The issue in the Minneapolis police shooting

[MineralMan]

of a woman who had called 911 to report a possible crime has nothing to do with race, religion, national origin or anything else except one stunning question that is at the core of increased police violence:

Why are police officers so quick to shoot people who are not police officers?

That's the real question here. When such shootings happen, they generally happen very quickly, with a police officer firing at and often killing someone who actually poses no threat to the shooter. A man sitting in his car after being stopped for a taillight out. A woman walking up to a police car after calling 911 to report a crime. A young boy at a park with a BB gun. A boy in a car with three others driving AWAY from somewhere. A troubled person who needs mental health care when police respond to a call from a parent or loved one. BANG! BANG! You're dead.

The problem isn't race. The problem is that police see civilians as a threat, whether or not any threat is present. The problem is that police officers are almost never charged and convicted when they shoot a civilian. The problem is that the police can, and do, act out of fear and loathing of anyone who is not a police officer. Shoot first and then ask questions seems to be SOP.

That is what needs to be addressed and redressed. We need our police to stop and think before pulling the trigger on their weapons. We need our police to stop seeing everyone not in a uniform as a potential threat. That's what we need to be talking about.

[exboyfil]

1. You throw on top black

means greater threat. Large male means even greater threat.

They had two rookie cops together at night in a squad car. Their procedures need to be evaluated. Are they that understaffed with veteran officers?

[Iggo]

4. "Their procedures need to be evaluated." No. They need to be prosecuted.

They killed an innocent woman.

The same thing needs to happen to them as would happen to me if I did that to one of them.

Equal protection under the law.

[exboyfil]

5. The two are not exclusive

I want to see the cop fired because he will not give a statement. Obviously I want him prosecuted if the facts merit it, and it sure seems that way right now.

[B2G]

7. "They" didn't shoot her.

Noor did.

[MineralMan]

6. Experienced cops often get to choose the shifts they want

to work. Rookies end up working the overnight shift, because who wants to work in the middle of the night. Perhaps that should change. But that's how things are in most cities. Those two cops were working a very quiet precinct in Minneapolis. They weren't in the district that has problems at bar-closing time. Where they were is one of the quietest residential parts of Minneapolis. Perhaps that's why two less-experienced cops were there. I don't know.

What I do know is that the cop in the passenger seat shot across the cop in the driver's seat of the squad car. That, in itself, is really, really poor procedure. He couldn't even see the person he shot clearly, and may not even have seen anything but a torso. He shot at that torso through the window on the other side of the car.

He shot before actually assessing the situation. He shot immediately. That shot killed a nice woman who had called 911 to report a possible sexual assault in the alley behind the home where she was staying. She went out to meet the officers to responded to that call. Personally, I would not have done that. Especially at night and in an alley. But, she did go out to talk to the officers, perhaps to give them some additional information.

We'll never be able to ask her, because she is dead from a gunshot wound to the abdomen from close range.

[cwydro]

14. He easily could have shot his partner.

The whole thing is mind-boggling.

[MineralMan]

16. Yes, he could have.

Also, discharging a firearm inside an automobile is never a good idea. Just the noise of the firing can permanently damage hearing. It's incredibly loud. He couldn't see what he was shooting at well, either. Think about looking out the driver's window of a car from the passenger seat. The view is poor and obstructed. I can't imagine he could see much of the person he shot at.

It was a stupid reaction shot with no consideration given at all to the actual situation.

Think about it: The woman had called 911 about what she thought was a sexual assault in the alley. She heard a scream, from what I understand. Almost certainly, the assaulter was a man, not a woman, based on the probabilities. So, the cops pulled up, and a woman approached the car. It makes no sense at all.

[cwydro]

20. It really is beyond belief.

I've not been impressed with the mayor either, who seems to give mealy-mouthed non-replies to questions.

I don't understand how this cop is allowed not to speak with authorities without being fired. If I were to commit some transgression at work, I would expect them to question me about it. I would fully expect to be fired if I refused to answer.

This whole thing is so strange.

[MineralMan]

22. Well, he likely faces criminal charges, so is remaining silent.

Any attorney would advise that, I'm sure. As for firing, that's a good thing to bring up. As is typical, he's on "paid administrative leave." Firing a cop can be complicated, unfortunately, but I think it's justified here. However this turns out, he doesn't appear to have the judgment required to be a police officer, I'd think.

But, the police union and contract make it very difficult to summarily fire a police officer. They can't fire him without "due process." They can suspend him, though, or keep him away from active duties.

Mayor Hodges is very frustrated by this incident, but really has no authority to demand anything from the Police. The investigation is being done by the State Department of Criminal Apprehension, our state FBI sort of agency. They do not have to report to the Mayor of Minneapolis or anybody else, so she's somewhat in the dark on this.

Worse, the Chief of Police is out of town on a personal trip. She simply isn't on the scene at all. And that's complicated by tense relationships between the cops and their Chief. She is not universally liked by the officers on her department. It's a complicated situation, and made more complicated by other incidents that have occurred in the past few years.

It is going to take some time before the whole story is told, if it ever is.

One thing I can guarantee, though: This shooting is going to cost the City of Minneapolis millions of dollars to settle. How many millions remains to be seen, but the civil suit in this case is going to be a huge one. It's not a good thing for the city.

[cwydro]

23. I didn't realize you were in the area.

That's good to know. Is it getting a lot of press there?

Please keep us posted.

[MineralMan]

24. Press? Oh, yes. It's the topic of the week, and

will be for some time to come. It leads the local news and has "team coverage." The Mayor held a news conference last night, and blivets of it were on the morning news shows.

I'll try to update, but there just isn't much real information emerging. The only witnesses so far are the two cops, and only one of them has talked to investigators. What was said hasn't really been revealed, except that the driver reported a "loud noise" as they arrived on the scene.

[cwydro]

43. Ok, thanks.

Yeah, I'm hearing that much on CNN.

Btw, I love that word "blivets"!

