# This is getting so out of hand. :(



## flexkill (Dec 16, 2014)

Cops shot man at Walmart, then interrogated girlfriend - CNN.com



> _After killing a man at an Ohio Walmart, police interrogated his girlfriend, accusing her of lying, threatening her with jail time and suggesting she could be on drugs, according to a video posted on The Guardian's website.
> 
> The man, John Crawford III, was holding an air rifle he had picked up off a store shelf when police shot him. A prosecutor called the case a "perfect storm" with "no bad guys," but the family has said police used excessive force._



How they treated the girlfriend after is truly f'd up. Grilling her Trying to get her to say something incriminating to justify the shooting. 

Edit: Found the Walmart security cam footage. Another case of the Police not even giving the person a chance. Just opened fire. I heard yelling, which I assume is the Police yelling at victim, but shots were fired almost at the same time as the voice command was given. Give a man a second or two at least to comply before killing him. The victim probably had no idea what was happening until it was way too late.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Dec 16, 2014)

I'm reading the story and it appears the guy was walking around the store with an out of package pellet gun? Was the tip not orange? If not, I'm not surprised he was shot. I find it hard to believe though, as from the small amount of the story I read, it was from that particular store. Usually you have to paint it to get rid of the orange tip. Gonna keep reading the rest of the article that explains what was going on.

Edit: Yeah, that was one ....ed up situation all around. The 911 caller seems to be the one at fault here though, as he said the guy was pointing the gun at people/waving it around which I didn't see. Putting myself in the cops shoes, I'd have probably done the same thing with the information I was given. I'd also have boatloads of regret afterwards, and would likely quit the force. Killing an innocent man doesn't feel good.


----------



## flaik (Dec 16, 2014)

A much as it pisses me off that another innocent person was killed by a police officer, you have to wonder what the hell this guy was thinking running around with a realistic looking bb gun in a walmart. 
The whole interrogation thing sounds like a whole other messed up story


----------



## Captain Butterscotch (Dec 17, 2014)

I've worked in a Wal-Mart. Sometimes people just pick shit up and walk around with it for no reason other than it's the first thing they grabbed. There was no reason for this kid's death.

I think it's past time for America to admit that we have a serious problem with violence in our culture.


----------



## Randy (Dec 17, 2014)

I'd be curious what anybody's justification would be for this shooting, but willfully looking the other way on 'open carry' public displays. Guy walking around with what may or may not be a loaded gun. No report of threats or hostages or anyone being hurt, but this guy gets lit up on sight?

Was it because he left his Paul Revere hat at home or because he should've left his extra melanin home instead?


----------



## UnderTheSign (Dec 17, 2014)

Ohio open-carry supporters bring guns to Walmart police shooting protest ? RT USA

I think this is the first time I've seen gun/open carry advocates come out and support the victim in a police shooting!


----------



## flint757 (Dec 17, 2014)

He gave him no time to comply and he definitely didn't bother to make sure he even heard him. The cop didn't enter the store it looks like either. He was in a completely nonthreatening position, there safety wasn't in danger. A few seconds really wouldn't have hurt anything. He was likely still shopping or browsing after he picked up the gun. It was probably just the first thing he grabbed. The package was even already open so it isn't like he opened it up with the intention of holding the store hostage or something.

As for the interrogation that's just messed up.


----------



## sevenstringj (Dec 17, 2014)

Imagine them leisurely strolling into that Walmart, grabbing a lawn chair, and having a nice little chat with the man about our constitution.


----------



## asher (Dec 17, 2014)

sevenstringj said:


> Imagine them leisurely strolling into that Walmart, grabbing a lawn chair, and having a nice little chat with the man about our constitution.




I'll give you three guesses about the difference between these two situations, and the first two don't count.


----------



## Randy (Dec 17, 2014)

That's one approach, however, I was thinking more about the 'attacking somebody for even calling the police because they saw somebody brandishing a firearm' angle:



> The battle has grown particularly ugly in Texas, where gun groups such as Open Carry Texas have conducted demonstrations showcasing their right under state law to openly carry rifles in public. The sight of groups of (mostly) men carrying semi-automatic rifles along a busy road or inside the local Jack in the Box has prompted bystanders to call police. In response, Open Carry Texas has begun making open-records requests, identifying callers and threatening to publicize their personal information.
> Callers told her she was a "stupid bitch" and "mother....ing whore." One threatened to come after her with a gun.
> 
> On April 10, Brett Sanders, a member of Open Carry Texas in Plano, a midsize city in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, posted a video on YouTube highlighting the name and cellphone number of a woman who'd called the police after seeing heavily armed men on her way to a shopping mall.



Spitting, Stalking, Rape Threats: How Gun Extremists Target Women | Mother Jones


----------



## Edika (Dec 17, 2014)

"We regretfully have to inform you that, ah, John passed away and we've been trying to cover our asses by trying to fish out information to justify our unjustifiable actions".

If I ever visit your country I'll make a note to be as compliant and obedient to any police or airport security personnel. I'm not dark skinned but I have a Mediterranean complexion.
I wouldn't want to turn a vacation or a business trip to my funeral.


----------



## flexkill (Dec 17, 2014)

This idiot who called 911 should be prosecuted for perjury or even accessory to murder.

Listen to this dumbass lie through his teeth. 

jump to 0:55 to skip the bullshit.


----------



## Xaios (Dec 17, 2014)

Randy said:


> > The battle has grown particularly ugly in Texas, where gun groups such as Open Carry Texas have conducted demonstrations showcasing their right under state law to openly carry rifles in public. The sight of groups of (mostly) men carrying semi-automatic rifles along a busy road or inside the local Jack in the Box has prompted bystanders to call police. In response, Open Carry Texas has begun making open-records requests, identifying callers and threatening to publicize their personal information.
> > Callers told her she was a "stupid bitch" and "mother....ing whore." One threatened to come after her with a gun.
> >
> > On April 10, Brett Sanders, a member of Open Carry Texas in Plano, a midsize city in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, posted a video on YouTube highlighting the name and cellphone number of a woman who'd called the police after seeing heavily armed men on her way to a shopping mall.



What the .... is wrong with some people.


