Today's one-liner: "The shortest way to the distinguishing excellence of any writer is through his hostile critics." Richard LeGallienne
Local Government TV
▼
Wednesday, August 01, 2018
Dorney Park Shooting: Too Soon To Condemn Officer
On Saturday, a South Whitehall Township police officer shot and killed Joseph Santos, an apparently unarmed Hispanic man who was acting erratically and damaging cars near Dorney Park. He even hung on to one car as it drove away and ignored police commands to get on the ground. A protest is being planned for tonight, 5:30 pm, at Lincoln Avenue and Hamilton Boulevard. People are angry that a police officer may have rushed to judgment, but aren't they doing the same thing?
In the video above, I'm unable to determine where the officer is located. Santos can first be seen be seen standing alongside the front passenger side of a police vehicle. Then he starts walking to the rear of the cruiser to pull briefly at something, perhaps a windshield wiper. He then continues walking away and is actually out of view when someone, probably the officer, commands, "Get on the ground, right now!" Santos can then be seen approaching the officer, who repeats his command several times as Santos continues to approach him and appears to raise his arm and shout something. While Santos is about three or four feet away from the cruiser, the officer opens fire and I count five shots. There was no attempt to use less lethal means to subdue Santos with a taser, mace or baton.
If the officer believed that Santos posed a serious threat of harm to him, he is authorized to use deadly force. Santos appeared to be either mentally ill or under the influence of some form of a hallucinogenic drug like PCP that seems to imbue users with superhuman strength. In these situations, repeated tasers, pepper spray and batons are often ineffective.
I find the whole situation very troubling. The officer's use of deadly force may have been justified. Or it may have been criminal homicide. But rather than protest police brutality that may be nonexistent, why not wait until the facts are in? An independent investigation is being conducted by the Pennsylvania State Police, and their findings will be reviewed by Lehigh county DA Jim Martin. In the meantime, a vigil in memory of Santos' life is commendable. A lynch mob is not. Unfortunately, we will have the latter, and from groups that have a political, and not a justice, agenda.
97 comments:
You own views are appreciated, especially if they differ from mine. But remember, commenting is a privilege, not a right. I will delete personal attacks or off-topic remarks at my discretion. Comments that play into the tribalism that has consumed this nation will be declined. So will comments alleging voter fraud unless backed up by concrete evidence. If you attack someone personally, I expect you to identify yourself. I will delete criticisms of my comment policy, vulgarities, cut-and-paste jobs from other sources and any suggestion of violence towards anyone. I will also delete sweeping generalizations about mainstream parties or ideologies, i.e. identity politics. My decisions on these matters are made on a case by case basis, and may be affected by my mood that day, my access to the blog at the time the comment was made or other information that isn’t readily apparent.
What if he did what he did to someones car that was carrying a weapon (legally).
ReplyDeleteIt's not too soon, Bernie, and you stated the reason: "There was no attempt to use less lethal means to subdue Santos with a taser, mace or baton."
ReplyDeleteThe purpose of having police is that they are agents who are permitted to inflict harm on behalf of the state in order to prevent a greater harm from being committed. If all an officer has to do to avoid accountability for shooting an unarmed person to death is say that they were scared, then that whole concept goes out the window, and we may as well just give anybody who wants them a gun and a badge.
Now, is being a police officer dangerous? Yes, and it would be great if it weren't. But it is, and you know that when you sign up. And frankly if the only response you can think of when an unarmed man is walking toward you (maybe on drugs, but maybe also schizophrenic, hearing impaired, suffering from heatstroke, or who knows what else) is to shoot him 5 times, then you shouldn't be a police officer, because you have no business being entrusted with the kind of power that the police have.
This is the correct response.
DeleteIf the deceased would have happened to overcome non-lethal tactics (common with those, who are mentally ill/ or in a drug induced rage-it does happen), the suspect may have overpowered the officer (who was alone), and created an escalated event- wherein the subject may have acquired the officer's weapon, and vehicle (which could have also been used as a weapon). The officer acted reasonably- he's only being charged because reactionaries are abusing a minority plea for "justice".
DeleteThe deceased was acting erratic, by trying to damage cars in a busy highway, also by jumping on the hood of the police vehicle, and by not complying to the officers command. If the officer lost control of that situation, many more lives might have been lost. That is what cops are trained to realize, and base their judgement upon (quickly so, because a situation can turn on a law enforcer in a split second.
