Must see - murder by cop

Dec 2013
30,309
18,405
Beware of watermelons
#2
Daniel Shaver's shooting by police officer was an avoidable execution

While in Mesa, Arizona on a business trip for his Texas-based pest control company in 2016, Daniel Shaver was slaughtered in a hotel hallway. And though the Arizona jury that acquitted the officer, 27-year-old Philip "Mitch" Brailsford, of second-degree murder and reckless manslaughter charges may have gotten it right according to a legal standard, Brailsford caused this tragedy, and it was entirely preventable.

A video clip of the shooting, captured by body camera, was just released by police. I first watched the revolting video segment as a civilian and can describe it in one word: horrifying.


Daniel Shaver's shooting by police officer was an avoidable execution (Opinion) - CNN
 
Oct 2017
585
288
In
#3
Michael Savage was all over this last week. The other cop there, at least one more was on scene, should have cuffed the poor guy. But he too was probably afraid of the killer cop.
 
Dec 2013
30,309
18,405
Beware of watermelons
#4
Michael Savage was all over this last week. The other cop there, at least one more was on scene, should have cuffed the poor guy. But he too was probably afraid of the killer cop.

The video is insane. I just saw it.
 
Nov 2017
1,343
757
Virginia
#10
If that was my son or brother I’d feel some obligation to get some homemade Justice.
And you know what - if I were on a jury and you were the defendant for taking homemade Justice type of action, I would not see any justification for finding you guilty of whatever you did (provided it was only to the monster itself and not its relatives, etc.).

I'm not a big fan of the death penalty, but I'm not outright opposed to it either, so when I discuss it with people who are opposed to it, what I point out is that if person X murders person Y, but doesn't get the death penalty, and then a family member (person Z) of person Y decides to do get themselves some DIY Justice by hunting down and killing person X, it would be an understatement to just say it's hypocritical to then call for the death penalty of person Z, the family member of murder victim person Y. The point here is about consistency - in a similar manner that it would be inconsistent to call for the death penalty of person Z in this scenario, it would be inconsistent to convict someone who sees no other recourse than to get some DIY Justice.

Anyways - I have a better idea than DIY Justice, though, because that sort of recourse has its limits and drawbacks, despite being something completely understandable and justifiable:

What we need to do is simply make the observation that having police agencies has turned out to be a failed experiment, and thus they ought to be disbanded and outlawed. Declaring it a failed experiment and disbanding it is basically all that's left in terms of recourse (aside from DIY Justice).

There are folks from both sides of the 2-party political spectrum who I see find these types of incidents, where police are killing people who never deserved to die at their hands and ending up completely getting away with it, as acceptable. These folks can band together to pressure both political parties to make this part of their political platforms and push for their candidates to be supporters of such a platform item.

I'm actually pro-law enforcement, but when there are things like corruption or systemic failure, I have to call it as I see it. I think 99+% of public servants in law enforcement are good, decent people, and a problem is that they need to say that the situations involving the remaining <1% are unacceptable, but they don't. If they don't agree that they're a failed experiment that needs to be disbanded, they have the burden and obligation of proving the assertion wrong, and showing that their profession is worthy of its existence.

One thing I'll mention that pertains to this is the issue of when cops should pull the trigger, because part of the problem entails a discrepancy on when it ought to be permitted. To me it's never acceptable for a cop to pull the trigger, with very few justifiable exceptions, such as that they're already being shot at and they're just returning fire, or the person they're after has already committed a crime using a deadly weapon (such as a gun) and they're pointing that gun or use of a deadly weapon against them (the cops) by the perpetrator is imminent, and even then there should be due scrutiny about their discretion if they chose to shoot them.

It shouldn't be their job to pounce on anyone like a raging deadly predator, their prime objective should be to bring perpetrators to justice, alive and without doing anything to their health. The reason cops are given firearms is not to hunt people down like animals, it's for absolutely no different of a reason than why any other person is armed for self defense, etc.

If it turns out that politicians or political parties fail to get that message, then the problem would be that there's no recourse left other than DIY Justice - that would be bad for everyone.
 
Last edited:
Likes: 2 people

Similar Discussions