[nadine_mn]

51. Ok maybe I have my facts mixed up - but didn't Noor say he would do a press statement

but not answer BCA questions, while his partner is cooperating with the BCA and won't talk to the press out of respect for the family?

Noor also has 2 other disciplinary charges pending investigation. He should not have even been out on a call until that was sorted out, IMO.

The Somali community here is going to face backlash - like any more of that is needed. There is no way Noor can stay on the force - who the hell would want to be partnered with someone who discharges a weapon (w/out warning) next to you in a car?

But of course things are going to be focused on race - because that is easier to get pissy about than the issue of our trigger happy police departments.

[cwydro]

54. Yes, Good post.

You know, I just wouldn't expect this kind of thing from Minnesota. In my mind, it seems a nice placid, safe state. Always want to visit.

But isn't this where Castile was murdered too? What's up with these cops?

[MineralMan]

62. I don't think so. I doubt he is going to talk to anyone.

I have not heard of any planned press statement.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

59. Here's the statement from the BCA:

http://stmedia.startribune.com/documents/1abcanew071917.pdf

[MineralMan]

61. Thanks for posting that!

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

78. There is a statutory limit on damages paid by municipalities.

So it won't cost Minneapolis millions to settle - maybe $1.5m at most, which is the limit on damages for a single incident. Punitive damages are not available. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=466.04

[Mosby]

121. The family could sue in federal court.

http://www.startribune.com/family-of-university-of-minnesota-freshman-who-froze-to-death-in-2013-sue-first-responders/406062016/

[raven mad]

116. I've both heard and read that the BCA there is very, very ethical -

and extremely capable of getting to the bottom of the problem. Not hidebound, red-taped , dogmatists unlike many police departments.

You must be frustrated, because you're a caring human. Yes, it's very, very difficult to fire a cop. Luckily here, there aren't that many who need to be. Of course, there aren't that many, period................ local town or borough, in particular. We rely heavily on our State Troopers!

[WinstonSmith4740]

41. From what I saw on our local news this morning...

He actually reached across his partner's face to shoot. He pretty much discharged his weapon in front of the guy's face. Even I know better than that. Don't they train these guys on anything anymore? We've militarized our police departments, who in turn look at themselves as an occupying force. That makes us the enemy.

[MineralMan]

45. Yes. Very unsafe and stupid.

When I think of how little he could see through the driver's side window from where he was, it seems even more stupid. I doubt either of them would have been able to hear anything for a long time after that shot was fired. The sound must have been painfully loud.

[CharleyDog]

46. Pajamas and guns

"a woman approached the car" in her pajamas!

Police fear civilians because so many guns (and now swords) are in their hands.

[rocktivity]

48. And what HAS his partner had to say about all this?

As I understand it, the victim approached the police car's front driver window and began talking to his partner who as at the wheel -- then the cop pulled his weapon and fired. Are they going to accuse the victim of making a threatening move?


rocktivity

[cwydro]

84. This idiot literally fired his weapon across his partner's face.

I can only imagine what that guy must think.

This Noor fella must be a special kind of stupid.

[tblue37]

88. The BCA report says the other cop, Harrity, said he was startled by a loud noise just as they drove

up, and that Damond approached the car immediately after the sound.

Wanna bet Harrity flinched at the sound and Noor jumped to the conclusion his partner had just been shot and that the (imagined) shooter was charging the car to shoot him, too?

These cops who are always on the edge of full blown panic as they approach any situation interpret every sound and every movement as a deadly attack, and in their terror, they have no control over their hair trigger response.

That is why they shoot immediately without taking even a half second to assess the situation. In their panicked minds, they have already assessed it, and if they don't shoot right away and empty their clips, they will be killed.

[rocktivity]

102. A "loud noise" versus what -- a gunshot?

I find it hard to believe Harrity coudn't tell the difference between the two.


rocktivity

[tblue37]

106. Harrity mentioned the noise and said it startled him and that Damond approached

the car right after they heard the noise. If the noise startled Harrity enough that he flinched, then Noor, in his mindless panic, might have assumed Harrity had been shot.

Harrity's interpretation of the noise doesn't matter, because Noor is the one who shot Damond.

[Lee-Lee]

110. Yeah that doesn't even make sense

In all my training and all my review of tactics the only reason I could see for shooting across your partner is is the person has a gun in his face, is stabbing him, or has their hands around your partners neck.

And it's not a case of mistaking something for a gun. It's awkward and not easy to draw a pistol from a retention holster while seated in a vehicle with a seatbelt on. Much slower than when standing. That would provide more than amble time to better see what the person had an determine their intent.

[tblue37]

111. I bet he already had his gun out as soon as they got there --again, because he was

scared beyond reason and ready to jump at shadows.

[Lee-Lee]

112. And that's horrible tactics

You don't handle your weapon in the car, for many reasons. First it's more dangerous while adding zero tactical advantage.

Second, in the event of a sudden stop or accident-likely in a pursuit and one can begin at any time, if you lose your grasp on the gun it goes flying and ends up in the floorboard or under your feet. That's actually a lesson learned in one of the most studied police shootouts the 1986 Miami FBI shootout where an agent drew his pistol but then was in an accident and the pistol actually flew out of the car.

[rocktivity]

113. But according to another report I read, Damond began conversing with Harrity.

The nature of that conversation will be the test, I guess.


rocktivity

[Lee-Lee]

93. His partner likely now has permanent hearing damage

Multiple gunshots right in front of your face in a car.

It could possibly be bad enough to even force a medical retirement.

[Iggo]

2. "Why are police officers so quick to shoot people who are not police officers?"

They are armed to the teeth and afraid of their own shadows.

(Also, there ain't near enough drug-testing going on.)

[YCHDT]

11. +1

[Lee-Lee]

118. They aren't. When you look at the facts its actually quite rare.

But the media and a lot of activists have conditioned you to believe its happening.

[Proud liberal 80]

3. Which is crazy because

You would think that they would have some type of Rules of Engagement and training. I am in the military and it seems like we are held to higher standard in War against an enemy and bigger threat than these cops are.

