Georgia Tech Student Activist shot dead by campus police

[Devout Centrist]

Sad situation for everyone

[Alabama_Indy10]

How is it at all relevant that he was an LGBT activist, aside from muh identity politics.  Is it believed the police were targeting a gay?

They weren't targeting anyone. They were responding to a call that he was carrying a gun. Turns out he was carrying a knife, and when they tried to get him to drop the weapon, he dared them to shoot him. They obliged.

That's no excuse to shoot him dead. They could've easily neutralized him and contained the situation without taking his life. This is simply excessive use of force.

And how do you propose they do that without being stabbed?

There's this amazing thing called the human body and there are many places on it where a person may be shot that'd inflict enough pain to neutralize them without inflicting a fatal wound. A competent, well-trained police officer would've been easily capable of making such a shot at that range without endangering himself either.

Please become a police officer. Just please do it. You'll be singing a different tune quickly.

The only new tune I'd be singing is an even stronger support for the outlawing of private ownership of guns and more robust public funding for mental health care, anti-poverty programs, and improved education.

Oh yeah.. advance your politics as a police officer. Would work well lol

[JA]

How is it at all relevant that he was an LGBT activist, aside from muh identity politics.  Is it believed the police were targeting a gay?

They weren't targeting anyone. They were responding to a call that he was carrying a gun. Turns out he was carrying a knife, and when they tried to get him to drop the weapon, he dared them to shoot him. They obliged.

That's no excuse to shoot him dead. They could've easily neutralized him and contained the situation without taking his life. This is simply excessive use of force.

And how do you propose they do that without being stabbed?

There's this amazing thing called the human body and there are many places on it where a person may be shot that'd inflict enough pain to neutralize them without inflicting a fatal wound. A competent, well-trained police officer would've been easily capable of making such a shot at that range without endangering himself either.

Please become a police officer. Just please do it. You'll be singing a different tune quickly.

The only new tune I'd be singing is an even stronger support for the outlawing of private ownership of guns and more robust public funding for mental health care, anti-poverty programs, and improved education.

Oh yeah.. advance your politics as a police officer. Would work well lol

Doesn't seem to particularly hurt the ones who harass and gun down low-income and minority Americans...

[Alabama_Indy10]

How is it at all relevant that he was an LGBT activist, aside from muh identity politics.  Is it believed the police were targeting a gay?

They weren't targeting anyone. They were responding to a call that he was carrying a gun. Turns out he was carrying a knife, and when they tried to get him to drop the weapon, he dared them to shoot him. They obliged.

That's no excuse to shoot him dead. They could've easily neutralized him and contained the situation without taking his life. This is simply excessive use of force.

And how do you propose they do that without being stabbed?

There's this amazing thing called the human body and there are many places on it where a person may be shot that'd inflict enough pain to neutralize them without inflicting a fatal wound. A competent, well-trained police officer would've been easily capable of making such a shot at that range without endangering himself either.

Please become a police officer. Just please do it. You'll be singing a different tune quickly.

The only new tune I'd be singing is an even stronger support for the outlawing of private ownership of guns and more robust public funding for mental health care, anti-poverty programs, and improved education.

Oh yeah.. advance your politics as a police officer. Would work well lol

Doesn't seem to particularly hurt the ones who harass and gun down low-income and minority Americans...

Oh yeah cops are out to kill the poor and minorities.. one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.

[JA]

How is it at all relevant that he was an LGBT activist, aside from muh identity politics.  Is it believed the police were targeting a gay?

They weren't targeting anyone. They were responding to a call that he was carrying a gun. Turns out he was carrying a knife, and when they tried to get him to drop the weapon, he dared them to shoot him. They obliged.

That's no excuse to shoot him dead. They could've easily neutralized him and contained the situation without taking his life. This is simply excessive use of force.

And how do you propose they do that without being stabbed?

There's this amazing thing called the human body and there are many places on it where a person may be shot that'd inflict enough pain to neutralize them without inflicting a fatal wound. A competent, well-trained police officer would've been easily capable of making such a shot at that range without endangering himself either.

Please become a police officer. Just please do it. You'll be singing a different tune quickly.

