# More about the police.



## James m (Mar 11, 2014)

Troopers Begin Investigation Into Deadly Wreck Involving Cop | WNEP.com

The comments were disabled. They were very interesting. So far he had a bad record of harassment. Killed a woman and injuring her school teacher husband. This was less than five six miles from here. They say his dad is a public official and came to the rescue of his children in the past.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Most forums of any type LE does bad the comments are quickly disabled and or thread closed.
Same as the ones exposing public school teachers trading sex for grades and molesting students they get shut down right then and there.


----------



## White Death (May 18, 2014)

Recently a group of a dozen or so police officers opened a hundred rounds of ammo on unarmed suspects in Miami. That is just terrible, yet another example of the Police thinking they are the best. I didn't look into it much passed the article, maybe the guys were highly dangerous, but they were still unarmed.

Here's the link if you want to read it:
http://rt.com/usa/158960-miami-police-fired-hundreds-rounds/


----------



## 6811 (Jan 2, 2013)

White Death said:


> Recently a group of a dozen or so police officers opened a hundred rounds of ammo on unarmed suspects in Miami. That is just terrible, yet another example of the Police thinking they are the best. I didn't look into it much passed the article, maybe the guys were highly dangerous, but they were still unarmed.
> 
> Here's the link if you want to read it:
> Miami cops fired hundreds of rounds, killing unarmed suspects and injuring two officers in crossfire ? RT USA


being unarmed is not an excuse not to get shot by the police. cops are allowed to shoot unarmed suspects. the key is justification, if the cops can articulate that he/she or the public is in imminent threat, he can shoot to incapacitate. Also, most people think that it is ok to fight the police, specially if the person is unarmed. they think that it is ok to punch a cop in the face thinking that they wont get shot. unfortunately this is farthest from the truth. a decent cop will shoot you if you punch him in the face. the truth is, there is always a gun whenever a person confronts a cop. the cop can justify by way of saying that when he was hit on the face, he felt like he was passing out, before he passes out, he shot the suspect because once unconcious the suspect could easily get the cops gun and shoot the cop or other people.

cops are not perfect. there are bad cops, stupid cops and there are criminals who wear the uniform and badge too. the good cops, since they are just human beings, they make mistakes too. from time to time, cops get into a shooting situation where two or more cops fire on a suspect that could be armed or unarmed. this is called simpathetic fire, it is not a good shooting however, this happens a lot of times. this can be fixed thru good training.


----------



## Notsoyoung (Dec 2, 2013)

mhans827 said:


> being unarmed is not an excuse not to get shot by the police. cops are allowed to shoot unarmed suspects. the key is justification, if the cops can articulate that he/she or the public is in imminent threat, he can shoot to incapacitate. Also, most people think that it is ok to fight the police, specially if the person is unarmed. they think that it is ok to punch a cop in the face thinking that they wont get shot. unfortunately this is farthest from the truth. a decent cop will shoot you if you punch him in the face. the truth is, there is always a gun whenever a person confronts a cop. the cop can justify by way of saying that when he was hit on the face, he felt like he was passing out, before he passes out, he shot the suspect because once unconcious the suspect could easily get the cops gun and shoot the cop or other people.
> 
> cops are not perfect. there are bad cops, stupid cops and there are criminals who wear the uniform and badge too. the good cops, since they are just human beings, they make mistakes too. from time to time, cops get into a shooting situation where two or more cops fire on a suspect that could be armed or unarmed. this is called simpathetic fire, it is not a good shooting however, this happens a lot of times. this can be fixed thru good training.


In the Miami case, the 2 people were in the car which was unable to move. They were both unarmed. The driver was a suspect in a shooting but not the passenger. 370 rounds or so were fired by the police while the two men were sitting in the car, 50 of which actually struck the car. Hard to excuse it.


