lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: Al Sharpton Arrested at Protest in NYC
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Sorry, this thread is closed. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 05-07-2008, 08:15 PM   #1
JediAthos
Senior Member
 
JediAthos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,438
Current Game: Defiance
Forum Veteran Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
Al Sharpton Arrested at Protest in NYC

NEW YORK - The Rev. Al Sharpton was arrested at the Brooklyn Bridge on Wednesday as he and hundreds of demonstrators blocked traffic to protest the acquittal of three detectives in the 50-bullet shooting of an unarmed black man on his wedding day.
ADVERTISEMENT

Sharpton, two survivors of the shooting and the slain man's fiancee were among about a dozen people arrested on disorderly conduct charges near the base of the bridge. Police led away demonstrators at several other bridges and tunnels in the city.

The protests were part of a coordinated campaign to urge federal authorities to investigate the November 2006 shooting of Sean Bell. Three officers were acquitted of state charges last month.

Sharpton, shooting survivors Trent Benefield and Joseph Guzman, and Bell's fiancee, Nicole Paultre Bell, lined up and peacefully put their hands behind their backs as police put plastic handcuffs on them. Sharpton and Bell were placed in a police vehicle.

The civil rights leader is seeking a federal civil rights probe into Bell's shooting outside a Queens nightclub. The case raised questions about police use of deadly force in minority neighborhoods.

Sharpton had promised recently to "close this city down" with civil disobedience.

Bell was black, as are his friends Benefield and Guzman; the three officers acquitted in the case are Hispanic, black and white.

U.S. attorney spokesman Robert Nardoza said the case was under review, but he declined to comment further.


(Source: AP via Yahoo.com)


Has anyone been following this story? What is your opinion on the officers acquittal? What is your opinion on Al Sharpton?


"You'll find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

JediAthos is offline   you may:
Old 05-07-2008, 08:29 PM   #2
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Source
Sharpton had promised recently to "close this city down" with civil disobedience.
Apparently he's confused as to what "civil disobedience" means
Achilles is offline   you may:
Old 05-07-2008, 08:46 PM   #3
*Don*
Rookie
 
*Don*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Compton
Posts: 205
The officers definitely did not deserve to be acquitted on all charges.
They should have at least been charged with something....
At any rate, I think Sharpton's trying to follow in MLK's footsteps with "civil disobedience" but I agree with Achilles when I say that he's definitely confused about the definition of civil disobedience itself.


"Any fool with a d*ck can make a child, but it takes a real man to raise one..."
- Boyz N The Hood
*Don* is offline   you may:
Old 05-07-2008, 08:57 PM   #4
JediAthos
Senior Member
 
JediAthos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,438
Current Game: Defiance
Forum Veteran Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
I agree Don...I think excessive use of force at the very least. Fifty bullets seems like a lot to me, but on the other hand I'm not a cop and I wasn't there.


"You'll find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

JediAthos is offline   you may:
Old 05-07-2008, 09:54 PM   #5
Arcesious
Trolololololololololololo
 
Arcesious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NE
Posts: 1,876
Current Game: Mass Effect
Yeah... 50 Bullets... What kind of gun was being used? If it was a handgun(I don't know the details very well), then I'd say that is was excessive... Because you have to reload before you can belt off 50 bullets with a handgun... It only takes one bullet to kill- and policemen should be trained to have a good aim... I think that this was deliberate, and those policemen deserve to be punished.


Please feed the trolls. XD
Arcesious is offline   you may:
Old 05-07-2008, 10:03 PM   #6
*Don*
Rookie
 
*Don*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Compton
Posts: 205
In fact, there was a report on CNN where they said that one of the officers actually stopped and reloaded his weapon and proceed to empty the clip into Bell once again.
If that isn't excessive force, I don't know what is.


"Any fool with a d*ck can make a child, but it takes a real man to raise one..."
- Boyz N The Hood
*Don* is offline   you may:
Old 05-07-2008, 10:12 PM   #7
Boba Rhett
I Slay Dragons
 
Boba Rhett's Avatar
 
Status: Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Man-Room in Missouri
Posts: 13,805
Current Game: Scrolling Eldery
LFN Staff Member 10 year veteran! LF Jester Helpful! 
It's been a while since this was discussed. As I recall it was five officers firing their handguns at three men in a car. Yes, one of the officers did reload but it wasn't as if he was standing over one of the men continuously plinking him. He was continuing to shoot at movement in the car. Having fifty shots fired in a very short amount of time isn't that ridiculous in such a situation. I think Bell was actually only struck four times in the hail of gunfire.

