Just watched it back in school as it was on front page..
I dunno really what to say about it, other than it made me feel disgusted and sad. I know it's happening almost everywhere but still.. jeez..
It's amazing how bad you can make things look out of context
For example, in the first video, they tazed the guy, no effect, and he went for an officer wielding a metal bar. Placed in that position, with no other options what a gun, what was the officer supposed to do?
I dunno how it is in the UK, but a police officer (at least a german one) has no right to use an amount of force and violence portrait multiple times in that vid. He can hold you captive, he can stop you with force if he or another civilian is in danger, but he must not beat you up with his colleagues once you lie on the ground .
That one with black guy and the cop with the chain(?) was most disturbing, they broke his knee but kept on beating ...
The guy who fell out of the car, for example, is probably no angel, but why kicking and beating him up when he already was unconscious before they first approached him?
Also, too many cases of gang beating a person who already is tied, handcuffed or just already disabled.
Breaking of that guy's leg, WTF?! Who ever he was, what ever he did, he was already placed down ond the ground, with hands tied behind his back... why breaking his leg?!
The officer was shooting to stop, which in this case, realistically, was going to be end in death. Who really cares how many bullets are fired, if the end result is going to be the same?
It doesn't just take one bullet to kill someone - after the first 5 shots he was still standing so could of still been a threat. Remember, if he was tazed before and pulled the barbs out and threw them back without even stopping who knows how effective 1, 2, 3 or even 5 bullets would of been.
I'm not saying that all police everywhere are amazing, just that that video is VERY biased and theres ALWAS a backstory which could well twist the whole video.
Imo a shot to leg or hand would have been enough. That is way overdone by the police, no doubts. And afterall, this happens again and again in many clips during the video :/
So if he would have put 20 into him, it's still the same to you, right? What about the guy getting beaten by the cop until his knee got destroyed. The cop was just trying to stop the guy from being able to run right? Totally justified then...
If he's dead, he's dead, whats the difference?
I was talking about the one video from the start that I actually know the back-story to - I'm just point out it's VERY easy to take a video out of context to make the Police look bad and this video is very VERY biased. I am NOT saying that every case in the video is justified!
Can you guarantee a shot to the leg or hand would of stopped him? In fact, can you even guarantee you'd be able to shoot someone in the hand (a small target), with a pistol, outside, while someone rushes you with an iron bar (so adrenaline)?
The reading you linked just deflates your point doesn't it? It was reported the man had a crowbar and was taking out windows. No signs of other weapons. So shooting down at his thighs instead of up at chest/head level is way more appropriate. After all, some of those bullets the cop fired missed, hitting things blocks away (says in the reading).
So once again, why were 10 shots needed above the person's stomach, when all he had was a crowbar?
If some of the shots missed thats all the more justification for 10 - imagine if he'd fired 5, all 5 missed and then got a crowbar to the face.
Does it matter if he had any other weapons? A crowbar can still kill...
What should the officer of done when he "went for him"?
He was tazed, and it had no effect - it could well be he's high on drugs. In which case, even if the shots DID get him in the leg, it might not stop him.
Jakg, I don't know what's up with you, for example, you might have bad memories on working with police, I don't know, but how can you not realise that video is harsh, and it's shows some horrifying footage..?
You're a douche. The guy posed no real threat and they shot him not once but 10+ times.
Jak, a backstory should not alter a Policemans perspective on a situation, past is past, a police-person should focus on the job in the present time. Even if the assailant is a muderous, raping, lunatic child abuser, if he doesn't resist, he doesn't need beating and so on, they'll get beaten enough in jail.
once in the leg to immobilise him. or, once in the torso again, to immobilise him. one shot is self defence. everything after is in cold blood... and in the back (no longer a threat).
For example, lets say there was a man who'd beaten the shit out of someone. When police tried to arrest him, he'd attacked and hurt several policemen. They get him on the floor but even then he's still kicking, punching, biting police and they struggle to handcuff him.
One uses a Tazer to disorientate him (perhaps they have to do this more than once), and then 6 officers jump on him to get him in cuffs and under control.
NOW imagine there was no video of the first part, and simply a video of the police tazing an "innocent" man laying on the floor several times before jumping on him. One would paint the police in a very bad light, whereas one would show a reasonable way of dealing with the situation while saving everybody unnecessary risk.
(something very similar to this happened in Nottingham and the video went viral).
I don't mean backstory as in "that guys a rapist so it's ok to beat the shit out of him".
You think someone coming at you with a crowbar is "no real threat"?
I've met good and bad police, and I'm not denying that a minority do some horrible horrible things. I'm just saying that it's very easy to edit a video in such a way to give *totally* the wrong impression. I didn't watch all of the video, and I'm unfortunately sure there probably is an example of brutality in there and of course thats not a good thing. But I really struggle to watch any sort of terrible biased video without wondering what the actual truth is.
Again - what if one shot isn't enough?
It's been quoted that ~80% of US police shots fired miss. While this is a terrible statistic, based on it if someone came at you with a crowbar, do you really think you'd fire only one shot? I know if it was me I probably would of fired a lot more than 10!
Good job quoting something off pistonheads, what else do they know over there? If evolution is indeed real?
If you actually bothered to look up the real statistics, you'd know that the average number of shots for an armed suspect is 5, with 30-50% of those shots hitting. Over 80% of the incidents are within 7m. You get the low % average because of times when you have multiple cops that corner a suspect, suspect pulls out an object (most of the time a gun) and the officers shoot 40-60 bullets at him, with normally only 9% of them hitting.
So please get a clue of what you are talking about before you start quoting things from pistonheads. They also say over there that US cops just go "bang [x8]" instead of asking questions. I guess they don't know how hundreds of cops get killed over here constantly because they try to talk to the suspects just for the suspects to shoot and kill them. The society over here causes heavy trigger fingers. However that doesn't make it right.
The guy had a crowbar, over a meter from one of the cops, and the other cop less than 3m away put 5 bullets into him, the suspect turned around having enough, just for the cop to put 5 more into his back. If your statistic was anywhere close to true, then only 2 of the 10 shots would have hit, therefore 1 shot stopped and 1 shot killed the man, yet you would have fired more than 10? What about if the 8 shots that missed killed 4 innocent people? Would firing all those shots be worth it then?
"But that's a what if, it didn't really happen"
Just because you don't get caught doing something wrong, doesn't mean it isn't wrong.
Jakg, I don't think it's a biased video at all, it's just a collection of police brutality. Each part of the clip shows a number of cops abusing one person or one or more already immobilized persons.
First clip: the cop who shoots is obviously scared of the guy, otherwise he would've let the dog which would bring him down and both cops could then jump and immobilize him... but some brain had to be used and trigger happy attitude dropped.
All the other clips mainly show tied up or already passed people being ganged by the cops.
Police job is to bring criminals to justice, and NOT to judge and execute the sentences. Apart from that first clip, in every other they already had people "ready for packaging" and they could've simply do their jobs and go for some donuts, but they just had to "have their way" with them and that is what's disgusting.
I've seen that sh*t already too much in my country during late '90s, so FU policemen with this attitude, drop fu*king dead! No excuses for this behavior.
