This looks like one of those situations where people will be like.... why didn't you shoot him in the shoulder? And looking back, it seems like that probably would've got the job done.
Fatal Shooting by Police in Grand Rapids
- Thread starter gohawks50
- Start date
People like to complain that it is all about white cops out to get black people. I wish there would be more discussions in the black community about just complying with officers. Does society/media like to build this idea that white people punch and fight with cops and don't get shot?
Clearly this officer is in the wrong in this particular instance. The problem is, society never focuses on the lack of compliance as the ultimate cause of these problems.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,030
- 190,173
- 113
The counterargument from the BLM/progressive types is that Blacks react with distrust and fear of police, particularly white police, BECAUSE of past incidents of excessive force, etc. Frankly, they have a legitimate point that is backed up with plenty of anecdotal evidence. That is, they run and resist BECAUSE they are afraid of being beaten/shot.
However, I think there is loads more evidence that in the vast, vast majority of situations, if you cooperate and comply with police, you are far, far more likely to come out of the interaction unscathed.
If I were a Black parent/mentor, etc., I would tell all younger Black folks to obsequiously comply with officers, even in situations where you feel you are being unfairly targeted. Better to be pissed off and alive than belligerent and dead. But then, that's easy for me to say as an upper middle class, middle aged white dude whose interactions with police have all been calm, polite and non-confrontational.
Yes, I agree. However, the counter argument from BLM is never having to take responsibility either. It's not like these black civilians that are pulled over don't have records. Most of them have lengthy records, have a warrant, are in possession of illegal firearms or drugs, and react violently to avoid being arrested. I think the situations are quite small where a black person that is pulled over for a simple violation and has no other issues, just starts punching and fighting with police because they are scared. I would be just as scared for any white person who started fighting with police. It likely won't end well.
Well. I am very pro-cop first of all. I probably shouldn't have said clearly the cop is in the wrong. Putting myself in that situation, I do feel being on top of him, if I were to grab my gun and he was face down, I would have backed up and pointed the gun right at him. If he came at me then, I would have shot him.
Your opening statement isn't necessarily true. This leftie is on the cops' side the vast majority of the time. If you fight a police officer you are taking a big risk of catching the dead.
Lyoya does not appear to have any former convictions or criminal history.
Originally from the Democratic Republic of Congo, he and his family came to the USA in 2014.
What was Patrick Lyoya's criminal history?
PATRICK LYOYA was shot in the back of his head by a cop, dying from the injuries. On Thursday, June 9, 2022, the police officer responsible for his death, Christopher Schurr, was charged with secon…
www.the-sun.com
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,030
- 190,173
- 113
Why is it a moronic take?
Had this officer been better at non-weapon self-defense, the outcome likely would have been better. The suspect could have been handcuffed and detained quickly. Instead, the officer could never fully control the situation, despite the fact this suspect wasn't particularly large or good at fighting.
It may be an unrealistic take, given how much training time is available, budgetary concerns, etc. But it is hardly dumb.
I'm not sure I understand your use of the word obsequiously here. It's my favorite word.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,030
- 190,173
- 113
Shawn is wrong, as usual.
I am a progressive and I think this shooting was justified.
It's ironic that the right wingers are always the ones accusing the "other" side of being inflexible, yet they literally defend each and every POS Republican no matter what, 100 percent of the time, and those on the Left are far more likely to have nuanced takes.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,030
- 190,173
- 113
I mean it in the way it's intended -- overly compliant, overly solicitous, overly polite.
"Yes sir, I will sir!"
Supposedly the dude asked a very clear "do you understand english". If so, that was very wise on the cops part and great policing imo.
He did, but wouldn't the suspect have to understand english to comprehend the question. In the beginning of the video, there seemed to be a clear lack of understanding of what was being asked of Lyoya.
He may not have. Curious if he had anything in the vehicle that caused him to act like that. Bottom line, the focus always seems to be on the cop and not the actions of the person pulled over. If this guy had done nothing wrong, there is zero reason for him to act like he did. If he is that terrified of police, he probably shouldn't be driving, especially in a car without proper registration.Lyoya does not appear to have any former convictions or criminal history.
Originally from the Democratic Republic of Congo, he and his family came to the USA in 2014.
What was Patrick Lyoya's criminal history?
PATRICK LYOYA was shot in the back of his head by a cop, dying from the injuries. On Thursday, June 9, 2022, the police officer responsible for his death, Christopher Schurr, was charged with secon…
The first time I ever heard the word - 35ish years ago, it was in the sentence, "These cookies are downright obsequious." It was explained to me that it meant something that compliments another thing - like a scarf or a necklace could be obsequious. Now that sentence makes no sense per the only definition I can find.
I'm glad I don't say it much because it seems like I have been wrong about the definition for years. Thanks for using it today!
This is fact. There is nothing a Republican can do or say that is worse than a lib. The state of Tennessee is showing that almost every single day with the pure crazy going on down there.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,030
- 190,173
- 113
Yeah, that's definitely not the right word usage!
obsequious
[ uhb-see-kwee-uhs ]adjective
characterized by or showing servile obedience and excessive eagerness to please; fawning; deferential:an obsequious bow;obsequious servants.
obedient; dutiful.
Yep I looked it up on several sites. It was literally used in the show Thirtysomething. A character called cookies downright obsequious.
