This site is closed to new comments and posts.

Notice: This site uses cookies to function.
If you are not comfortable with cookies then please don't browse this website.

at least two people shot on carlton/dean tonight - Page 10 — Brooklynian

at least two people shot on carlton/dean tonight

1…4567810»

Comments

  • whyfi
    whyfi
    Captain M- holy crap-on-a-stick cross-post! :lol: Not only were we making the same points, we both chose the 'monday morning quarterback' analogy... brother? Is that you? :wink:
  • captain m
    captain m
    nybt wrote: Captain M- holy crap-on-a-stick cross-post! :lol: Not only were we making the same points, we both chose the 'monday morning quarterback' analogy... brother? Is that you? :wink:
    True that!
  • qtrain
    qtrain
    I'm doing my share of monday morning quarterback, but the googling is an attempt to recreate the training process, not the decision process. No one has ever sat me down and explained to me appropriate use of lethal force (if you've had "the talk", I'd like to hear it). It is not left to the police to work out the entire process every time they face an armed suspect. They are trained based on legal precedent, and I'm trying to understand what that is.

    I believe all points were met when Higgins brandished the fake gun, but I believe that the imminent threat ceased when he ran away.
    it’s essential to understand that the immediate jeopardy” condition can go away at the drop of a hat... Jeopardy can cease suddenly and unexpectedly if your attacker surrenders or clearly ceases to be a threat... for instance... he tries to run
    I believe that the three conditions in that list all refer to the same threat, which must be current, immediate, and unavoidable. By that reading, the use of force must stop when the current, immediate, and unavoidable threat ceases; combine that with the description of imminent jeopardy, and the threat that can be countered with lethal force ceases when the suspect runs. It may seem like legal gymnastics, but I think it boils down to the rule that you can't shoot someone in the back if they are not about to shoot someone in front of them.

    I'm ok with us disagreeing on this, though. I don't have all the facts. I demand a lawyer.
  • whyfi
    whyfi
    I'm okay with us disagreeing as well, and I'm happy to point out that at no point did this debate degenerate into pointless name-calling and/or deliberately insulting comments. Kudos- it's the way it should be done.

    I'll make my (maybe) final point-

    If my family and I were one or two blocks away, in the direction that Higgins (or any criminal suspect brandishing a gun) was running, I would have been incredibly relieved when learning, after the fact, that he had been taken down 30 seconds before arriving at my location.
  • captain m
    captain m
    Agreed...

    I'm glad we know which point we disgree on, maybe when more detailed facts come to light we can discuss further.

    If they shot him after he tossed his gun you'd certainly be right.
  • qtrain
    qtrain
    Ok, I think this settles it -- in Krueger v. Fuhr, the 8th circuit held that a police officer's shooting of a fleeing subject was objectively reasonable.

    Shootings by Police Officers Are Analyzed Under Standards Based on Reasonable Objectiveness (pdf)
  • anonymous
    anonymous
    nybt wrote: I'm okay with us disagreeing as well, and I'm happy to point out that at no point did this debate degenerate into pointless name-calling and/or deliberately insulting comments. Kudos- it's the way it should be done.

    I'll make my (maybe) final point-

    If my family and I were one or two blocks away, in the direction that Higgins (or any criminal suspect brandishing a gun) was running, I would have been incredibly relieved when learning, after the fact, that he had been taken down 30 seconds before arriving at my location.
    i'm the earlier guest, again.

    great debate, everyone, enjoyable read.

    my thoughts however tend to be:

    "If my family and I were one or two blocks away, in the direction that Higgins (or any criminal suspect brandishing a gun) was running, I would have been incredibly pissed off to think that there were 22 bullets flying through the air for little reason."
  • jack
    jack
    Anonymous wrote: If my family and I were one or two blocks away, in the direction that Higgins (or any criminal suspect brandishing a gun) was running, I would have been incredibly pissed off to think that there were 22 bullets flying through the air for little reason.
    For little reason, I would be pissed as well. But the kid didn't steal a copy of Playboy from a local newstand and just ran down the block. He robbed a man at gunpoint and until the gun was recovered and shown to be a pellet gun, the police were justified in their actions to take the kid down.

    Even moreso when it's revealed the kid was out on bail for indictment of murder charges.

    Also in this hypothetical rethinking, if there were people in the range of the police shooting, I doubt they would have shot at all.

    The kid is a thug. He was out to menace and rob. And he had a pellet gun not to practice target shooting on pigeons, but to threaten bodilly harm on someone else. The police 100% justified to take this kid down.

    And for all of those who are subtly defending Javaughn Higgins, let me put some perspective on this. I completely understand the concept of some cops thinking people are "guilty while black". And how it makes sense to defend a 16 year old whose life might not exist if he ends up in the system. But in this case, he's a stone cold thug. There's no reason to defend garbage like this. If there's a case of a kid being railroaded by cops, defend that. But this Higgins kid deserves everything he will get... Even more so...

    I really feel sorry for his mom. Because now her life is going to be that much harder on many levels because her son is a fool.
  • whyfi
    whyfi
    Jack wrote: [quote=Anonymous]If my family and I were one or two blocks away, in the direction that Higgins (or any criminal suspect brandishing a gun) was running, I would have been incredibly pissed off to think that there were 22 bullets flying through the air for little reason.
    For little reason, I would be pissed as well. But the kid didn't steal a copy of Playboy from a local newstand and just ran down the block. He robbed a man at gunpoint and until the gun was recovered and shown to be a pellet gun, the police were justified in their actions to take the kid down.


    Thank you.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In

Categories