The only new tune I'd be singing is an even stronger support for the outlawing of private ownership of guns and more robust public funding for mental health care, anti-poverty programs, and improved education.

Oh yeah.. advance your politics as a police officer. Would work well lol

Doesn't seem to particularly hurt the ones who harass and gun down low-income and minority Americans...

Oh yeah cops are out to kill the poor and minorities.. one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.

I suppose you never bother to read your own posts then...

Considering the harassment, intimidation, profiling, and murder experienced disproportionately by low-income and minority Americans at the hands of our ill-trained, militarized, and institutionally racist and classist police forces, I will stand by what I said. The police officers who engage in such activities are, through their actions on the job, expressing and advancing their moral and political beliefs, which are bigoted.

[Alabama_Indy10]

How is it at all relevant that he was an LGBT activist, aside from muh identity politics.  Is it believed the police were targeting a gay?

They weren't targeting anyone. They were responding to a call that he was carrying a gun. Turns out he was carrying a knife, and when they tried to get him to drop the weapon, he dared them to shoot him. They obliged.

That's no excuse to shoot him dead. They could've easily neutralized him and contained the situation without taking his life. This is simply excessive use of force.

And how do you propose they do that without being stabbed?

There's this amazing thing called the human body and there are many places on it where a person may be shot that'd inflict enough pain to neutralize them without inflicting a fatal wound. A competent, well-trained police officer would've been easily capable of making such a shot at that range without endangering himself either.

Please become a police officer. Just please do it. You'll be singing a different tune quickly.

The only new tune I'd be singing is an even stronger support for the outlawing of private ownership of guns and more robust public funding for mental health care, anti-poverty programs, and improved education.

Oh yeah.. advance your politics as a police officer. Would work well lol

Doesn't seem to particularly hurt the ones who harass and gun down low-income and minority Americans...

Oh yeah cops are out to kill the poor and minorities.. one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.

I suppose you never bother to read your own posts then...

Considering the harassment, intimidation, profiling, and murder experienced disproportionately by low-income and minority Americans at the hands of our ill-trained, militarized, and institutionally racist and classist police forces, I will stand by what I said. The police officers who engage in such activities are, through their actions on the job, expressing and advancing their moral and political beliefs, which are bigoted.

1. Which posts?

2. Was the shooting in Minnesota of an Australian woman by a Somali-American officer an example of your so called "racist and classist police forces." What about the shooting of Philando Castile by another minority?

3. You just said if you were an officer you would be advancing your political beliefs.. Does that not make you a bigot?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I'm not one to defend cops just about ever. But in cases like this it's kind of hard to argue against them, since that's basically arguing against science. The problem is that guns and wounds do not work the way they do in movies.

First of all, every police force trains to shoot at the center of mass to "neutralize", not to kill or wound specifically. That's because it's not possible to really make that distinction. The center of mass is the best target because it's the most likely to be hit. Aiming at the arm or legs is not really an option for a couple reasons.

For one, kneecapping someone is NOT a "safe" way to shoot them. The shock of getting hit in the leg is enough to put a big strain on even a healthy adult's heart, much less someone with a heart condition, and could easily kill someone even before blood loss...if you had a fully stocked ambulance and trained paramedics immediately nearby they MIGHT be able to defibrillator the person but that's if they are IMMEDIATELY nearby, not a 10 minute drive away. For that matter even if that doesn't take the person out the blood loss likely would in minutes. In Hollywood the person will just writhe around on the ground moaning before the ambulance showed up, but in reality they'd have to be shot on hospital grounds to get the needed medical attention in time. The person can survive (as many have) if the wound doesn't hit any vital veins but there is no way for any cop to know where that person's vital veins are, and even if they could it'd be impossible to aim for.

Which brings to the second point, legs and arms are terrible targets to shoot at. Not only are they quite thin and small compared to the rest of the body, they are very easy to move around quickly. An action movie hero might be capable of hitting exactly what they aim for every time, but in reality it doesn't matter if the cop is a former Olympics sharpshooter, it'd be sheer luck if they pulled it off. One exception is if the cop isn't on the ground but an actual sniper but even in this case if a person is shot by a sniper rifle bullet in the leg or arm not only are they going to be without that limb for the rest of their life, that's going to be a very short period since the blood loss will be immense and even quicker than the above scenario.