----------



## narad (Dec 17, 2014)

"That's when [the officer] ...grabbed a hold of him and put him down" - holy shit.

I also enjoyed, "was waiving around a _rifle-like_ weapon." If it's rifle-like AND it's a weapon, I believe that would make it a rifle. If it's rifle-like AND not a weapon, like an air soft gun, then it's no more a weapon than anything else is.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Dec 17, 2014)

flexkill said:


> This idiot who called 911 should be prosecuted for perjury or even accessory to murder.
> 
> Listen to this dumbass lie through his teeth.
> 
> jump to 0:55 to skip the bullshit.




what a ....ing piece of shit. Why would you say he was pointing the gun/loading it when he ....ing wasn't? This numb nuts deserves some flak. If a guy's walking around with what appears to be a rifle, then tell the police that, but don't color your story to make it seem like it's worse than it is.

Edit: just proof read this. If it's unclear, I mean the 911 caller is a numb nuts, not anyone here.


----------



## asher (Dec 17, 2014)

And why did the police:

not register the fact that there was zero commotion in the Wal-Mart, not what you expect when someone's waving a gun around;
assume the caller was 100% factual going in and treat it with any skepticism;
not even bother to assess the situation when they got to the aisle?


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Dec 17, 2014)

asher said:


> And why did the police:
> 
> not register the fact that there was zero commotion in the Wal-Mart, not what you expect when someone's waving a gun around;
> assume the caller was 100% factual going in and treat it with any skepticism;
> not even bother to assess the situation when they got to the aisle?




They have to treat all gun calls as real, in fact they treat any non-specific weapon call as a gun call. Worst case scenario and all that. With that said, they gave him what? Two seconds to comply? He didn't even motion, let alone raise the stupid thing. It looked like he was holding it one handed by his side or something. Hell, he almost seemed unaware that there was a police presence at all.


----------



## Alex Kenivel (Dec 17, 2014)

_Wake up.. 

... Stretch... Yawn.. 

Ready for the day.. 

Grab phone, read this story, 

Depressed

Back to bed... _


----------



## flexkill (Dec 17, 2014)

Chokey Chicken said:


> They have to treat all gun calls as real, in fact they treat any non-specific weapon call as a gun call. Worst case scenario and all that. With that said, they gave him what? Two seconds to comply? He didn't even motion, let alone raise the stupid thing. It looked like he was holding it one handed by his side or something. Hell, he almost seemed unaware that there was a police presence at all.



Dude it wasn't even 2 seconds, it was like they shot as they were shouting.


----------



## flint757 (Dec 17, 2014)

Not even 2 seconds.

edit:


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Dec 17, 2014)

flexkill said:


> Dude it wasn't even 2 seconds, it was like they shot as they were shouting.



my point remains. 2 seconds wasn't long enough, let alone less than 2. Especially considering the guy never raised the supposed weapon.


----------



## flexkill (Dec 17, 2014)

You know, considering how many people walk around with music playing with earbuds....what if he couldn't even hear them? What then? You just get killed?


----------



## Negav (Dec 17, 2014)

And I bet nothing will happen to the officer...


----------



## flint757 (Dec 17, 2014)

He only 'warned' him to cover his ass. He had no intention of ending the incident peacefully. That's apparent in so many factors of this case.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Dec 17, 2014)

flint757 said:


> He only 'warned' him to cover his ass. He had no intention of ending the incident peacefully. That's apparent in so many factors of this case.




South park's "they're coming right for us" comes to mind.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 17, 2014)

Edika said:


> If I ever visit your country I'll make a note to be as compliant and obedient to any police or airport security personnel. I'm not dark skinned but I have a Mediterranean complexion.
> I wouldn't want to turn a vacation or a business trip to my funeral.



About 69 million people visited the US in 2013, and most of them _probably_ didn't die. I think you'd be alright .

Source: http://travel.trade.gov/outreachpages/download_data_table/Fast_Facts_2013.pdf


----------



## FILTHnFEAR (Dec 22, 2014)

He didn't point the gun at the cops and they gave him zero time to drop it, but who really thinks that walking around a Walmart with a realistic looking pellet gun would be an OK thing to do?


----------



## Randy (Dec 22, 2014)

FILTHnFEAR said:


> who really thinks that walking around a Walmart with a realistic looking pellet gun would be an OK thing to do?



Exhibit A:


----------



## FILTHnFEAR (Dec 22, 2014)

Randy said:


> Exhibit A:





Ok, and what happened? He was asked to leave and he did. He also had it slung over his shoulder, not carrying like he was about to use it.

Do I agree with open carry laws, yup. Do I think it's excessive to carry your AR to Walmart, yup.


----------



## Randy (Dec 22, 2014)

If that's your point, you could've worded your original question better.

You said:



> who really thinks that walking around a Walmart with a realistic looking pellet gun would be an OK thing to do?



You didn't mention the manner which the weapon was being carried. I posted my example because clearly that's someone who thinks walking around Walmart with a REAL gun is an okay thing to do and the worst that happened was he was asked to leave.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Dec 22, 2014)

They didn't give Crawford a second to even drop the gun. They didn't give him a second to leave the store with the gun, like the fellow above. Some dick just called the police, lied about what was going on, and then the police made demands, didn't give him time to comply and shot him. 

The two situations played out drastically differently. The two differences were that one guy was black the other white. One gun was real, the other was fake. (I don't fault anyone for assuming the gun was real though.) Hell, the white guy even did it to make a scene. Crawford was just lacking a bit of sense at that point in time. He wasn't up to "no good" and his actions certainly didn't warrant getting shot without being given enough time to respond.


----------



## tacotiklah (Dec 22, 2014)

Inb4 a bunch of entitled white people try to blame the victim and the girlfriend for all of it. 
I'm so jaded on this topic because it's depressing as hell seeing just how many people refuse to see the truth; America has a growing problem with police officers breaking the very laws they're supposed to uphold.

But yeah, it's everyone else's fault because yay 'murrica or some dumb reason like that.


----------



## FILTHnFEAR (Dec 22, 2014)

Randy said:


> If that's your point, you could've worded your original question better.
> 
> You said:
> 
> ...



Ok fair enough, I wasn't detailed in my statement.