As for the "reverened" Mr. Sharpton; when I'm thinking of an abject buffoon in a suit, I'm usually thinking of him.
Boba Rhett is offline   you may:
Old 05-07-2008, 10:14 PM   #8
SilentScope001
May The Force Serve You.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,236
It does not matter if the guy is actually guilty. The courts declare him innocent, and the Consitution prevent the guy from being retired except there is new evidence. He may be guilty, but that's why Rev. Al Sharpton is a Reverend...there's God to punish injustice.

There's no real reason why to shut down the city, since the courts cannot go against the Consitution and try him again. Once the criminal is declared innocent, he will be seen as innocent, no matter what.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Onion
"The Cambodian government has established many exciting-sounding 're-education camps' where both intellectuals and everyday citizens can be sent at any time," Day said. Well, we at Barnes & Noble have always supported re-education in America, and we intend to extend this policy to our new customers." For every hardcover book sold, Barnes & Noble will donate a dollar to the Cambodian government to help re-educate local children.
Full Article Here
SilentScope001 is offline   you may:
Old 05-07-2008, 10:49 PM   #9
TK-8252
Get Cloned.
 
TK-8252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,850
I find it strange how cops can pump FIFTY ROUNDS into an UNARMED MAN... and get away with it.

Don't cops need to, like, actually SEE the gun the man was suspected of carrying before they open fire? Jesus... if I were to see someone break into my house, and he does not have a weapon although I suspect he does, and I shoot him just once, I would be thrown in prison for a very long time. The idea that cops should be held to a lower standard than your average citizen is just outrageous.
TK-8252 is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 12:07 AM   #10
Arcesious
Trolololololololololololo
 
Arcesious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NE
Posts: 1,876
Current Game: Mass Effect
Can't they plee 'mistrial' and retry the policemen for the crime?


Please feed the trolls. XD
Arcesious is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 12:45 AM   #11
JediAthos
Senior Member
 
JediAthos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,438
Current Game: Defiance
Forum Veteran Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
Not under the double jeopardy provisions in the law. There would have to be some kind of new evidence or a different set of charges for them to be tried again at the state level. Now the Federal government on the other hand could bring charges against them.

TK-8252: No..a police officer does not need to see the weapon a suspect may be carrying. The officer only needs to perceive that the threat exists which could be indicated by a suspect reaching into a jacket, behind a back etc... As far as someone breaking into your home goes...that varies. In a lot of places if someone breaks into your home and you shoot them you are justified regardless of whether they had a weapon or not.


"You'll find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

JediAthos is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 01:03 AM   #12
Boba Rhett
I Slay Dragons
 
Boba Rhett's Avatar
 
Status: Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Man-Room in Missouri
Posts: 13,805
Current Game: Scrolling Eldery
LFN Staff Member 10 year veteran! LF Jester Helpful! 
Our entire judicial system would be for not if such a thing were to occur, Arcesious.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
if I were to see someone break into my house, and he does not have a weapon although I suspect he does, and I shoot him just once, I would be thrown in prison for a very long time.
Are you in the states? Most states now have stand-your-ground Castle Doctrine laws concerning these matters, meaning that you have the right to use deadly force to defend against forcible unlawful entry. Almost all the other states at least take a duty-to-retreat stance on the issue where you can at least use deadly force when it is absolutely necessary and you have announced that you will do so.


Need Help? massage message me
Boba Rhett is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 01:12 AM   #13
Da_man
CHEATER (Apparently)
 
Da_man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sunny Arizona
Posts: 1,173
Current Game: Team Fortress 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcesious
Yeah... 50 Bullets... What kind of gun was being used? If it was a handgun(I don't know the details very well), then I'd say that is was excessive... Because you have to reload before you can belt off 50 bullets with a handgun... It only takes one bullet to kill- and policemen should be trained to have a good aim... I think that this was deliberate, and those policemen deserve to be punished.
Like Arcesious, I think 50 bullets is a little over the top, since they were most likely using handguns, even for cops. The average handgun has something like 10 rounds to a clip, and even if they were using SMGs, which I doubt they were, they still have to reload at some point.I wouldn't be lieve they'd search the dude before they started shooting. I mean you have to have resonable suspicion of the guy having a weapon, and i don't think that you would get a very good idea of the guy if you just loooked at him while he was in a car.

