Michigan cop on Black man's back, fatally shot him

[Grizzly Adams]

It really was not worth risking death to bring in the big bad guy with the illegal plates.

He was not obligated to let Lyoya go, especially after he committed felony obstruction.

And welp the cop's competence is what is being investigated in this case, so it is very relevant.

You said it was his incompetence that allowed Lyoya to get the taser. Even if true, it's irrelevant as to the decision to use deadly force. Lyoya took the taser and every action he'd taken to that point would lead a reasonable person to believe he was going to use it.

The "totality of circumstances" was that it was not important to arrest Lyoya.

That's not the totality of circumstances. It's a subjective opinion (yours) that has no bearing on anything.

And it does matter where Lyoya was shot it is part of the investigation.

Where deadly force is applied doesn't make the force any more or less deadly. If deadly force is justified, it can be applied anywhere.

Again you are just making excuses for a cop killing a citizen in cold blood.

And you're making shit up.

 

[mike2810]

So? That's not the subject. (Besides, a 40-year-old, Reagan era piece of garbage "analysis"? Get current, friend.)

Noted:
You provide nothing to prove link is "garbage"?

Why is it that some shy away from the fact that blacks kill blacks. Personally, the color of the skin of the shooter and the victim means nothing. We are all humans.

 

[IQ57]

That’s right Mike. The media and Dems WANT to make it about race. That is how they are fueling the race war they created and propping Trump as their “straw man”.

People need to open their eyes and see the big picture. Too many people are getting sucked in claiming to be suckless suckers, then projecting the suck without debate.

 

[NWRatCon]

Noted:
You provide nothing to prove link is "garbage"?

Why is it that some shy away from the fact that blacks kill blacks. Personally, the color of the skin of the shooter and the victim means nothing. We are all humans.

Obviously that's is not true, since you felt the need to highlight it...

The citation was irrelevant. The article is outdated. I actually read it, too, which is why I said the analysis was garbage.

 

[IQ57]

Dems bringing up race, AGAIN and saying it isn’t about race, while making it about race.

 

[mike2810]

Obviously that's is not true, since you felt the need to highlight it...

The citation was irrelevant. The article is outdated. I actually read it, too, which is why I said the analysis was garbage.

You are the one harping on cop shooting blacks. Not me.

I could provide a more current article, but according to you it is not relevant for discussion on this thread.

I gave an opinion about race/color of skin is meaningless. You disagree. Seems you don't want people to be treated the same.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

And blacks/colors have a disproportionate rate of violent crime, also fact.
Let's see if we can tie the two together somehow ...

Strangely enough, almost the same discrepancy exists with respect to the rate of poverty.

You don't suppose that there is any link between "poverty" and "crime" do you?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

He lawfully pulled him over and lawfully asked for his ID, which he did not produce but is required to by law in that situation. He was investigating a possible stolen vehicle and understandably, reasonably became suspicious given his noncooperative behavior. It escalates from there, largely based on Lyoya's behavior. I'm not saying the officer couldn't have done some things different. But the initial attempt to detain was reasonable, and I think that when Lyoya fled, the pursuit on foot was reasonable. Pulling out the taser and the gun...those are probably going to be debated in a courtroom at some point.

Let me see if I have this correct.

If a police officer receives a report that a red, 1982, Yugo (with licence plates ABC 123) has been stolen then they are justified in stopping every red, 1982, Yugo (regardless of licence plate numbers) on the grounds that the driver of the vehicle MIGHT have changed the licence plates and the vehicle IS a red, 1982, Yugo?​

Right?

PS - Personally I feel that the police should be pulling over everyone driving 1982 Yugos REGARDLESS of the color of the car - for a mental capacity evaluation and to see whether or not they are actually in possession of a day pass from "The Home" - but that's a totally unrelated point.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

Let me see if I have this correct.

If a police officer receives a report that a red, 1972, Yugo (with licence plates ABC 123) has been stolen then they are justified in stopping every red, 1972, Yugo (regardless of licence plate numbers) on the grounds that the driver of the vehicle MIGHT have changed the licence plates and the vehicle IS a red, 1972, Yugo?​

Right?

What does this hypothetical have to do with the Lyoya encounter?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

What does this hypothetical have to do with the Lyoya encounter?

It has to do with the initial stopping of Mr. Lyoya vehicle.

Or are you under the impression that police officers are able to identify every driver of every vehicle and also know which of those drivers are driving with excessive blood alcohol levels while having warrants out for their arrest simply by looking at the back end of the vehicle?

 

[Grizzly Adams]

It has to do with the initial stopping of Mr. Lyoya vehicle.

Or are you under the impression that police officers are able to identify every driver of every vehicle and also know which of those drivers are driving with excessive blood alcohol levels while having warrants out for their arrest simply by looking at the back end of the vehicle?

