Kenosha shooting

[Hagbard Celine 10892]

Wisconsin attorney general won't say whether Kenosha police knew Jacob Blake had a knife before shooting him

"We are not commenting on facts that may be disputed."

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wisconsin-attorney-general-kenosha-police-knew-jacob-blake/story?id=72676725

 

Authorities identify Kenosha cop who shot Jacob Blake, say Blake had knife

https://abcnews.go.com/US/shots-fired-tear-gas-deployed-wisconsin-jacob-blake/story?id=72616792

[dcar00 14312]

8 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

Wisconsin attorney general won't say whether Kenosha police knew Jacob Blake had a knife before shooting him

"We are not commenting on facts that may be disputed."

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wisconsin-attorney-general-kenosha-police-knew-jacob-blake/story?id=72676725

 

Authorities identify Kenosha cop who shot Jacob Blake, say Blake had knife

https://abcnews.go.com/US/shots-fired-tear-gas-deployed-wisconsin-jacob-blake/story?id=72616792

he could have picked up the knife when he leaned into the car initially.  the officer could have seen that and then shot him and then of course blake dropped the knife.  that could all happen in a matter of a 2 seconds.  it also could be he reached for it and never grabbed it and was shot.  in the first case he had the knife in the second case he didn't "have" the knife.

still not sure if he had the knife in his hands outside the care before the police came and maybe put it back in the car.

as with a lot of cases details will matter.

[jkates 316]

17 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

If there really was a plague of racist police officers hunting down and executing black men, you wouldn't think every single case BLM and its supporters riot over would involve a criminal resisting arrest.

And out in the middle of the street in broad daylight.

[bad_teammate 13219]

No one is arguing that there is a plague of racist police officers hunting down and executing black men in The Most Dangerous Game sense, that's a dishonest characterization by an edgy troll.

What IS being contended is that cops of all races are more callous and severe when dealing with black citizens and that this is connected to a larger set of anti-black inequalities in America.

[fattyflattie 4639]

18 hours ago, Pancho said:

As of Wednesday

 

Why wouldn't he?  Did he deserve 7 in the back, no, not likely at all.  Still a criminal that resisted arrest, yes. 

[immortal13 4059]

2 hours ago, dcar00 said:

he could have picked up the knife when he leaned into the car initially.  the officer could have seen that and then shot him and then of course blake dropped the knife.  that could all happen in a matter of a 2 seconds.  it also could be he reached for it and never grabbed it and was shot.  in the first case he had the knife in the second case he didn't "have" the knife.

still not sure if he had the knife in his hands outside the care before the police came and maybe put it back in the car.

as with a lot of cases details will matter.

 

[Dahobbs 17626]

3 minutes ago, immortal13 said:

 

Hard to tell much from that photo, but the way his hand wraps around it makes it look more like a phone than a knife. That said, I have no idea if there is any indication he had a phone with him.

[Pancho 44862]

1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

Why wouldn't he?  Did he deserve 7 in the back, no, not likely at all.  Still a criminal that resisted arrest, yes. 

Criminal?  Okay...

”Not likely”  - really?

[ChickenSandwich 9843]

Wait, you don’t agree he was a criminal assaulting two police officers and fighting off a taser?  Is this debatable?

[fattyflattie 4639]

4 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Okay. 

Is resisting arrest not a crime anymore?

[dcar00 14312]

Just now, immortal13 said:

 

i'm not fallin for the banana in the tailpipe again....

[Pancho 44862]

 

[dcar00 14312]

If he did have a knife at that point I can see why the officers aren't trying to tackle him.  not sure what happened initially behind the vehicle.

[ChickenSandwich 9843]

5 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

This is how crime escalates.  No consequences for breaking the law.

[Brisketexan 105164]

8 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

This is how crime escalates.  No consequences for breaking the law.

That you post that without any irony is exactly why our society is in the shit that it's in.

When you create a class of people that can violate the law with near-total impunity, that's how that class of people becomes emboldened to violate the law regularly and without giving a shit.  We shouldn't have done that.  It leads to lawlessness across the board.