The very distressing thing about this and many police shootings is the number of rounds fired. In another part of the country a man had a knife to a woman's throat and threated to cut her. The police surrounded them and fired fifteen rounds killing both the man and the female hostage. It may be time for police to go back to revolvers as the tendency appears to be use your automatic handgun to spray and pray. While center mass targeting is part of training, some discretion needs to be used. Also property crimes are not grounds to use deadly force. That is to the yahoo who claims someone who's car is being damaged could have shot him with their gun.
ReplyDeleteTime to reevaluate recruitment and training, including psychological workups.
An automatic handgun? The only thing automatic is the muscle memory employed by the officer. His training is what saved his life and the life of others. The police are not running around shooting random people. Mr Santos made a collect call to anarchy and the call was answered. I want this cop as my neighbor.
DeleteOnce the layers are peeled back we will find this shooting not only justified but necessary. It’s a sad dose of reality but this incident is why we fund and promote public safety.
There are many abuses of power and doses of brutality in our society. This is not the case here.
"Too soon ..."
ReplyDeleteExactly. None of us were there and little information has been made available.
4:30 AM stated “It may be time for police to go back to revolvers...” In this situation, a revolver would not have had a different outcome. Police are not issued automatic handguns nor do they carry them as their sidearm. They are issued semi-automatics which, like a revolver, also require one pull of the trigger for each shot.
ReplyDeleteThe guy got what he deserved. He was endangering people with his antics and now the public is safe from his actions permanently. Good riddance.
ReplyDeleteSome would prefer that officers would wrestle with those who do not obey commands, bullshit, they do not need to risk life and limb. Teach the children to respect the law and those that enforce the law. As for 5 shots, all training of law enforcement teaches that you keep firing until the threat is eliminated which means down or incapacitated. This tried and proven methods of law enforcement.
ReplyDeleteGet on the ground me and get on the ground, what are they protesting here?
ReplyDeleteWhere are the protesters when a Cop is shot ?.
ReplyDelete"The guy got what he deserved."
ReplyDeleteWe really don't know.I know it is just as premature to praise the cop as it is to condemn him.
"The very distressing thing about this and many police shootings is the number of rounds fired. ... Also property crimes are not grounds to use deadly force."
ReplyDeleteOnce a decision to use lethal force is made, I understand completely why so many shots would be fired. You are trying to kill someone,nit wing him. Also, the officer would not be using deadly force to prevent property crimes. He would be using deadly force bc he thought his own life is in danger.
Whether the officer was justified will have to be determined by PSP and the DA. My question is why he did not use mace or tase him. Did he have a basis to think his own life was in danger? If not, he will unfortunately have to be charged. If he did, he will be exonerated.
Do you really think Jim "Hiccup" Martin will cross the thin blue line?
ReplyDeleteThere is a school of thought that purposes that Joseph Santos got to age 44 because of police protection, if not for police, and the good citizen's fear and/or respect for police, someone would have taken Santos out years ago.
ReplyDeleteWith police protection the citizen stands relieved of duty and puts themselves in greater danger with the state, than with the criminals when taking action.
If this officer acted as a citizen, it was a clean kill, if he was acting as a specially trained, specially equipped paid professional, trained in dealing with violence and conflict de-escalation, it's a fail.
No, you’re not trained to “shoot to kill”, you are trained to shoot to stop the threat, a fine but distinct proposition.
ReplyDeleteThat the officer will be exonoritated by the DA in Lehigh County is a foregone conclusion.
A civilian in the same circumstances would most certainly face trial.
ReplyDeleteTell that to the officer in MA who had his service weapon taken from him by a perp and used against him to kill him. Did he feel theatened? You just dont know what is going to happen, especially with someone acting in such an erratic manner.
ReplyDeleteCOMPLY or DIE
ReplyDeleteMental illness is not an exception.
Harassing traffic in the vicinity of Dorneyville is a Capital Offense.
Anyone who doesn’t listen to a police officer deserves to die,
When in doubt exercise summery execution.
ReplyDeleteIt is the American Way,
"A civilian in the same circumstances would most certainly face trial"
ReplyDeleteA civilian would have run away and called the cops.
Do we want our cops to run away and leave guys like this running loose in traffic doing harm to others?
A civilian in the same circumstances would most certainly face trial.
ReplyDeleteCivil trial for sure, but the DA would have to be blind.