[MineralMan]

10. They do have training. But, that takes a back seat

to day to day conversations with fellow cops, I'm sure. Training is good. Training, however, cannot replace common sense, and that seems to be in short supply on many police forces and missing altogether with some who wear the uniform.

[Voltaire2]

21. Training focused on threat suppression.

Rather than de-escalation. There has been a complete shift in focus. This is all part of the militarization of police forces that started with swat and is now pervasive.

[Proud liberal 80]

25. You mentioned militarization

of police forces. But like I said, even in the military we are held to a high standard and just can't go all Willy Nilly Rambo style on people.

[Voltaire2]

35. But the focus is threat suppression.

Not crisis de-escalation.
Police are trained to make shoot don't shoot decisions within a framework of total threat suppression. Once a threat has been identified the goal is to eliminate the threat. In tests police do significantly better than civilians making shoot don't shoot decisions. The problem is that that is essentially the starting point: they are in a hostile environment filled with threats that need to be identified and suppressed.

[Proud liberal 80]

42. I see your point

The military is the same way, once you identify a threat you are allowed to eliminate it. But I guess the ROEs on making that assessment are higher for the military than for police.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

80. They do have rules of engagement training.

Their training tells them it's too late once the item is produced so it's ok to shoot first. If it's a wallet or a cell phone, too bad so sad.

30 plus years of dash cam videos used in training showing cops getting killed in routine stops and the cops are scared of their own shadows. Add blatant racism OR subconscious racism and brown people are 10 times worse off.

Ironically the cops I know are all pro second amen.... err uh... flood the streets with guns. Which I guess is ok in their minds if THEY get to shoot first and ask questions later.

[Sunlei]

8. they're all jittery with fear with their training to freakout at people approaching making noise & c

can't see hands or worse a cell phone in hands becauseee...the person is ON their cell phone WITH police dispatcher.

That's how my friends 19 yr old son got shot dead. He called police, the 2 yr newbie officer shot him because....cell phone in hands talking to dispatcher!

[YCHDT]

12. So did anything happen to the officer in that situation? Sorry for your loss

[Sunlei]

17. family 'forgave' him, I didn't pry-but it was a huge loss of a really nice child-college freshman.

made the news, even the dispatcher recording was in the news.

[MineralMan]

13. Yes, and in this case, the shooter was looking

out the driver's side window from the passenger seat. He couldn't see clearly what was outside of that window at night. He shot a torso that was in the window. He didn't pause to consider anything. He just pulled the trigger.

[tblue37]

89. MM, what do you think of my theory, in post #88 above, about how this might have happened?

If my guess is correct, then maybe Noor figured Harrity had already been shot, so shooting the imagined assailant in such a dangerous way--i.e., right in front of Harrity's face--was justified, even necessary, to prevent Harrity from being "shot" again, and also, of course, to protect Noor himself.

IOW, a hair-trigger, panicked response to an imagined attack and ongoing threat.

[MineralMan]

90. I don't know, really. Too little information.

[Sunlei]

15. have to add its not just the training. off duty they spend TO MUCH time chatting with fellow police

bragging about citizens they deal with, bragging how many bites their vicious dogs have.. makes them all scared for their lives. Makes many of them hate their jobs and many love to hurt people!

[cwydro]

9. K and r.

Thank you for this OP.

[MineralMan]

19. No problem. I've been thinking about this incident,

and have been following it on local news here in the Twin Cities. There's still not a lot of information, and the only account that has been told comes from the cop who was driving. The shooter is exercising his right to remain silent, so we aren't going to hear from him. The victim is dead, so cannot speak.

There are reports that someone on a bicycle was in the area at the time, and they're trying to get that person to come forward and offer whatever information he or she has.

So, I've been going through possible scenarios, but I cannot think of one where such a shooting would be justified, frankly.

[RKP5637]

18. K&R!!! n/t

[iluvtennis]

26. Very well stated!

[MineralMan]

27. Thanks. It's a very frustrating situation,

especially for those of us who live nearby.

[iluvtennis]

32. We feel the pain all the way here in California...these senseless shootings have to stop

[MineralMan]

34. Yes. This has become a national story.

I'm troubled by the extra publicity, though, that is generated because the victim was a white woman. I think all unjustified police shootings should be national news. We need to do something to stop these police killings. It's becoming an epidemic all across the country.

[malaise]

28. It's a mess but this time it will be the race and religion

of the cop not the cop culture of killing civilians. Think Sandra Bland - she was not the bride to be but she was heading for new career opportunities. She was murdered.

[MineralMan]

31. Possibly so, but I'm trying to help people understand

that it's a broader problem than just that. There's no question that police shoot people of color more often. Still, the cop vs. civilian thing is always there. It's all part of the same us vs. them conflict.

[cwydro]

74. I disagree.

As MM stated, this is way beyond race.

The police need to be reined in.

[malaise]

97. Who disagrees with that point?

Not me

[HipChick]

29. They shoot cops in street clothes too..

[MineralMan]

30. That's true. If you're not wearing the uniform,

how can they tell you're a cop?

[HipChick]

40. We have had two local incidents of this happening...pretty sad

[MineralMan]

64. It often seems to happen when an off-duty cop

gets involved in a situation and is not recognized by uniformed cops. Dangerous stuff.

[uponit7771]

38. +1

[genxlib]

33. I think

A big part of it is gun culture.

They react as if everyone is a threat so they are twitchy in a way that they did not used to be.

If everyone they encounter might have a gun, every move they make is a possible threat.

Fear Is the enemy and the likelihood of guns just makes them fear everyone. It is infinitely worse for POC because of the ingrained attitudes of fear that starts the baseline even higher.

Beyond that the training has become overly aggressive. As noted above, they are taught to neutralize. Once they decide to shoot, they shoot to kill.

Combine those two things and we get a lot of unnecessary deaths.

[MineralMan]

37. Yes, that plays a role, too, I'm sure.

In any case, we need to raise the alarm and try to find a way to prevent this kind of senseless shooting by the police. I don't have any answers, though, just questions.

