It almost seems that cops are trained to think that they ARE in fact incompetent & thus, are trained to react like fearful fools. Trained to be twitchy, fearful & reactionary, armed with a deadly weapon & set loose on our streets. Oh and also, institutional racism, inherent bias & a ridiculously inaccurate & antiquated view of MaryJane.
1 Like
Deans would be heavier still. Is using Cathedral clergy in artillery usual in the US?
You’re failing to note my distinction between farmers (small landowners) and farm labourers, including slaves. My reference to “tenants” implies farmers, in fact, in the UK context. Farmers usually had horses and could provide a crude cavalry, tow guns, and be a mounted infantry in the classical (or Celtic) pattern of horse or chariot riders who fought on foot.
Yes, I have read up on it, both the society in the US and the largely English background from which it derives.
5 Likes
He never touched his gun. It was found later by paramedics, I believe, in his pocket. He was reaching for his ID, which the officer had asked him for. The amount of time that passed between Castille informing the officer he had a firearm and The officer opening fire was literally seconds. It seems clear to me that the officer was already of the mindset that he’d pulled over a criminal guilty of something as soon as he pulled him over, and when he heard the word “firearm” he immediately went into full blown fight-or-flight panic mode.
Edited: I miswrote and said Castille opened fire. Total brain fart.
9 Likes
There are many conclusions people have jumped to in this…some perfectly logical leaps, some great leaps but understandable given the circumstances and climate, and others I don’t even get.
As Picard says in Measure of a Man: “Your honor, a courtroom is a crucible. In it we burn away irrelevancies until we are left with a pure product - the truth, for all time.” a forum or blog, or the internet is not a courtroom; but I do in these types of situations try to push away the fat and get to the stripped down truth.
a civilian man is dead, a police officer shot him and caused said death. The why is muddied, but can be boiled down to “The officer felt threatened”. and since we have no clear indication that the man (Philando) made any overtly threatening action that we can reasonably see…then it is on the officer in my opinion for failing to do his job. He needed to remain in control. He needed to de-escalate the situation.
I feel the cop is at fault, but I do not think he was willfully out to murder someone. I do not agree with the jury’s decision based on what I have seen; however, this is the verdict and the officer cannot be retried. So, we have to live with it and the consequences of it.
1 Like
I agree that this is exactly what likely happened. Which is an utter failure on the officer’s part. Their job is not “shoot first ask questions later” and it appears to me this is what he did.
1 Like
Slave, yes, of course they didn’t support that. I see your point on distinction between land owners and laborers, though I contend there were far more small farms working the land with family, vs wealthy land owners hiring workers.
And while I see your point on that, I am not sure there was really animosity between laborers and land owners are far as arms go. And as I said people like Jefferson wanted everyone to be elevated to the point they could all be self sufficient, more or less.
Now in England there certainly was, especially because of the way classes worked there. But part of the founding principles of America (though not perfect in its first form, and still need some work today) is a more equal footing between classes. I don’t think they would be aghast the common man carrying arms. Some would probably be surprised at the former slaves owning guns.
Still, while I respect a lot of the early principles and framework by the founding fathers, especially Jefferson, all of them had antiquated thinking in many areas. What they would or wouldn’t be aghast at isn’t really that relevant. Do I really hold someones opinion as sacred on one topic because it supports my view, when their opinion on other topics don’t at all align with me (or America) today. It’s one of those things about not putting heroes too high on pedestals.
Even more bogus, this guys testimony wasn’t evidence of a clearly dangerous state of mind.
Murder would require pre-meditation. He doesn’t appear murderous, but he does transition phase very quickly to killing. The suggestion that his training encouraged this reaction could be driven as an argument that the pre-meditation occurred during training and in subsequent interactions with other officers and social connections.
I feel it’s murder. But legally, this has to be manslaughter at the very least.
I’m so sorry you guys have these people in the USA.
2 Likes
I could not have rolled my eyes more at that statement. I assume his defense team either came up with or approved it.
