Wonder why cops are hated

[rhinefire]

I watch "The First 48" a reality show about the police investigating murders in our cities. One thing I noticed is how many of the detectives bite their fingernails down to a nub. These are people in the 30's-50's age group. It tells me they are one step away from anything. Granted, I would never do that job but it is scary that their emotional state does not appear to be stable.

 

[jimbo]

I know many will think this statement is partisan hackery at its best but...the bold and underlined part? Yeah....Thanks Director Comey for letting those that have power flaunt the law with no repercussions and showing others in power that they too can do the same.

This incident occurred 3.5 years ago in LA. I don't think Comey had much to do with it.

 

[jimbo]

How can we not understand how people would mistrust cops and demonstrate mightily for reform? Why are we ALL not NUTZ about this?



This is insanity.

Just as troubling is part two of the story:

Twenty-five minutes after the shooting, Torrance police officers stopped David Perdue a few blocks away as he was driving to the beach to go surfing before work. After the officers questioned him and ordered Perdue to turn around, he complied with their commands and began driving away when another Torrance police cruiser raced towards his vehicle and broadsided him. Suffering from a concussion and back pain, Perdue remained in his vehicle as an officer opened fire on him.
Although Torrance PD and LAPD were searching for a black man driving a gray Nissan Titan, Perdue is a white man who was driving a black Honda Ridgeline. Carranza and Hernandez were driving a blue Toyota Tacoma when the officers ambushed them without bothering to confirm their identities.

Apparently this group of stupid cops can't learn from their stupidity.

 

[Excon]

That's nuts. Those cops needed to go a long time ago and, frankly, I thought they had.

-edit-

I thought this had been cleared a while ago and the memo actually came out at the end of January - http://documents.latimes.com/memorandum-dorner-related-officer-involved-shooting/

While the cops weren't prosecuted (an absolute travesty!) the women did collect a couple of million each.

If you happen to read the memo please note that all the stuff related to the cops that shot has been redacted. For those that like to pursue cover up conspiracies, this is a good one for you.

Here is the PDF image version of it.

Memorandum​

As a lawyer who grew up in L.A. and lives here, I know a little about the L.A. County D.A.'s office. The lawyers who work there are not crooks and idiots--far from it. A rabble-rousing article by someone with unknown credentials is hardly a detailed analysis of what went into the decision not to prosecute these cops. I don't know what was involved in the D.A.'s decision not to prosecute them for that shooting, and I doubt you do either. I remember this incident, but I never saw any discussion of what crimes the police might have been charged with. Prosecutors often find it hard to prove the intent crimes require, and it's not obvious to me what evidence there was that these cops intended to shoot at two innocent women.

Which has me wondering why the CNN report which was linked in the biased person's article wasn't provided instead.

Link from the quote in the OP: 107 bullets.

It was a combination of factors which lead to believing the threat was real and establishes why not charging them was appropriate.

 

[Thoreau72]

Wait... you buy this incident but not the San Berd shooters?

Notice in the 'Bias in the Media' section that the 2 minute interview with Sally A in San Bernardino has been taken down from the internet, even as the French authorities according to Le Figaro are asking the CCTV records of the Nice event be destroyed.

Pattern of behavior, dude.

 

[MaggieD]

Here is the PDF image version of it.

Memorandum​

Which has me wondering why the CNN report which was linked in the biased person's article wasn't provided instead.

Link from the quote in the OP: 107 bullets.

It was a combination of factors which lead to believing the threat was real and establishes why not charging them was appropriate.

What a pile of dog doo. The slap of newspapers on the wet driveway sounded like gunshots. And that, of course, would immediately cause eight officers to fire 107 times at the wrong make, model and color truck. Absolutely ludicrous. I don't know how these people could present that absurd report with a straight face.

It was careless. It showed complete indifference for human life. They don't lose their jobs. They don't present this travesty to a grand jury. Taxpayers pony up over $4 million and life goes on.

Disgusting.

 

[ocean515]

What a pile of dog doo. The slap of newspapers on the wet driveway sounded like gunshots. And that, of course, would immediately cause eight officers to fire 107 times at the wrong make, model and color truck. Absolutely ludicrous. I don't know how these people could present that absurd report with a straight face.

It was careless. It showed complete indifference for human life. They don't lose their jobs. They don't present this travesty to a grand jury. Taxpayers pony up over $4 million and life goes on.

Disgusting.

Pretty typical in all levels of government/police activity in LA.

Of course it would have been nice if the total context of what was going on at the time regarding the suspect they were searching for was provided by the author in the OP. Makes me wonder why it was completely disregarded.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Dorner_shootings_and_manhunt

Doesn't excuse the gross incompetence.

 

[Excon]

What a pile of dog doo.