The vehicle was stopped because the plates didn't belong to that car.

I have no idea where you're coming up with this other stuff.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

The vehicle was stopped because the plates didn't belong to that car.

I have no idea where you're coming up with this other stuff.

Do police officers "run" the licence plates of EVERY car that they see?

Or is there a "standard form" of running the licence plates of every _[fill in the blank]_ car?

 

[Grizzly Adams]

Do police officers "run" the licence plates of EVERY car that they see?

I don't know. He ran this one, which is how he knew the plates didn't match, giving him a valid reason to stop the car and investigate.

Or is there a "standard form" of running the licence plates of every _[fill in the blank]_ car?

Couldn't tell you what forms GRPD uses.

 

[jaeger19]

Try again. I never said he had a knife. I said THE SAME PRINCIPLE APPLIES HERE.

And a knife is very very much different than a taser that has been deployed twice. So no.. not the same principle.

Depends on the totality of circumstances. If he just stabbed five people and is walking toward another, yeah, light his ass up.

Right. BUT. he can;t be killed just because he has a knife and walks away... because he "coulda". Which you keep contending.

I don't know how many times this has to be spelled out in big block letters and short words before you'll get it: BASED ON LYOYA'S PREVIOUS ACTIONS, IT WAS ENTIRELY REASONABLE TO BELIEVE HE WAS GOING TO GET FREE AND USE THE TASER TO CONTINUE HIS EFFORTS TO RESIST THE OFFICER.

I know.. you keep saying that. And you keep ignoring that he never once made an aggressive move toward the officer. Never a kick, a punch.. a strike of any kind. He just kept trying to get up and walk away.
And yet.. you have jumped to the conclusion that somewhere in the future.. he is going to use the taser..which is deployed... and he lastly was seen holding it by the barrel.. to use it against the officer.. incapacitating him.. (even though even the manufacturer says the drive stun is not incapacitating").. and then shoot the officer with his own gun.

Sorry dude.. but your previous actions don;t lead up to that.

The video is there for everyone to see. Count the seconds. Almost 2.5 minutes. No fabrication. You're either lying (again) or ignorant. In either case, no one needs pay you any more attention.

Yeah.. 2.5 minutes.. big whoop. I am middle aged and I just fought 3 five minute rounds with a 20 something. Show that he was "exhausted".. from 2.5 minutes.

At least once before with the officer on his back. I guess he's a ninja after all.

Really.. he managed to direct a taser into the cops body? How many times? Oh wait.. he didnt;

Where's the video of you getting drive-stunned in the face and fighting through it, tough guy?

I am not that stupid. Maybe you are.. but I am not.

Put the **** up or shut the **** up.

Nah.. I think I will just continue to make you look foolish.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

And a knife is very very much different than a taser that has been deployed twice. So no.. not the same principle.

It is the same principle in that an officer doesn't have to wait until he is being tased to take action against a person who has stolen his taser and demonstrated a determination to evade the officer's lawful detention by whatever means he can muster.

Right. BUT. he can;t be killed just because he has a knife and walks away... because he "coulda". Which you keep contending.

This is a lie. I have never said this, or anything like it. Stop lying.

I know.. you keep saying that. And you keep ignoring that he never once made an aggressive move toward the officer.

The theft was aggressive. The wrestling was aggressive. The refusal to drop the taser he stole was aggressive. That's a lot of aggressive for never being aggressive.

(even though even the manufacturer says the drive stun is not incapacitating")

Surprisingly, you still haven't posted the video of you taking a taser to the face and being able to fight through it.

Why. Could. That. Be.

Sorry dude.. but your previous actions don;t lead up to that.

Lyoya was a threat, and had demonstrated an increasing level of escalation.

Yeah.. 2.5 minutes.. big whoop. I am middle aged and I just fought 3 five minute rounds with a 20 something.

Regardless of the veracity of this claim, it doesn't mean shit with regard to this use of force.

Show that he was "exhausted".. from 2.5 minutes.

Uh, maybe the way he sounded when he shouted at the passenger? MAYBE? Did you even watch the video?

Really.. he managed to direct a taser into the cops body? How many times? Oh wait.. he didnt;

Never said he did. Again with the lies.

I am not that stupid.

But you claim he should be fine. It's not incapacitating. What's the big deal?

Maybe you are.. but I am not.

Bait ignored.

Nah.. I think I will just continue to make you look foolish.

You'd have to start first.

 

[Cope]

Strangely enough, almost the same discrepancy exists with respect to the rate of poverty.

You don't suppose that there is any link between "poverty" and "crime" do you?

There likely is yes.

Do we see the media, BLM, and Democratic politicians rushing to decry actions of the police to those stricken with poverty? Or just to Blacks?

 

[jaeger19]

It is the same principle in that an officer doesn't have to wait until he is being tased to take action against a person who has stolen his taser and demonstrated a determination to evade the officer's lawful detention by whatever means he can muster.


