Playa del Carmen, Mexico's virtual guidebook written by locals
 

Go Back   www.Playa.info > Off Topic Stuff > General Off-Topic Stuff
FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 06-22-2017   #16 (permalink)
añejo
 
Mnbruce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: St. Louis Park,Mn.
Posts: 11,548
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlayadelSolDos View Post
I hope his family sues the shit out of everyone involved.
There will be a civil lawsuit.

Last edited by Mnbruce; 06-22-2017 at 11:04 AM..
Mnbruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2017   #17 (permalink)
añejo
 
PlayadelSolDos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanD View Post
51+ times of not learning to carry a weapon in the car, smoke dope in front of your young kid, looking over your vehicle so you wont get pulled over, not high as **** while driving impaired, FULLY Complying with the Officer .... Jesus - You think someone would some time in their life finally get a forking clue on the procedure ??
The man had a permit to legally carry. He did what he was supposed to do as a person carrying with a permit, which is announce to the officer that you are armed.

He tested positive for THC (which means nothing and, as far as I know is not a crime carrying the death penalty) but this BS from the cop convinces me of his guilt:

Quote:
"And I thought if he’s, if he has the, the guts and the audacity to smoke marijuana in front of the five year old girl and risk her lungs and risk her life by giving her secondhand smoke and the front seat passenger doing the same thing then what, what care does he give about me. And, I let off the rounds and then after the rounds were off, the little girls was screaming."
Seriously? What crossed his mind as he empited his weapon into the man was that the man was a threat because of the danger of secondhand smoke. No friggin way. I wonder if he considered the societal problem of secondhand bullets.
PlayadelSolDos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2017   #18 (permalink)
way into it
 
sonya_thomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 246
Trigger warning - lots of profanity. The liberal redneck's take on BLM, really makes his point at 1:56 in:


Last edited by sonya_thomas; 06-22-2017 at 02:52 PM..
sonya_thomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2017   #19 (permalink)
añejo
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlayadelSolDos View Post
Figure this deserves its own thread as it hasn't been getting the coverage I believe it deserves.

I do not know how any reasonable person could see that video and conclude that the cop was innocent. Not even a manslaughter charge stuck. What a complete travesty of justice.

I have called out BLM when they were pushing false narratives like Michael Brown but I'll be damned if they don't have a good case here. Why was he shot and killed by the cops? The only reason I can come up with is his skin color. He did everything he was supposed to and the cop filled him full of lead.
Based on news coverage for the several months leading up to the trial, before seeing this video I was of the opinion that the cop over-reacted, panicked, and shot too soon. The video clearly shows the cop doing everything by the book, polite, calm, professional, roughly this:

Cop: I stopped you because your brake lights aren't working.
PC: I have to tell you I have a firearm.
Cop: OK, well don't pull it out, then .....don't pull it out!!, don't pull it out!!! (cop reaches in to grab his hand, wrestles for a moment then backs off and shoots him several times, as he was trained to do when it appears he's continuing to pull something out of his pants pocket despite being specifically and repeatedly told not to.)

There is no doubt in my mind after seeing this video that the cop did the right thing when the dummy appeared to continue to do exactly what he was told not to do. The cop is under no obligation to risk his life waiting to see what the dummy pulls out of his pocket - the presumption is, after specifically talking about a firearm - and being specifically told in a calm, non-offensive, reasonable voice "well, don't pull it out then", as if anybody in his right mind would even consider attempting to pull it out right in front of the cop, who was clearly openly surprised when he kept doing it - that whatever he's trying to pull out of his pants pocket after being told not to is, in fact, the very gun he was warned not to pull.

The clincher is that the cop had a moment to reach into the car and try to immobilize his hand, but for whatever reason couldn't immobilize it - was he resisting, or seemed to be resisting? Only the cop knows, and his reaction was consistent with being unsuccessful in overcoming 'resistance', if that's what he thought it was, and in backing away the cop has now placed the guy's hand, with whatever is in it, below the window sill out of the angle of his line-of-sight. That was a mistake, but an excusable one - it's probably difficult (and not particularly smart) to train a cop to stay put in the window, withing inches of presumed drawn weapon, so he can see what it turns out to be in the split second before he gets it right between the eyes.

The cop did everything by the book, as he was clearly well-trained to do -
except he wasn't trained (if that can even be done) to abandon his humanity and be so suspicious and hard-nosed that he assumes that whatever he says to anybody will be routinely ignored. That happens more often that we realize, of course, which is why nice cops probably have a lower life expectancy than the hard-nosed variety, who do a better job of staying alive.

