Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
"there are so many unknowns"
So the procedure is if not sure who the bad guy is, shoot first, figure out later.
"When the first officer arrived on scene, several community members pointed him toward a nearby home reporting that children were inside, and somebody was shooting. The officer approached the open front door and reported seeing a struggle. He yelled at the men to show their hands, but neither fully complied. This is when the officer-involved shooting took place," the department said.
Notice the change to passive voice. "The officer arrived", "community members pointed", "somebody was shooting", "the officer approached", "he yelled".
Then just "the officer-involved shooting took place".
That type of corporate whitewashing of language pisses me off so much. The shooting did not take place. The officer shot the victim.
The officer entered the house and saw people fighting. They didn’t listen to him so he started shooting
Its not like its easy for the people to stop. Person À and Person B are both involved in a scuffle. Cop or whatever tells them to stop. If A stops but B doesn't stop, A just gets his ass kicked as a best case, or might get killed as a worst case if B has a weapon, for example. And vice versa. They have to both stop at the same time, which means expecting coordination between them which is ridiculous.
There's also the very real possibility that the homeowner did stop and freeze, but person B kept attacking, and so the cop still shot at them since they didn't both stop.
It's ridiculous that this needs explaining to a supposedly trained cop.
The officer entered the house without consent and shot people inside of it.
Police don't need consent if they have reason to believe a violent crime is happening, and even from an ACAB perspective it would be wild to make community-protectors wait at the door in this situation. Everything after that point is an abject failure.
Yeah, sure. But you can see how that could lead to very open-ended logic of "we're just gonna have to check now."
I live in Finland. I had a videomeeting with a nurse a few weeks ago. I got rather upset and have a loud voice. Anyway, about 20-30 min after the videomeeting, cops arrive at my door. I don't understand why. Apparently a neighbour had called and "heard yelling". To specify, by the time the police arrived, there had been no yelling for almost half an hour. Still. They demanded entry. I politely refused, asking what for. They said "we can't know that you haven't murdered someone in there."
If that's all the authorities need to enter your private apartment, then you see how no-one has privacy, actually, right?
I mean, if the burden of proof is put on me and they demand I prove a negative, then that's quite the impossible standard to reach.
So having a loud voice and living in an apartment building is enough in my country for your privacy to go bye bye.
Wouldn't have mattered as much, but I grew me own weed. One autoflower nothing large, just my own smokes. Mild strain, CBD heavy. But still illegal in Finland.
Last time this happened, it took like 2 months for me to get the warrant they supposedly used and it was dated 2 months after the search.
So you know, while I agree with the public safety angle, there has to be a very clear limit set on when and how the cops are allowed to do what. Granted the US does that a lot more than we do. As in, things may not be objectively going as great in the US, but at least there's two sides in the fight. In Finland no-one wants to recognise our university-educated police can have anything wrong with them, especially on a systemic level.
I mean, I also agree our cops are pretty decent, but that doesn't mean I don't have some severe criticism of them. Fuck the police and ACAB, but you'll notice I did smudge the visible face of the officer here. And it's because I promised them at the time. I know promises cops make to you don't matter, but the ones I do, do. And this was the first "house-call" for this young lady. And while the police who originally entered (older constable) did make it very clear I'm allowed to video, he just asked if I could avoid faces. And I don't see a point as to why not, since none of them did anything to personally offend me, and the older constable even called his superior after I explained him what happened last time they took me to jail. So he managed to convince his superior there was no need to jail me for it. Last time the guards didn't give me my meds ended up being awake for 72 hours in isolation where they watched me go nuts and eat myself and draw on my own blood on the walls. 3 days lights on constantly I didn't eat or sleep but they thought my "take as necessary" antipsychotics and relaxants weren't necessary. I also didn't even have a mattress. And there's not a single Finn who believes me despite me having photos of the cell. The cops conveniently lost the videos when I asked for them after they tried accusing me of vandalising the cell with my blood. Here's the cell. (But the mattress and blanket weren't there when I was. Not for 90% of the time anyway.)
So yeah when that happened some years ago, I also tried filming the cops coming in. The cop took my phone away ans said "you can't film the police when they work". Which is complete BS ofc . So luckily I had the few s clip of him saying that while taking my phone away. Me complaining about that went to the supreme Court of Finland who did incidentally agree with me (ofc.) The cops even tried the argument of "no but it was a private apartment so I'm not allowed to film them due to their privacy.... when they're coming into my private apartment to invade my privacy.
You prolly won't read the article in Finnish so here's the screencap translated.
So yeah, I agree it would be wild if an active wrestling match with two guys fighting for a gun with bad intentions in mind wouldn't be enough of a reason for the cops to go in, I URGE you to consider the other side of the coin as well.
Oh I'm very much aware of the entire coin. Police overreach, judges willing to turn a blind eye, Defense Attorneys more interested in looking out for themselves than serving the public, we've got a whole pile of shit before you even get to the jails-as-punishment and slavery-for-profit problems.
In Finland no-one wants to recognise our university-educated police can have anything wrong with them, especially on a systemic level.
This is getting tangential, but this point is pretty frustrating as an American. We hear about how racist our country is and how Europe doesn't have these problems but it seems like we're the only ones even trying to see the bigotry and classism inherent in the system, much less do something about it.
I'm sorry your own experience was so bad but I'm not surprised.
Defense Attorneys more interested in looking out for themselves
Oh man. If I'd had had any attorney for most if it, could've helped. I eventually got some help from some law-firm intern. He rang the police up after the jail thing, after they had sent me the accusation of vandalism as well. Based on that we asked "surely you have video of the crime" and I had put in GDPR information request as technically the video on me was under it as well and I had a right to it. The intern said "he's never heard the cops being so weird and awkward".