This is a lie. I have never said this, or anything like it. Stop lying.


The theft was aggressive. The wrestling was aggressive. The refusal to drop the taser he stole was aggressive. That's a lot of aggressive for never being aggressive.


Surprisingly, you still haven't posted the video of you taking a taser to the face and being able to fight through it.

Why. Could. That. Be.


Lyoya was a threat, and had demonstrated an increasing level of escalation.


Regardless of the veracity of this claim, it doesn't mean shit with regard to this use of force.


Uh, maybe the way he sounded when he shouted at the passenger? MAYBE? Did you even watch the video?


Never said he did. Again with the lies.


But you claim he should be fine. It's not incapacitating. What's the big deal?


Bait ignored.


You'd have to start first.

The officer has to have a reasonable belief he is in imminent danger of death or grave bodily harm.
He doesn't get to say..well he was walking away... but he " coulda turned..coulda ran toward me..coulda pulled a knife and coulda stabbed me" ..
So I had to shoot him when he was walking away.
2. Yeah no. Everything you describe was defensive.
3. There was no increased level of escalation from the suspect. Only the officer.
4. You mean excited?
5. I never claimed he would be " fine".
First it hurts. And only an idiot would 1. Allow it...2. Not recoil from it which is in part why it's not incapacitating.
The officer was not in a position for your coulda to happen when he shot the suspect.

 

[NWRatCon]

The officer has to have a reasonable belief he is in imminent danger of death or grave bodily harm.
He doesn't get to say..well he was walking away... but he " coulda turned..coulda ran toward me..coulda pulled a knife and coulda stabbed me" ..
So I had to shoot him when he was walking away.
2. Yeah no. Everything you describe was defensive.
3. There was no increased level of escalation from the suspect. Only the officer.
4. You mean excited?
5. I never claimed he would be " fine".
First it hurts. And only an idiot would 1. Allow it...2. Not recoil from it which is in part why it's not incapacitating.
The officer was not in a position for your coulda to happen when he shot the suspect.

You cannot win this, my friend. Grizzly has an extremely long history of "making up facts" to support his fantasy narratives. It's best not to engage delusional outbursts.

 

[justabubba]

The officer has to have a reasonable belief he is in imminent danger of death or grave bodily harm.
He doesn't get to say..well he was walking away... but he " coulda turned..coulda ran toward me..coulda pulled a knife and coulda stabbed me" ..
So I had to shoot him when he was walking away.
2. Yeah no. Everything you describe was defensive.
3. There was no increased level of escalation from the suspect. Only the officer.
4. You mean excited?
5. I never claimed he would be " fine".
First it hurts. And only an idiot would 1. Allow it...2. Not recoil from it which is in part why it's not incapacitating.
The officer was not in a position for your coulda to happen when he shot the suspect.

would you please point out at what time in the video did the cop shoot the now-deceased perp as the perp was walking away

 

[jaeger19]

would you please point out at what time in the video did the cop shoot the now-deceased perp as the perp was walking away

Apparently.. it was the same time the suspect made the ninja like move with the deployed taser and pressed it against the officers face..

 

[NWRatCon]

would you please point out at what time in the video did the cop shoot the now-deceased perp as the perp was walking away

Perp? You expose your bias with every post. What crime did he perpetrate? Your ignorance of the law is bottomless.

Let me correct that... your ignorance of the law appears bottomless.

 

[justabubba]

Apparently.. it was the same time the suspect made the ninja like move with the deployed taser and pressed it against the officers face..

it would appear that you used as an example to defend your argument something you now acknowledge did not happen
when lies are all you have to defend your assertion you have clearly lost

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I don't know. He ran this one, which is how he knew the plates didn't match, giving him a valid reason to stop the car and investigate.


Couldn't tell you what forms GRPD uses.

If the police officer, routinely checks the licence plates of "every ____ car that is driven by a ____ male" then there is a term for that practice and it isn't allowed.

 

[justabubba]

Perp? You expose your bias with every post. What crime did he perpetrate? Your ignorance of the law is bottomless.

the inital police stop was due to tags that did not match the auto registration
as the driver, he perpetrated that driving violation
and as we now know, he was drunk at about thrice the legal limit,
which allows us to conclude the driver perpetrated drunk driving on the public roads
information indicates the driver was wanted on an arrest warrant. for an arrest warrant to have been issued, the named party must have perpetrated an illicit act

Let me correct that... your ignorance of the law appears bottomless.

then school me by sharing why the above presentation makes the now deceased to be other than a perpetrator of legal violations

 

[justabubba]

If the police officer, routinely checks the licence plates of "every ____ car that is driven by a ____ male" then there is a term for that practice and it isn't allowed.

"suspicious"

why is that not allowed?