I live in an open carry state. I'm used to seeing people carrying firearms. Usually though if it's in a store, it's most likely a pistol in a holster on their hip. No big deal, so what. Not an AR on someones back and definitely not in their hands. 

Either case though, pistol or rifle, it would be alarming if they had it in their hands walking around the store because that would mean to me that they are probably about to use it. I would NEVER walk around with my gun drawn for any reason unless my life or someone elses was being threatened, because that would be ignorant as .... and completely irresponsible. So if they're not about to use it the only other reason I see someone carrying around a rifle in a store, in their hands, real or just realistic looking, is to get a rise out of people. Not cool, bad idea that could result in a very bad outcome. 

This is not an excuse for the police or the idiot that called it into 911. I'm just saying how ignorant actions can cause equally ignorant reactions. Don't put yourself in a situation like that.


----------



## flexkill (Dec 22, 2014)

FILTHnFEAR said:


> I'm just saying how ignorant actions can cause equally ignorant reactions. Don't put yourself in a situation like that.



He wasn't being "ignorant" dude. He was walking around Walmart and picked up a toy basicly, then proceeded to just waste some time while his GF shopped. We live in a supposed 1st world country that claims to be free and where it's citizens have rights. Crawford shouldn't have to think to himself man, I better put this toy gun down because I'm going to get myself shot in this Walmart. 

With this logic every time someone gets killed in a car accident we could just say, he should never have gotten in that car, Then he wouldn't have been in the position to be in a car accident.


In no way was this the victims fault. NO WAY.


----------



## asher (Dec 22, 2014)

FILTHnFEAR said:


> Don't put yourself in a situation like that.



The point is that *HE DIDN'T*.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Dec 23, 2014)

To an extent I agree. There's a difference in picking up a toy an walking around, and picking up what appears to be a real gun and walking around with it in your hands. In this day and age in the US when theaters and schools are getting shot up, it's not outrageous for people to expect the worse.

What remains outrageous however, is the 911 callers lies, and the police's hairpin trigger fingers. I don't think it was too out there for attention to be on the guy, but the blatant lies and lack of communicating with him is downright ....ed.

Crawford is without a doubt still the victim, but let's not pretend that you would turn a blind eye to someone walking around with a gun in hand. Even the white fellow had people pointing and concerned. Guns attract attention, and air soft guns are some of the most real looking "fake" guns out there, so they'll attract just as much attention as a real gun. Again, it's the extent of the reactions that make this as ....ed up as it is. Not the fact that they reacted to a gun, but the fact that they drastically over reacted to the gun. (Ie: lies and shooting before giving him a reasonable amount of time to put the gun down.)


----------



## flint757 (Dec 23, 2014)

Even if he was being threatening and it was a real weapon the police would have still been in the wrong for both how the shooting went down and the interrogation afterward. There may be more leeway and justification if it were a real weapon, but simply put he didn't give him enough time to even notice or acknowledge their existence, much less comply.

It seems quite a few police officers are poorly trained to handle stressful situations. Not a fan of the shoot first, if they're alive, ask questions later and if they die hound their loved ones to try and pin a nonexistent crime on someone to take the heat off the department for their obvious screw up.


----------



## FILTHnFEAR (Dec 23, 2014)

flexkill said:


> He wasn't being "ignorant" dude. He was walking around Walmart and picked up a toy basicly, then proceeded to just waste some time while his GF shopped. We live in a supposed 1st world country that claims to be free and where it's citizens have rights. The victim shouldn't have to think to himself man, I better put this toy gun down because I'm going to get myself shot in this Walmart.
> 
> With this logic every time someone gets killed in a car accident we could just say, he should never have gotten in that car, Then he wouldn't have been in the position to be in a car accident.
> 
> ...



*Bad analogy flex.*



asher said:


> The point is that *HE DIDN'T*.



*Yes, he did asher.*
*
Ok, both of you, next time you're in a Walmart or some such store that sells these, take one out of the package and walk around the store with it. See what kind of reactions you get from people. They are not going to be pleased. His actions were ignorant.*



Chokey Chicken said:


> To an extent I agree. There's a difference in picking up a toy an walking around, and picking up what appears to be a real gun and walking around with it in your hands. In this day and age in the US when theaters and schools are getting shot up, it's not outrageous for people to expect the worse.
> 
> *Exactly.* *What kind of reactions would you expect from people?
> *
> ...



Good points all around Chokey.


----------



## flexkill (Dec 23, 2014)

FILTHnFEAR said:


> *Bad analogy flex.*



I agree, just as ridiculous as your statement. Hindsight is always 20/20 right?


----------



## ghostred7 (Dec 23, 2014)

Ohio has a law that signs carry "force of law." This means that if there's a sign on the front that says "No Weapons/Guns" you are required by law to follow it. There is no way to tell if that was a real or fake firearm w/out having hands on. It didn't have the "orange tip" a lot of airsoft/fake firearms have.

Additionally, per the video it's a Crossman MK-177. That means it shoots .177 caliber pellets. You are all kidding yourself if you don't think that can harm/kill. Hell...I accidentally almost killed a neighbor with one through the fence/hedge that separated our properties from ~250yd away (stars aligned & shit) when I was in 4th grade. It's a .177 caliber bullet that moves at about 700fps and no one could have known whether or not it was loaded/primed w/out already seeing the surveillance video.

Officers: should have allowed more reaction time
911 Caller: idiot
Victim: should not have carried an AR type WEAPON openly in the store, especially with hand on handle/trigger area

Sad thing that happened, but I'm not placing sole responsibility on the LEOs here. I mean in all reality, they should have had a better security on their weapons in-store. If anything the catalyst was the ease of accessibility in the store. The closest wally-world to me locks everything but actual airsoft away just like it was regular firearms AND you have to be 18 (or with 18+ guardian) to even look at it.


----------



## FILTHnFEAR (Dec 23, 2014)

flexkill said:


> I agree, just as ridiculous as your statement. Hindsight is always 20/20 right?



So ridiculous? You really telling me you wouldn't think twice if you saw someone in a store walking with a rifle, holding it by the handle? Where you couldn't tell if it was real or not.