And furthermore the notion that someone with a knife is significantly less dangerous than with a gun giving the cop more time to aim is only true in first person shooters, next time you're out walking and you see someone approaching you jogging imagine that person has a knife and is threatening you and then imagine that your cell phone or anything you're holding is a gun. Put in your pocket like a holster and see if you can pull it out and aim it before they approach you. You probably can...only at the body and center of mass. A cop fiddling around to hit the arm or leg even if this was useful is way more likely to end up with a stab wound than a successful non-lethal disarming.

Oh and by the way, guns shot with silencers on don't sound like someone popping a cork off a champagne bottle, it's still going to be louder than a barking dog (silencers are actually primarily used to prevent hearing loss), and cars will not blow up if shot at. Even if it hitting the gas tank. And people don't get blow backward from a gunshot. Amongst other things.

That said, Badger is probably correct here, there is really no such thing as intentional non-lethal force with a gun, but a gun should not be the first resort, especially amongst campus police. Not that tasers are completely safe either, especially if the target is standing on concrete, but still the best option here.

[JA]

How is it at all relevant that he was an LGBT activist, aside from muh identity politics.  Is it believed the police were targeting a gay?

They weren't targeting anyone. They were responding to a call that he was carrying a gun. Turns out he was carrying a knife, and when they tried to get him to drop the weapon, he dared them to shoot him. They obliged.

That's no excuse to shoot him dead. They could've easily neutralized him and contained the situation without taking his life. This is simply excessive use of force.

And how do you propose they do that without being stabbed?

There's this amazing thing called the human body and there are many places on it where a person may be shot that'd inflict enough pain to neutralize them without inflicting a fatal wound. A competent, well-trained police officer would've been easily capable of making such a shot at that range without endangering himself either.

Please become a police officer. Just please do it. You'll be singing a different tune quickly.

The only new tune I'd be singing is an even stronger support for the outlawing of private ownership of guns and more robust public funding for mental health care, anti-poverty programs, and improved education.

Oh yeah.. advance your politics as a police officer. Would work well lol

Doesn't seem to particularly hurt the ones who harass and gun down low-income and minority Americans...

Oh yeah cops are out to kill the poor and minorities.. one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.

I suppose you never bother to read your own posts then...

Considering the harassment, intimidation, profiling, and murder experienced disproportionately by low-income and minority Americans at the hands of our ill-trained, militarized, and institutionally racist and classist police forces, I will stand by what I said. The police officers who engage in such activities are, through their actions on the job, expressing and advancing their moral and political beliefs, which are bigoted.

1. Which posts?

Pick one

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So, out of the literally thousands of police killings in the past few years, you think one example is going to disprove something? If you read what I wrote, I specifically said "experienced disproportionately by low-income and minority Americans;" that means there are cases wherein people who're neither low-income nor minority experience those problems at the hands of police. As for the case of Philando Castile, with what part of institutional racism are you having trouble? It can manifest in the actions of a person of any background; African American cops can be just as or even harsher towards African American suspects than White cops. Just because the cop and suspect belong to the same race doesn't mean racism isn't playing a role.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No? I never said all police were bigots; police forces as institutions and, arguably, the majority of police as persons are bigoted and frequently work to advance a morally abhorrent agenda, but that doesn't mean every police officer must, by necessity, be a bigot. A person is not the institution, nor is the institution a person; they often act as their own agents. Personally, I wouldn't be a police officer because, among other reasons, I object to many of their practices and the laws they're required to enforce.

[GGover]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is how you know s/he was white.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Speaking of Olympic shooters by the way, consider that this is what they wear when competing:



Not exactly standard in a cop uniform. And even with that as noted you'd be lucky to get a direct hit on a limb if aimed for.

[dead0man]

It's true. Cops over here are trained to shoot to immobilise rather than kill; hitting the legs or arms.

that seems strange to me....I found this.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Kingpoleon]

Quite frankly, if you don't want hurt and someone is in a position to kill/hurt you, the best thing you can do is freeze. If you don't, it's hard for someone's reflexes not to kick in - retreating signals weakness, meaning one should attack so they don't get away. Advancing signals aggressiveness, meaning one should attack to protect oneself.