Actually, the article you provided was exactly as you just described.
The CNN article it linked, was by far, better.

The slap of newspapers on the wet driveway sounded like gunshots.

It can sound like that if the circumstances are right.
Which is apparently the case here.

And that, of course, would immediately cause eight officers to fire 107 times at the wrong make, model and color truck.

OMG! 107 rounds. iLOL That is what happens when you have numerous Officers firing back until it registers with them that there is no longer a threat.

According to the report the vehicle was similar.

"... the truck that Margie Carranza and her then-71-year-old mother, Emma Hernandez, were driving was similar to Dorner's; ..."​

Gee? Similar looking vehicle with what sounds like gun shots coming from it.
Like I said; "It was a combination of factors which lead to believing the threat was real and establishes why not charging them was appropriate."

I don't know how these people could present that absurd report with a straight face.

Regardless of you already having made up your mind without having a minimum of details from the other side, the report includes them now. And no, there is nothing absurd in the report.

It was careless. It showed complete indifference for human life.

Careless? Indifference? iLOL
That does not come into play when you reasonably believe you are returning fire at the party it is believed to be coming from.

They don't lose their jobs.

Nor should they.
All the information points to their action being reasonable.

They don't present this travesty to a grand jury.

Nor should they.
All the information points to their action being reasonable.

Taxpayers pony up over $4 million and life goes on.

And? The Government shouldn't payout to an injured party when it makes an error even though that error was in good faith?

 

[MaggieD]

It can sound like that if the circumstances are right.
Which is apparently the case here.

According to the report the vehicle was similar.

"... the truck that Margie Carranza and her then-71-year-old mother, Emma Hernandez, were driving was similar to Dorner's; ..."​

Gee? Similar looking vehicle with what sounds like gun shots coming from it.
Like I said; "It was a combination of factors which lead to believing the threat was real and establishes why not charging them was appropriate."


Regardless of you already having made up your mind without having a minimum of details from the other side, the report includes them now. And no, there is nothing absurd in the report.


Careless? Indifference? iLOL
That does not come into play when you reasonably believe you are returning fire at the party it is believed to be coming from.


Nor should they.
All the information points to their action being reasonable.


Nor should they.
All the information points to their action being reasonable.


And? The Government shouldn't payout to an injured party when it makes an error even though that error was in good faith?

Mistakes have consequences. In this particular case, the consequence of eight officers firing 107 bullets at a truck only injured one woman. Could have been two dead. And you would support these eight officers for panicking and killing them. I find that attitude disgusting.

And their aim appalling.

 

[Excon]

Mistakes have consequences. In this particular case, the consequence of eight officers firing 107 bullets at a truck only injured one woman. Could have been two dead. And you would support these eight officers for panicking and killing them. I find that attitude disgusting.

And their aim appalling.

Your emotions are irrelevant to what actually occurred.

The consequences of the error was a payout for those injured, which is very different from whether or not the Officers acted reasonably.

 

[radcen]

Your emotions are irrelevant to what actually occurred.

The consequences of the error was a payout for those injured, which is very different from whether or not the Officers acted reasonably.

Oh, well, that makes it ok, then. Carry on.

:roll:

 

[reinoe]

Oh, well, that makes it ok, then. Carry on.

:roll:

It's a good thing they survived to collect, which means in contrast, if the cops had killed them both: too bad so sad.

 

[MaggieD]

Your emotions are irrelevant to what actually occurred.

The consequences of the error was a payout for those injured, which is very different from whether or not the Officers acted reasonably.

The officers did not act reasonably. Their actions exhibited gross incompetence. The case belonged in front of a grand jury.

Oh, and that similar car? Yeah, right.

They had received a description of Dorner's truck: a light-gray Nissan Titan with the license plate 8D83987.]

Your opinion is your opinion, and mine is mine. I support good cops. I don't, for one second, support these incompetent fools.

 

[radcen]

The officers did not act reasonably. Their actions exhibited gross incompetence. The case belonged in front of a grand jury.

Oh, and that similar car? Yeah, right.



Your opinion is your opinion, and mine is mine. I support good cops. I don't, for one second, support these incompetent fools.

When he said similar vehicle I almost burst out laughing. I thought, "Really, dude?" :lol:

 

[radcen]

It's a good thing they survived to collect, which means in contrast, if the cops had killed them both: too bad so sad.

No kidding.

 

[Excon]

Oh, well, that makes it ok, then. Carry on.

:roll:

Your reply is illogical.
The error was not ok from the point of the injured, that is why they received a payout, which is irrelevant to the fact that the Officers acted reasonably given the circumstances.

 

[reinoe]

What a pile of dog doo. The slap of newspapers on the wet driveway sounded like gunshots. And that, of course, would immediately cause eight officers to fire 107 times at the wrong make, model and color truck. Absolutely ludicrous. I don't know how these people could present that absurd report with a straight face.

