Police shoot another unarmed black man

 "The number of officers shot is up 7% from last year’s historic numbers and up 29% compared to 2018. As of December 28, 311 officers have been shot, and 47 of those officers have died this year." 

By setting themselves as a force occupied with themselves as they state I am in  constant in fear for their lives and the lives of their family. 

By removing themselves from the community they now seem to be an occupying force.  That serves no one's best interests. 

They continuously destroy the lives of everyone they encounter including their own.

Drug addiction alcoholism divorce mental illness is destroying them and their families and within the scope of law order they find themselves in no man's land. 

This is going to get alot worse. Few bad seeds or couple bad apples , no it more of a wide spread belief that some how they are above the law. That they immune to prosecution.  This does not make them immune . Because once they cross the bridge and no longer their brothers keeper., it becomes they as vulnerable as any other and within the scope of humans they can not remain untouchable.

And that is exactly it isn't it. It goes to my other point in this thread and devaluing blacks. But Detox will point out that statistics will support the idea that they (police and society) SHOULD feel more threatened. Jesse Jackson even agrees with that. How do we change that? How do we make officers more reluctant to fire? 

If you are apart of a community law enforcement should reflect and be apart of that community. 

Their kids should be of the other kids lives the schools the public should be as one. If you have children shoulder yo shoulder they should be of the same.

But you can't take personal from miles away protected to even names not known to police as an occupying force.

To gather clearance, fine the most aggrevious men and army known in modern society Hitler and the third Reich could not stop the "protest" in warsaw, and believed Hebrews needed to police Hebrews in that ghetto once upon a time.

Nothing of America would condone the totalitarian regime of the Nazi occupation of Poland well at least publically,  so some how 

We should destroy the lives of optical dissenfents, with tanks bombs and guns.

Hitler knew he couldn't,  with authoritain response of rights of conquest , but what happens to a citizen does not affect all citizens?

We must have men of caliber integrity and at the very least honor. What we have is weasels scared and citizens fed up with stupid idiots who can't tell a Walter ppl from a big bright me in green taser....

I'm seeing 15 killed by gunfire so far. Up 7%, from 14 in the same time period of last year.

There were 48 killed by gunfire last year, down from 51 in 2019. If cops are that afraid for their lives, then they shouldn't be cops. If a person if afraid of the high seas, they don't become fisherman. If the are afraid of heights, they don't become iron workers. Cops use to wear nice uniforms. They looked honorable. Like someone to be respected. They carried revolvers. Then at some point the narrative shifted. Now the gear up like they're going on a raid in Ramadi. These aren't insurgents.

My belief is when they started to view humans as less then human beings.

When the red nhi marks came out around Rodney king incident but possibly even before that. As a way to qualify where police needs were most needed they mark murder rape and extortion as two folders one set needed resources the other nhi  (no humans envolved)

Hence an entire lockers of cold cases exist with the tag because it did not matter. Now that that is the majority of all corgi aged disputes time is taken to go through the files.

But realistically 76 will be killed in Chicago this week end 7 detectives on monday  will have x amount of time to devote 100 deaths a week. 

Overtime not possible

the city is in an ever lasting  budget crisis

so where is a line drawn.

Or is everything just the pd's fault.

As for Minneapolis st paul if the aryans crypt bloods and kings made a formal truce tolerance treaty.

That would not bode well for federal facilities federal reserve bank, federal buildings, state agencies or city government, 

I understand the need to keep those three the main domestic cartel at odds with each other in that situation. Crack heroin and meth are the resources , prostitution gun runs and smuggling is the endeavor, the outside actors and new to the community are Somalia nationals as they begin to involve themselves in the human trafficking , and drug scene this can involve the reality of extremists who want nothing more than attack our homeland through discourse and domestic violence these predators feed and a glock drive by shooting is kiddie camp to a van suicide bomber in a soft target area.

We can learn alot from Nashville.  A r.v enough explosives and no warning a consequences can be very devastating. 

At times some one some where in risk management must start to insure the safety of the homeland or house even if the kids inside seem to be in a spat...again.

Police are more reluctant to use guns in countries with low gun ownership in population, strict gun laws and better training of police.  Unfortunately, US has the most armed nation, weak gun laws, plus minimal training for police and gun owners.  Despite high gun ownership, Switzerland has no mass shooting in 18 years because of far stricter regulations and training.  Buying a gun is harder.  Most people aren't allowed to carry guns around. 