Absolutely. LEO training in general needs to be overhauled and reimagined.
You would be surprised biggrey.....but those are days gone by.....You assume a lot though....But cops get into trouble more oft than not because they FAIL to exercise proper caution.....Its a damn tough job but bad LEO decisions make it a lot tougher than it needs to be. It is important to remember that generally there is a "perp" who is a little more stupid and shows a little poorer judgment than the LEO... Not always, but generally. Tell me biggrey....If that LEO would have waited in his car and called for back-up...do you think any of this shit would have happened? As a LEO, you dont wanna put yourself in a "Rambo" situation...
Based off the information I have I cannot confirm that cop is 100% In thr right. It certainly does not.look good he was physically on top.of someone and fired a shot down. A review of the total interaction is needed. I am of the belief the officer did a damn good job with the situation in front of him however based off what we do know but there is wayyy more to this story.
My take is that the dead guy is vastly more culpable in the outcome. My concern with the police officer is why didn't he use his taser before trying to grapple such him? After he walked away, why did he get so close that the guy could grab the taser?
This is another example of the need for better training and police strategies for these situations.
This is another example of the need for better training and police strategies for these situations.
Question on that taser though. It seemed to me that it had already been used and could not be used again without loading a new cartridge in it which does not seem to be something that the suspect could reasonably do.
That said the suspect is partially at fault here. Trying to take a taser away from a cop even if it can't be used again isn't a good idea.
That said the suspect is partially at fault here. Trying to take a taser away from a cop even if it can't be used again isn't a good idea.
My understanding is that the officer fired the taser at Lyoya but missed (you can hear it deploy in the video). Lyoya then grabbed the taser away from the officer.
That's fair, looks like you're offering the suspect some benefit of the doubt. I don't understand how you reconcile what you've said here and when you ridiculed me for thinking an alternative to being shot in the back of the head was possible.
In one instance you cannot confirm 100%, in the other instance you seem to believe an alternative result is naïve. Are you talking real world in one, but not real world in the other?
Some tasers can be fired twice and I think there are some that can even be fired three times. I'm not sure which model the officer was using in this incident.
It's hard to blame the officer here, despite the "look" of the shooting. The subject was uncooperative, resistant and had disarmed the LEO of his nonlethal taser and as a result he was a clear threat to the LEO from that point forward. Not quite sure why the LEO pulled the firearm out while still trying to gain physical control of the subject, it seems counterintuitive to me to have one of your hands now occupied with a lethal object in that situation, but hindsight is 20/20.
How many more times does this outcome have to happen before people wise up and cooperate with LEOs? Isn't it obvious to everyone yet that cooperating with a LEO during an encounter is really the only good option you have available to ensure your own safety?
How many more times does this outcome have to happen before people wise up and cooperate with LEOs? Isn't it obvious to everyone yet that cooperating with a LEO during an encounter is really the only good option you have available to ensure your own safety?
I am sure that the LEO was thinking as they were rolling on the ground trying to re-gain control of his taser...."Jeeeebus, how do I explain this to my Sergeant?"
The video in post #15 is probably the best but you can hear the taser go off at around 50 seconds.
So my analysis of the situation the the culpability of the officer depends heavily upon if the taser could be used a second time.
I also would need confirmation that the suspect actually had his hands on the taser and it wasn't just something being yelled by the officer. I can't determine that visually. I am presuming that he is in fact struggling for the taser.
The point about ignorance of American policing rules may have been a huge factor here. It sounds like he had been in the United States for only about 8 years and didn't have a criminal record. He may have had little or even no interaction with American police prior to this incident. And I don't know what police are like in the Democratic Republic of Congo, but I'm guessing some of them are probably a bit sketchy.
He may have also been drunk or on drugs. He didn't seem particularly coherent.
Does anyone's opinion change if there was no taser at all?
What about instead of taser, it's a beer bottle, pocket knife, pipe, baseball bat?
Each could cause serious harm and could result in a officer fearing for their safety but they aren't designed to be a weapon like a taser.
What about instead of taser, it's a beer bottle, pocket knife, pipe, baseball bat?
Each could cause serious harm and could result in a officer fearing for their safety but they aren't designed to be a weapon like a taser.
Who are you defining as the "suspect"?
I have not ridiculed you.
My immediate response is that I think this cop acted appropriately based odd the Information available. I think, as with everytime a LEO discharges a firearm, the full context needs to be reviewed.
You need to get over the "back of the head" thing. If a cop is going to fire their weapon they do so with the intent to stop the threat immediately. You don't shoot someone in the leg. God knows we have heard the "xxx times shot in the back" story. The Leo had a clean oppuetunity to stop the threat without ricochets. They were wrestling it was not someone in a non threatening situation with hands on head while the other guy fired at him from a sage distance (aka an execution). It cracks me up to read some of you talk about how you think stopping a fight should go or how it should look.
Yes. I think the Leo attempting non lethal first validates him going lethal.
The "bad guy" having a taser gives him.an immediate ability to incapacitate the cop. A pocket knife not so much.
Latest posts
-
-
-
The Youngest DeJean: Jaxx Earns All-State Honors, Begins Recruitment
- Latest: Eliot Clough
-
Missouri State Transfer WR Raylen Sharpe Visiting Iowa on Tuesday
- Latest: Eliot Clough
-