----------



## flexkill (Dec 23, 2014)

FILTHnFEAR said:


> So ridiculous? You really telling me you wouldn't think twice if you saw someone in a store walking with a rifle, holding it by the handle? Where you couldn't tell if it was real or not.



Think twice? Maybe. Take a harder look? Maybe. Kill him, NO. You need to take his actions into account as well. He wasn't brandishing or wielding the so called weapon in a harmful or threatening way whatsoever. How about TALKING to the guy .

This could have all been avoided if just ONE person would have asked the guy, hey man, whats up with the rifle?


----------



## Randy (Dec 23, 2014)

flexkill said:


> How about TALKING to the guy .
> 
> This could have all been avoided if just ONE person would have asked the guy, hey man, whats up with the rifle?



Which could've easily and safely been done over the PA system.


----------



## Explorer (Dec 23, 2014)

Chokey Chicken said:


> The two situations played out drastically differently. The two differences were that one guy was black the other white. One gun was real, the other was fake.



The second difference is probably the only reason the NRA isn't up in arms about the black guy getting shot... right? 

Because there is no chance that someone would be shot under the same circumstances while carrying a real gun.

While white.

Do I have that right? Because it sure looks that way.


----------



## ghostred7 (Dec 23, 2014)

flexkill said:


> Think twice? Maybe. Take a harder look? Maybe. Kill him, NO. You need to take his actions into account as well. He wasn't brandishing or wielding the so called weapon in a harmful or threatening way whatsoever. How about TALKING to the guy .
> 
> This could have all been avoided if just ONE person would have asked the guy, hey man, whats up with the rifle?



I do take his action(s) into account. Had I have seen what the security cameras shown...there is NO WAY IN HELL I would have approached that guy. 

There is ZERO way to tell visually whether or not that was a real firearm. By definition, he was most definitely brandishing it. Legalese definition of brandishing: to wave or shake in a manner that an individual may find threatening. 
A brandishing charge can be brought as soon as a firearm is visible, even if it's still living in the holster (a friend of mine had to go to court over his CCW showing from under his shirt when bending over and it caused a MWAG call). So ya, he was completely brandishing it. Obviously *someone* felt threatened or there would have never have been a 911 call in the first place. 

Honestly, had I have been in that store and that kid turned and leveled/pointed/aimed/whatever at ANY of my family or friends....I'd probably have shot him too. He was clearly old enough to know better. Hell, my kids have been taught to never point a firearm, toy or otherwise, at anything they do not wish to destroy. They have understood this since 7-8 y/o (now 17 & 15).

This circles back around to the individuals that called in. Based on the MWAG (man with a gun) call, the LEOs were most likely told that there is an armed assailant brandishing a firearm in the store and nothing more. Again, the mindset going in is "armed assailant" and not "dude with bb gun." 

I still submit that the LEOs could have de-escalated w/out lethal force...but this is the 30,000ft armchair observation. The video, whether or not the kid was already shot at this point, *did* show him (victim) appear to be going for the weapon again.


----------



## flexkill (Dec 23, 2014)

ghostred7 said:


> I do take his action(s) into account. Had I have seen what the security cameras shown...there is NO WAY IN HELL I would have approached that guy.
> 
> There is ZERO way to tell visually whether or not that was a real firearm. By definition, he was most definitely brandishing it. Legalese definition of brandishing: to wave or shake in a manner that an individual may find threatening.
> A brandishing charge can be brought as soon as a firearm is visible, even if it's still living in the holster (a friend of mine had to go to court over his CCW showing from under his shirt when bending over and it caused a MWAG call). So ya, he was completely brandishing it. Obviously *someone* felt threatened or there would have never have been a 911 call in the first place.
> ...



So he was going to take over Walmart with an air soft rifle? Did you watch the same video as me? I saw no evidence of him reaching for anything. Of all the people who knew the gun wasn't real, I am pretty sure Crawford knew the gun in his hand was a toy. Why would he reach for it in defense? What was he going to do? Raise it and say "BANG" until everyone fell over dead?


----------



## ghostred7 (Dec 23, 2014)

First off....per the video, it was a Crosman MK-177 Air Rifle...that is NOT an airsoft gun and very well capable of doing real damage (vs. welts airsoft rounds will provide). At the end of the day, it's a .177 caliber bullet moving 700+ FPS (per Crosman's site). There is a reason people use this for hunting small game. Please do not confuse Airsoft with an Air Rifle...they aren't close to the same thing.

No audio on the video to hear what the LEOs are saying, but what is evident is that Crawford did NOT stay still, nor stay down. At the video 8:27:01 mark, he's moving towards the weapon. No one but him knew it was fake at this time. 

This BB/pellet gun is designed to look like a real weapon and really cannot tell it isn't unless holding it.






So ya, I wouldn't approach him. If he pointed at me and I was carrying, I'd of dropped him if I was with my family. I've assembled and disassembled numerous AR-15/M16, M60, M2, etc throughout the years....and even looking at that picture now, it's difficult to say it's an air rifle via glance.


----------



## Axayacatl (Dec 23, 2014)

Judging by that Walmart video it really seems like those officers would have shot that dude even if he had been roaming around Sur La Ta-ble with a butter knife pulled off the shelf. 

Officer: "Put that weapon down!"
Dangerous Criminal: "I'm not.... ab-le.."
BAM! 

I did not see the kid in the video strike a threatening pose with the gun. They sell that gun off the shelf in the same fukcing store for crying out loud. I did not even see the officers give 'de-escalation' a chance. 

It's sad that a dedicated cop killer like the one caught recently in Pennsylvania's woods (wood's woods!) gets more chances to live than a foolish kid talking on the phone at a store holding an off-the-shelf gun (that part cannot be emphasized enough). 

I have a lot of respect for law enforcement officers which is why _I expect we should hold them to the highest of standards._ It is almost comical that our brother's and sisters in the armed forced are thrown into the most difficult and frightening of situations and are held to arguably very high standards by everyone at home and abroad but our local law enforcement officers get the ''well I wasn't there and they know better, you know black people scary sometimes'' VIP treatment. 

So far we've had numerous examples of frighteningly untrained personnel in somewhat frightening situations (12 year old with a gun!). Racism and crappy training seem to be the killer ingredients in this shit storm of shit we are so bravely sailing in to. 