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

That guy had to be on crystal meth, angel dust or bath salts.

[Rookie Yinzer]

I hope he was not mentally ill. He brought this on himself. Killing him was clearly the last thing any of these officers wanted to do.

[Adam Griffin]

Quite frankly, if you don't want hurt and someone is in a position to kill/hurt you, the best thing you can do is freeze. If you don't, it's hard for someone's reflexes not to kick in - retreating signals weakness, meaning one should attack so they don't get away. Advancing signals aggressiveness, meaning one should attack to protect oneself.

WTF

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

How is it at all relevant that he was an LGBT activist, aside from muh identity politics.  Is it believed the police were targeting a gay?

They weren't targeting anyone. They were responding to a call that he was carrying a gun. Turns out he was carrying a knife, and when they tried to get him to drop the weapon, he dared them to shoot him. They obliged.

That's no excuse to shoot him dead. They could've easily neutralized him and contained the situation without taking his life. This is simply excessive use of force.

And how do you propose they do that without being stabbed?

There's this amazing thing called the human body and there are many places on it where a person may be shot that'd inflict enough pain to neutralize them without inflicting a fatal wound. A competent, well-trained police officer would've been easily capable of making such a shot at that range without endangering himself either.

The idea that it's easy to shoot to wound is a Hollywood fiction.

[Helsinkian]

The idea that it's easy to shoot to wound is a Hollywood fiction.

The police in Finland have a policy to shoot in the legs. From 2003 to 2013 the Finnish police fired their service weapon 122 times. Only 7 of those cases led to a fatality.

This policy was followed even when dealing with the recent terrorist stabber: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Turku_stabbing

[JA]

The idea that it's easy to shoot to wound is a Hollywood fiction.

The police in Finland have a policy to shoot in the legs. From 2003 to 2013 the Finnish police fired their service weapon 122 times. Only 7 of those cases led to a fatality.

This policy was followed even when dealing with the recent terrorist stabber: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Turku_stabbing

Who the hell do you think you are coming into this here thread spouting verifiable facts that contradict the narrative adored by most Americans?!

[dead0man]

The idea that it's easy to shoot to wound is a Hollywood fiction.

The police in Finland have a policy to shoot in the legs. From 2003 to 2013 the Finnish police fired their service weapon 122 times. Only 7 of those cases led to a fatality.

This policy was followed even when dealing with the recent terrorist stabber: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Turku_stabbing

Who the hell do you think you are coming into this here thread spouting verifiable facts that contradict the narrative adored by most Americans?!

who is spouting unverified facts (other than the guy that said it was law in Australia to shoot to wound) and who is adoring anything?  Nobody, especially the cop that did it, wanted this dude dead.

Look, there is an argument both ways here.  The vast majority of gun professionals, police forces and militaries in the world use and train using the "shoot to stop the threat/firing some number of rounds center mass/head".  That doesn't make them right and shooting to wound people wrong though.

[Virginiá]

Well shooting people in the legs can also be deadly.. Would you be raging at these cops if they shot someone in the arm or leg to try to "immobilize" them and they ended up dying?

Do you think I'm that unreasonable? I mean this doesn't really make sense. There is a difference between wanting cops to take on a different approach to dealing with people then faulting them at every turn no matter what.

No, I wouldn't be raging at them if they tried and failed. The risks of a gunshot wound are obvious. A lot of people are just calling for police officers to be retrained in numerous aspects, and for them to actually be held responsible in the worst abuses of authority. That isn't too much to ask. I don't really expect you to agree, though. I don't think you've ever had experiences with nor see police the same way the communities in question do. Although, interestingly enough, I probably haven't either, but I can see what they are talking about. It doesn't take rocket science to see what has been going on for decades generations now.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Well shooting people in the legs can also be deadly.. Would you be raging at these cops if they shot someone in the arm or leg to try to "immobilize" them and they ended up dying?

Do you think I'm that unreasonable? I mean this doesn't really make sense. There is a difference between wanting cops to take on a different approach to dealing with people then faulting them at every turn no matter what.