Da_man is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 01:52 AM   #14
Boba Rhett
I Slay Dragons
 
Boba Rhett's Avatar
 
Status: Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Man-Room in Missouri
Posts: 13,805
Current Game: Scrolling Eldery
LFN Staff Member 10 year veteran! LF Jester Helpful! 
A standard police issue Beretta has a 15 +1 capacity. If they had extenders maybe up to 19+1. These clips can be emptied in big hurry.

I'm not entirely sure what you're saying in the latter half of your paragraph.


Need Help? massage message me
Boba Rhett is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 02:22 AM   #15
Rogue Nine
*static*
 
Rogue Nine's Avatar
 
Status: Administrator
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 14,651
Current Game: Bravely Default
10 year veteran! Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boba Rhett
A standard police issue Beretta has a 15 +1 capacity. If they had extenders maybe up to 19+1. These clips can be emptied in big hurry.
New York City Police use Glocks, which usually carry a 15-round or higher magazine.

And Rev. Sharpton is such an ass. He paid witnesses, for crying out loud. If I'm trying to find justice for Sean Bell, I don't want him on my side.




have a suggestion for the lf poll? pm me
Rogue Nine is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 02:27 AM   #16
El Sitherino
The Original.
 
El Sitherino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Planet Funkālnite.
Posts: 14,509
Hot Topic Starter LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran LF Jester 
I don't get it. Why arrest them?

Just give them all ticket. I understand what they did, even considering the reasonings, was over-exaggerated, but arrest is silly. Plus they just know they're gonna pay out.
It seems over-exaggerated on the Police Departments side.

You'd think the children of people from the decades of many protests and marches would be a little more perceptive and appreciative of the ability to even make a bold act like this. It's what the country was developed on, the right to express concern for injustice against people for petty and personal reasons.

I know, "They blocked Brooklyn Bridge and there was traffic backing up for hours". I don't recall a time, but if it were normal hours for traffic (civil disobedience could reasonably be cover for staging a "prayer-in" during normal back-up hours) then no harm was caused.


“This body is not me. I am not caught in this body.
I am life without limit.”
El Sitherino is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 02:34 AM   #17
TK-8252
Get Cloned.
 
TK-8252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by JediAthos
TK-8252: No..a police officer does not need to see the weapon a suspect may be carrying. The officer only needs to perceive that the threat exists which could be indicated by a suspect reaching into a jacket, behind a back etc... As far as someone breaking into your home goes...that varies. In a lot of places if someone breaks into your home and you shoot them you are justified regardless of whether they had a weapon or not.
Are you sure? So if I reach in my pocket while being questioned by a cop, they are within their rights to shoot me dead? I doubt it.

The suspect was in a car when he was shot. Reaching for something while in your car is not something you deserve to die for. The cops were trigger-happy and that's all there is to it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boba Rhett
Are you in the states? Most states now have stand-your-ground Castle Doctrine laws concerning these matters, meaning that you have the right to use deadly force to defend against forcible unlawful entry. Almost all the other states at least take a duty-to-retreat stance on the issue where you can at least use deadly force when it is absolutely necessary and you have announced that you will do so.
Yes I am. I imagine the only place you could legally kill an unarmed intruder would be Texas, and even there, you probably would still be prosecuted for it.
TK-8252 is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 02:53 AM   #18
El Sitherino
The Original.
 
El Sitherino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Planet Funkālnite.
Posts: 14,509
Hot Topic Starter LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
Yes I am. I imagine the only place you could legally kill an unarmed intruder would be Texas, and even there, you probably would still be sued for it.
Fix'd.

Also to note. You cannot shoot at someone just for reaching at something, especially in a car. I highly doubt you drive with your registration and your wallet with ID out in your lap at all times.


“This body is not me. I am not caught in this body.
I am life without limit.”
El Sitherino is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 03:08 AM   #19
Boba Rhett
I Slay Dragons
 
Boba Rhett's Avatar
 
Status: Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Man-Room in Missouri
Posts: 13,805
Current Game: Scrolling Eldery
LFN Staff Member 10 year veteran! LF Jester Helpful! 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
Are you sure? So if I reach in my pocket while being questioned by a cop, they are within their rights to shoot me dead? I doubt it.
Err... well, yes. Absolutely. ...you really doubt this? Seriously? If a police officer is given any reason to think that you are going for a weapon, they are going to draw their firearm and use force. Why would you think differently? They're not going to wait around to see if they get shot then shoot you back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
The suspect was in a car when he was shot. Reaching for something while in your car is not something you deserve to die for. The cops were trigger-happy and that's all there is to it.
Ah, so you have a problem with unarmed civilians being killed? Me too! Unfortunately, past experience with armed and dangerous civilians have made police fear for their own lives. Are you suggesting that police officers be asked to play russian roulette with their own lives every day by having to always assume that the person standing in front of them isn't reaching for a weapon if they suddenly jam their fist into their pocket?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
I imagine the only place you could legally kill an unarmed intruder would be Texas, and even there, you probably would still be prosecuted for it.
How is anyone supposed to know when an intruder is unarmed or not? Ask politely?

