An undercover police officer arranged to buy 2 magic mushroom chocolate bars over Instagram then opened fire within seconds, killing the driver and injuring the passenger for selling $100 worth of antidepressants. Perfectly justified.

  • Hegar@kbin.socialOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 个月前

    Op means to incite emotional response from readers by using the “because of” version.

    No I don’t.

    I mean to invite emotional response using the meaning I just explained above - cops planned to arrest someone over nothing, and their incompetence lead to killing him over nothing.

    If it was just because they had 2 shroom bars, that would be extrajudicial execution. That’s Duterte level policing and would be a national story.

    The pointlessness of this arrest should be emotional - it’s an obvious injustice. The police set up a potentially deadly situation with no potential value to society. The standard mamallian response to being cornered was all it took to escalate this to fatal. Over nothing.

    bullshit to not show all sides of the story.
    That’s some Fox News shit.

    Nope, one side is objectively lying about the facts. Repeating the lies of the powerful is some fox news shit. I’m gonna to stick to presenting the facts - cops planned to arrest someone over nothing, and their incompetence lead to killing him over nothing.

    • skeptomatic@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      8 个月前

      I’m with you, that it was mishandled and the cop who fired is incompetent, I’m with you that loss of life is terrible, I’m with you that setting up a sort of sting to buy 2 zoomer-bars is a waste of taxpayer money. It’s all an injustice. As I said before the victim might not even have known the guy was a cop…
      But they didn’t kill him over “nothing” they killed him over the flee attempt.
      The guy must have been a known drug dealer for them to bother setting up. And reminder, he had a loaded semi-auto rifle in the vehicle. Though it doesn’t say anything about the legality of that weapon.

      Anyway, here’s a scenario:
      Man walks into convenience store.
      Man shoplifts a chocolate bar.
      Cop notices.
      Cop says “hey stop”.
      Man pulls hidden GRENADE from his pocket, pulls the pin, and attempts to throw at vicinity of cop.
      Police shoot and kill man.

      The way you say your headline should read:
      DOJ says police officer justified in killing man for shoplifting chocolate bar.

      I mean…c’mon.

      • Hegar@kbin.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 个月前

        they didn’t kill him over “nothing” they killed him over the flee attempt.

        The decision was: do I let this kid get away with selling 2 shroom bars or do I deploy potentially lethal force?

        If someone’s unnecessarily killed during say an armed robbery, they weren’t killed over nothing, even if they could’ve been arrested.

        Police are empowered to use violence with the understanding that it will benefit society. And most will agree that preventing armed robbery has value.

        This officer deployed violence to prevent a kid from getting away with selling 2 shroom bars. Without any personal threat. That has no value to society, nothing. And a kid was killed over it.

        I don’t understand why the particular events that happened before that seem so important to you?

        • skeptomatic@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 个月前

          That wasn’t the decision. There’s not an ice cube’s chance in hell he went through the longer thought process it would take at the speed events unfolded to contemplate, “hmm, you know what, this kid has 2 whole mushroom bars in that car and he appears to be trying to leave with them, and he’s now accelerating towards me, or at least in such a close proximity to me that it’s now dangerous, probably not dangerous for my colleagues whom have just driven up because I can see the future like a Jedi all of a sudden and know what’s going to happen before it happens, but they still have those damn mushroom bars and my partner and I we’re going to split one of them after the bust and I owe him for talking that hooker he busted last weekend into getting let off in trade for giving me a free beeg behind Wendys, so I really need those mushroom bars and that’s totally the reason I better start blasting.”
          😆

          The decision was, “suspect driving at me, he’s now a danger to me or my colleagues, shoot at danger.”

          Don’t matter how they all got there.
          Cops and correction officers are trained to take the decision making process out of the equation for faster reaction times.
          I’m in no way saying that’s the best, or even a good-at-all way to train cops, but it’s predictable.

          So, what’d we all learn?
          This cop in question certainly is a fuck up and should be fired, and charged for the extant he can be.
          Officer training needs work.
          2 mushroom bars remains a very stupid reason to arrest someone in the first place, and mushrooms should be legalized. But it doesn’t matter in this case because laws are laws.
          The Victim was killed over attempting to flee, because we know now how cause-and-effect works, and the mushroom bars can’t be the cause because had he not fled, he wouldn’t have been shot at and killed.
          Ops tag line was sensationalized to remove blame from the vic and add blame to the cops because, well they deserve it, but also because we’re in the police problem sub. It lacks though because, “2 magic mushroom chocolate bars” can be substituted with, “bust”, or, “drug deal gone wrong”, or, “waxing gibbous moon”…and those would all be valid, therefore if it’s any of them, it’s none.
          They were there and present over mushroom bars, but the Victim was killed over ( what I’m sure the cop will say in court is) attempt vehicular homicide.
          And, Don’t.fucking.run.from.cops. regardless of their training.
          Cheers.

      • Revan343@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 个月前

        In your scenario, the police did not actively seek out the situation and then fuck it up.

        In this scenario, they did

          • Hegar@kbin.socialOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 个月前

            You compared throwing a grenade at a police officer to fleeing. If you say that two very different things are the same, people will probably point out that they are not.