"Now, is being a police officer dangerous? Yes, and it would be great if it weren't. But it is, and you know that when you sign up." What did Trump say to the wife of a fallen soldier that everyone was up in arms about? And the Officer that was shot with his own gun was struck HOW MANY TIMES and WHERE by bullets??? What is so hard about, "STOP!!" "Don't move!", "Let me see your hands!", "Get on the ground!",... etc.... Did anyone see the size of the bad guy, or the photo of him standing in the WEIGHT ROOM???? MACE DOES NOT WORK ON EVERYONE, a Baton can be taken from an officer who has to be within a couple to few feet of a bad guy, to use effectively, tasers don't always work, and if you miss with a prong, it's serves no purpose. Where is the vigil for the 16 year old murdered and the other two critically wounded, tonight?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/massachusetts-police-officer-was-shot-10-times-his-own-gun-n891846
PS Bernie, this was a well written article. Thank you.
“STOP ......... or die.
ReplyDeleteWhat could be simpler?
10:55 am
ReplyDelete"Harassing traffic in the vicinity of Dorneyville is a Capital Offense.
Anyone who doesn’t listen to a police officer deserves to die,"
In the real world, police exist for one reason, to protect the criminals, from the citizens, which they largely do, from top to bottom.
In a way, I kind of get your point, the police should have been there to protect Santos from us.
"A civilian in the same circumstances would most certainly face trial."
ReplyDeleteA civilian would not be in he same circumstances. The officer was there to respond to reports of someone engaged in malicious mischief and who was acting erratically. A civilian would have no authority to direct Santos to get on the ground. Under the law, the use of force against another person is justifiable if the person who acts in self-defense believe that the use of force is: "immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force by such other person on the present occasion." I believe a civilian might have a duty to retreat. The officer had an obligation to stay there and prevent the law from being broken.
We just don't know enough at this point. My chief question is why other, less lethal means, were not considered. Also, the officer appeared to be alone.
Just because something is legal, doesn’t make it right. Owning people was legal remember. A country that started off the way we have, I think it’s time EVERY single law gets re-evaluated.
DeleteAs for the idea of protecting property, if we cannot protect our property, what will happen, are we now required to let people take everything we worked for. If the policy becomes we cannot protect our property, no one will be safe.
ReplyDeleteYou said it yourself. He used no other means first. When you sign up to be a police officer, you know the feild you are in. Serve and protect. What is that man was a victim of being drugged or something and he killed him. We will never know the truth even after an investigation that’s been proven and is being proven across the country.
ReplyDeleteI got to school in that area and I’ve said it numerous times, it’s not a very friendly area! I do think we should have done something Saturday when it happened. I went by the spot Monday morning on my way into school and it killed me to see no one from near by put flowers or anything so I did because regardless that was someone’s family and I think they deserved to know someone cared.
Right now everything is so sensitive, but I think people are missing the point an entire group of people are being hurt everyday. And we just keep being told to shut up and get over it.
"My chief question is why other, less lethal means, were not considered."
ReplyDeletePerhaps there are different rules of engagement near such a facility, but your question needs to be answered.
"I believe a civilian might have a duty to retreat"
A civilian maybe, civilian has not been defined constitutionally, but every citizen certainly has a duty to protect there life and liberty, and to stand their ground.
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-lapd-hostage-shooting-20180730-story.html
ReplyDeleteHere's a case where the officer attempted to use non-lethal beanbags to back up a suspect wielding a knife. The bad guy backed up, took a hostage, slashed her throat, and both were shot and killed by the cop. His use of non-lethal force resulted in the death of an innocent woman. These are high-stress situations and it's too easy to opine without all the facts. I won't either, except to point out that deferring to non-lethal force is not always the best response.
Wrong. A citizen in Pa can stand his ground only if immediately necessary to protect himself. The castle doctrine is not the same as in Fl. Your assailant must have a lethal weapon. Citizens also donor have the authority to bark commands at others, excepting some jerks.
ReplyDelete" ..that man was a victim of being drugged or something ..."
ReplyDeletePerhaps. But if he's a victim of being drugged or something, who is the perpetrator who drugged or somethinged him?
Well why don’t you go into he afterlife and ask him. Who knows, like are you in the same world? He was just coming from Dorney. Isnt this the same place they were just touching kids? People are sick.
DeleteHe was there with his fiancé and son celebrating his sons birthday. A new article is posted, it makes no sense. He even has a clothing line called DREAM That stands for DRUGS RUIN EVERYTHING AROUND ME.