We hear about how racist our country is and how Europe doesn't have these problems but it seems like we're the only ones even trying to see the bigotry and classism inherent in the system, much less do something about it.
Basically yeah. It's sort of weirdly paradoxical a bit, but I definitely agree. As in I would say our police are better trained and do generally behave well. (And only used their guns like once in 10 years, although there's a massive population difference, it's still a magnitude or two lower than in the US.)
Like because you've had these problems and you've actually had civil rights movements and also basically the "real" American spirit, as in freedom liberty equality (which is what the French have on their money btw) is at least chased in the US.
In Finland it's just sort of apathetic and no-one "wants to make a fuss" so I get literally no attention to these horrid miscarriages of justice. My mom lowkey victim-blamed me for them essentially torturing me. It's just impossible to convey the simplistic Finnish take on these things. But if we don't pay attention to bad justice at all even if it doesn't happen that much, then authoritarianism will be on the rise.
And don't even get me started on the racist thing. I've gotten into social trouble for pointing out to adult people that perhaps using the n-word isn't the most politically correct thing anymore. But once I did that and this elderly lady got so fking mad at me. I was driving a taxi, and she kept using it so liberally. I didn't comment, just refrained from using it. Which made her (80-something) go crazy, then I explained i just don't personally want to use the word and she started demanding I say it "call them what they are". Almost hitting me from the backseat.
Anyway that's genuinely one example out of hundreds. The shitty racist bullshit "jokes" I had to listen as a kid. Pfff. Our racism is different but it's very much there even if the laws don't have as much systemic racism in them as the US with its history.
I'm sorry your own experience was so bad but I'm not surprised.
Eh, I've had wilder weekends. It's not the experience itself which hurts me so, it's the fact people think I'm exaggerating or making fuss out of nothing and just "trying to blame others the junkie fuck" and I say junkie because in Finland even if you just smoke weed, you're considered a lowlife junkie no-one wants to associate with, despite their weekend rituals consisting of getting black-out drunk and vomiting and fighting. For decades now.
So I'd say while you may have more problems you also definitely acknowledge at least most of them, unlike here where we might have less but acknowledge none.
ACAB perspective … community-protectors
Always wondered who’d protect communities in the abolished-police world, and if they could stay good indefinitely
Two people are fighting. One of them you know must be the homeowner. So what do you do? Intervene or use non lethal force because one of them is THE INNOCENT HOMEOWNER WHO CALLED FOR HELP?
Naaaah, just open fire.
Dumb fuck is probably going to be reprimanded with paid time off.
Lemme guess, did they shoot the one with a "foreign" skin tone?
ACAB.
Fuck the police
And they'll charge anyone but the cop for the murder.
For the curious: Cops can charge you with murder if they kill someone while trying to stop you from committing a felony. For instance, if you rob a bank and the cops needlessly shoot a bystander, you can be charged with that bystander’s murder.
And that’s exactly what they’re doing here. They’re charging him with a felony for the break-in and attempted robbery, and they can pin the murder (that the cop committed) on him.
Yup.
The suspect, Edgar Ledezma Garcia, has been indicted on 11 felony counts, including first-degree murder, for reportedly initiating the violent confrontation that led to the homeowner's death.
I mean good? That's good, he deserved to be charged with that.
Not saying the police officers actions shouldn't be scrutinized, hopefully the body came will be released. I'm not going to judge it too harshly until I watch it.
The person who I know deserves to be charged is the one who broke into someone's home armed with a firearm.
No, "felony murder" is not a good thing in our legal system.
If you have a problem and call a pig, now you have two problems.
Which is why you dislocate their shoulder and call an ambulance to pickup an injured person having a psychotic episode. Cops can get involved at a hospital full of people and cameras
ACAB
Christian Diaz
Gee, I wonder why the cops shot him?
"wait a minute chief, his name's Christian" "Oh wait. Christian Diaz... My bad, you know what to do"
Interesting that the website has a category for "Police Shootings". I'm not sure I know of many other countries that need this.
Can we determine from statistics if on average getting the police involved in any situation improves the outcome of the situation? Genuine question.
Yes, there was a really good time to study this in New York 2014/2015 during a police work slowdown (equivalent of a strike when protected by police unions but can't technically strike). They saw a significant decrease in major crimes during that time.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-017-0211-5
One study on one event doesn't support a trend, but it is interesting and directly counters traditional appeals to more police or police funding means more community safety often espoused by wealthy politicians and police organizations. It's possible you just need a small group of dedicated people to work on serious crimes, the rest of the ticketing and quotas may just be security theatre and making the problem worse not better.
Doesn't this imply they just saw less crimes with less officers? Like less covid cases when we stopped reporting on it?
crimes would still get reported, they just wouldn't have the officers working on them to clear the cases so the clearance percentages would go down instead.
Yeah people were still reporting crime, the police just slow rolled their job to let major crime go up but it didn't
"The results challenge prevailing scholarship as well as conventional wisdom on authority and legal compliance, as they imply that aggressively enforcing minor legal statutes incites more severe criminal acts."
Where the contradicting conventional wisdom was more aggressively policing the smaller things led to less crime overall, ala broken windows, they found the opposite actually happens.
That means they would probably have to have accurate data on the subject.
I don't think you can find the statistical answer you're asking about because it is hard to find data for events where people don't call the police.
Like, police may keep records of how many street fights they break up, but if police are not called, then there is no organization to make the record of the street fight.
Not enough information.
Information needed: What color is the skin?
Entirely dependant on skine whiteness.
My skine is whit.
Good guy with a gun, gunned down by other good guy with a gun.
I'm not sure about the "good"
The only way to stop an accident with a gun is another accident with a gun.
Do I really need the /s
"No situation has ever been improved with the addition of the constabulary".