No, I wouldn't be raging at them if they tried and failed. The risks of a gunshot wound are obvious. A lot of people are just calling for police officers to be retrained in numerous aspects, and for them to actually be held responsible in the worst abuses of authority. That isn't too much to ask. I don't really expect you to agree, though. I don't think you've ever had experiences with nor see police the same way the communities in question do. Although, interestingly enough, I probably haven't either, but I can see what they are talking about. It doesn't take rocket science to see what has been going on for decades generations now.

This wasn't an abuse of authority though.  And for the most part, the LGBT community isn't violently harassed by police all that often, so I don't think you can really say they've had the sort of dynamic with the police that many African-American and Hispanic communities do.  All due respect, I do think expecting the officer to risk getting stabbed by aiming for this person's legs is unreasonable in this case given the circumstances. 

[Ban my account ffs!]

I'm not one to defend cops just about ever. But in cases like this it's kind of hard to argue against them, since that's basically arguing against science. The problem is that guns and wounds do not work the way they do in movies.

First of all, every police force trains to shoot at the center of mass to "neutralize", not to kill or wound specifically. That's because it's not possible to really make that distinction. The center of mass is the best target because it's the most likely to be hit. Aiming at the arm or legs is not really an option for a couple reasons.

For one, kneecapping someone is NOT a "safe" way to shoot them. The shock of getting hit in the leg is enough to put a big strain on even a healthy adult's heart, much less someone with a heart condition, and could easily kill someone even before blood loss...if you had a fully stocked ambulance and trained paramedics immediately nearby they MIGHT be able to defibrillator the person but that's if they are IMMEDIATELY nearby, not a 10 minute drive away. For that matter even if that doesn't take the person out the blood loss likely would in minutes. In Hollywood the person will just writhe around on the ground moaning before the ambulance showed up, but in reality they'd have to be shot on hospital grounds to get the needed medical attention in time. The person can survive (as many have) if the wound doesn't hit any vital veins but there is no way for any cop to know where that person's vital veins are, and even if they could it'd be impossible to aim for.

snip

Thanks BRTD.  I did not know quite a bit of this.

[Alabama_Indy10]

Well shooting people in the legs can also be deadly.. Would you be raging at these cops if they shot someone in the arm or leg to try to "immobilize" them and they ended up dying?

Do you think I'm that unreasonable? I mean this doesn't really make sense. There is a difference between wanting cops to take on a different approach to dealing with people then faulting them at every turn no matter what.

No, I wouldn't be raging at them if they tried and failed. The risks of a gunshot wound are obvious. A lot of people are just calling for police officers to be retrained in numerous aspects, and for them to actually be held responsible in the worst abuses of authority. That isn't too much to ask. I don't really expect you to agree, though. I don't think you've ever had experiences with nor see police the same way the communities in question do. Although, interestingly enough, I probably haven't either, but I can see what they are talking about. It doesn't take rocket science to see what has been going on for decades generations now.

1. Which is what most people are doing.

2. Would you consider this one of the "worst abuses of authority?"

[Gustaf]

I saw the video of this. This isn't the worst case of police abuse in the US, but generally it's obvious to me that there is a severe problem with US cops being way too trigger-happy. This person didn't actually seem very dangerous in the clip, more disturbed and I'm pretty sure the situation could have been de-escalated. As has already been noted, Nordic police forces act a lot less aggressively and it seems to work fine (I'm pretty sure shooting at legs is the Swedish policy as well).

Also, yes, I'd probably be scared and shoot someone in the face if they came at me with a knife. I'm not a trained police officer. They should be trained to deal better with those situations rather than shoot first, ask questions later.

[Doimper]

How is it at all relevant that he was an LGBT activist, aside from muh identity politics.  Is it believed the police were targeting a gay?

They weren't targeting anyone. They were responding to a call that he was carrying a gun. Turns out he was carrying a knife, and when they tried to get him to drop the weapon, he dared them to shoot him. They obliged.

That's no excuse to shoot him dead. They could've easily neutralized him and contained the situation without taking his life. This is simply excessive use of force.

And how do you propose they do that without being stabbed?

What is a Taser, doofus?