[ms liberty]

36. Well said, MM

The ultimate problem is that we excuse cops poor performance and behavior, because "their job is so dangerous" but we - and they - expect civilians to perform flawlessly under the same trying and confusing circumstances. I think we should expect better from cops than civilians, since they're allegedly the professionals and should be getting specialized training in dealing with these situations.

[MineralMan]

39. Exactly.

Our system has failed to give police officers enough reason not to react to everything with extreme violence. The attitude is that they're cops, so they always get a pass if something goes wrong. Once we stop giving them that pass, they'll be forced to think longer before pulling the trigger.

Far too many people are shot and killed, despite their presenting no immediate threat to the police.

[yallerdawg]

44. Arm everyone to the teeth and this is what you get.

If we assume everyone around us has a gun, we live in perpetual fear, panic and paranoia. Not "security."

If everyone has a gun, when something happens ('loud noise') the typical reaction would be to shoot.

In fact, anything alarming or unexpected (like reaching for an ID) would be expected to be responded with a 'shoot first' reaction - another meaning to the term "First" Responders.

[MineralMan]

49. I agree completely. However,

given the reality, training for police officers in the use of deadly force really, really needs to be vastly improved. There are just too many instances of completely unjustified shootings by police.

Not everyone thinks of the danger when interacting with police officers, either. They should, though. The problem is that most people rarely, if ever, actually deal with the police. And, by the same token, the police often deal primarily with people who present some danger to them.

That combination of factors makes every interaction with the police potentially dangerous.

[Hoyt]

104. Excellent Point. If I were a policeperson, I wouldn't trust anyone coming up to the car. Way too

Way too many armed "citizens" nowadays. I do think the officer involved should be dismissed. He's demonstrated he's too quick on the trigger and dismissive of citizens' lives.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

47. Aren't more people of color more likely to be shot?

I don't think we need to dismiss race so quickly.

[MineralMan]

50. Yes, they are, but the risk is far from limited

to people of color. I'm not dismissing race as a factor in police shootings, but it was not in play in this particular police shooting. The shooter was black. The woman was white, but that was not the factor in why the person was shot, I'm sure, at least this time.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

55. I get that it wasn't a factor here. But it's kind of Stats 101

It's like saying that one had an uncle that didn't wear his seatbelt and that allowed him to be thrown from the car and survive the explosion so wearing your seatbelt isn't important. Just because you can find a few examples that contradict the correlation doesn't mean the correlation doesn't exist. Just that it isn't at 1.

[MineralMan]

58. I think we're probably looking at the situation from

two different positions, really. For a lot of people with white privilege, recognizing excessive use of force by police isn't really part of their general view of law enforcement. Increasingly, though, I think it needs to be.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

75. Of course it needs to be

But doesn't it seem like white privilege to say "Oh, look, they shoot white people, too, so it's not about race." There is a problem of racial shootings by the police. The statistics bear that out. Seems to me it's best to leave the anomalies as they are--anomalies.

Are there a lot of police officers that are just generally power hungry assholes? Of course.

[Lee-Lee]

124. Actually, no. That is the media and anti-cop narrative, but actual studies show it to not be true

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/study_police_are_no_more_likely_to_shoot_at_blacks_than_whites_but_blacks_g/

Now, it does show other uses of force are more likely against people of color, and I think there are probably several explanations there to include conscious and subconscious bias on the part of police, cultural difference on how people of different backgrounds react to police, the different responses based on the level of violence in different neighborhoods, and even cultural differences in how people communicate.

But the facts show people of color are in fact not more likely to be shot by police.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

130. Not completely sure of the methodology of that study

but this is a possible problem "Fryer wanted to also study situations that could provoke a justified police shooting, rather than cases in which a shooting occurred."

What about the unjustified shootings? And how do those compare.

[Lee-Lee]

131. Well, it's hard to study what happens in fairly small numbers

and get a trend.

One thing that is required for a study to be valid is a large enough sample size. Without a sizable sample of data one or two outliers can skew it.

How many actual wrongful/unjustified shootings do you think happen in a year? Is there enough data to do a valid study?

[TygrBright]

52. With respect, MM... while I agree this is at the core of ALL police-on-citizen violence...

...with respect to this SPECIFIC incident, I believe there's a decades-long history of shitty culture in the Minneapolis Police Department that needs to be nailed to the flagpole, loudly and publicly.

In spite of periodic efforts at cultural reform under various mayors and city councils, the Minneapolis Police Dept has a record of deeply-rooted bunker mentality, entrenched us-vs-them thinking, racism and misogyny that has pervaded every chain of command in every division for decades.

And although I am a deep believer in the positive power of unions and their role in protecting workers, the MPD Federation is obstinately determined to protect and perpetuate this culture in the name of protecting "their" officers. Between MPDF and the division-level leadership protecting each other and their own, officers keep getting away with all kinds of shit.

Now add in the man-bites-dog aspect of a rookie brown-skinned officer killing a blonde white woman and the wagon-circling is going far into Bizarro Galaxy, but the one place they WILL NOT GO is into the systemic cultural us-vs-them mentality that pervades officer recruitment, selection, training, supervision, and disciplinary processes.

MPD isn't the only police department to have this problem, certainly. But in Minnesota, they are the big turd in the punchbowl. St. Paul PD, for all its issues, has always been a little more successful at community-centric policing.

DON'T get me started on the exact opposite juxtaposition of the Twin Cities' Fire Departments, but suffice to say maybe MPD could learn a thing or two from their Fire Department, which has done a better job with staff management and organizational culture overall. And St. Paul Police could certainly teach their city's asshole Fire Department executive management a thing or two on the same topics.

In short, it's a LEADERSHIP issue, and that's where I'd start.

But yeah, the overall firearms discipline training and supervision also needs heavy-duty attention and rigorous upgrading.

diffidently,
Bright

[MineralMan]

56. I don't disagree with you regarding the MPD.

It has some real problems with its mindset. I live in St. Paul, which has its own problems with over-authoritative police behavior, but nothing quite as severe as seems to be present in Minneapolis. The current chief of the MPD has a real problem with respect from her force, which seems to dislike her quite a good deal. I don't follow MPD news that closely, since I am actually rarely in that city, but I know that there is serious friction between their chief and senior management within the department.