[ChickenSandwich 9843]

You are advocating rewarding assaulting police officers when being arrested.  This action will undoubtedly lead to cases where African Americans resist arrest and escalate the danger of the encounter and more will be shot or killed.  I'm sure Blake is well aware of Rayshard Brooks and the support he received for resisting arrest, assaulting officers and firing a taser at them after passing out drunk behind the wheel.  When you excuse the behavior you will get more as we see here.

You are arguing to create a class of people that don't need to obey the law or comply with law enforcement.  It will lead to lawlessness across the board.

And we will just disagree with your SOP position that the overwhelming majority of LEOs are criminals.  10 million annual police interactions dispute this.  Accountability and prosecution for criminal LEOs needs to happen when appropriate.  No more blanket protection etc.  This we agree.

Edited August 28, 2020 by ChickenSandwich

[fattyflattie 4639]

25 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

A free man, and a millionaire to boot.  

[landman 559]

20 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

That you post that without any irony is exactly why our society is in the shit that it's in.

When you create a class of people that can violate the law with near-total impunity, that's how that class of people becomes emboldened to violate the law regularly and without giving a shit.  We shouldn't have done that.  It leads to lawlessness across the board.

That fact that there is zero respect for property and persons, including authority figures, is the reason we are in the shit that we are in.

[immortal13 4059]

44 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

If he did have a knife at that point I can see why the officers aren't trying to tackle him.  not sure what happened initially behind the vehicle.

This is where I'm at. They had tried to taze him twice and if he was armed with a knife, he really backed the cops into a corner and limited their options

Edited August 28, 2020 by immortal13

[Brisketexan 105164]

2 minutes ago, landman said:

That fact that there is zero respect for property and persons, including authority figures, is the reason we are in the shit that we are in.

Yes.  The fact that the very entities charged with upholding the Rule of Law get to act so that is doesn't apply to them isn't corrosive at all.

It's like saying that the reason the household is utterly broken is because the kids are little shits, and not because the parents are abusive and have been for decades.  Sure, I'd like the kids to be better behaved.....but when they are raised by parents who can beat them and get away with it with a smile....WTF outcome did we expect?

[Brisketexan 105164]

18 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

And we will just disagree with your SOP position that the overwhelming majority of LEOs are criminals

Now do the percentage that protect and cover for the ones who commit open misconduct.  That's a really, really important part of the equation.  It's the part that makes the problem "lawlessness" as opposed to "some bad guys did bad things and paid for it."

[ChickenSandwich 9843]

Why don't you show your imaginary "percentage" and what sources you use for this claim.  Does it happen, no doubt, to what extent is highly debatable, but you operate from the assumption of a majority. 

"I have no doubt that a MAJORITY of attorneys break and bend the rules of law to get better outcomes for themselves and their clients while their co-workers and partners look the other way"

Solutions like mandatory full time body-cams plus dash cam, two officers at all times etc can make this coverup more difficult, but would probably require more funding, not less.

Edited August 28, 2020 by ChickenSandwich

[InkaUtexas 26011]

31 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

A free man, and a millionaire to boot.  

Bet he also hopes he can walk. 

[Brisketexan 105164]

3 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Why don't you show your imaginary "percentage" and what sources you use for this claim.  Does it happen, no doubt, to what extent is highly debatable, but you operate from the assumption of a majority

Prove the negative?  How many cops are doing bad things while their buddies cover for them?  Pretty hard to show.  However....sometimes, these things blow up and escape their control after the fact.....and it turns out that cop after cop after cop knew exactly the bullshit that was going on.  Check out the fallout from the Harding Street raid in Houston last year (and how many cops knew damned well the racket that was going on).    How about the LAPD frame-job conspiracy?  https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-01-15/lapd-could-take-action-against-officers-in-gang-framing-case-within-days-chief-says

We almost never find out that 1) one cop was bad, and 2) no other cops knew he was up to bad shit.  The rule is that there were multiple cops who were either in on it, or were aware and kept quiet.

8 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

"I have no doubt that countless attorneys break and bend the rules of law to get better outcomes for themselves and their clients while their co-workers and partners look the other way"

Excellent example.  Would you like to pull up the monthly disciplinary records for the State Bar of Texas vs. the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement?  No profession is perfect at self-policing, but the fact that the profession that is charged with ACTUAL POLICING is terrible at it is a big fucking problem.

[fattyflattie 4639]

4 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Bet he also hopes he can walk. 

Yeah, wonder if there is anything he could have done differently. 