It was careless. It showed complete indifference for human life. They don't lose their jobs. They don't present this travesty to a grand jury. Taxpayers pony up over $4 million and life goes on.

Disgusting.

Many police don't read newspapers, and some can't read at all.

 

[MaggieD]

Your reply is illogical.
The error was not ok from the point of the injured, that is why they received a payout, which is irrelevant to the fact that the Officers acted reasonable given the circumstances.

What, you're Mr. Spock now?

The officers did not act reasonably.

 

[Excon]

The officers did not act reasonably. Their actions exhibited gross incompetence. The case belonged in front of a grand jury.

Oh, and that similar car? Yeah, right.

Wrong. Their actions were reasonable given the circumstances.

If you were an Officer and reasonably believed someone was shooting at you, you too would return fire.

Your opinion is your opinion, and mine is mine. I support good cops. I don't, for one second, support these incompetent fools.

The circumstances of this case show your opinion to be as wrong as it is emotive.

The officers did not act reasonably.

Yes, they did. Nothing you can say changes that.

 

[Excon]

When he said similar vehicle I almost burst out laughing. I thought, "Really, dude?" :lol:

He?
Wut?

 

[americanwoman]

Your reply is illogical.
The error was not ok from the point of the injured, that is why they received a payout, which is irrelevant to the fact that the Officers acted reasonable given the circumstances.

Is there ever a time, in your opinion, when an officer acts unreasonably?

 

[MaggieD]

Wrong. Their actions were reasonable given the circumstances.

If you were an Officer and reasonably believed someone was shooting at you, you too would return fire.

The circumstances of this case show your opinion to be as wrong as it is emotive.

Reasonable giving what circumstances? That the truck was absolutely NOTHING like the truck the suspect was driving? That the license plate wasn't even close? That the truck held two women and not one black male in sight? Reasonable to interpret a newspaper hitting wet pavement as a gun shot? Reasonable to shoot 107 times spraying nearby houses with gunfire? Reasonable to hit one old lady twice? Where do you get your definition of reasonable?

That's about the third time you have referred to my anger as if it's a bad thing. It's not. That anger you detect? Now THAT'S reasonable.

Bunch of scaredy cats with the worst aim in the history of the world. Thank God for that. Keystone Cops at work.

 

[jimbo]

I watch "The First 48" a reality show about the police investigating murders in our cities. One thing I noticed is how many of the detectives bite their fingernails down to a nub. These are people in the 30's-50's age group. It tells me they are one step away from anything. Granted, I would never do that job but it is scary that their emotional state does not appear to be stable.

You watch a TV show and from that you can conclude that many of the detectives bite their fingernails down to a nub. These are people in the 30's-50's age group. It tells me they are one step away from anything. Granted, I would never do that job but it is scary that their emotional state does not appear to be stable.

I wish I were that good at judging people.

 

[Excon]

Reasonable giving what circumstances?

No wonder you do not understand given the fact that you then go on to misstate the information of the circumstances.

That the truck was absolutely NOTHING like the truck the suspect was driving?

No MaggieD.

1. That is not what was reported.
2. A Nissan Titan does look similar to a Toyota Tacoma.​

Reasonable to interpret a newspaper hitting wet pavement as a gun shot?

And again.

It can sound like that if the circumstances are right.​

That the truck held two women and not one black male in sight?

Your arguments are like that of a person ignorant of the details.
As reported in the article; Accept for the windshield, the windows of the vehicle were tinted.

Reasonable to shoot 107 times spraying nearby houses with gunfire?

And again.

OMG! 107 rounds. iLOL That is what happens when you have numerous Officers firing back until it registers with them that there is no longer a threat.​

And can the exaggerations, they were not spraying nearby houses. Nearby houses were hit.

Where do you get your definition of reasonable?

Apparently you are choosing not to separate the differences.
That they got wrongly shot has been acknowledged and taken care of by that Government.
That in no way makes the Officers actions wrong given the circumstances.
And again.

If you were an Officer and reasonably believed someone was shooting at you, you too would return fire.​

That's about the third time you have referred to my anger as if it's a bad thing. It's not. That anger you detect? Now THAT'S reasonable.

As I said, your emotions are irrelevant.

 

[Caine]

I completely agree with you. So why are we at odds?

Because when police do things like mentioned in the OP of this thread, it is a localized issue.

Hearing about it on national news should not make a person "hate" their local police officers because of some **** that happened halfway across the U.S.

But sadly, most people don't have that logic. They find it perfectly acceptable to lump all police officers across the nation into one group "pigs".

And they don't even realize that by doing so, they are acting just like the KKK when they group all black people into the same group "niggers".