I don't know what the solution for that will be, but I know that there needs to be some shaking up going on down the chain of authority. There are real problems in a city that has its own set of unique problems that vary from district to district. I'm sure those problems are similar in many large cities.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

76. Both the mayor and the police chief are women.

And the chief is an out lesbian. I suspect that they don't mix well with the macho, testosterone-fueled culture of the MPD.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

53. I would take issue with your statement "the problem isn't race."

Black men get shot by police more often than any other identifiable group of people. This strongly indicates that at least a large part of the problem is race, because the cops, whether consciously or subconsciously, tend to see black men as more of a threat than other people. The notion that there is a threat that needs to be resolved instantly by shooting the threat is tied into that racism. In some cases there is an actual, immediate danger but in many cases there is not. The frequency of these shootings suggest a real problem with both training (to recognize a real threat vs. something harmless) and mind-set.

Some 25 years ago I knew a few Minneapolis cops who were friends of a friend. These guys are certainly retired by now, but I distinctly recall a comment one of them made (laughingly): "There are just two classes of people: cops and assholes." This does reflect an attitude that still seems to exist almost everywhere: Civilians are presumptively assholes. The police shoot black men more than they shoot other people, but they also quite regularly shoot mentally ill people who are acting out because they aren't trained to deal with the "threat" their behavior seems to pose except by shooting or tasing them. There is little training in de-escalation.

I do know that officers go through training that involves shooting or not shooting at "friend or foe" targets in simulated situations that have become pretty realistic. But that's never the same as the real world. Also, the cop who shot Philandro Castile had recently attended a voluntary "Bulletproof Warrior" training session in which the trainees were taught to assume all interactions with civilians are dangerous. This attitude, I think, is the essence of the problem. Read more here: http://www.startribune.com/officer-in-castile-case-attended-bulletproof-warrior-training/386717431/

[MineralMan]

60. I believe that the core problem isn't one of race.

I believe the core problem is one of authority figures vs. others. It is more often expressed through violence against people of color, which has given people with white privilege reason to pay little attention to the problem. I'd like to change that and have everyone recognize the problem of giving a small segment of the population the authority to use deadly force, whether justified or not.

Perhaps I should have written, "The problem isn't just race."

[cwydro]

63. Agreed.

Spot on.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

67. That might be a more accurate assessment

and it squares pretty well with the remark the Minneapolis cop made about cops vs. assholes. An authoritarian state of mind combined with paranoid and/or inadequate training leads to people getting shot. Add racism to the mix and black people will especially get shot. But what gets an unarmed white woman shot? We haven't heard the cop's explanation yet, and the police federation is unusually quiet. I don't know how you explain this one.

Yesterday I had to go to the 5th Precinct, the same precinct where the shooting occurred, to file a police report (and that's a whole 'nother story, having to do with asshole neighbors). There was a TV truck in the parking lot but no other unusual activity. The officer who took my report was very nice and helpful, and I wasn't worried about getting shot. But I can just imagine how weird things must be in the back offices right now.

[MineralMan]

69. I have had occasion to call the police a few times

to report suspected criminal activity in my St. Paul neighborhood. Each time, I had interactions with the responding officers. I am very careful in such situations, and immediately identify myself as the one who called to report the incident. I do that from a distance, before approaching the officers.

Any time I'm dealing with armed police officers, I am careful. Unless it is absolutely necessary, I do not approach them at all. Typically, my interactions have taken place after they have dealt with whatever situation I called them for.

I realize that they do not know who I am unless I tell them. So, I make it clear immediately.

In other situations, like a traffic stop, I use even more caution. However, I can't actually remember when I was last pulled over by a cop. It was many, many years ago.

[cwydro]

87. I'm a petite white woman, and I am careful too.

Like you, I've not been pulled over in years, but if it were to happen, I'd be as cautious as possible.

Very sad that we have to feel this way. I still cannot understand people who run from the cops (as in the case in SC) or try to cause trouble during the traffic stop. I give them exactly what they ask for and nothing more.

[Lee-Lee]

120. In order to have government, you must have representative of that government authorized to use force

Your notion that "giving a small segment of the population the authority to use deadly force" is a problem ignores the fact that you must do that for government to exist and work.

Government, at its core, is force used to maintain order and carry out the tasks the people want it to. There is nothing, no task and no law, that government does that isn't, at the very base, backed up by those government representatives authorized to use force.

Taxation can't exist without penalties for noncompliance enforced by people authorized to use force. Nothing is funded without that.

You can't have zoning and building codes unless force is used to evict those who refuse to comply.

You can't have antitrust law without force being an option to shut down companies and force compliance.

You can't have minimum standards for what insurance companies provide without a mechanism to forcefully shut down those that don't meet the minimum.

Quite literally every time anyone has ever said "we need a law that says XXX" what they have really said is "we need to give a small segment of the population the authority to use deadly force to make sure people do XXX". From everything as bog as the rich paying their taxes to as small as prohibiting the sale of loose cigarettes, that is what every law is.

Because without that small segment of the population authorized to use force behind them laws are just suggestions.

[Ligyron]

57. and they empty the entire clip into them too.

Make sure they are good and dead I guess?

[MineralMan]

65. That's part of their training.

Shooting someone once is no assurance of ending a threat, so they are trained to keep shooting. That can lead to some pretty gruesome things happening, as we have seen.

[cwydro]

66. Was she shot more than once?

So little info on this.

God, it's awful.

[MineralMan]

68. I don't know about this particular case.

I have not seen anything about multiple shots, though. After being deafened by the intitial shot, it may be that the shooter decided not to do that again. I have fired a pistol from inside a car just once. I would never do that again. I couldn't hear anything for a long time after that.

Incredibly loud and actually painful.

[cwydro]

70. Yes, I learned to shoot as a kid with my dad.

Never shot from inside a car, but I HATE loud noises and guns make loud noises. Cannot imagine what that cop was thinking to do that.