That takes a two second google search. It’s a cover up saying he was high, where’s the witnesses, video of him running after cars, something!
Maybe it was suicide by cop. Seems to be a big thing these days. Die a martyr and (1)start a racial issue in the community (2)make big bucks for the surviving family members and friends who may be lucky enough to get a book/movie deal out of it!
ReplyDeleteLots of good questions here, many of which have already been mentioned:
ReplyDelete1) Do SWT officers carry tasers or other less-than-lethal options? If so, did this officer have them on him?
2) Do SWT officers have body cams? If so, when will that footage be available?
3) Do SWT officers have dash cams? Even if it was pointed the other way, is there audio available from any part of the incident (particularly when the guy was hanging on the side of the police car)?
4) It seems five shots were fired. How many hit the victim/suspect? That's an incredibly busy area in general, and the day of the shooting was particularly busy. Whether or not there were any errant shots, or if the angle of shooting posed any threat to innocent bystanders needs to be considered.
5) Timeline/timeline/timeline. How long was the entire incident going on? How long was the officer engaged with the suspect? We've all seen the video of the end of the incident, but only know bits and pieces from what happened before. That information is surely relevant, and would have been part of the officer's decision making.
All these and more are fair questions, and ones that we all should want fully answered during the investigation. Police accountability is government accountability, and everybody should want that (police, family, community included).
That said, to hold a protest tonight (or a protest masquerading as a vigil) is wrong. Nobody likely knows the answers yet, and to incite people at this point is reckless. I'm sure the "protest" is more of a political rally for opportunists trying to push their narrative.
Let's let the facts come in, and then decide what was or wasn't justified.
"Wrong. A citizen in Pa can stand his ground only if immediately necessary to protect himself. The castle doctrine is not the same as in Fl"
ReplyDeleteI speak only from the jury box, if you were a fellow juror and pointed this out, it would not change my vote. I believe the constitution provides equal protection to both Floridians and Pennsylvanians.
1:01, you can ignore a fellow juror but have to listen to the law as you get it from the judge.
DeleteMACE only works 99% of the time.
ReplyDelete1:25, I have linked to a YouTube video that shows just how difficult it was for officers to subdue a man on angel dust. You are incorrect.
Delete"It’s a cover up saying he was high ..."
ReplyDeleteNobody is saying he was high. Toxicology tests will provide that information. Calling something so serious a "cover up" at this point in the investigation is irresponsible and unfair.
For what it's worth, during my days as a user, I often slipped away from family functions to get stoned. Fetching cigarettes was my go-to excuse. 9 years straight and sober next week. But I was a real sneaky POS while struggling with my problem.
Bernie O'Hare said...
ReplyDelete"Wrong. A citizen in Pa can stand his ground only if immediately necessary to protect himself. The castle doctrine is not the same as in Fl. Your assailant must have a lethal weapon..."
That's not quite the whole story. While a PA resident might not be able to invoke the stand your ground law, they're still entitled to the right to self defense.
Certainly, if the people in the car that had the window ripped out were armed, they have a right to defend themselves at that moment if they felt they were in danger of death or serious bodily harm (again, at that moment). Personally, I think most people would believe they were in danger of death or serious bodily harm at that moment.
However, if after the assailant got off the car and moved away, those same people got out of the car (instead of just driving away) to take matters into their own hands or tried to function as a police officer, that's a whole different situation, and much less defendable from a legal standpoint.
Similarly, if someone else who is legally carrying believes that someone else is in danger of death, serious bodily injury, rape, etc., they can intervene with deadly force. Legally, I wouldn't recommend it in every location (because of different prosecution standards, likely jury pool, etc.) but I can understand the argument that someone feels a moral obligation to step in when someone's life is in danger (if they are able to).
Bottom line, circumstances matter. Think through what you're willing to do (ahead of time) if you become a victim or a bystander. As a civilian, try to exhaust all other options before taking a shot.
Hopefully, we have a full and complete investigation, and everyone can learn from it.
ReplyDeleteI know the police (across the country) will dissect these types of incidents to see if there was anything that could have been done better or differently.
Similarly, I think it would be good for civilians to learn from the incident. No matter what the ruling on the end of the incident (the shooting), there likely were multiple opportunities for the suspect/victim to de-escalate the situation.
Whether it's simply complying with police officer's commands on the scene, or just a better understanding of what a situation looks like from the officer's perspective, a lot can be learned on the civilian side as well.