So, regarding your post, what crap you write.
__________________
Beam-Eye, be my baby

Last edited by beam-eye; 06-22-2017 at 04:47 PM..
beam-eye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2017   #20 (permalink)
¡No mames güey!
 
roni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mérida, Yucatán
Posts: 75,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by beam-eye View Post
Based on news coverage for the several months leading up to the trial, before seeing this video I was of the opinion that the cop over-reacted, panicked, and shot too soon. The video clearly shows the cop doping everything by the book, polite, calm, professional, roughly this:

Cop: I stopped you because your brake lights aren't working.
PC: I have to tell you I have a firearm.
Cop: OK, well don't pull it out, then .....don't pull it out!!, don't pull it out!!! (cop reaches in to grab his hand, wrestles for a moment then backs off and shoots him several times, as he was trained to do when it appears he's continuing to pull something out of his pants pocket despite being specifically and repeatedly told not to.)

There is no doubt in my mind after seeing this video that the cop did the right thing when the dummy appeared to continue to do exactly what he was told not to do. The cop is under no obligation to risk his life waiting to see what the dummy pulls out of his pocket - the presumption is, after specifically talking about a firearm - and being specifically told in a calm, non-offensive, reasonable voice "well, don't pull it out then", as if anybody in his right mind would even consider attempting to pull it out right in front of the cop, who was clearly openly surprised when he kept doing it - that whatever he's trying to pull out of his pants pocket after being told not to is, in fact, the very gun he was warned not to pull.

The clincher is that the cop had a moment to reach into the car and try to immobilize his hand, but for whatever reason couldn't immobilize it - was he resisting, or seemed to be resisting? Only the cop knows, and his reaction was consistent with being unsuccessful in overcoming 'resistance', if that's what he thought it was, and in backing away the cop has now placed the guy's hand, with whatever is in it, below the window sill out of the angle of his line-of-sight. That was a mistake, but an excusable one - it's probably difficult (and not particularly smart) to train a cop to stay put in the window, withing inches of presumed drawn weapon, so he can see what it turns out to be in the split second before he gets it right between the eyes.

The cop did everything by the book, as he was clearly well-trained to do -
except he wasn't trained (if that can even be done) to abandon his humanity and be so suspicious and hard-nosed that he assumes that whatever he says to anybody will be routinely ignored. That happens more often that we realize, of course, which is why nice cops probably have a lower life expectancy than the hard-nosed variety, who do a better job of staying alive.

So, regarding your post, what crap you write.
I was waiting for Dr. Beam-Eye to show up.

He did not disappoint.
roni is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2017   #21 (permalink)
añejo
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by roni View Post
I was waiting for Dr. Beam-Eye to show up.

He did not disappoint.
Right. Applying a little logic to purely emotional posts is a welcome diversion, but fraught with disappointment.
beam-eye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2017   #22 (permalink)
añejo
 
PlayadelSolDos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 2,228
You know how you sometimes hear people say things like "He wrote the definitive book on agricultural policy in sub-Saharan Africa immediately following the French revolution" or similar such platitudes? I think some people believe they do that for internet posts too. They don't.
PlayadelSolDos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2017   #23 (permalink)
añejo
 
Mnbruce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: St. Louis Park,Mn.
Posts: 11,548
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mnbruce View Post
There will be a civil lawsuit.
Lawsuit avoided. Three million dollar settlement announced this morning.
Mnbruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2017   #24 (permalink)
añejo
 
PlayadelSolDos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mnbruce View Post
Lawsuit avoided. Three million dollar settlement announced this morning.
If they settled for this amount, maybe there is more to the story than I know. Seems very low. Then again, maybe the family just wanted closure.
PlayadelSolDos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2017   #25 (permalink)
añejo
 
Babaloo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Playa del Carmen
Posts: 29,588
Quote:
Originally Posted by beam-eye View Post
Based on news coverage for the several months leading up to the trial, before seeing this video I was of the opinion that the cop over-reacted, panicked, and shot too soon. The video clearly shows the cop doing everything by the book, polite, calm, professional, roughly this:

Cop: I stopped you because your brake lights aren't working.
PC: I have to tell you I have a firearm.
Cop: OK, well don't pull it out, then .....don't pull it out!!, doqn't pull it out!!! (cop reaches in to grab his hand, wrestles for a moment then backs off and shoots him several times, as he was trained to do when it appears he's continuing to pull something out of his pants pocket despite being specifically and repeatedly told not to.)