Not sure what facts you are using here?  This may be perception or at the very least your opinion.  I know it is the media’s opinion.  I do not see the everyday cop ‘geared up as if going on a raid in Ramadi’. They may do that when going into an active shooter scene or when they expect something aggressive — but why wouldn’t they?  It would be stupid not to.  But they don’t do that all of the time.  

It doesn’t matter what your profession — trust me, no one wants to get shot. Even if you don’t get killed it ... does ... not ... feel ... good at all!!

The point the article is making is that the cops have an ever increasingly dangerous job.  Not sure so much as folks think it is afraid for their lives as it is being prudent — you absolutely  have to respect the danger.  

That article didn’t touch on this — but I would add, the younger generation today so not care, do not have a conscious.  Guns are more readily accessible to them as well.  Their brains are not fully developed yet and they simply do not understand the consequences of their actions, nor do they care.  

Fireman get killed everyday fighting fires.  They are not necessarily ‘afraid’ as much as respect the danger.  But it is steady and somewhat getting better.  You can train all you want — but sooner or later, you will have to go into a burning building — and like we always say it will be your first time. This could affect your life and the lives of others.  

If people were simply complying — cops would not feel threatened and on edge.  But they almost have to be AND all the studies show that it has increased and that it is getting younger.  

K. If you treat go as you have. The va as it always been dependant on the post office for monetary resources.  You send young men for at least infantry training all the way to nuclear bomb engineering battalions. 

Give em every pc of possible knowledge to kill and destroy. And what the 2500 hundred troops the fin withdrawal from Afghanistan. 

What now give em to the cartel at least 10. Have been there since the start of that fiasco. 

To what settle down in no where with nothing and expect that they understand what a pc of shy uncle Sam really iz.... 

For what purpose , watch an kill assault maim , and some how twist it all into it was some personality defect?

Come on .... And to expect any different? 

Really msu, it a suck pill but we reap as we sow.

great point             the swiss have very high percentage for gun ownership but none of the issues with gun violence we face

also the economic classes r not near as disparate there as here  

and they dont have the level of confrontational racism we have either

this contributes immensely to lower use of guns for crime over there

this can be said of most nations , except us

canada has about 1/7th the gun violence we do on a per capita statistic

@Raiders22

 The point I am making is why are cops so in fear for their lives? It is an extremely dangerous job but the numbers don't support this notion that cop's lives are so much more at risk. At what point is, "I was afraid." not enough? If so many cops are so afraid, they are in the wrong profession. Like I said, this case isn't particularly egregious but to look at the case of, say, Philando Castille... He was complying.

All these cops are so afraid. Go be garbage men. They don't make cops like they used to. It would be hard to argue that there aren't far less racist cops than there were 20... 40... 60 years ago. I don't think this is simply a race thing. I think it's a prejudice thing but more than that, I think it's a societal thing. I think people just aren't made the same. Men can't change tires. Cops are always afraid. 

You asked what facts i'm using. I say again, covid killed more cops in the line of duty last year than bullets. Guns killed 48, down from 51 in 2019. Miss me with the bullshit about how much pressure they're under. A lot of it's real. A lot of it's in their own heads. I know cops. Oakland cops. Not some suburban cops. They aren't 24/7 on edge. One went to the academy at 18, has close to 30 years in, has never shot a kid during a traffic stop. 30 years in Oakland, you know he's had some moments were he's had to rock and roll. And not only that, he has had colleagues killed in the line of duty. There was one instance that was pretty well covered were several officers were gunned down. It can be a dangerous job. So can delivering pizza in the wrong neighborhood. Fear is not an excuse. This is the job you signed up for. 

@StumpTownStu

 I see your point and agree.  But your premise is that they are scared?  Are they really?  More so than 5 years ago...10 years ago...etc.?

Why would they be?  Do they have a reason to be?  A lot of these are ex-military guys and people that are trained and people that have been doing it for many years already.

Why would they more more scared now? 

Do not even know why the media is pushing this 'covid killed more in line of duty than bullets' narrative.  What in the world has this to do with anything?  Other than them trying to push their Wuhan agenda.  Yeah, most of those deaths were older cops that had been decades on the job.  More people have died from covid in lots of occupations -- so that skews the numbers all over -- if not properly parsed.  But now the media wants to steer folks away from the anti-police evidence by saying, '...oh well covid kills more than bullets..'  --- fails the logic test absolutely.  Flu, car crashes, etc. -- I am sure do as well.  One has absolutely nothing to do with the other!

So, just ignore the fact that more police are getting shot at?  What happens when Wuhan goes away?  Will they use something else for deflection?