Almost all of your statements so far have been conjecture. Which is hard to refute because more conjecture will surely follow. You're more than welcome to doubt/imagine/etc. whatever you want to but I assure you that I'm not simply pulling my statements from my arse, despite the rumors Niner so viciously spreads about me. As I said, most states, 31 of them I believe, currently support the stand-your-ground policy which, and I quote, which expressly relieves the home's occupants of any duty to retreat or announce their intent to use deadly force before they can be legally justified in doing so to defend themselves.


Need Help? massage message me
Boba Rhett is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 10:07 AM   #20
El Sitherino
The Original.
 
El Sitherino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Planet Funkālnite.
Posts: 14,509
Hot Topic Starter LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran LF Jester 
There's a little notation in Police Conduct called, reasonable measure, Rhett.

Unless there is a sincere immediate fear for life, you are generally to take a more non-lethal approach to firing shots. If the car was driving off, they could have easily followed after and arrested the men.


“This body is not me. I am not caught in this body.
I am life without limit.”
El Sitherino is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 11:10 AM   #21
mimartin
TOR ate my KotOR
 
mimartin's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,021
Current Game: TOR/FO:NV
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Officer The Walking Carpets Guild Officer Alderaan News Holopics contributor 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
Yes I am. I imagine the only place you could legally kill an unarmed intruder would be Texas, and even there, you probably would still be prosecuted for it.
Let's leave Texas out of this one please. When you can shoot a drunken Irish man through a locked door and get away with it, the Texas juridical system is not the standard I want to hold the rest of the world to. FWIW Texas requires that you be in fear for your safety or fear for your property.

It is also my understanding that Mississippi allows the use of deadly force if the intruder is fully within your property. So don’t shoot the burglar coming through the window until they are within the home and not in danger of falling out.

Al Sharpton has the right to protest and I actually agree with this cause. He does not have the right to block traffic. Since I don’t know if the police gave an order for the protesters to disburse or not. I cannot say if police acted correctly, but if I was stuck in that traffic I would have applauded their decision.



Last edited by mimartin; 05-08-2008 at 11:58 AM.
mimartin is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 11:16 AM   #22
ET Warrior
PhD in horribleness
 
ET Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Evil League of Evil
Posts: 9,405
LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran 
In Colorado we have the 'Make my Day' law, which grants the use of deadly force against the invader of your home if you believe it is for criminal intent.



ET Warrior is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 12:07 PM   #23
Rogue Nine
*static*
 
Rogue Nine's Avatar
 
Status: Administrator
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 14,651
Current Game: Bravely Default
10 year veteran! Forum Veteran LF Jester 
New York is one of the busiest cities in the world with regards to automobile traffic. What Sharpton did was disrupt the flow of that traffic by being in the way. That's just not smart. What he did was boneheaded and stupid, and only serves to prove he's a giant windbag seeking to cause publicity in any way he can, mostly in a negative way.

What a maroon.




have a suggestion for the lf poll? pm me
Rogue Nine is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 12:31 PM   #24
Web Rider
Senior Member
 
Web Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: here
Posts: 1,768
"Officer Gescard Isnora fired eleven, and veteran officer Michael Oliver emptied two full magazines"

TWO!? Two full magazines, damn man! This guy should of at least gotten cross misconduct and recklessness. I'm amazed Guzman survived after being shot 19 times. According to cameras a block away, one of the cops shots nearly hit a port authority and a couple dock workers.


"So if you go to Washington, it's buildings clean and nice. Bring a pack of matches...and we'll burn the White House twice!"

"Nobody's talking about extermination. No one ever does. They just do it." - Magneto

"Don't solicit for your sister, that's not nice, unless you get a good percentage of her price."
Web Rider is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 12:35 PM   #25
tk102
Well past expiration date
 
tk102's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,765
Current Game: Assassin's Creed 4
Forum Veteran Helpful! Notable contributor 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
Apparently he's confused as to what "civil disobedience" means
Apparently I am too, because it sounds like he protested civilly and disobediently.


tk102 is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 01:28 PM   #26
Totenkopf
English spoken in What
 
Totenkopf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: What?
Posts: 4,778
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogue Nine
New York is one of the busiest cities in the world with regards to automobile traffic. What Sharpton did was disrupt the flow of that traffic by being in the way. That's just not smart. What he did was boneheaded and stupid, and only serves to prove he's a giant windbag seeking to cause publicity in any way he can, mostly in a negative way.