There is no doubt in my mind after seeing this video that the cop did the right thing when the dummy appeared to continue to do exactly what he was told not to do. The cop is under no obligation to risk his life waiting to see what the dummy pulls out of his pocket - the presumption is, after specifically talking about a firearm - and being specifically told in a calm, non-offensive, reasonable voice "well, don't pull it out then", as if anybody in his right mind would even consider attempting to pull it out right in front of the cop, who was clearly openly surprised when he kept doing it - that whatever he's trying to pull out of his pants pocket after being told not to is, in fact, the very gun he was warned not to pull.

The clincher is that the cop had a moment to reach into the car and try to immobilize his hand, but for whatever reason couldn't immobilize it - was he resisting, or seemed to be resisting? Only the cop knows, and his reaction was consistent with being unsuccessful in overcoming 'resistance', if that's what he thought it was, and in backing away the cop has now placed the guy's hand, with whatever is in it, below the window sill out of the angle of his line-of-sight. That was a mistake, but an excusable one - it's probably difficult (and not particularly smart) to train a cop to stay put in the window, withing inches of presumed drawn weapon, so he can see what it turns out to be in the split second before he gets it right between the eyes.

The cop did everything by the book, as he was clearly well-trained to do -
except he wasn't trained (if that can even be done) to abandon his humanity and be so suspicious and hard-nosed that he assumes that whatever he says to anybody will be routinely ignored. That happens more often that we realize, of course, which is why nice cops probably have a lower life expectancy than the hard-nosed variety, who do a better job of staying alive.

So, regarding your post, what crap you write.
Some creative editing you did there with the actual transcript.
Nice job conveying how we know you really feel.
Babaloo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2017   #26 (permalink)
añejo
 
horizon200's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Delaware
Posts: 14,676
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlayadelSolDos View Post
The man had a permit to legally carry. He did what he was supposed to do as a person carrying with a permit, which is announce to the officer that you are armed.

He tested positive for THC (which means nothing and, as far as I know is not a crime carrying the death penalty) but this BS from the cop convinces me of his guilt:



Seriously? What crossed his mind as he empited his weapon into the man was that the man was a threat because of the danger of secondhand smoke. No friggin way. I wonder if he considered the societal problem of secondhand bullets.
Assuming he had proper training ( and that's a stretch given how many "security training companies" are out there now), he only did PART of what he should have done. He had two options..1) not declare or 2) declare. Once he declared though, he should have put and kept his hands in plain view (preferably on the wheel) and awaited further instruction from the police officer.
We don't know exactly what he did since we can't actually see him in the video.
My best man went to his uncle's funeral this past weekend. His uncle was a retired detective. He spoke to a lot of the cops that were present and that's what he was told. Basically, once you declare you have a gun and that you are licensed to carry, then the cops are looking for you to put and keep your hands on the steering wheel and await further instructions from the officer. It's not a case of rights, it's a case of keeping everyone safe and maintaining an air of calm in an already tense situation.
horizon200 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2017   #27 (permalink)
añejo
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 2,186
So at first the Pride parade organizers didn't want the cops to take part in the parade as a protest to the verdict in this case. Then they decided the cops could be in it, but the couldn't be in uniform or marked police cars. So get the irony there. The gay and lesbian community organizes a parade to celebrate their pride at being LGBTQURST, but they want the cops to 'stay in the closet' so to speak and not dress in uniform.
LilG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2017   #28 (permalink)
añejo
 
Mnbruce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: St. Louis Park,Mn.
Posts: 11,548
Quote:
Originally Posted by LilG View Post
So at first the Pride parade organizers didn't want the cops to take part in the parade as a protest to the verdict in this case. Then they decided the cops could be in it, but the couldn't be in uniform or marked police cars. So get the irony there. The gay and lesbian community organizes a parade to celebrate their pride at being LGBTQURST, but they want the cops to 'stay in the closet' so to speak and not dress in uniform.
Fake news. Officers were in uniforms.
Mnbruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2017   #29 (permalink)
añejo
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 2,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mnbruce View Post
Fake news. Officers were in uniforms.
After the organizers rescinded.
LilG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2017   #30 (permalink)
añejo
 
Mnbruce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: St. Louis Park,Mn.
Posts: 11,548
Quote:
Originally Posted by LilG View Post
After the organizers rescinded.
Your post was false. Don't bother denying it.
Mnbruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:57 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.