I wear ear protection when shooting anything other than a 22.

I really am not a big fan of guns, but living on 26 acres in rural NC means one must have at least a rifle. I don't like predators after my chickens or geese.

Even with that said, I have only had to kill two creatures in the last five years. A raccoon who was killing the chickens and a snake whom I literally had to unwrap from one of my ducks as it was being constricted. I gave the snake a chance. Set him loose. When he came back on the same mission, I had to dispatch him. Didn't use a gun though, just an ax.

[MineralMan]

72. The time I shot from inside a car was to kill a rabid skunk

when I was working on a citrus farm. I carried a pistol because I was always running into rattlesnakes in places I had to put my hands. My ears rang for days. Still, I was not about to get near that skunk on foot.

[cwydro]

73. Don't blame you one bit.

You know, it's odd, I was just saying to a friend how I never see or smell skunks anymore.

When I lived in the NC mountains, my dogs ALWAYS found them lol. And as a kid, when we came from the city out here to our farm property, I always knew they were around.

But lately, I've never seen or smelled a skunk on the property. Not complaining lol, but it seems odd. Maybe they don't live in this area anymore.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

71. Apparently only once. Here's the BCA news release:

http://stmedia.startribune.com/documents/1abcanew071917.pdf

[cwydro]

79. Thanks for posting that.

God, it makes it even more real and horrid.

I truly don't understand how her family is dealing with that.

[captain queeg]

77. I suppose because there are so many guns out there nowadays

I hate to say it, but I was reading an old article about the Spokane, WA police force in the old days. The cops were all over 6 ft and it was common practice when dealing with a trouble maker to take him to the edge of town and beat the shit out of him. I am not endorsing that (though getting a beating is probably a better option than getting shot), but even when I was a kid the state patrol where I lived had a requirement for officers to be over 6 ft. How many fat, out of shape cops have you seen who would neither be able to subdue or even protect themselves from a unruly suspect. For so many cops today taser or even deadly force is their only option.

I guess when so many people have guns it makes the cop being physically imposing irrelevant.

[moondust]

81. Not all states are perpetual war zones.

The firearm death rate for Minnesota in 2015 was 7th lowest. Virtually all the bottom 10 are blue states while the top 10 are red states (that really, really, really, really love their gunz and ammo). Thus the fear factor in many states is fairly low, though still too high AFAIC.

I also wonder how much it affects the attitudes of cops in general when judges and juries repeatedly let cops off the hook for killing innocents.

[MineralMan]

83. I think the result of the lack of conviction is that it confirms

the belief on the part of the police that they can do as they wish. I think that's a mistake, but juries regularly find cops not guilty or end up with hung juries.

[uponit7771]

86. Which makes one wonder why some LEO's are afraid of their own shadows !?!?!

[bullsnarfle]

82. I would like to make another point,

one that really pisses me off. From the news accounts, both officers were wearing body cams. Both were turned off. The car was equipped with dash-cam. It was turned off.

What the hell good does it do to spend beau-coup amounts of taxpayer money for this technology, when the rat bastards will just turn it off to get away with anything (including murder). I think they should BOTH be suspended, immediately and indefinitely, for not having the damn cameras turned on in the first place. And that goes for any and every other cop found to be circumventing the process by leaving their cameras off.

[cwydro]

91. Yep.

It should be a fireable offense to have your body cam off.

[Lee-Lee]

98. You need body cams that can be left on then

Most are actually not capable of running a full 8 or 12 hour shift because of battery and memory limitations.

[cwydro]

103. Good point.

I appreciate your perspective here for the police.

I'm not a cop-hater. To my way of thinking, the body cams also will protect the police officers wearing them,

[Lee-Lee]

108. Absolutely. I wish body cams existed when I was doing the job

Video footage clears an officer in a complaint around 95% of the time. When dash cams first came out and people were not really aware of them you had around half of the people registering complaints who immediately dropped the complaint upon learning there was video.

I actually purchased out of my own pocket one of the micro cassette recorders in the 90's, it was around $150 then, and around 2000 when the first digital ones came out I paid about $200 for one that could do 2 hours. But recording situations where I thought a dispute may come up more than once changed what would have been a long pain in the ass investigation based on what I said versus what they said to an open and shut case by producing audio.

[Lee-Lee]

95. Most body cameras out there can't record a full shift

The technology isn't out there widely yet to have a camera that can be small enough to be wearable and has the storage and battery life to last a full 8 or 12 hour shift.

Think about how long your GoPro will run. Can you get 12 hours of quality video on and SD card?

Those that claim to often will only at super low resolution that is worse than a 90's cell phone.

Newer really expensive ones are finally coming around that can, but most places don't have them and don't have the budget to them.

So for most agencies the reality is having to deal with turning them on and off as needed. And then means errors where people forget and lost footage when things happen suddenly.

[bullsnarfle]

137. First off ---

then why did they have the dash cam turned off? In fact, why do so many cops, so much of the time, purposely turn off the dash cam? Your battery excuse won't wash there, it's hard-wired into the car for God's sake.

And why are you automatically giving these guys a pass "Oh, nothing they did wrong, it was because of the batteries"? How do you know it was a battery issue? How do you know they didn't just say "Screw this body cam crap" and turn the thing off?

I know they can't have it on all the time. I realize people have to use the bathroom. Heck, no reason for them to run it during lunch. Or when they are sitting in the station doing paperwork. But when you are going into what obviously looks like it might be a hairy situation wouldn't that be a really good time to turn your cam on? At least one of the cops if not both? They are riding together, if "battery life" is such an issue how about each of them have one on 1/2 the time?

It's easy to make "battery" excuses, but too many cops are getting clean away with murder and it cannot be allowed to continue.

[Lee-Lee]

138. Well on all of that

I do t know how their dash cam system is configured as there are many variations, but most do not allow the officers to turn it on or off. Rather it is connected to the blue light system and automatically comes on and starts recording when the lights are turned on. Most newer ones have a buffer system around 30 seconds that is continually refreshing and so when you flip the blue lights on you get everything from 30'seconds before that until then.