Also, was there even evidence he was smoking it? Just a claim of marijuana smell is pretty weak sauce as well.
3 Likes
I wish more people used thinking like this. I’ll admit I’ve jumped to conclusions but I do try to keep it to just the facts. Unfortunately, the facts in this case are hidden from view. Some are saying he never touched his gun. but does that mean he wasn’t going for his gun and was stopped by the officer shooting? Perhaps he was and the officer would be justified. but that burden of proof will always fall on the officer. I suppose a good body camera in this situation could have solved this, but even then I think there’s a good chance it would not have seen what he was grabbing. One solution here might be cameras on the officers glasses instead of on their chest. As close to their own eyes as possible This would tell us exactly what he was seeing. I’ve never been comfortable that a body camera tells the whole story, but if we knew exactly the direction the officer was looking it would be closer to the truth and better evidence for or against his judgement.
1 Like
Why are cops above the law?
3 Likes
Seriously? You really want to JAQ off?
Use your brain. I know that sounds like an insult, but I’m serious. Use your brain and think through the scenario. The driver is sitting in a cramped position in a cramped space. The officer is standing free in an open space. Even if we make the heroic assumption that Castile was going for his firearm with the intent to harm McTwitchy, then all the advantages still lay outside the vehicle. Retrieving his weapon and bringing it to bear (after, remember, telling McTwitchy he had one, and with his family in the car, and otherwise just going about his day … context matters) would take significant effort, composure, and time. No one can magically transition in an instant from thinkink a thought to having a weapon in their hand oriented in the correct direction.
[quote=“Ericb, post:70, topic:103149”]
As close to their own eyes as possible This would tell us exactly what he was seeing. I’ve never been comfortable that a body camera tells the whole story, but if we knew exactly the direction the officer was looking it would be closer to the truth and better evidence for or against his judgement.[/quote]
Oh bullshit. This is just a variant of “Welp, we can’t really know what happened so [shrug]. Best we just take the killer’s word for it.”
9 Likes
He was reaching for his ID as the officer told him to. If reaching for something is enough to justify shooting, what can any of us expect to happen to us during traffic stops?
This guy did everything right and is dead.
6 Likes
I know right? I used to date a guy, years ago, who rode a bike and carried a gun (he was white and kind of neo-pagan nerdy, BTW) and when we got pulled over one night, he told the cop immediately that he was carrying and had a conceal permit, which the cop asked to see, along with his license, etc. That’s what you’re supposed to do if you have a licensed gun, yeah? Cops KNOW this shit. They fucking KNOW it!
This cop has a case of panic of black man. This is just horrible on so many levels that this keeps happening.
6 Likes
Which if you ask me, is still entirely unecessary, but yes, at least if he had done this, Castile would not now be dead.
6 Likes
geez, read my first post. I completely agree he’s in the wrong here and all of the burdens are on the officer. I said they need to be trained to do nothing until they have proof of a weapon. I believe I’m using my brain here more than you are and not just spouting off. And I really don’t get what you are getting at about my comment on having a camera closer to their eyes. If anything, in this case, it probably would have condemned this officer as it would have shown us the driver had nothing in his hand and the shooting was not justified. This would be the opposite of ‘taking the killer’s word for it’.
Being born black in America?
3 Likes
there is no proof either way what he was reaching for. Regardless, the officer admitted he did not know what the driver had in his hands, so he should be held accountable for his actions.
how about you have someone with a gun in your face freaking out and yelling at you and see how “perfectly” you react.
6 Likes
His girlfriend, who was sitting next to him says he was.
"Ms Reynolds is heard explaining that her boyfriend was reaching for his ID, to which Mr Yanez replied: “I told him not to reach for it.”
The officer called for emergency responders and later is heard saying: “I don’t know where the gun was.”
The footage appeared to corroborate Ms Reynolds’ account of the incident. which she filmed immediately following the shooting."
We don’t need video proof to agree that the shooting was not justified.
6 Likes