29 yo and in top 10% of wealth in the country in less than a week.  Not a bad gig, if you can get it.

[landman 559]

24 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Yes.  The fact that the very entities charged with upholding the Rule of Law get to act so that is doesn't apply to them isn't corrosive at all.

It's like saying that the reason the household is utterly broken is because the kids are little shits, and not because the parents are abusive and have been for decades.  Sure, I'd like the kids to be better behaved.....but when they are raised by parents who can beat them and get away with it with a smile....WTF outcome did we expect?

Yeah, it's all because of the police.  It has nothing to do with the rest of society. 

[dcar00 14312]

21 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Why don't you show your imaginary "percentage" and what sources you use for this claim.  Does it happen, no doubt, to what extent is highly debatable, but you operate from the assumption of a majority. 

"I have no doubt that a MAJORITY of attorneys break and bend the rules of law to get better outcomes for themselves and their clients while their co-workers and partners look the other way"

Solutions like mandatory full time body-cams plus dash cam, two officers at all times etc can make this coverup more difficult, but would probably require more funding, not less.

maybe we can quit funding stupid less important stuff, you know like a household would have to do on a limited budget. and I'm all for more trained people to respond to calls that are considered "low level" non violent.

[Brisketexan 105164]

2 minutes ago, landman said:

Yeah, it's all because of the police.  It has nothing to do with the rest of society. 

ALL?  No, not all.  We are a broken "me me me" society for sure.  But just like I put a greater obligations on parents than I put on children, I put a greater obligation on our paid employees charged as being the front line in the Rule of Law.  It's literally their job.  When they are doing the OPPOSITE of their job, and the culture protects that, that's really damned corrosive.  I mean, in the Selfish States of America, why should I follow your damned fool laws if you, the person demanding my compliance, won't even do it?

[ChickenSandwich 9843]

1 minute ago, dcar00 said:

maybe we can quit funding stupid less important stuff, you know like a household would have to do on a limited budget. and I'm all for more trained people to respond to calls that are considered "low level" non violent.

Cutting the size of the force, delaying cadet classes will lead to more work for less officers leading to more overtime. Does anyone assume an officer working 60-70hr weeks will operate better than one working 40?  
 

maybe we can quit funding stupid less important stuff, you know like a household would have to do on a limited budget. - can you run for city council?

[dcar00 14312]

37 minutes ago, immortal13 said:

This is where I'm at. They had tried to taze him twice and if he was armed with a knife, he really backed the cops into a corner and limited their options

agreed.  and to repeat tasers are fucking stupid.  they don't work reliably at all.  if he had the knife, was getting in the car, and potentially intending to drive away or get another weapon(with a felony warrant) what do you do?  let him drive away or get in the car, which he could use as a weapon itself?   If he does start to use the car you might have to shoot at him driving with the kids in it.

 I'm not sure what I would have done with a guy in that state.  I wonder what the training for a situation where someone with a weapon resists arrest and then tries to get into a vehicle?

[Brisketexan 105164]

2 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Cutting the size of the force, delaying cadet classes will lead to more work for less officers leading to more overtime. Does anyone assume an officer working 60-70hr weeks will operate better than one working 40?  
 

maybe we can quit funding stupid less important stuff, you know like a household would have to do on a limited budget. - can you run for city council?

What I find fascinating is that the very people who decry the government and government spending.....are fighting like hell not just to keep gov't spending at its current levels, but INCREASE it (pay for more cops, that will make it better!  Pay for more training!")

The police apologists don't present any package of solutions that doesn't end with "and therefore, increase the shit out of the PD's budget."  It's fascinating to watch.  Government BAD!......unless we're paying for more jackboots to be placed on citizen throats, and then, GOVERNMENT GREAT!  MORE GOVERNMENT!

[Brisketexan 105164]

1 minute ago, dcar00 said:

agreed.  and to repeat tasers are fucking stupid.  they don't work reliably at all.  if he had the knife, was getting in the car, and potentially intending to drive away or get another weapon(with a felony warrant) what do you do?  let him drive away or get in the car, which he could use as a weapon itself?   If he does start to use the car you might have to shoot at him driving with the kids in it.

 I'm not sure what I would have done with a guy in that state.  I wonder what the training for a situation where someone with a weapon resists arrest and then tries to get into a vehicle?