----------



## 6811 (Jan 2, 2013)

Notsoyoung said:


> In the Miami case, the 2 people were in the car which was unable to move. They were both unarmed. The driver was a suspect in a shooting but not the passenger. 370 rounds or so were fired by the police while the two men were sitting in the car, 50 of which actually struck the car. Hard to excuse it.


 you are absolutely right, no excuse for firing 370 rounds specially coming from a dozen or more cops. that is clearly simpathetic fire, it endangered other cops and the community. this shooting occurred because a cop was either killed or shot by one of the suspect. to add insult, the suspect took the police car. the cops were out for revenge, this is a human trait, not saying it is ok but thats what happens. training is very important in police work...


----------



## James m (Mar 11, 2014)

http://wnep.com/2014/05/14/questions-surround-conduct-of-officer-homanko/#

The coverup ensues.


----------



## Chipper (Dec 22, 2012)

The problem is the imminent threat is based on the officers opinion at the time. Once the suspect is shot it's a one sided story. The cop gets the benefit of doubt because no matter what he is always right. His buddies the DA, fellow officers, courts and judges will ALWAYS back him up. The cop knows this and can easily twist the truth to save his own [email protected]@. Why would anyone doubt his story, he's the cop??


----------



## 6811 (Jan 2, 2013)

Chipper said:


> The problem is the imminent threat is based on the officers opinion at the time. Once the suspect is shot it's a one sided story. The cop gets the benefit of doubt because no matter what he is always right. His buddies the DA, fellow officers, courts and judges will ALWAYS back him up. The cop knows this and can easily twist the truth to save his own [email protected]@. Why would anyone doubt his story, he's the cop??


there are places or jurisdictions that do back up their cops, but not all places. In my jurisdiction, as a cop, if you shoot anyone under any circumstance, the case will be heard by the grand jury. the grand jury will decide if the officer should be charged or cleared of the shooting. the "cover up" is not all that good when it comes to real life. its good as a story plot in the movies.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

How mean can you get? Check out the reason they made these stops.


----------



## The Resister (Jul 24, 2013)

mhans827 said:


> there are places or jurisdictions that do back up their cops, but not all places. In my jurisdiction, as a cop, if you shoot anyone under any circumstance, the case will be heard by the grand jury. the grand jury will decide if the officer should be charged or cleared of the shooting. the "cover up" is not all that good when it comes to real life. its good as a story plot in the movies.


In theory, what you say makes the process seem reasonable and fair, etc. You and I know it isn't. The judge gets to decide what the Grand Jury can and cannot hear. The judge can suppress evidence. Then as officers of the court, the attorneys for every side have a duty to the courts and the system first.

It's not the cops fault, though. It is the citizens who keep voting and lobbying to make government bigger, more intrusive and with many novel ways to circumvent the Constitution.


----------



## White Death (May 18, 2014)

mhans827 said:


> being unarmed is not an excuse not to get shot by the police. cops are allowed to shoot unarmed suspects. the key is justification, if the cops can articulate that he/she or the public is in imminent threat, he can shoot to incapacitate.


However, it has to be EXTREMELY dangerous or some seriously wanted people to just shoot unarmed suspects. On most occasions, that is illegal when you can just arrest them without shooting. And the fact that they went through 300+ rounds with another citizen in the passenger seat.

I do agree with you though, except these cops were totally inappropriate firing when there is another guy in the passenger's seat and other citizens around that could have been caught in cross-fire.