Isolated incidents? Not a trend? Both Ferguson and Cleveland have been under federal scrutiny since at least 2013 for being outliers in police violence. 

An example from Cleveland, 2012 (from here, my emphasis added):

"In 2012, Timothy Russell and Malissa Williams, two black residents, led police on a short chase. It began when the two drove past a police officer who believed a gun had been fired from the vehicle. The chase ended in a school parking lot.

Surrounded by officers, the two were killed in a hail of 137 bullets fired by 13 of the more than 100 officers involved in the chase.

One officer emptied two 16-bullet clips, reloaded a third time and then l*eapt onto the hood of the vehicle and fired bullets through the windshield*.

Russell and Williams were unarmed. Their car had backfired."

Did these 'professionals' think that perhaps they were in some fukcing Lethal Weapon remake? These are our 'trained professionals'?  "I may not like your methods, but by golly do you get a lot of killing of black folk done and done!"

To my mind to even worry about the specs of the off-the-shelf-in-unlocked-display-at-the-very-same-store gun is to severely miss the point. No offense intended, I just think that it is very much _besides the point _ for anybody bar the specialized officials looking into the case. 

Until America catches up I will continue to praise my (Aryan White) Lord Jesus Christ for making Mommy and Daddy white enough for comfort so I can continue to menacingly pace around Sur La Table with a butter knife without getting shot. Make no mistake: I have received very specialized training and I can be absolutely lethal with a salt shaker. Better trust me, buddy, I'm very ab-le!


----------



## Explorer (Dec 24, 2014)

ghostred7 said:


> A brandishing charge can be brought as soon as a firearm is visible, even if it's still living in the holster (a friend of mine had to go to court over his CCW showing from under his shirt when bending over and it caused a MWAG call). So ya, he was completely brandishing it. Obviously *someone* felt threatened or there would have never have been a 911 call in the first place.
> 
> Honestly, had I have been in that store and that kid turned and leveled/pointed/aimed/whatever at ANY of my family or friends....I'd probably have shot him too.



You'd have shot your black friend for brandishing a firearm? I'm glad he made it to court.

Just out of curiosity... is your friend black or white? I was taking a guess that the situations were equivalent, and I'm hoping I'm not mistaken. 

If your friend is white, and was charged instead of killed... that goes to the main thrust of the topic then, doesn't it? That whites get talked to and minorities get killed?


----------



## flint757 (Dec 24, 2014)

ghostred7 said:


> No audio on the video to hear what the LEOs are saying, but what is evident is that Crawford did NOT stay still, nor stay down. At the video 8:27:01 mark, he's moving towards the weapon. No one but him knew it was fake at this time.



First off, he didn't give him enough time to comply or even do something 'menacing'. Second off, someone yells something at you what is your first reaction if you didn't quite catch what they said? Mine is usually to turn and see what the hell is going on or straight up get out of the way if it seems threatening. I've watched the same video you have and don't even remotely come to the same conclusions. All I'm seeing is quite a lot of attempts to straight up justify the police officers actions by apparently making the case that he 'could' have been dangerous and I guess, in your mind, therefore didn't deserve any attempt to not get shot in the process of resolving the situation. Did you also find the interrogation to be appropriate? 

All other facts are completely moot because he wasn't given enough time to do ANYTHING at all. Real gun, fake gun, mass murderer, prankster, bored shopper it really doesn't matter because that officer was 100% in the wrong in how he handled that situation. Now, I'm not saying that he's 100% to blame for the whole incident because that isn't the case. Walmart is negligent for leaving it out and in the open despite their stores policies, the 911 caller is negligent for lying to the dispatchers (or rather exaggerating), the guy played a part for simply picking up the thing (although I wouldn't jump right to responsible because of that fact), the police are responsible for executing the guy without even giving him a chance to comply and the officer who was doing the interrogation for just being a dick. All these factors played into what happened, but that officer is 100% responsible for his poor actions and nothing said here will change that. He won't get in any trouble of course because that's how good ol' America works. They never get in trouble even when they are without much doubt guilty. It never usually even makes it to trial to determine whether or not they are guilty to begin with.

[EDIT]

I'd also add that if someone were shooting at me, police or not, I'd absolutely ....ing bolt. I'm not going to wait to assess the situation first if I'm not fully aware what the .... is going on. I doubt most people would either.


----------



## ghostred7 (Dec 24, 2014)

Explorer said:


> You'd have shot your black friend for brandishing a firearm? I'm glad he made it to court.
> 
> Just out of curiosity... is your friend black or white? I was taking a guess that the situations were equivalent, and I'm hoping I'm not mistaken.
> 
> If your friend is white, and was charged instead of killed... that goes to the main thrust of the topic then, doesn't it? That whites get talked to and minorities get killed?


What are you talking about? The "he" I was talking about was the dude in Walmart, not my friend.

Stop race-baiting, race has nothing to do with my personal situation. My friend mentioned was indeed African-American and didn't get shot over the MWAG call. The brandishing charge brought against my friend was because someone saw his sidearm while he bent over, causing his shirt to come up over his belt and the CCW be seen. It never left the holster. Someone felt they were in danger enough to call 911 over it (similar to the caller in the Walmart incident).

I said I would have shot the Walmart dude if he had pointed that weapon at me and I was with my family (no matter the color of his skin). 

@Flint - I'm not justifying the police actions, never did. I already acknowledge the LEOs didn't try to de-escalate and handled things poorly. I'm merely stating facts presented in the video.


flint757 said:


> All other facts are completely moot because he wasn't given enough time to do ANYTHING at all. Real gun, fake gun, mass murderer, prankster, bored shopper it really doesn't matter because that officer was 100% in the wrong in how he handled that situation. Now, I'm not saying that he's 100% to blame for the whole incident because that isn't the case. Walmart is negligent for leaving it out and in the open despite their stores policies, the 911 caller is negligent for lying to the dispatchers (or rather exaggerating), the guy played a part for simply picking up the thing (although I wouldn't jump right to responsible because of that fact), the police are responsible for executing the guy without even giving him a chance to comply and the officer who was doing the interrogation for just being a dick. All these factors played into what happened, but that officer is 100% responsible for his poor actions and nothing said here will change that. He won't get in any trouble of course because that's how good ol' America works. They never get in trouble even when they are without much doubt guilty. It never usually even makes it to trial to determine whether or not they are guilty to begin with.