I have always hated the "why didn't you shoot him in the leg!?" response to police shootings.  A shooting of a person is either justified or not, and if it is, you shoot them, period.  BUT.....in this case, if the fear was him taking off in the car, the cops are literally standing next to the tires.  Shoot the tires instead of the person.  He won't go far, or fast.  In other words, there should be some ways that cops run through a list of all non-lethal alternatives before shooting at a person.

[Captainant 27682]

1 minute ago, dcar00 said:

agreed.  and to repeat tasers are fucking stupid.  they don't work reliably at all.  if he had the knife, was getting in the car, and potentially intending to drive away or get another weapon(with a felony warrant) what do you do?  let him drive away or get in the car, which he could use as a weapon itself?   If he does start to use the car you might have to shoot at him driving with the kids in it.

 I'm not sure what I would have done with a guy in that state.  I wonder what the training for a situation where someone with a weapon resists arrest and then tries to get into a vehicle?

Man, just imagine if the cops had to handle a shooter armed with a full-sized rifle that was actively shooting other people! Just imagine what measures they would take to protect the populace from that threat!

...

oh, I guess if you're white you get a freebie instead of shot in the back seven times

[dcar00 14312]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

What I find fascinating is that the very people who decry the government and government spending.....are fighting like hell not just to keep gov't spending at its current levels, but INCREASE it (pay for more cops, that will make it better!  Pay for more training!")

The police apologists don't present any package of solutions that doesn't end with "and therefore, increase the shit out of the PD's budget."  It's fascinating to watch.  Government BAD!......unless we're paying for more jackboots to be placed on citizen throats, and then, GOVERNMENT GREAT!  MORE GOVERNMENT!

strawman much.  you can reduce spending elsewhere but keep on with JACKBOOTS!! NAZIs!!! RACISTS!!!  aaarghhhh!

[ChickenSandwich 9843]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

What I find fascinating is that the very people who decry the government and government spending.....are fighting like hell not just to keep gov't spending at its current levels, but INCREASE it (pay for more cops, that will make it better!  Pay for more training!")

The police apologists don't present any package of solutions that doesn't end with "and therefore, increase the shit out of the PD's budget."  It's fascinating to watch.  Government BAD!......unless we're paying for more jackboots to be placed on citizen throats, and then, GOVERNMENT GREAT!  MORE GOVERNMENT!

Crazy that folks can have different opinions on different topics that don’t fall in line with someone else’s perceived ideological projections.  

[dcar00 14312]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

I have always hated the "why didn't you shoot him in the leg!?" response to police shootings.  A shooting of a person is either justified or not, and if it is, you shoot them, period.  BUT.....in this case, if the fear was him taking off in the car, the cops are literally standing next to the tires.  Shoot the tires instead of the person.  He won't go far, or fast.  In other words, there should be some ways that cops run through a list of all non-lethal alternatives before shooting at a person.

I really don't think they knew what he was going for when he reached in the car.  they went with worst case scenario which is he is going for another weapon, IMO.

can't remember did the guy have a history with a weapon?

[Captainant 27682]

Just now, dcar00 said:

I really don't think they knew what he was going for when he reached in the car.  they went with worst case scenario which is he is going for another weapon, IMO.

can't remember did the guy have a history with a weapon?

I find it a perfect encapsulation of how fucked things are right now that a black guy is judged to DEFINITELY have a weapon and MUST get shot in the back seven times to protect "the people" - but the white kid who just shot three people with an AR he's too young to legally own gets to literally walk past the cops and go home and sleep in his bed.

[Brisketexan 105164]

4 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

strawman much.  you can reduce spending elsewhere but keep on with JACKBOOTS!! NAZIs!!! RACISTS!!!  aaarghhhh!

Cool.  I say we cut fire budgets.  And public education.  And food aid for children.  Fuck it, let's spend ALL our money on jackboots, and not on the things that can help prevent creating a criminal class......nah, that's fiscally irresponsible.  The only valid things to spend money on are 1) weapons and 2) training on how to use those weapons against our own people.  That seems like it's worked out well.

[dcar00 14312]

I'm getting to the point where I really actually might consider a fucking warning shot vs. a stupid taser as a reliable option to try to get someone to stop and comply.