Sadly, I don't think any of those who are now jumping into protest mode have any interest in learning anything beyond any bit of information that supports the narrative they want to spin.
The best information indicates that TAZERS@ are effective on 94% of occasions.
ReplyDeleteAs I have mentioned before, they can be completely useless against someone on angel dust. Most cops know this, too, bc they have experienced it.
ReplyDeleteALSO, LAPD sez it is only 50% effective. https://www.scpr.org/news/2016/03/04/58182/lapd-using-taser-more-but-the-weapon-found-less-ef/
ReplyDeleteOMG Can we please dispense with the "protest" crap. Do something USEFUL to make your point. Do something USEFUL to get something done. Do something USEFUL to make a change. The protest/vigil is really getting old. I'd really like to know if 90% of the people who attend these things really give a crap about what happened. Maybe I should show up and take a poll.
ReplyDelete1:53PM
ReplyDeleteLet them protest and march...they'll all get some exercise, get tired and hungry and go home. Think of it as a communal picnic like the old pictures of hangings, and a chance to make money, go sell hotdogs and bottles of water, cash in...polls are fake news anyway.
MACE/Pepper Spray does not work on individuals “high on Angle Dust”.
ReplyDeleteSource Please.
The effectiveness of TAZER depends on the skill level of the police officer and the amount or type of clothes worn by the suspect.
The primary issue is the officer made no other attempt to subdue. The suspect prior to using deadly force.
ReplyDelete1:01, you can ignore a fellow juror but have to listen to the law as you get it from the judge.
ReplyDeleteI would not ignore a fellow juror, I would listen to them, as I would listen to the judge. But I will not be compelled to ignore my conscience.
"A citizen in Pa can stand his ground only if immediately necessary to protect himself. The castle doctrine is not the same as in Fl. Your assailant must have a lethal weapon." Is a fist considered a "lethal weapon"? This burly, scaring looking dude, crazed and/or drunk/high approaches my car, rips out my car window, potentially threatening my family, then reaches in with his hands... can I use lethal force with my permit to carry, to shoot him? Is that simple self-defence or "stand my ground"?
ReplyDelete2:25PM
ReplyDeleteIs that simple self-defense or "stand my ground"?
In your hypothetical situation there is no distinction.
How much training time at the Police Academy is devoted to dealing with the mentally ill!
ReplyDeletePolice acting on behalf of the state should have more responsibility to demonstrate lethal danger relative to their training than a citizen does protecting himself and family.
ReplyDeleteA fist can most certainly kill you.
Shoot everyone who makes a fist.
ReplyDeleteThe new normal.
Let's face it, no matter what that Officer would have done, the S*** would have hit the fan in some way. Taser - objection Mace-objection Pepper spray - objection
ReplyDeleteBaton - objection Gun - objection Run him over with the car - objection Piss on him - objection AND if they had just let the moron run around in traffic until some poor motorist or two took him out, there would still be objections from one group or another. Battle the legal rights issue all you want but start to face one fact: As a nation upholding liberty and justice for all, we have gone to hell in a hand basket! Be afraid Be very afraid
He had a clothing line called D.R.E.A.M
ReplyDeleteDrugs
Ruin
Everything
Around
Me
Guess he was right, probably relapsed on some sherm sticks and went loco essé!
Anon 7:21, I am sure he meant semi-automatic. You know s well as I the trigger action on a semi-automatic handgun is much lighter than firing a revolver. Let us not quibble around the edges of the point.
ReplyDeleteIt is a given that Martin will not press charges that is his MO. If the officer felt he or others were in mortal danger he certainly had the right to use deadly force. The sad thing is how many people on this blog cheer the action. A life is a life. In the age of trump we are all becoming less humane.
ReplyDeleteThe action on a semiautomatic pistol may, or may not, have a lighter action than a given revolver.
ReplyDeleteGeneralizations are bullsjit.
Anonymous 3:36 said...
ReplyDelete"I am sure he meant semi-automatic. You know s well as I the trigger action on a semi-automatic handgun is much lighter than firing a revolver"
Wow, just when I thought I had heard every ignorant statement about guns, you come up with a new one.
I'm assuming that you really have no experience with any type of firearms.
anon 3:55 you are nuts. A revolver by design will require a heavier action. Semi-auto handguns can be adjusted to be even lighter.