I pretty much said this too and agree.



ghostred7 said:


> Officers: should have allowed more reaction time
> 911 Caller: idiot
> Victim: should not have carried an AR type WEAPON openly in the store, especially with hand on handle/trigger area
> 
> Sad thing that happened, but I'm not placing sole responsibility on the LEOs here. I mean in all reality, they should have had a better security on their weapons in-store. If anything the catalyst was the ease of accessibility in the store. The closest wally-world to me locks everything but actual airsoft away just like it was regular firearms AND you have to be 18 (or with 18+ guardian) to even look at it.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Dec 24, 2014)

flexkill said:


> Think twice? Maybe. Take a harder look? Maybe. Kill him, NO. You need to take his actions into account as well. He wasn't brandishing or wielding the so called weapon in a harmful or threatening way whatsoever. How about TALKING to the guy .
> 
> This could have all been avoided if just ONE person would have asked the guy, hey man, whats up with the rifle?



It's ill advised to approach someone who has a firearm drawn in a store. But, here's the thing. The police could have... I don't know... Talked to him before shooting him? They were in every position to actually talk to the guy and do exactly what you said, but they didn't.

Also, Walmart has done away with loud speakers due to racial comments being made by customers who knew how they worked. They use walkie talkies now. I'm not positive there's an emergency override or anything.

In the end, WalMart sucks for leaving opened unattended guns, air soft or not, lying around for days on end. 911 caller sucks for lying and escalating the situation beyond where it needed to be. The police suck not for holding the man at gunpoint, because to their knowledge he was in fact walking around pointing a real now loaded gun at people, but they suck because of their piss poor reaction. The man made no moves with his weapon. Where even if the gun was a loaded, real gun, he showed no intent to use it. He made no movements with the gun that said "I'm going to aim at you now and shoot you." There was zero reason for this guy to actually being shot.


----------



## Edika (Dec 24, 2014)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> About 69 million people visited the US in 2013, and most of them _probably_ didn't die. I think you'd be alright .
> 
> Source: http://travel.trade.gov/outreachpages/download_data_table/Fast_Facts_2013.pdf



Yeah I know I was just exaggerating. Not that all these news feel me with confidence though.


----------



## Emperor Guillotine (Dec 25, 2014)

Graphic picture of a NYPD officer beating an unarmed African American.






(Actually, it looks like the African-American is winning.)


----------



## flexkill (Dec 25, 2014)

Must read.



How to Regain Control of Your Local Police - The Solutions Institute


----------



## Steinmetzify (Dec 27, 2014)

Man, this whole thing is sad. OP is right and it's getting out of hand.

Two videos. One black dude with a fake gun. Shot and killed. One white guy with a real gun, asked to leave.

Not justifying the cop in the OP at all, but my reaction would probably have been much the same. Only difference is, I'M NOT A COP. 

If I'm in a Wal-Mart alone and see a guy, black/white/Chinese/whatever carrying around what looks like it could be a real gun, I'm out. If I'm with my family and dude is brandishing and for whatever reason it got pointed our way, dude would be at the very least drawn on and commanded to stop. Last resort is he gets shot. That's what I carry a gun FOR...so no one can continually threaten my family.

Difference being that cops are supposed to be trained to stop this type of thing without violence if possible, and it doesn't look like they even bothered to try.

Not to be rude or callous, but there's no way I'd ever carry even a fake gun around a store like that, and even though it was a toy, I think it was remarkably stupid of the kid to do so. In certain areas it's just asking for trouble.

I'd like it known that I have carried a handgun for almost 20 years, and trained heavily in their use....that means if I see a handgun, I'd usually be able to tell at some distance if it's real or not....but I have no idea about rifles or automatic rifles, certainly not enough to know whether that thing was real or fake. The picture posted above looks real enough to me. If I walked around a corner in a store and there was a guy standing there right in front of me pointing that thing at me, I'd do whatever I had to do to get him to drop it.

EDIT: one of these is a toy and one is a real firearm, both with plastic housings...would you be able to tell at a glance which one is fake? 



 by Steinmetzify, on Flickr


FN%20P90 by Steinmetzify, on Flickr


----------



## Randy (Jan 23, 2015)

Expounding on my last point in this thread

Black Man Lawfully Carrying Gun Gets Pummeled by White Vigilante at Walmart | Mother Jones


----------



## bostjan (Jan 23, 2015)

This is a sad story. It makes me sad. America these days.
Now I have to go look at the multiscale Ibanez to make me feel a little less sad.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jan 23, 2015)

So, basically SSO has become the place to defend our families with sharpened pencils against people whom probably have something a little more effective [I hope this was a joke] and complain about racist guns. 

Where's Mrs. Lovejoy when you need her... "Will somebody *PLEASE *think of the children!?"


----------



## asher (Jan 23, 2015)

wat


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jan 23, 2015)

Randy said:


> Expounding on my last point in this thread
> 
> Black Man Lawfully Carrying Gun Gets Pummeled by White Vigilante at Walmart | Mother Jones



Race baiting... Rev Sharpton would be proud of MJ.


----------



## flint757 (Jan 23, 2015)

Is it race baiting when all the comments I read on a similar incident that happened in Florida basically implied that white people carrying guns were incapable of committing a crime (or at least beyond being suspect) and that we 'know' what the 'real' criminals look like (it was a white dude that got pummeled in a Walmart there). If that isn't thinly veiled I don't know what is personally. The perception is all that really matters and it's quite pervasive.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jan 23, 2015)

flint757 said:


> Is it race baiting when all the comments I read on a similar incident that happened in Florida basically implied that white people carrying guns were incapable of committing a crime (or at least beyond being suspect) and that we 'know' what the 'real' criminals look like (it was a white dude that got pummeled in a Walmart there). If that isn't thinly veiled I don't know what is personally. The perception is all that really matters and it's quite pervasive.



Gonna need to be a little less vague than "Florida incident", cuz frankly, I don't know how many times a week I say, "Only in Florida..."