Since this doesn't sound like the kind of call you would have lights activated while you drive trough and investigate if the agency set up the dash cams to only come on when the blue lights were on that would explain it.

But, as I said, I don't know how their systems are setup so I can't say if it was malfeasance or just how the city set the systems up. And guess what- you don't know either and you seem to know very little about how dash cams work so your leaping to the conclusion that it must be a sign or corruption or misconduct is based on just ignorance and not facts, coupled with your own obvious biases.

As for the cams, they said the department policy was turn them on whenever it looked like they would make contact with the suspect of an investigation or as soon as possible after. So typically that would be when you exit your vehicle, and that's probably how they had conditioned themselves to doing it. Keeping one person on at a time would be impractical for many reasons, including you don't know when your going to suddenly be involved in an hours long situation that needs them and if you just ran most of your battery off just driving around it's useless.

I am all for officers having cams that have good enough memory and battery life to run a full shift. Taxpayers in every city should demand it and be willing to properly fund the departments to buy them. But most are not, they like the idea of Jody cams in theory but say it might mean higher taxes for good ones and taxpayers and city councils who set the budget suddenly are ok with the "good enough we can get for less" so you end up like this.


If I had my way body cams would be good enough for a full shift and only turned off for bathroom breaks and sensitive situations like interviews with sexual assault or domestic violence victims. And I would go a step past that and require them to log in with dispatch when they are turned off and back on so it's on record of any periods it's off and also to serve as a reminder to turn them back on.

But I don't have my way. The technology is what it is and how much money taxpayers and city councils are willing to pay for the technology is what it is- so you don't have what we want. It is what it is. What it isn't is some sign of misconduct or conspiracy or malfeasance or anything else your attempting to imply or presume with no evidence.

[WinkyDink]

85. As to your premise statement: You hope. You believe. You trust. But you cannot know. Only the

shooter knows.

It is best for society for you to be correct. But there exists, for good or ill, the possibility that you are not correct.

[Lee-Lee]

92. Your premise is flawed to some degree, and your concern overblown

Yes, the police do see every interaction on a call as a possible threat. Because there are officers attacked and killed more often than everyone here understands. I'm sure some reading this are already starting to type about how police line of duty deaths are down and that it's not the most dangerous profession- but that's only part of the story. Police deaths are down not because there are fewer attacks on police, assaults on officers are actually rising. What accounts for the drop is that you have better body armor and it's worn 100%, you have medical care my better that makes wounds more survivable, and you have police tactics that make those attacks on police more survivable.

It's a double edged sword. Police deaths are down in part because they are so cautious and treat every stop and interaction as a potential threat. But people use the fact that deaths are down to say they shouldn't be more cautious.

It's a far more complex problem than the police mindset. That mindset is there as a result of real and actual threats and problems officers face every day. If they become complacent they are more likely to be seriously injured or killed.

Now, is more and better training on use of force needed? 100% absolutely. We should all push for that in our communities. But, that costs money. Most people will say they want better trained police but when asked to pay more taxes to fund that they don't want it. They say they want better quality officers recruited but when they are asked to pay more to recruit a better quality and more educated officer they don't want it. They want everything and want to pay for nothing- and you get what you pay for.


That said, you have to keep things in perspective. How many police shootings that are not justified are there in a given week? Less than one. There are 775,000 sworn police officers in the US. If each one works a 40 hour week they will probably interact with 100 people that week. That is over 75 million police interactions a week. While every wrongful death at the hands of police is a tragedy, statistically it's not the problem activists and the media are leading you to believe it is.

To compare it, there are around 800,000 doctors in the USA. Doctors will probably interact with the same number of patients in a week as a police officer does people. Medical errors kill 250,000 people a year in the USA. That is 4800 per week.

In contrast, the total number of people shot by police- in talking even the most clear cut and justified of shootings- in 2016 was 963.

So medical errors kill the same amount of people every 36 hours as the police kill- including justifiable shootings that make up most of that number- in and entire year.

But have you been conditioned by the media to fear every intersection with the health care system? It's more than 250 times more likely to kill you than the police are? And if you only count police errors it's 2500 more times likely to kill you with its error. If not, why not? What does that tell you about how the media and some activist groups have been manipulating your perceptions and emotions?

Wrongful police shootings from police errors, while
Each one tragic, are less than 100 a year even in the most worst of years. Medical errors kill over 250,000 a year. Why is there all the focus on one?

Given that cops receive a fraction of the public that doctors and nurses do in most areas, it should be seen as remarkable that they as a profession have a fatal error rate that is 2500 times lower.

Keep it in perspective, people.

[MineralMan]

94. And yet, an innocent young woman is dead at the hands of the police.

How many unjustified homicides do you think there need to be for you to be concerned?

I propose that there is no number that is small enough that is greater than zero.

So, thanks for your reply, but I remain unconvinced that its OK that that young woman is now dead.

[Lee-Lee]

96. I never said what you are claiming I did

Sure, be concerned.

But also keep your concern in perspective.

The fatal error rate for police is 1/2500th of medical professionals.

We should always shoot for perfect. But in any endeavor undertaken by humans there will never, ever be perfection.

If your going to bash the police overall because they can never achieve a standard that is never achieved in anything ever done by humans, while they actually keep a remarkably low fatal error rate, it will show your concern isn't actually about those errors but just to generally bash law enforcement.

[jmg257]

99. Bottom line Lee - there is NO justification for what happened. None.

Don't have to be anti-police to see that.

Noor fucked up - on purpose, or by accident, or due to some unjustifiable reason - but he murdered that girl.

[Lee-Lee]

100. There absolutely is no justification for that event

I don't disagree one bit. I tend to give more benefit of doubt to police than anyone else on this board and don't disagree with you one bit on this case.

But that doesn't mean there is a huge systemic problem in the nations police because of a few events. There are more fatal errors commited in half a day by medical professionals than fatal errors by police in a year in this nation. To use this as an example to paint all police with a broad brush is wrong, justa s wrong as when right wingers use an incident of terrorist to paint all Muslims with a broad brush and start talking about how there is a systemic problem in the religion.

