiled by US senators on Tuesday, a day after the Guardian published an investigation into the fatal use of force by police.

Senators Barbara Boxer of California and Cory Booker of New Jersey proposed legislation that would demand all states submit reports to the US Department of Justice that they said would bring “transparency and accountability to law enforcement agencies nationwide”.

Guardian analysis finds 102 people killed by police so far this year were unarmed, and that agencies are killing people at twice the rate calculated by US government. Of the 27 deaths that occurred after a Taser was deployed by law enforcement, all but one involved an unarmed person.

Black Americans are more than twice as likely to be unarmed when killed during encounters with police as white people, according to a Guardian investigation which found 102 of 464 people killed so far this year in incidents with law enforcement officers were not carrying weapons.

An analysis of public records, local news reports and Guardian reporting found that 32% of black people killed by police in 2015 were unarmed, as were 25% of Hispanic and Latino people, compared with 15% of white people killed.

An analysis of location data shows that Oklahoma, where 22 people have died through encounters with law enforcement, is the state with the highest rate of fatal incidents per person in 2015, at one fatality per 175,000 people over five months. (... annual rate = 1 per 75,000)

The Counted, a comprehensive interactive database monitoring all police killings in the US through 16 data points including age, location, gender, ethnicity, whether the person killed was armed and which policing agency was responsible..

'This Is Straight Murder': A Troubling Acquittal in Cleveland

On November 29, 2012, police officers and witnesses heard what appeared to be gunshots coming from a car driving near a police station in Cleveland. A high-speed car chase ensued, drawing in over 100 officers on duty, before the police managed to corner the car. Thirteen police officers then fired 137 rounds of ammunition at the vehicle, whose occupants Cleveland police suspected were armed. After the other officers stopped firing, 31-year-old Michael Brelo climbed on top of the hood of the suspect’s car and fired 15 more rounds at close range. When the shooting stopped, the car’s occupants, 43-year-old Timothy Russell and 30-year-old Malissa Williams, were dead. Both were unarmed. The “gunshot” witnesses heard turned out to be a backfiring car.


Judge John P. O’Donnell with mannequins showing the gunshot wounds to Timothy Russell and Malissa Williams.

Police Beat Mentally Ill Homeless Man to Death – and Get Away With It

Today two ex-police officers were found not guilty in the 2011 beating death of a mentally ill homeless man.

Kelly Thomas, a 37-year-old homeless man with schizophrenia, was approached by Fullerton police who were responding to a vandalism call on the night of July 5.

A 33-minute surveillance camera video caught the entire confrontation.

FBI behind mysterious surveillance aircraft over US cities

The FBI is operating a small air force with scores of low-flying planes across the U.S. carrying video and, at times, cellphone surveillance technology—all hidden behind fictitious companies that are fronts for the government, The Associated Press has learned.



The planes' surveillance equipment is generally used without a judge's approval, and the FBI said the flights are used for specific, ongoing investigations. In a recent 30-day period, the agency flew above more than 30 cities in 11 states across the country, an AP review found.

RThe FBI confirmed for the first time the wide-scale use of the aircraft, which the AP traced to at least 13 fake companies, such as FVX Research, KQM Aviation, NBR Aviation and PXW Services. Even basic aspects of the program are withheld from the public in censored versions of official reports from the Justice Department's inspector general.

One of the planes, photographed in flight last week by the AP in northern Virginia, bristled with unusual antennas under its fuselage and a camera on its left side. A federal budget document from 2010 mentioned at least 115 planes, including 90 Cessna aircraft, in the FBI's surveillance fleet.

These are not your grandparents' surveillance aircraft," said Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst with the American Civil Liberties Union, calling the flights significant "if the federal government is maintaining a fleet of aircraft whose purpose is to circle over American cities, especially with the technology we know can be attached to those aircraft."

During the past few weeks, the AP tracked planes from the FBI's fleet on more than 100 flights over at least 11 states plus Washington, D.C., most with Cessna 182T Skylane aircraft. These included parts of Houston, Phoenix, Seattle, Chicago, Boston, Minneapolis and Southern California.

Evolving technology can record higher-quality video from long distances, even at night, and can capture certain identifying information from cellphones using a device known as a "cell-site simulator"—or Stingray, to use one of the product's brand names. These can trick pinpointed cellphones into revealing identification numbers of subscribers, including those not suspected of a crime.

Officials say cellphone surveillance is rare, although the AP found in recent weeks FBI flights orbiting large, enclosed buildings for extended periods where aerial photography would be less effective than electronic signals collection.

At least 13 front companies that AP identified being actively used by the FBI are registered to post office boxes in Bristow, Virginia, which is near a regional airport used for private and charter flights. Only one of them appears in state business records.

Included on most aircraft registrations is a mysterious name, Robert Lindley. He is listed as chief executive and has at least three distinct signatures among the companies. Two documents include a signature for Robert Taylor, which is strikingly similar to one of Lindley's three handwriting patterns.

A Justice Department memo last month also expressly barred its component law enforcement agencies from using unmanned drones "solely for the purpose of monitoring activities protected by the First Amendment" and said they are to be used only in connection with authorized investigations and activities. A department spokeswoman said the policy applied only to unmanned aircraft systems rather than piloted airplanes.

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and assembly.