What a maroon.
Hence its inevitability. FTR, think it's ridiculous how much attention this buffon gets in the media, especially from Fox.


Now, I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor, dumb bastard die for his country.---Patton

There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism.---Teddy Roosevelt

I never forget a face, but in your case I'll make an exception.---Groucho

And if you all get killed, I'll piss on your graves.---Shaman Urdnot

How would you like to own a little bit of my foot in your ass.---Red Foreman
Totenkopf is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 01:54 PM   #27
JediAthos
Senior Member
 
JediAthos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,438
Current Game: Defiance
Forum Veteran Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
I myself am not a fan of Al Sharpton at all. I don't agree with most of what he says or does, but in this instance I hate to admit that he is probably right and those officers should be held accountable for their actions.

From this excerpt form an AP article on yahoo dated today it looks like the NYPD might just drop the hammer on them too.

"Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly has said his department is considering disciplinary action against the detectives."


"You'll find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

JediAthos is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 02:03 PM   #28
EnderWiggin
Sine Amore Nihil Est Vita
 
EnderWiggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,395
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk102
Apparently I am too, because it sounds like he protested civilly and disobediently.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Boba Rhett
How is anyone supposed to know when an intruder is unarmed or not? Ask politely?
You're completely right. And to top it off, the testimony heard in court was that one of the men in the car was believed to have a weapon. One of the perpetrators was reported to have said "Yo, get my gun and kill that dumb white b***h."

Quote:
Originally Posted by JediAthos
I agree Don...I think excessive use of force at the very least. Fifty bullets seems like a lot to me, but on the other hand I'm not a cop and I wasn't there.
Quite right. You weren't. Think about it from the cops' point of view. They were trying to apprehend the suspect(s) who was trying to flee and they believed he was armed. They didn't just say to themselves, "Let's see how many shots we can get off before this guy dies." And even so, there were four (or five?) cops that fired shots. Not like one guy just went psycho and shot three-and a half clips into the car.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcesious
Can't they plee 'mistrial' and retry the policemen for the crime?
Seriously? . First of all, a mistrial is called if there is a mistake in the trial or if something happens that makes it impossible for the trial to be finished fairly. That wasn't the case here. Look up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_A...ouble_Jeopardy if you need a crash course in American Freedoms, since you obviously want to throw all of the rules out of the window in order to convict these men. You seriously think they deserve the 25 years in prison that a 1st degree Manslaughter charge gets you? (Granted, this is the maximum, but prison is required.) Wow.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
Are you sure? So if I reach in my pocket while being questioned by a cop, they are within their rights to shoot me dead? I doubt it.
Abso-freaking-lutely.

Try it sometime. I'll come to your funeral.

-----

Look up the case, people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Bell

"The undercover officer ordered Bell to raise his hands after getting in his car. Instead, Bell accelerated the car and hit an unmarked police minivan."

In that moment, they acted how the police should act. And for that, they should not be punished.

_EW_



Hello, Pot? This is Kettle. You're black. ~ Prime

Yes, I hate you.

J7 - thanks for accepting me as part of the 'family.'
EnderWiggin is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 03:16 PM   #29
Web Rider
Senior Member
 
Web Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: here
Posts: 1,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by EnderWiggin

Look up the case, people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Bell

"The undercover officer ordered Bell to raise his hands after getting in his car. Instead, Bell accelerated the car and hit an unmarked police minivan."

In that moment, they acted how the police should act. And for that, they should not be punished.

_EW_
Unload 50 shots into 3 people in a car? If that's how police are "supposed to act" then we need some new police. A guy was shot 19 times. 19!

First: Bell and co did not know the car in front of them was a cop car, as it was UNMARKED. Second: the police did not inform Bell and friends that they were cops. They were plainclothes guys who came up to them, while they were in their car, and told them to put their hands up. Bell and friends were also very drunk.

So, you just got out of a bar, you're drunk. You go to get in the car, which is a bad move, but hey, you do it anyway. A bunch of guys(of mixed races), who are probably large and intimidating, come up to your car and tell you to put your hands up.

Your first reaction is: "OH SH** I'M GETTING CARJACKED!" And hit the gas. of course, you're to drunk to realize that there's a car in front of you, so you rear-end it.