The point is the job is increasingly more and more violent and more dangerous, and NOT because of Covid.  haha!

Obvious tactic by the media to highlight a non-pertinent point to deflect while trying to lowlight the important point.

Even though police have a dangerous job there are many more dangerous jobs.  Loggers, roofers, even taxi drivers.  But it is usually NOT because of someone attacking or shooting at you.  It is NOT just the danger of the job.  Again, there are MORE dangerous jobs.  It is the human factor and trends and psychology.

For example, look at the trends from the 60s to 70s and thru the early 90s.  Then look at the trends for the last few years.  Then look at the sentiment. 

Some various quotes on this:

“The unarmed shootings — which are the ones that are the troublesome ones — there are only 9 of them against blacks — 20 against whites in 2019."

The paper argued, drawing from its own database, that there were 55 incidents in which police shot and killed unarmed individuals last year, not the 9 he notes. The newspaper said that 25 of those incidents involved whites, while 14 were black.

Over the past five years there has been no reduction in the racial disparity in fatal police shooting victims despite increased use of body cameras and closer media scrutiny, according to a new report by researchers at Yale and the University of Pennsylvania.

“Those killed by police on average are young people — the average age for all victims is 34,” Boatright said. “For Black people, the average age is 30.” For Hispanics killed, the average age is 33; for Native Americans, 31; and for white people, 38.

For the last five years, the police have fatally shot about 1,000 civilians annually, the vast majority of whom were armed or otherwise dangerous.
There is no epidemic of fatal police shootings against unarmed Black Americans
Ideally officers would never need to take anyone's life. But the data on police killings doesn't support reducing or abolishing law enforcement.

The video of George Floyd’s tragic death under the knee of a Minneapolis police officer has led many to ask whether it represents the tip of an iceberg of police brutality. For centuries, United States law enforcement was interwoven with slavery and segregation, and that memory cannot be easily erased. But the evidence does not support the charge that biased police are systematically killing Black Americans in fatal shootings.

Much of modern policing is driven by crime data and community demands for help. The African American community tends to be policed more heavily, because that is where people are disproportionately hurt by violent street crime. In New York City in 2018, 73% of shooting victims were Black, though Black residents comprise only 24% of the city’s population.
Nationally, African Americans between the ages of 10 and 34 die from homicide at 13 times the rate of white Americans, according to researchers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Justice Department.

Community requests also determine police deployment, and the most urgent requests often come from law-abiding residents of high-crime neighborhoods.

An elderly resident in the Mount Hope neighborhood of the Bronx once described to me her fear of entering her building lobby, since it was so often occupied by trespassing youth hanging out and selling drugs. The only time she felt safe was when law enforcement was around: As long as she saw the police, she told me, everything is OK. You can come down and get your mail and talk to decent people.

Improve — don't abolish — police

This sentiment is echoed in the dozens of police community meetings I’ve attended. Though they also want improved quality of policing, the percentage of Black respondents in a 2015 Gallup poll who wanted more police in their community was more than twice as high as the percentage of white respondents who said the same. Activists who seek to disband police departments will have to explain to these law-abiding residents that they will in essence just have to fend for themselves.

Such self defense may be understandable if the police were engaging in an epidemic of shooting unarmed Black men and women, as we now hear daily — but there is no such epidemic. For the last five years, the police have fatally shot about 1,000 civilians annually, the vast majority of whom were armed or otherwise dangerous. Black people account for about 23% of those shot and killed by police; they are about 13% of the U.S. population.

As of the June 22 update, the Washington Post’s database of fatal police shootings showed 14 unarmed Black victims and 25 unarmed white victims in 2019. The database does not include those killed by other means, like George Floyd.

The number of unarmed Black shooting victims is down 63% from 2015, when the database began. There are about 7,300 Black homicide victims a year. The 14 unarmed victims in fatal police shootings would comprise only 0.2% of that total.

Ideally, officers would never take anyone’s life in the course of their duties. But given the number of arrests they make each year (around 10 million) and the number of deadly-weapons attacks on officers (an average of 27 per day in just two-thirds of the nation’s police departments, according to a 2014 analysis), it is not clear that these 1,000 civilian shooting deaths suggest that law enforcement is out of control.

One last point that I think is key.  It leads to this:

Cops pulled back from discretionary activity — questioning a suspicious person on a known drug corner, for example — and simply drove on by. Such stops are voluntary; cops are not mandated to make them.

In Chicago, the Harvard economists found, the number of police-civilian interactions decreased by almost 90% in the month after the investigation into deadly force was announced. In Riverside, interactions decreased 54%. In St. Louis, self-initiated police activities declined by 46%.