[Brisketexan 105164]

1 minute ago, Captainant said:

I find it a perfect encapsulation of how fucked things are right now that a black guy is judged to DEFINITELY have a weapon and MUST get shot in the back seven times to protect "the people" - but the white kid who just shot three people with an AR he's too young to legally own gets to literally walk past the cops and go home and sleep in his bed.

Yeah, but, I mean, the black guy MIGHT have been going for a weapon, and the white kid, well, there's just no way of knowing if he had a weapon!  You understand.

[dcar00 14312]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Cool.  I say we cut fire budgets.  And public education.  And food aid for children.  Fuck it, let's spend ALL our money on jackboots, and not on the things that can help prevent creating a criminal class......nah, that's fiscally irresponsible.  The only valid things to spend money on are 1) weapons and 2) training on how to use those weapons against our own people.  That seems like it's worked out well.

have you looked a a city budget recently?  more strawmen as no one said only spend money on JACKBOOTS!!!! ARRRGH!!

Edited August 28, 2020 by dcar00

[Brisketexan 105164]

6 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Crazy that folks can have different opinions on different topics that don’t fall in line with someone else’s perceived ideological projections.  

Cool, so put you down for "the solution is to spend MORE money on police."  They must fucking LOVE guys like you.   What government agency doesn't love members of the public who clamor to increase their budget?

[dcar00 14312]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

Yeah, but, I mean, the black guy MIGHT have been going for a weapon, and the white kid, well, there's just no way of knowing if he had a weapon!  You understand.

regardless of color of skin, the officers were already engaged with him, tried to taser him, it appears he has a weapon already, and then it looks like he might be going for another one.  audio would be interesting.

[ChickenSandwich 9843]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

Cool, so put you down for "the solution is to spend MORE money on police."  They must fucking LOVE guys like you.   What government agency doesn't love members of the public who clamor to increase their budget?

I’m not privy to their budget. Is there excessive waste like OT that could be better used for these purchases?  I assume all government budgets are full of BS that could be better used. Logically, adding equipment and personnel would cost more money not less that would need to come from somewhere.  It is possible they already have the funds. 
 

Blanket statements of “defund” with zero context or direction is pandering. 

[dcar00 14312]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Cool, so put you down for "the solution is to spend MORE money on police."  They must fucking LOVE guys like you.   What government agency doesn't love members of the public who clamor to increase their budget?

we can agree on this.  thats how we spend billions on fly by night solar panel hucksters.

[bad_teammate 13219]

I'm all about spending more on police if by "police" we mean " a law enforcement and civil security outfit consisting primarily of unarmed people trained in handling at-risk populations with a focus on de-escalation and provision of necessary services".

[elguapo 4586]

5 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I find it a perfect encapsulation of how fucked things are right now that a black guy is judged to DEFINITELY have a weapon and MUST get shot in the back seven times to protect "the people" - but the white kid who just shot three people with an AR he's too young to legally own gets to literally walk past the cops and go home and sleep in his bed.

Let's not forget that the cops encouraged and gave water to this group of men playing dress-up soldier. Mixing together rioters and armed wannabes, what could possibly go wrong?

[ChickenSandwich 9843]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

I'm all about spending more on police if by "police" we mean " a law enforcement and civil security outfit consisting primarily of unarmed people trained in handling at-risk populations with a focus on de-escalation and provision of necessary services".

That’s not a very catchy slogan. 
 

But I don’t disagree. 

[Brothahorn 10087]

Videos like this show the problem with simply defunding the police. They need more money specifically pointed towards training, not guns/tanks. I'm talking 6 months to a year before getting out on the street. And then a week long refresher very 30-45 days. 

And don't get bogged down on the guy who posted the video. Do you honestly want cops like that acting in that manner on the streets? Especially when it could be in a situation that involves you?

 

[ChickenSandwich 9843]

Just now, elguapo said:

Let's not forget that the cops encouraged and gave water to this group of men playing dress-up soldier. Mixing together rioters and armed wannabes, what could possibly go wrong?

And local governments all but endorsing the riot behavior. The consequences are entirely predictable. Escalation was inevitable, as was the dumbass response of citizens attempting to do the job the government should have done in the first place but you can’t put the genie back in the bottle. They struck the match, watch it burn