The cops unload 50 rounds into you. One cop even stop to reload and keep shooting...until the second clip is EMPTY. Their shots are so errattic that they almost hit a port authority a block away(which in NYC can be quite a distance).

Now, do you think that they acted "reasonably" and "as cops should"? These cops were what, 5 feet away from the car? less? Missing is rather hard at this point. Letting off 3-4 shots per cop, at that range, is generally enough to down 3 people, especially when there were 5 cops. Especially when those people were sitting in a car, and not likly to escape.

I could understand if it said: 15 shots fired. And one of the guys was hit 2 or 3 times. But this is 50 shots, and one man was hit 19 times. That is approx 17 shots PER PERSON. Now, only in the most extreme cases of a strong man being high on drugs has it required the cops to unload that many shots into a person to stop them.

Since this was not the case, I wonder, exactly, what rationale went through the officers minds that they needed to fire this many shots into 3 men.


"So if you go to Washington, it's buildings clean and nice. Bring a pack of matches...and we'll burn the White House twice!"

"Nobody's talking about extermination. No one ever does. They just do it." - Magneto

"Don't solicit for your sister, that's not nice, unless you get a good percentage of her price."
Web Rider is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 03:39 PM   #30
Da_man
CHEATER (Apparently)
 
Da_man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sunny Arizona
Posts: 1,173
Current Game: Team Fortress 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by EnderWiggin
Look up the case, people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Bell

"The undercover officer ordered Bell to raise his hands after getting in his car. Instead, Bell accelerated the car and hit an unmarked police minivan."

In that moment, they acted how the police should act. And for that, they should not be punished.
Might I point out that the atricle came from wikipedia! Wikipedia can't be trusted. We have no clue who wrote that.

Da_man is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 03:46 PM   #31
EnderWiggin
Sine Amore Nihil Est Vita
 
EnderWiggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,395
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Web Rider
First: Bell and co did not know the car in front of them was a cop car, as it was UNMARKED. Second: the police did not inform Bell and friends that they were cops. They were plainclothes guys who came up to them, while they were in their car, and told them to put their hands up. Bell and friends were also very drunk.
First: I don't care whether they were driving a cop car or an ice cream truck. Second: The police testified that they announced who they were. And if Bell was very drunk, then in my opinion most of the blame falls on him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Web Rider

So, you just got out of a bar, you're drunk. You go to get in the car, which is a bad move, but hey, you do it anyway. A bunch of guys(of mixed races), who are probably large and intimidating, come up to your car and tell you to put your hands up.
I think you are making generalizations and assumptions there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Web Rider
Now, do you think that they acted "reasonably" and "as cops should"? These cops were what, 5 feet away from the car? less? Missing is rather hard at this point. Letting off 3-4 shots per cop, at that range, is generally enough to down 3 people, especially when there were 5 cops. Especially when those people were sitting in a car, and not likly to escape.
Good conjecture and speculation. Were you there to decide that people driving a car were unlikely to escape? "The majority of the bullet holes in the Altima were on the passenger side of the vehicle, also supporting claims that police thought that passenger Joseph Guzman was reaching for a gun, and not just firing haphazardly as the prosecution claims."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Web Rider
But this is 50 shots, and one man was hit 19 times. That is approx 17 shots PER PERSON.
Fifty shots by five guys is an average of ten.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Web Rider
Since this was not the case, I wonder, exactly, what rationale went through the officers minds that they needed to fire this many shots into 3 men.
Perhaps the rationale that any man who thinks they are going to die. The officer thought he had a gun, saw him reaching, saw his arm coming up. What was he going to do? He kept shooting until there was no more movement.

He acted in order to eliminate the perceived threat to him and his fellow officers caused by someone who was breaking the law. He ended a life. It's tragic. But they're not culpable for it.

_EW_



Edited out the condescending and belligerent comments.

Keep it civil, people.
~9



Hello, Pot? This is Kettle. You're black. ~ Prime

Yes, I hate you.

J7 - thanks for accepting me as part of the 'family.'

Last edited by Rogue Nine; 05-08-2008 at 06:17 PM. Reason: Edited for tone.
EnderWiggin is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 03:57 PM   #32
Corinthian
Banned
 
Corinthian's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,165
Police Procedure is, when Deadly Force is called for, open fire until suspects are no longer moving. Oh, yeah, and they're not trained to hit targets in the arms, legs, or shoot the guns out of their hands. If the facts of the case are accurate, and: 1: The cops were threatened by one suspect declaring he possessed a weapon and would "Kill the White *****", proceeded to ignore Police orders and attempt to flee in their vehicle, then crashed, the Cops were RIGHT to open fire. Especially given that Sean Bell was a pretty rough criminal, what with him being a drug dealer.