ReplyDelete1.37
ReplyDelete"there likely were multiple opportunities for the suspect/victim to de-escalate the situation."
and there is plenty of room for the cop to calm things down.
perhaps more emphasis on the police controlling the action without gunfire.
a person died and the reason for that death should be better than the information offered so far
The fact that he was on probation for drug charges does not make him a monster. He was still a human being. I'm not so sure about you, though.
ReplyDelete"a person died and the reason for that death should be better than the information offered so far"
ReplyDeleteWhy? Because some anonymous asshole says so? The PSP and DA Jim Martin are under no obligation to satisfy your demand for instant everything. Investigations like this take time. Before you break out the torches and pitchforks, try a little patience.
"Shoot everyone who makes a fist.
ReplyDeleteThe new normal."
You should not be shot for making a gun, pointing at someone is different. Same goes with your fist.
" Be afraid Be very afraid"
ReplyDeleteThat's what Authoritarian Donald Trump tells you, and you respond. Better buy a few more guns.
"Shoot everyone who makes a fist"
ReplyDeleteYou don't know that at all.
2:25, You are asking stupid questions based on facts you don't know. Give it a rest.
ReplyDelete"The primary issue is the officer made no other attempt to subdue. The suspect prior to using deadly force."
ReplyDeleteYou don't know that. There may have been other efforts. That video only covers the very endof the encounter.
As evidenced by some of the commentary offered in response to Bernie's article, the Lehigh Valley is sorely in need of vastly improved mental health services.
ReplyDelete12:55, I have read SWT officers do have body cams. If so, that will answer a lot of questions.
ReplyDeleteThe perp sure has a long druggie arrest record spanning over a decade and lots of jail time too. Amusing that he called his " charity work "DREAM" as a ruse to cover his drug business.....Was only a matter of time with this loose drug cannon... I wonder how many lives he ruined with his drug business?
ReplyDelete"The fact that he was on probation for drug charges does not make him a monster."
ReplyDeleteSo true! The monsters are those that kept him from cheap legal access to drugs.
Without the state and the police trying to protect him from himself he would have never made 44.
5.15
ReplyDeletewhere did i say i wanted instant anything?
a persons life should have value.
Just because a cop has the right to shoot does not mean he should.
The information shown so far is lacking in many respects.
the investigation should take time.
so the question becomes whether that man had to die or not.
A critical piece of the missing mental health services is appropriate training for local police department.
ReplyDelete5.23
ReplyDelete"You don't know that. There may have been other efforts. That video only covers the very endof the encounter."
and if no effort was made?
Do you really believe that the officer will face any consequences?
"a persons life should have value."
ReplyDeleteMy guess is the market will pay more for the video...the photographer must have seen it your way, I don't think he thought of shopping it around. If it were me this would be a home video until someone values my life enough to buy it.
5.37
ReplyDelete"Amazing all these cry babies make it the police fault until of of these druggies hurts one of your own right?"
And what happens if the cop is at fault?
Has that officer been given a drug test?
The cop is alive and a person is dead.
Why he had to die is important and it will take time to know the full story
"Do you really believe that the officer will face any consequences?"
ReplyDeleteIf he does, it will be largely due to the video.
Does anyone remember what happened to Ramsey Orta the videographer of the Eric Garner choke-hold death? You guess it, he has been jailed.
"far left will blame president Trump."
ReplyDeleteThat because the far left is financed by the far right.
Anon @4:12
ReplyDeleteWhen you don’t have a clue about a subject it’s better to shut up.
n0on 6:27, you don't know what you are talking about.
ReplyDeleteReading the posts on this blog it is clear that we are OK with a police state. Just wave a flag and wear a MAGA hat and you will let the police take over. Sad. Goodbye America. Many historians have predicted it would end this way.
ReplyDeleteI get comments from both sides. Historians do not predict what is going to happen. Also, I see nothing in this incident that leads me to conclude that we are on the verge of becoming a police state. That's histrionic on your part, speaking of history. I think prejudice is very real, and a lot of it is just under the surface. People deny they have it. But it is very real. Just a few weeks ago, a black friend of mine was pulled over by an officer bc a neighbor saw him in his aunt's driveway and called the cops. The officer actually watched him,and then pulled him over. Turns out my friend coached one of the officer's kids. He was very apologetic. But let's not rush to judgment. This matter is getting an independent, impartial investigation by a separate police agency.