And as for perception, I don't care about other people's perception, because it means nothing to me. To clarify, I don't judge people based on other people's perception. Furthermore, I don't go, "Man, this person is ....ing awesome, but he's blaxican, so I just can't hang out with them." Besides, the 70s and 80s sure proved that white people being "beyond suspect" is a stupid misconception. ie, Bundy, Gacy, Dahmer, Jesperson, etc. Whomever made that conclusion that you are referring to should go win themselves a Darwin award; it'd make me happy. 

I'm just sick of the constant, "So guess what racist bullshit white people pulled today!?" in the media. I'm sorry, but I'm not sorry for: shit other people pulled, shit that happened in the past, shit that other people believe, and shit I didn't personally do to someone. I guess I'm a self-centered prick that way, because I mainly [try to anyways] focus on myself and if people don't like that, then that I am sorry for, because I actually did something.

Just for discussions sake, what proverbial "side" do you think I'm on? I'm curious because it might explain your angle in the comment I'm replying to.


----------



## flint757 (Jan 23, 2015)

Well, surprisingly a lot of people do care and that's part of the problem. People shouldn't assume anything based on skin color alone, including the notion that every white guy is racist, BUT that doesn't really change the fact that there are some severely racist people out there. I'm sure a ton of people legally carry in Florida so one has to make one of two assumptions about this man: either he's racist or making some sort of point. The two that followed are likely a little racist and incredibly dense though. An old man is being attacked by a guy and then they help the attacker? Makes no sense to me. From the gun side of the debate it's exactly why I'm anti-vigilante to begin with. Regular folk have a tendency to misevaluate the situation putting other peoples lives actually in danger. If this man had a gun and he was hyped up on being the hero, like he was trying to be here, then he would have killed this man. He would have no doubt paid the price for it, like he has in this situation, but things shouldn't be able to go that far in the first place IMO. 

As for sides, I'm sure you support the guy with the gun as I know from past threads you are a strong gun advocate. 

What is a bit scary to me is that I don't think I've ever seen a situation where people who are typically advocates of guns side against a legal gun owner shooting someone. Certainly not EVERY single incident was the other guys fault, yet the amount of support is usually about the same across the board. United we stand kind of thing I guess.


----------



## synrgy (Jan 24, 2015)

flint757 said:


> United we stand kind of thing I guess.



If you'll allow me to run with that single concept into a few different directions..

That's what's bothering me about the current national 'conversation' about police behaving badly. With rare exception (of which several posters here are included), I'm seeing virtually no middle-ground between "All officers are infallible" and "All officers are inherently evil". It's become yet another 'us versus them' situation, pragmatism be damned.

Similarly, I'm offended by police generally having some bastardized version of "the bro-code" (I've heard once or twice "Blue Code".. Is that the official term?) which seems to prevent them from speaking out against each other when/if one of their bad apples gets into trouble. I can't help but feel that public perception would be much different right now, if only the good officers out there (who I mostly believe outnumber the bad) would stand up and say things like "That cop gives the rest of us a bad name, and we do not support them."

While I'm inherently against the concept of dedicating one's life/career to regulating how other people live theirs, I concede the need for such a service due to the instability of humanity. I also have friends and/or spouses-of-friends who are officers. The piece I often see missing in the equation in conversations happening from either side of this topic, is that officers, and victims, and/or criminals, all have something in common: They're human. Therefore, to imply that all are good or that all are bad or that all are the same regardless of where they are on the spectrum, is ludicrous. I can forgive to a point given that these are increasingly hyperbolic times, but I guess I've just grown weary of all the blind team-sport posturing involved with seemingly every hot-button topic in this country.

All that said, _clearly_ there is a precedent of officers either A) not being trained well enough and/or B) not being screened well enough for mental issues, whether they be ptsd, racism, or less-obvious conditions, in order to handle the situations into which their job places them. But there's another side to that coin: We have various laws regarding personal freedoms in this country which regularly place officers into situations that no mortal can be reasonably expected to handle peacefully, training or not. No amount of training is likely to override thousands of years of evolution in a fight-or-flight situation.

But I don't pretend to have solutions. Any wisdom I have tends to stop at the level of identifying a problem. 

I'd like to see police forces take clear actions to address this growing problem, but I'd _also_ like to see less posturing on behalf of victims who were either A) acting criminally and/or B) doing something quantifiably stupid. There's a lot of "that person didn't do _anything_ wrong that goes around. While in most of these cases the response far outweighs the action, such doesn't automatically forgive or negate the action.

I'm a pasty white boy, and the older I get the more I realize how much privilege that comes with. Does it absolutely suck donkey balls that racism exists? Yes. Will acting like it doesn't exist do any favors for an adult male of-color carrying a firearm in a public place? Probably not. 

Hell, putting race aside, when I was a kid, boys played with toy guns, but things have shifted over my lifetime to the point where kids now get suspended (and sometimes expelled) from school for *drawing* guns, with crayon, on construction paper. So, in this specific case, yeah, I think it was pretty effing stupid for the victim to walk around the store with the weapon. 

However, it's also painfully obvious that death or even injury was in no conceivable way the warranted response to his stupidity. I sincerely _hope_ the officers (and the douchenozzle who made the 911 call) are held accountable, but I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## asher (Jan 24, 2015)

The "Thin Blue Line" is in fact very wide, and is a huge part of the "us vs. them" problems we have. Obviously not every cop is a horrible person, but it's really hard to feel good about the ones who refuse to speak out (even if its because they know they will get ostracized, passed over, and generally shit on). So the public views the whole institution with extra skepticism, and then most departments and cops exude a "you're just civilians, you have no grounds to criticize us" attitude.

Fvck, the entire NYPD has gone on strike with a stick up their ass, and turned their backs on the Mayor speaking at officers' funerals _simply because he suggested that it's understandable why people would be frustrated with Gardner_, and some personally blame him for the crazy guy who stalked and ambushed those two cops.


----------



## flint757 (Jan 24, 2015)

If anything bad happened because of their negligence during the strike I wonder if it can be brought to civil suit? I think most people and officers fail to realize that saying we need to fix the system and that there are some rotten eggs in the PD does not equate to 'we don't need the police'. On the contrary we just need the police to be better. I don't think it's too much to ask those who enforce the law to both know the law they are enforcing and to follow it. Apparently that's a really radical concept though. 

