Four Minneapolis officers fired after death of black man

[chipbennett]

The catch is that of those 15,000 police killings, many of them are determined to be justified. The data says so. The only data there is says so. There is no other data. There can be no other data. To ask for data is false.
Now what if some of them that are determined to be justified really were not justified. Fox and hen-house. You say you want data about that but that is ridiculous - the data says they were all justified.
This is one of the main reasons for the very existence of BLM.
The noise you hear and the riots you see are about the most egregious cases - the ones chosen to make noise about.


Also, of course these questionable cases are NOT representative of what happens in the remainder of the 15,000 cases. Nobody has ever said that.

No, that's not true. Nothing is preventing someone from researching every single instance of police killing in the line of duty. Sure, to collect those data would be difficult, and inconvenient, and time-consuming - possibly even expensive. But it's not impossible; it can be done.

 

[KLB]

This is data. Four names are anecdote.

Now: how many fatal, on-duty shootings happen? I believe the number is on the order of 1,000 per year. So, we're talking about on the order of 15,000 such shootings in this time frame.

And how many of those shootings were justified vs unjustified? And of the unjustified shootings, how many had sufficient evidence to sustain a charge, prosecution, and conviction of the officer involved? (And side note: I wonder how the percentage of unjustified police shootings that have sufficient evidence to pursue a prosecution compares to the percentage of unjustified non-police shootings that have sufficient evidence to pursue a prosecution?)

It would seem that the starting point is 98, or roughly 100 out of 15,000, about 0.67%. Of those, 35 have been convicted (and per your article, another 21 are still pending).

I will start from the presumption that the vast majority of police-involved killings are justified use of deadly force in apprehending violent criminals and/or self-defense in the performance of their duties as police officers. I will certainly entertain arguments to counter that presumption.

How do we even start to determine what number of police killings are justified vs unjustified? One starting point might be to look at the subset of police killings that involve "unarmed" persons, since it is unlikely that police killing of an armed person is going to be unjustified. According to this study, approximately 10% of police killings involve "unarmed" persons. That brings the pool of possibly unjustified police killings down from 15,000 to 1,500, and increases the percentage of those charged up to 6.7%.

But keep in mind, "unarmed" does not mean "unjustified". (Anecdotally, Michael Brown was "unarmed", but his killing was 100% justified.) Per the same study, some 11% of officer deaths occurred by persons who were "unarmed" (either the officer was beaten to death, or the offender took the officer's gun and used it to shoot/kill the officer). So, we can't assume that all police killings of "unarmed" persons were unjustified. I'm unsure how to drill down farther here.

Excellent points. I'm stuck on 98 instances in 15 years in a country of 330 or so million. That is 6.5 a year on average. Talk about digging deep to find a problem.

 

[jamil]

That makes no sense. The intellectual dishonesty would lie in ignoring the thing that accomplishes what you want to accomplish.

Yes, accidents happen, but there's already a remedy for that. A law banning accidents doesn't make accidents any less likely.



Accidents happen with regular warrants, too. So do you want to take those away? Or create a situation where well-armed and dangerous criminals can avoid warrant service by being better-armed and more dangerous than police? That's where no-knocks are most used.

But, if we're negotiating, if we all get MRAPs, I might be willing to subscribe to your newsletter. Gas is cheap these days.

C'mon man. No. It doesn't accomplish what I want. And you know it doesn't. They do no-knock raids now. They get the address wrong. People die that didn't need dead. Disallowing no knocks accomplishes what I want. I want no, that means zero, no knock raids.

Oh. ANd about the MRAPs. They're too expensive for everyone to get one. So there is some sharing involved. And since I'm grand poohbah, I get dibs for weekends.

 

[ghuns]

...But it's not impossible; it can be done.

Careful, man.

In my experience, saying that is akin to volunteering.

 

[chipbennett]

Careful, man.

In my experience, saying that is akin to volunteering.

If someone wants to pay me, I'll do it.

I don't think they'll like my hourly rate, though.

 

[Alpo]

If someone wants to pay me, I'll do it.

I don't think they'll like my hourly rate, though.

With a high enough rate, I'll be your assistant!

 

[printcraft]

London being London... From the home of Kahn... we have to accept terrorism as normal.

https://twitter.com/9NewsAUS/status/1268267100914749451?s=20


https://twitter.com/Matt_VickersMP/status/1268253142786990087

Looks like a party... anybody still think this isn't coordinated?

 

[nonobaddog]

No, that's not true. Nothing is preventing someone from researching every single instance of police killing in the line of duty. Sure, to collect those data would be difficult, and inconvenient, and time-consuming - possibly even expensive. But it's not impossible; it can be done.

Without video it would be impossible. I suspect many times the description is written only and written in such a way that it smells pretty.

 

[chipbennett]

Without video it would be impossible. I suspect many times the description is written only and written in such a way that it smells pretty.

It feels like the goalposts just moved. Does every solved crime now require video?

 

[nonobaddog]

It feels like the goalposts just moved. Does every solved crime now require video?

Only if you want to do what you were talking about - review it honestly for justification. No goalpost movement whatsoever.

 

[Tombs]

Looks like officials are giving into the anarchist's dreams.

 

[churchmouse]

Looks like officials are giving into the anarchist's dreams.

Brothers this is going to get seriously ugly.
Be careful what you wish for. As your wish just might come true.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Looks like officials are giving into the anarchist's dreams.

Let them do it. The public will be begging for them to reinstate them after a couple of weeks. But they should get a taste of what real anarchy looks like to put this **** to bed once and for all. It will turn into a real life version of the movie "The Purge".

 

[nonobaddog]

Minneapolis feels threatened by other bigger cities getting all the news so they are joining the race to complete failure.

 

[JCSR]

 

[HoughMade]

View attachment 87690

 

[Alamo]

View attachment 87690

Instapundit runs this theme every so often. It's not just that they have Democrat mayors (except for bakersfield), but they've had them for decades. Every city policy and police department has been under the leadership of the Democratic party for decades.

 

[jamil]

Looks like officials are giving into the anarchist's dreams.

DO IT! Please please please do it.

 

[jamil]

Let them do it. The public will be begging for them to reinstate them after a couple of weeks. But they should get a taste of what real anarchy looks like to put this **** to bed once and for all. It will turn into a real life version of the movie "The Purge".

Eh, I dunno. I think that what would take it’s place is the city Karen mob force. Social compliance [STRIKE]coerced[/STRIKE] “enforced” through bullying and social canceling.

 

[printcraft]

Looks like officials are giving into the anarchist's dreams.