EDIT: It also depends where you are located, and I can't say I know much about Miami laws haha


----------



## bigdogbuc (Mar 23, 2012)

mhans827 said:


> being unarmed is not an excuse not to get shot by the police. cops are allowed to shoot unarmed suspects. the key is justification, if the cops can articulate that he/she or the public is in imminent threat, he can shoot to incapacitate. Also, most people think that it is ok to fight the police, specially if the person is unarmed. they think that it is ok to punch a cop in the face thinking that they wont get shot. unfortunately this is farthest from the truth. a decent cop will shoot you if you punch him in the face. the truth is, there is always a gun whenever a person confronts a cop. the cop can justify by way of saying that when he was hit on the face, he felt like he was passing out, before he passes out, he shot the suspect because once unconcious the suspect could easily get the cops gun and shoot the cop or other people.
> 
> cops are not perfect. there are bad cops, stupid cops and there are criminals who wear the uniform and badge too. the good cops, since they are just human beings, they make mistakes too. from time to time, cops get into a shooting situation where two or more cops fire on a suspect that could be armed or unarmed. this is called simpathetic fire, it is not a good shooting however, this happens a lot of times. this can be fixed thru good training.


As a citizen now, and not a cop anymore, I can guarantee that if I shoot someone for punching me in the face, I'm going to have a very expensive, drawn out prosecution. Most cops who shoot someone for punching them in the face use the "I was blacking out and afraid they would take my gun and shoot me with it" excuse. Which 90% of the cops I know call bullshit on. Police have very little accountability and as long as they can reasonably articulate their actions, will get off with little more than an ass chewing. Firing or prosecuting them invites a guaranteed win on the lawsuit. That same "articulation" does not apply to the public at large. Which again, is bullshit.

Shit, most union rules preclude an officer from having to give a statement anywhere from 72 hours to 30 days after a shooting. Had a King County deputy and a Parole Officer enter the wrong house and shoot and kill an unarmed man who was sleeping. The guy woke up, dazed and confused I'm sure as to what the hell the commotion was about, turned and they shot him. "We were afraid he was going for a weapon." ??? Really? Defense? We were acting in Good Faith. Which our state doesn't recognize as the state supreme court, and our constitution, do not justify excusing the violation of someones rights because they were Acting in Good Faith. Verdict? Justified. Next.

We had a deputy who shot a naked man in a tree. There were numerous officers present, so her life was not in danger. She grabbed her Glock "by accident", instead of her TASER, and literally shot him out of the tree. The other question everyone had was "Why were you going to taze him when he was 15' up a tree?" Luckily, being shot AND falling out of the tree did not kill him. The shooting was deemed "accidental" and she received "additional training". We as average citizens would not receive the same benefit. I, as former law enforcement would even get the "you used to be a cop, you should have known better" treatment.

A man in the next town over shot a burglar in his kitchen when the bad guy tried to attack him with a butcher knife that had been on the counter. The burglar crawled back out of the window he came in and collapsed on the ground. The blood trail showed the shooting took place in the kitchen, and it went out of the window. The knife, with the bad guys prints was on the floor. Our glorious "anti-gun", "give them what they want and they will go away" liberal ass sucking prosecutor went full guns on the homeowner, but finally had to drop the charges, but not until the homeowner was ordered to pay ALL of the guys medical expenses by the equally liberal ass sucking judge.

This same prosecutor, has justified and refused prosecution on every single police shooting we have had in this county, even some that were clearly questionable (one guy was left to bleed to death after officers refused to allow him medical attention). Yet he has spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars over the last 15 years in an attempt to prosecute a friend of mine for possessing a "fully automatic AR", which wasn't, and when he lost the prosecution (to my friend who acted as his own attorney-which he isn't) he went after the gun club that my friend is the executive director of, trying in vain yet again, to get it shut down. The latest piece of harassment from the county is over a driveway that was put in without the "proper permit". Problem is, that driveway has existed since the club was established in 1926. It had overgrown and they cleared back the foliage. No changes were made except trimming back some bushes. Apparently in our county, we're not allowed to weed and trim bushes without a permit. Or have tree houses. But that's another story.


----------



## Silverback (Jan 20, 2014)

Notsoyoung said:


> 50 of which actually struck the car. Hard to excuse it.


 It was the best target practice they had in months....


----------



## PaulS (Mar 11, 2013)

Silverback said:


> It was the best target practice they had in months....


Likely their most accurate shooting in months too!


----------