[Keith_McClary]

Hawaii Tourists Getting Swept Up in Honolulu Homeless Crackdown

As Honolulu tries to brush up its image for tourists by cracking down on homelessness in Waikiki, it is causing legal problems for some visitors.

Hawaii News Now reported that one in five of the citations issued for nighttime beach visits have gone to tourists, according to city prosecutors.

Honolulu began closing popular Waikiki beachfront parks at midnight to stop homeless people from settling. Violators receive a criminal citation, which could become a warrant if they do not show up in court.

Those who pay the fine will have a criminal mark on their record, and that could cause non-citizens to be refused entry to the U.S. if they return
...
Police officers do issue warnings, but they can’t make exceptions just for visitors, the department said.

The police may be worried about being sued by advocates for the homeless, said attorney Victor Bakke, who has helped several visitors who received citations. “They don’t want to look like they are discriminating against the homeless people,” Bakke said.

The mayor’s office confirmed the police can’t just give visitors a break.

“Police have to enforce the laws equally against everyone,” spokesman Jesse Broder Van Dyke said. “They don’t target homeless in park-closure enforcements.”

Some tourists have told attorneys and court workers that they are so upset they vow never to return.

The Law is the Law.

[evilgenius]

Hawaii Tourists Getting Swept Up in Honolulu Homeless Crackdown

As Honolulu tries to brush up its image for tourists by cracking down on homelessness in Waikiki, it is causing legal problems for some visitors.

Hawaii News Now reported that one in five of the citations issued for nighttime beach visits have gone to tourists, according to city prosecutors.

Honolulu began closing popular Waikiki beachfront parks at midnight to stop homeless people from settling. Violators receive a criminal citation, which could become a warrant if they do not show up in court.

Those who pay the fine will have a criminal mark on their record, and that could cause non-citizens to be refused entry to the U.S. if they return
...
Police officers do issue warnings, but they can’t make exceptions just for visitors, the department said.

The police may be worried about being sued by advocates for the homeless, said attorney Victor Bakke, who has helped several visitors who received citations. “They don’t want to look like they are discriminating against the homeless people,” Bakke said.

The mayor’s office confirmed the police can’t just give visitors a break.

“Police have to enforce the laws equally against everyone,” spokesman Jesse Broder Van Dyke said. “They don’t target homeless in park-closure enforcements.”

Some tourists have told attorneys and court workers that they are so upset they vow never to return.

The Law is the Law.

Yeah, and cops don't decide for themselves every day how many miles per hour over the speed limit they will allow people to go before they will give out a ticket? If the law was the law then going one mile per hour over would be enough for them. Unless you live in a state politically dominated by old people, you probably don't see cops pulling over people who do one over.

Perhaps giving out night time beachgoing tickets indiscriminately is a little like profiling of motorists though. Hawaii is saying that, if they are going to give out tickets, they will not profile. Who says, however, that the officers do need to give out tickets? Wouldn't interactive warnings as a matter of course serve the purpose, and avoid the growing hassle this is obviously causing the tourism industry? What's the fine, anyway? How much is Hawaii making from these fines altogether? Is that money significant to anybody? It would be hard to fix the issue if anybody in a position of power actually relies upon the money.

Assuming there's no hang up over money you don't have to give up on the threat of a fine to help with the problem. You simply have to adopt a policy that you would only give out tickets to people you've warned already. And you don't have to adhere strictly to that policy either. If somebody is giving you a hard time, but they haven't crossed any technical lines, you could deviate from normal procedure and give them a ticket anyway.

This is an interesting subject because it speaks to the loss of discretion, seemingly, by police officers. Can you ever get more than a small number of people who can handle dealing with the public and exercising discretion? If you try to go over the limit you seem to get men who operate like teenage boys, having to aggressively deal with everybody who stares at them, or men who are overwhelmed and want to apply the fallback blanket approach, where everybody now has to live life under an obviously imperfect set of rules. If we allow our fears to get the better of us and go down the road where we perceive a need for more and more cops, armed with more and more lethal stuff, then we are asking for trouble. Maybe we already are in trouble?

[onlooker]

In keeping with stories coming out of Brazil, Mexico and Russia.
First Brazil during the run up to the recent World Cup there, I read that police and para-militaries were targeting homeless and criminals meaning they were in fact killing them even poor children. In Mexico, as Central Americans immigrants try to pass Mexico they are victim to robbery and rapes. In fact the robberies not just by the gangs that are around there but by supposedly normal folk who see chance to get "things" for free. Finally Russia, I also read that certain government people and police have just run over people without a second thought apparently they get away with it. Yep it is a Mad Mad world we live in all the more reason I actually wish this current iteration of the world will end already.

[MD]

So we use bullets on "dangerous" or belligerent humans but will use tranquilizer darts on dangerous animals on the loose?

Hmmm... not computing in my tiny brain. Not getting it at all.

[Keith_McClary]

In keeping with stories coming out of Brazil, Mexico and Russia.
First Brazil during the run up to the recent World Cup there, I read that police and para-militaries were targeting homeless and criminals meaning they were in fact killing them even poor children. In Mexico, as Central Americans immigrants try to pass Mexico they are victim to robbery and rapes. In fact the robberies not just by the gangs that are around there but by supposedly normal folk who see chance to get "things" for free. Finally Russia, I also read that certain government people and police have just run over people without a second thought apparently they get away with it.

and New Mexico, according to:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/06/09/ ... ve-people/