Sean Bell was an idiot. Ultimately, his death was his fault, and his alone.
Corinthian is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 04:13 PM   #33
*Don*
Rookie
 
*Don*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Compton
Posts: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Da_man
Might I point out that the atricle came from wikipedia! Wikipedia can't be trusted. We have no clue who wrote that.
That part is actually true.
Look up the sources at the bottom of the page and it'll lead you to the New York Post website which is a much more reputable source.

As for the cops being scared for their lives and opening fire, whatever the hell happened to ducking and finding cover?
Its NYC and hence there are plenty of objects (parked vehicles etc) to duck behind.
Once Sean Bell's car had stopped and the passengers got out, the cops could have waited to proceed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EnderWiggin

I think you are making generalizations and assumptions there.
They're quite accurate assumptions. In a place like Queens, NY, carjackers are rampant and are constantly watched out for.

If plainclothes people come up to you and claim to be officers and ask you to keep your hands where they can be seen, wouldn't you be skeptical?
If your from the suburbs maybe you wouldn't. But in the inner cities, an event like that would have alarm bells going off in the back of any man's head.
With no uniform and no badge that can be immediately seen, it's a little weird if you get approached as such.


"Any fool with a d*ck can make a child, but it takes a real man to raise one..."
- Boyz N The Hood
*Don* is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 04:15 PM   #34
EnderWiggin
Sine Amore Nihil Est Vita
 
EnderWiggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,395
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corinthian
Police Procedure is, when Deadly Force is called for, open fire until suspects are no longer moving. Oh, yeah, and they're not trained to hit targets in the arms, legs, or shoot the guns out of their hands. If the facts of the case are accurate, and: 1: The cops were threatened by one suspect declaring he possessed a weapon and would "Kill the White *****", proceeded to ignore Police orders and attempt to flee in their vehicle, then crashed, the Cops were RIGHT to open fire. Especially given that Sean Bell was a pretty rough criminal, what with him being a drug dealer.

Sean Bell was an idiot. Ultimately, his death was his fault, and his alone.
Thank you very much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Da_Man
Might I point out that the atricle came from wikipedia! Wikipedia can't be trusted. We have no clue who wrote that.
Gotta be kidding me. With this being in the news so much and seeing how it gets so many page views its ridiculous to think that misinformation would remain on the article. Others would fix it. Plus, its got a bunch of citations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don
Once Sean Bell's car had stopped and the passengers got out, the cops could have waited to proceed.
....That never happened. The guys were still in the car because they were trying to get away when the shooting started. And the cops thought he was grabbing a gun. So there was no waiting needed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don

They're quite accurate assumptions. In a place like Queens, NY, carjackers are rampant and are constantly watched out for.
I was referring to the assumption that the guys were intimidating.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don
If your from the suburbs maybe you wouldn't. But in the inner cities, an event like that would have alarm bells going off in the back of any man's head.
With no uniform and no badge that can be immediately seen, it's a little weird if you get approached as such.
Doesn't excuse the victim or incriminate the cops. So it's a bit moot.

_EW_



Hello, Pot? This is Kettle. You're black. ~ Prime

Yes, I hate you.

J7 - thanks for accepting me as part of the 'family.'
EnderWiggin is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 04:24 PM   #35
Totenkopf
English spoken in What
 
Totenkopf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: What?
Posts: 4,778
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by *Don*
As for the cops being scared for their lives and opening fire, whatever the hell happened to ducking and finding cover?
Its NYC and hence there are plenty of objects (parked vehicles etc) to duck behind.
Once Sean Bell's car had stopped and the passengers got out, the cops could have waited to proceed.
Don't know about you, but if the cops are busy ducking and hiding, most criminals would be busy getting the hell out of dodge. Cops are paid to face danger, not run away. If all they did was the former, why hire any (besides throwing biz to the coffe & donut shops )?


Quote:
If plainclothes people come up to you and claim to be officers and ask you to keep your hands where they can be seen, wouldn't you be skeptical?
If your from the suburbs maybe you wouldn't. But in the inner cities, an event like that would have alarm bells going off in the back of any man's head.
With no uniform and no badge that can be immediately seen, it's a little weird if you get approached as such.
On the other hand, this guy had a rap sheet, or at least a reputation. The idea of being busted by undercover cops wouldn't have been a foreign idea to him.