[jmg257]

101. Agreed. Cheers!

Stay safe.

[cwydro]

126. Yes.

I'm not anti-police, but this case seems obvious.

[Hoyt]

105. Why is it that gun toters almost always support shooters, whether it's policeman shooting an unarmed

person, or a George Zimmerman type citizen?

[Lee-Lee]

109. Why is it that gun haters always resort to trite stereotypes

And seem to think every gun owner is George Zimmerman?

[cwydro]

114. Ignore them.

Many of us appreciate your input and experience.

[NutmegYankee]

115. Countless examples where you are wrong - yet you still make the claim

[Hoyt]

122. Should have posted just a few examples.

[cwydro]

107. Kick.

This story seems to have been forgotten by CNN.

[Blue_Tires]

117. This one outlier notwithstanding,

it usually *IS* about race, 95% of the time...

[Lee-Lee]

119. I just saw where the officer who shot had 21 months on the job and his partner just a year

Now my criticism of this may be off because of my experience, I never had the luxury of riding with a partner once I was past training. My department had 5 officers per shift (only 4 half the time because of vacations, sick time, court days and training that took people off shift) to cover 500 square miles so we rode solo once we were past our FTO period.

But if you have an agency with the manpower and budget to have two person cars it would make much more sense to have partners paired with differing levels of experience. You learn a lot on your first 1-5 years from the more experienced officers. Two inexperienced officers riding together are just learning together and can often be setting up bad habits. The guy with 9 more months experience isn't a mentor. One experienced paramedic was once talking to me about how a local EMS agency had lost all its experienced people, and in his words "when the freshmen are all learning from the sophomores you are setting yourself for long term problems" and that fits here too.

I am curious if this speaks to more systemic problems in the agency with leadership, or maybe high turnover and a lack of experienced officers.

[cwydro]

123. Kicking again. nt

[cpamomfromtexas]

125. You got that right!

No accountability and this just keeps on happening!

[Thrill]

127. Why are you a cop if you're that scared being out there

How are you supposed to help people that call you for help if you're scared as shit yourself.

It must be too easy to become a cop

[YCHDT]

128. Right!!!

[MineralMan]

129. Well, I'm not a cop, so I have no first-hand experience

of that doing that job feels like. I also don't know how applicants are selected or trained in any real detail. So, I can't really comment on your reply with any accuracy.

[Lee-Lee]

132. Feel free to apply and find out.

I say that because there is no blanket answer. It varies state to state on what the minimum state standards are and agency to agency on how competitive it is.

When I applied for my job there were 212 applicants for 4 openings. I couldn't even apply until after completing Basic Law Enforcement Training at the local community college, the equivalent of the academy here except it's done before your hired in most cases and your not paid to attend. Of my BLET class we started with 22, graduated 14, and 10 of us got first time passes on the state exam. 3 of those 10 never got jobs in the field because they proved themselves to be assholes or unreliable during the class and none of the instructors would give them a recommendation- the way it is structured it's a 3 month job interview as well as training in many ways because they see who and what you are.

But, in other states and other areas the system can be totally different.

[Thrill]

134. I think being a cop is a lot like being in the military

It takes a certain type of person. A fearless person. If you're shooting people that are coming for help or a person reaching for their ID, you don't have the right temperament. Being a cop isn't for you.

Just like if you don't have the courage to have bullets flying all around you. Being in the military isn't for you

[Lee-Lee]

135. Military vets are actually shown to use force less when they become cops

Because they have faced more stressfull, more dangerous situations or at least spent years training for and simulating them.

When you have spent a year in some foreign country with rockets shot at you and IEDs a constant threat a single person with a knife is still a real danger and very stressfull, but it isn't nearly as much so than if you have spent 4 years in college where the most stress was a pregnancy scare and finals and then just a few months in training.

[Decoy of Fenris]

133. Cops (generally) become cops in order to "protect and serve".

Now, let me preface by saying that no, not all cops are good cops or have altruistic or charitable intent. That said, every cop I know joined the force so they could help people in need. Some joined to serve their country in a way that wasn't active duty military. Some joined -because- they were military and the two are fairly similar. The common goal of "Helping people" was the primary driving variable, no matter what the -why- is.

The problem arises when a police officer is exposed, through active duty, to many threatening situations. Even in something as routine as a traffic stop, there is always a chance that there's a lunatic behind the wheel who will try to shoot you, stab you, drive off, or any number of other horrific options. Look at the case in New York recently, where the police officer was executed simply for being a cop. Recently, there was another case where a cop arriving to solve a domestic dispute was shot and killed. He died bleeding into his lungs, suffocating in his own blood, and alone. Once you don that uniform, you have a target placed firmly in the center of your chest, no matter how well-meaning you are.

Police are scared because for every bad cop story you hear, fifteen or twenty good cops die in the line of duty. They know this. So yes, that makes your average run-of-the-mill cop scared. Despite that fear, they continue to go out day after day, arguably risking their lives, to make sure the rest of us aren't injured or killed -instead- of them. That is an almost textbook definition of "Courage", if you're wondering.


A buddy of mine was just rejected from being a cop. It's his life's ambition, because he thinks that he can do a ton of good in that line of duty. Help people. He gave up his old job, put in months and months of physical training, took several college courses of legalism, and he -still- didn't make the cut. He's trying again next month, even though he's almost completely out of money to live. He does this in the hope that some day, he can put on the uniform and help make America a safer place. While I can't say if the same is true where you live, I'm certain that it's not "too easy" by any stretch where my friend lives.

[Lee-Lee]

136. Very well said

It's not an easy process. People who want it for the wrong reasons are generally weeded out well before they pass all the hurdles.

Do some bad apples make it through? Absolutely. And that will always happen because we recruit our police from our society and applicants can come from all aspects of society with all of societies problems. You set up processes to try and eliminate the bad apples, but nothing done by humans is ever perfect.