view the rest of the comments
News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
Simply possessing a gun absolutely not, but there are rules and exceptions for example on if they have shot at innocent people during the altercation already.
I'm just not sure where that line is, but it does exist.
edit: Like, shooting at innocent people during the alternation might not be enough even, it might need to be shooting at innocent people while fleeing.
All the police have is unsubstantiated claims from a 911 call. Thinking that is enough for lethal force is why SWATing happens. Fake 911 calls about serious crimes trying to get the police to show up and murder people. The job of the police is not to determine guilt or innocence, nor do they punish, those are for the judicial branch.
I never said that was enough for lethal force, but there are reasons a cop will shoot someone in the back and it be valid.
You kinda keep dodging what I'm talking about, which is if the person has shown to be a actual threat to the public.
There are rules around it, I just don't know what that threshold is.
I'm not saying this was met in this case, but I am saying they CAN shoot someone who's running away in some circumstances. (edit: without having to even be pointing the gun at the cop)
edit: My bad also you aren't the same person replying to me, so you aren't repeatedly dodging anything.
Hypothetically, yes there are justified shootings. Deciding if a shooting is justified should be done by a jury though, not an internal investigation. All lethal use of force cases should be prosecuted and guilt/innocence should be decided by a jury. The use of lethal force justification being decided by a judge/prosecutor/police is short-cutting the legal standard that any other victim would see their perpetrator held to and is therefore a 14th amendment violation.
Ya, that does seem like a fair way to handle something like that.
Is that actually how it happens, or is it typically done internally and decided by a judge/prosecutor/police?
That is not how it is done. It is the police chief saying, "We investigated ourselves and (found no wrongdoing)/(everything was within policy)." Occasionally it will be a prosecutor saying something along the lines of, "There isn't enough evidence to get a guilty verdict so we are not going to pursue this." If it gets past both of these the judge will dismiss the case for some random excuse or they do a bench trial where instead of a jury the judge just decides the cop is innocent. Very rarely it will make it to a jury trial and the cop will lie his ass off and never get charged for perjury.