Now, I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor, dumb bastard die for his country.---Patton

There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism.---Teddy Roosevelt

I never forget a face, but in your case I'll make an exception.---Groucho

And if you all get killed, I'll piss on your graves.---Shaman Urdnot

How would you like to own a little bit of my foot in your ass.---Red Foreman
Totenkopf is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 04:49 PM   #36
*Don*
Rookie
 
*Don*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Compton
Posts: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Cops are paid to face danger, not run away.
What danger? They weren't getting shot at.
And, with the exception of the car accident, the victims hadn't endangered anybody.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EnderWiggen
Doesn't excuse the victim or incriminate the cops.
I never said that it was incriminating.
At the same time, it doesn't excuse the cops for firing 50 bullets.
Had it just been 10 or 15, I could've understood. But why did the cops discharge 50 shots in respsonse to a gun which they did not even see?


"Any fool with a d*ck can make a child, but it takes a real man to raise one..."
- Boyz N The Hood

Last edited by *Don*; 05-08-2008 at 05:04 PM.
*Don* is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 05:03 PM   #37
EnderWiggin
Sine Amore Nihil Est Vita
 
EnderWiggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,395
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by *Don*
What danger? They weren't getting shot at.
And, with the exception of the car accident, the victims hadn't endangered anybody.
Really?

First of all, they suspected these guys were going to go shoot a woman. Then, the guy gets in an accident. Both are endangerment to others.

Also, you and I both know that apprehending criminals and preventing crime are both things they're also paid for as well as facing the danger that you don't believe existed.

_EW_



Hello, Pot? This is Kettle. You're black. ~ Prime

Yes, I hate you.

J7 - thanks for accepting me as part of the 'family.'
EnderWiggin is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 05:12 PM   #38
*Don*
Rookie
 
*Don*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Compton
Posts: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by EnderWiggin
Really?

First of all, they suspected these guys were going to go shoot a woman. Then, the guy gets in an accident. Both are endangerment to others.

Also, you and I both know that apprehending criminals and preventing crime are both things they're also paid for as well as facing the danger that you don't believe existed.

_EW_
I agree that the drunk driving was definitely endangerment.
But if the cops were so concerned about preventing vehicular homicide, why didn't they just shoot at the tires?
Additionally, even if the car escaped, backup was already on the way and they could've been chased down.

Furthermore, simply being suspected of murder isn't a valid excuse for killing a man.
How's that justified? They attempt to kill three people in order to save a woman?

Additionally, at the time, the cops apparently didn't know about Bell's previous drug dealing past.
According to sources, they were tipped off by another person and feared that a shooting may occur.


"Any fool with a d*ck can make a child, but it takes a real man to raise one..."
- Boyz N The Hood
*Don* is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 05:21 PM   #39
EnderWiggin
Sine Amore Nihil Est Vita
 
EnderWiggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,395
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by *Don*
I agree that the drunk driving was definitely endangerment.
But if the cops were so concerned about preventing vehicular homicide, why didn't they just shoot at the tires?
Hello? You don't shoot the tires of a car that has three suspects in it, perceived to be armed, raising his arm. Not a good plan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don
Furthermore, simply being suspected of murder isn't a valid excuse for killing a man.
How's that justified? They attempt to kill three people in order to save a woman?
If Sean Bell & Co would have complied he wouldn't have died and then everyone would have been saved. It's absolutely his fault. They acted in order to prevent a murder. It's a valid excuse if you think you're going to die. They didn't just start shooting. There were exigent circumstances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don
Additionally, at the time, the cops apparently didn't know about Bell's previous drug dealing past.
According to sources, they were tipped off by another person and feared that a shooting may occur.
Are you arguing my side or yours?

_EW_



Hello, Pot? This is Kettle. You're black. ~ Prime

Yes, I hate you.

J7 - thanks for accepting me as part of the 'family.'

Last edited by EnderWiggin; 05-08-2008 at 05:37 PM.
EnderWiggin is offline   you may:
Old 05-08-2008, 05:31 PM   #40
Rogue Nine
*static*
 
Rogue Nine's Avatar
 
Status: Administrator
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 14,651
Current Game: Bravely Default
10 year veteran! Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Guys, watch the tone. There's no reason we can't discuss this maturely, no reason we have to resort to pointed condescension and sarcasm.

Play nice.




have a suggestion for the lf poll? pm me
Rogue Nine is offline   you may:
Post a new thread. Sorry, this thread is closed. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > Knights of the Old Republic > Community > Kavar's Corner > Al Sharpton Arrested at Protest in NYC

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:30 PM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.