ReplyDeleteMonday morning quarterbacks , other poster is correct ,semi-automatics are issued firearms not ‘automatics’ . Revolver shooters are now rare everywhere . I carried one as a constable— intentionally. I also would qualify each year with ‘frangible’ ammo made right here in Pennsylvania. This officer was in some stress . He may have intended to use a taser ,but may have found it inoperable as everything has a flaw—- at the last seconds during his confrontation with this ‘mad man’. Non of us know. The officer didn’t just pick on this guy ,this character was a threateningly public safety issue before and during the stop.
ReplyDeleteAnon 3:36
ReplyDeletePlease get your facts straight. Semi automatic triggers are no more sensitive than revolvers unless cops would be required to carry single action revolvers which I highly doubt. This isn’t the Wild Wild West in some cowboy movie where cowboys are required to cock their gun before firing
Bernie O'Hare said: "Just a few weeks ago, a black friend of mine was pulled over by an officer bc a neighbor saw him in his aunt's driveway and called the cops."
ReplyDeleteThat doesn't make it a racial incident or example of prejudice. If I see something unusual at my neighbor's house, I'll either check it out myself or call the police to check it out. That could be a different car, or a person, or something else. That's called being a good neighbor.
Now if the guy had been there multiple times and the neighbor had seen him at the house before, that's another story. But if it's a first-time thing, that doesn't mean it's racial.
I was brought up to look out for and help my neighbors. I don't think I'm alone in that, or that people of other races are brought up differently. I would expect the same response if I was a first-time visitor at a house in a predominantly black (or Hispanic, etc.) neighborhood.
I'm not saying racism doesn't exist, just that there might be other explanations for things that are portrayed as racism nowadays.
He sure thought it was racist and there is no doubt in my mind the cop would have no concern at all if a white guy was ditting in that car with his daughter. You don’t see it bc you probably are a latent racist yourself. Don’t be offended. I think most in my age group are latent racists, including me. We just have no clue what it is like to be pulled over for bullshit or followed in stores or to see women cross the street when they see us. I believe the problem is going away but will linger for a few generations.
ReplyDelete"Us"? WTF? Are you now a black man, Bernie? Or do women cross the street when they see you because you look like an obese degenerate?
ReplyDeleteI am black Irish, and everyone crosses the street when they see me coming. As well they should.
ReplyDeleteanon 9:56 you are pedaling half truths. Stop pedaling NRA nonsense. Reality matters.
ReplyDeleteAnon 9:56 statement does not have any logic,your trigger issue not relative to anything . Or Evan ‘single action handguns.’When people ‘slap ‘ a trigger and fire 5 rounds in rapid fire , they usually fail to hit anything.
ReplyDeleteOnly an experienced operator with discipline could hit a human at 12 yds with all five round expended . Well made Revolvers are inherently more accurate than autoloaders with very little exception. Mostly ,shot placement is a matter of watching the front sight and proper body positions. So 12: 19 your statement has nothing to do with the NRA. Pray for these men that protect us .
"I am black Irish, and everyone crosses the street when they see me coming. As well they should"
ReplyDeleteThis is beautifully double edged...and long an aspiration of mine...hope you don't mined if I use this someday.
Bernie O'Hare said...
ReplyDelete"He sure thought it was racist and there is no doubt in my mind the cop would have no concern at all if a white guy was ditting in that car with his daughter. You don’t see it bc you probably are a latent racist yourself. Don’t be offended. I think most in my age group are latent racists, including me."
First, I don't think I'm in your age group and I'm not a racist.
As I stated originally, the guy in the driveway may have felt the motivation was racist, and may have experienced racism previously, but that doesn't necessarily make it so in this instance.
I also don't know how the cop (in your 8/1; 9:49 side story) gets any blame. According to your own comment, the cop was responding to a call from a neighbor. So the cop has an obligation to check it out.
As I noted previously, good neighbors watch out for each other. They look for things that are unusual. I would say that any car lingering in my neighbor's driveway with someone inside is going to get checked out by me or a fellow neighbor, or called in to police. It doesn't matter what color the guy inside the car is, if that can even be seen. If I don't recognize the car, I'd rather be safe than sorry (for my neighbor).
Apparently, the "racist" neighbor was concerned about this guy's aunt, who I'll assume is also black. That seems like an odd thing for a "racist" to care about.
Maybe we'll find out more when the investigation is complete, but I don't think the "racist" label should be thrown around without all the facts. Let's give this incident the same time to be investigated as the Dorney Park shooting.