Same thing I thought. I was told by police officers at a bar many years ago that you protect yourself first, then have your day in court. If youāre in a body bag, no day in court. That you may get convicted anyway, but priority number one was to come out alive.
It was a very long conversation but that was the gist of it. I also have a family member who is a NJ State Trooper. He tells me that most of them do not carry tasers due to the laws regarding their use in this state.
Thats how it works, a suspect must follow basic rules when being apprehended and arrested. If you pose a possible threat to the police lives or others, you can be shot. There is nothing wrong with that. That is basic law and order in a system where people can live their lives mostly freely. A criminal cannot risk others lives because they are flipping out, going crazy, on drugs or acting in a possibly dangerous manner.
You donāt even know the guy was being arrested. There are rules for the police to follow when making an arrest as well. You donāt lose your rights simply because the police deem you a possible suspect in the commission of a crime. Thatās never been how that works.
There are rules that keep you alive as well. That kid was either going for suicide by cop or heās as dumb as a stone. To quickly open the door and reach into the car? Youāre never going to see a cop wait to see what youāre going for.
Sure. And you donāt lose the right to self defense when police are making an unlawful arrest either. Unless of course the crime is driving while black.
There are many statements on both sides that are all true at the same time.
Militarization of police: is a problem
No body cams: is a problem
Allowing police looser rules of engagement than soldiers in a war zone: is a problem. (This is mine)
But also-
Not following orders: is a problem.
Acting aggressive: is a problem.
Until more is known about this incident, itās impossible to call it. Thereās things we donāt know that could swing it either way.
This is true. Not enough information at this point to make an honest call one way or the other at this point. All anybody can do is speculate what happened leading up to the man being shot, in the back, seven times. How many shots does it officially take before an unarmed man is no longer a threat?