Also, I hate the 'in their shoes' argument. It's a thinly veiled attempt at stopping all criticism/critical thinking about an incident. Even if an officer acted in the best of his abilities it doesn't mean the situation couldn't be improved upon so that it goes better the next time a similar situation crops up. That's pretty much how every other field operates.


----------



## synrgy (Jan 24, 2015)

flint757 said:


> That's pretty much how every other field operates.



Bingo. That part baffles me.. Draw an analogy to virtually any other profession, and the analogous behavior is unacceptable, but for police, we're all just supposed to look the other way?


----------



## Grief (Jan 24, 2015)

The police and judicial system in the US seem to me to be inherently corrupt and operate somewhat like a gang.

In the news we see far too many cases like Eric Garner, the Walmart-man, that 12yr old with the BB gun etc etc etc. There seems to be too many incidents for there always to be justification and/or no cause of action for a criminal prosecution. Part of the deal with being a firearm carrying policeman is you have to be good with it and should rightly face consequences if you fail in your duty.

In everyday life i see the Police in maybe 50% of encounters breaking the laws they are supposed to uphold: Chatting away on personal cellphones while driving, speeding, dangerous driving etc. 

The police where i live operate a charity and send out an annual mailshot soliciting donations. The don't tell you where the money goes but keep a record of course of donors. So, what does it seem the money is given for?

The police here have license plates on their private cars that denote their occupation. What are these for if not to ensure preferential treatment for their colleagues and families or whoever he loan their vehicles to?


The police in the US are often for hire privately in their uniform. Doesn't sound very impartial.

The police are institutionally racist. That's not an accusation, it is a fact:
BBC News - US attorney general calls for end to racial profiling

The police in the USA set themselves up as being above the society they are supposed to be an integral part of. 

Of course i'm thankful for good cops and good law and believe that police officers should be treated with the same respect we expect them to treat us with. 

But they are also volunteers, well-remunerated and pensioned and just doing a job like the rest of us.

It seems like this might be a difficult discussion in USA but bad law, badly enforced law and bad cops are not essential and not something to be thankful for. All this bad stuff can be replaced by better things and good police officers should embrace better training, better policy and the rooting out of shitty cops. Otherwise they seem to be covering up and holding their entire profession as being above reproach.


----------



## flexkill (Jan 26, 2015)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Gonna need to be a little less vague than "Florida incident", cuz frankly, I don't know how many times a week I say, "Only in Florida..."
> 
> And as for perception, I don't care about other people's perception, because it means nothing to me. To clarify, I don't judge people based on other people's perception. Furthermore, I don't go, "Man, this person is ....ing awesome, but he's blaxican, so I just can't hang out with them." Besides, the 70s and 80s sure proved that white people being "beyond suspect" is a stupid misconception. ie, Bundy, Gacy, Dahmer, Jesperson, etc. Whomever made that conclusion that you are referring to should go win themselves a Darwin award; it'd make me happy.
> 
> ...


Dude, when I posted this it had nothing to do with the color of the victims skin. I wasn't even thinking anything like that when i posted the OP. My whole point was the lack of respect for human life in general by a seemingly large part of our police force.

Why is it the supposedly non racist "race protectors" like yourself so quick to make it about or bring up race? Your posts come off as hypocritical and quite frankly are uncalled for.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jan 27, 2015)

flexkill said:


> Dude, when I posted this it had nothing to do with the color of the victims skin. I wasn't even thinking anything like that when i posted the OP. My whole point was the lack of respect for human life in general by a seemingly large part of our police force.
> 
> Why is it the supposedly non racist "race protectors" like yourself so quick to make it about or bring up race? Your posts come off as hypocritical and quite frankly are uncalled for.


I was referring to this. Black Man Lawfully Carrying Gun Gets Pummeled by White Vigilante at Walmart | Mother Jones

And I appreciate you insinuating I'm racist. That's totally uncalled for, but that's none of my business. 

By the way, you can stop looking down your nose at me. Thanks.


----------



## vilk (Jan 27, 2015)

I used to get really bent out of shape by the idea that someone would think me a racist, especially because I have a lot more experience than the average white American in terms of having lived as a minority. 

But now I kinda don't ....in' care anymore. I'm not racist, and I know that. It doesn't matter if I say the wrong thing or some goofy bullshit that people get caught up about; I don't hate anyone or judge their worth based on ethnic background (or country of birth for that matter). And I know that. Actions/true emotions speak louder than words (though, of course, speaking is an action. That's kind of confusing).


Soooooo one thing that makes people who aren't racist appear to be racist is saying "I'm not racist!! Listen to these reasons why!!" When people hear some of the impressions I've had about the variety in human life on Earth they have accused me of being racist. All I can come back with is, "You don't even know me. And you're wrong." Usually try to leave it around there. Back when I used to get more upset about it I might have mentioned about how I've never hated someone for their skin, but I do hate assholes that make ignorant insults based on fleeting conversations of strangers to try and inflate their own egos. But honestly, when you pull the "get off your horse" card instead of the "I'm not a racist! I'm not!!! I have a black frieeeeennnnnnnnnnnddddddd!" it usually somehow gets the point across much better. Maybe it's the confidence?


tl;dr protip: if you're not racist, the best way to show that you're not racist is by not getting into it with people. The more a non-racist tries to prove he's not racist the more racist he becomes.


----------



## pink freud (Jan 27, 2015)

vilk said:


> I used to get really bent out of shape by the idea that someone would think me a racist, especially because I have a lot more experience than the average white American in terms of having lived as a minority.
> 
> But now I kinda don't ....in' care anymore. I'm not racist, and I know that. It doesn't matter if I say the wrong thing or some goofy bullshit that people get caught up about; I don't hate anyone or judge their worth based on ethnic background (or country of birth for that matter). And I know that. Actions/true emotions speak louder than words (though, of course, speaking is an action. That's kind of confusing).
> 
> ...



Best reply is "Maybe, but not intentionally. Let's talk about what I did that would make you think that."

I know that there are things I don't know, and some of those things might lead to unintentionally offending people. And let it be known that if I offend somebody I want it to be on purpose


----------