By contrast, in cities where incidents of police use of deadly force were under investigation, but did not go viral or grab national attention, homicides and total crime went down. Police officers were not afraid to continue policing.

The “Ferguson effect” is one of the more widely discussed, and controversial, explanations for the recent increases in violent crime. It refers to the assertion that crime has increased recently because police are avoiding proactive policing tactics out of fear of repercussions for the use of aggressive tactics.

There is a small but growing body of literature on the Ferguson effect, and the evidence is mixed. For example, recent research conducted by a

Johns Hopkins University sociologist found some evidence of a post-Ferguson decrease in arrests and a post-Ferguson increase in crime in Baltimore. However, the research did not reveal a causal link between the decreasing arrests and increasing crime.

Additionally, studies of the Ferguson effect have generally focused on a single state or specific cities, which make the results of these studies non-generalizable to other jurisdictions

Source.  https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R45236.html

The interaction between crime and the pull back of police from interacting did not affect the rate of criminal behaviours or directly lead to a rise or fall in crime.

A more direct factor is and has always economic stress, 

Financial hardships seems to be the leading factor of most street crime. 

My thought with this police need to interact with the public is not necessary.  With the now universal held cell phone their would be a much easier algorythm that if implemented could address the most serious criminal behavior than to allocate resources on a dime bag hustler and try to work up the food chain to get the smugglers. 

It seems the antiquated notion that police must involve themselves directly with the public where alot easier ways to disseminate violent crime from what should be understood as petty criminal activity.

We don't need to allocate millions to find a pick pocket for an example. But we should concentrate our resources in larger more soicity damaging such as murder human trafficking or violent sexual assaults than to worry of who giving a blow job for a crack hit.

Just my opinion 

 Improve — don't abolish — police

@Raiders22

 You keep dancing around my point. Police increasing use fear as the impetus for using deadly force. "I feared for my life." The point i'm making is about 50 cops are gunned down a year. Millions of interactions. 50 die by gunfire. One death in the line of duty is too many but let's not act like criminals are just hunting down cops, like there is complete and utter lawlessness. The job is dangerous. It isn't that dangerous. So I say again, if so many cops are afraid, they need to be mail men.

@StumpTownStu

 I think you misunderstand my point about fear. 

For example:

Each officer and each incident is unique. So every interview or statement will also be unique. Saying “I feared for my life” without explanation is meaningless. This is not what happens. The officer has to explain why his fear was reasonable under the circumstances he encountered, with the knowledge he possessed at the time. So the officer’s statement could be words to the effect of “Our call was of a street disturbance involving a man with a gun. When we arrived, we saw a man who appeared to match the description in the call. We approached him from behind, and announced ourselves as police officers, and ordered him to stop and raise his hands above his head. At that point he took off running down an alley. We pursued on foot, at which point he spun around and appeared to have a small shiny silver object in his right hand. Fearing he was about to fire at us, and having no cover available, I fired two rounds from my duty pistol, striking the suspect in the…” The object in the suspect’s hand may turn out to be a firearm, a replica firearm, or another object such as a cell phone. If the officer reasonably believed he was about to be shot, the shooting would likely be ruled justified, regardless of what the shiny object turned out to be. Officers are not expected to put their lives in the hands of the suspect by waiting to see if the object in their hands is capable of shooting them. It’s sometimes too late at that point as numerous officer’s funerals can attest.

It is not that the job is that dangerous.  The occupation doesn’t even crack the top 10.  

The job is not dangerous UNTIL the suspect doesn’t comply and/or pulls a weapon.  THEN it    becomes dangerous. 

Not dangerous like a logger or roofer — but dangerous like a soldier when you are about to be fired upon.  You may NOT have time to do anything but react.  

Nobody is telling a taxi driver not to be a driver because he is scared,  or a logger not to log.  It is a ‘cop-out’ (pun intended) to tell cops to leave the job if they are afraid — just because they have the means to protect themselves.  That is very unreasonable.  

This attitude presumes the cop to be wrong to defend himself when threatened.  Very, very rarely is he doing this without a threat.  The media just makes folks think it is so.  

It is not a brave cop that just stands there and lets a suspect shoot him — it is a stupid cop.

Self-defense and afraid are not synonymous— no matter what the media tells you.

No cop I have ever known has been ‘in fear’ UNTIL a weapon was pulled or seemed about to be.  It is not that they are all day scared to do their job.  That is media propaganda.