ForumGarden

A six year old boy has been shot dead by police in Louisiana....Yet another act of police brutality?

Six-year-old boy in Louisiana was likely fatally shot by police says coroner | US news | The Guardian

http://www.inquisitr.com/2545456/6-year ... condition/

Bit of overkill (no pun intended) on the number of cars just to serve one warrant.

Well, as tragic as this is, there's nothing in the article to suggest that his death was a result of police brutality. The father must bare some responsibility for his death. Unlawful killing doesnt mean that brutality is necessarily involved

Snowfire;1489161 wrote: Well, as tragic as this is, there's nothing in the article to suggest that his death was a result of police brutality. The father must bare some responsibility for his death. Unlawful killing doesnt mean that brutality is necessarily involved
Absolutely. Although if the country wasn't so culturally trigger happy it wouldn't have happened in the first place. I didn't see anywhere in the article that the Police were even aware of there being a child in the car in the first place. When the policy is to shoot first & ask questions later, what can you expect?

The way the police behave in the US is sometimes a total disgrace! As you say, he was trying to evade arrest; surely it didn't warrant a hail of gunfire? Sorry, I forgot; we're talking about psycho's in uniform with itchy trigger-fingers!! I've just seen the news article on TV, and 2 cops have been arrested on homicide charges. What's the betting the jury clears them? Surely they could have blocked him in, even if it 'wrote off' a couple of police 'cruisers'?

As opposed to sweeping the car with sustained gunfire and killing an innocent child!

The problem is simply that there is a probability any person approached by police may be armed, the police will expect the worst and act accordingly to protect their own lives................and that situation is not going to change anytime soon.

Snowfire;1489161 wrote: Well, as tragic as this is, there's nothing in the article to suggest that his death was a result of police brutality. The father must bare some responsibility for his death. Unlawful killing doesnt mean that brutality is necessarily involved


Have you seen how many people have been killed this year by US police? And how many kids? Sorry, there's no excuse possible;-we manage to stop people fleeing in cars by USING CARS TO BLOCK THEM IN!

If the cops had done that, THEN surrounded the vehicle with guns drawn, I'm sure the fleeing man would have surrendered. The police action was utterly irresponsible. Talk about 'retards'!

I'm not sure how you could describe unleashing a fusillade of gunfire on a car carrying a child as anything other than police brutality!

I know I've quoted Snowfire's post, but it's a general comment.

I agree that the father is partly to blame for this, as he must have known how these uniformed psychos were likely to respond!

The US police have taken the approach to send the message of don't run, don't resist, and don't disagree. They're getting away with it too. I think it's deplorable, but it is what it is. Anyone who stands up to them is being castrated by the police.

Top Cop Union Threatens Quentin Tarantino | Mother Jones

Ahso!;1489172 wrote: The US police have taken the approach to send the message of don't run, don't resist, and don't disagree. They're getting away with it too. I think it's deplorable, but it is what it is. Anyone who stands up to them is being castrated by the police.

Top Cop Union Threatens Quentin Tarantino | Mother Jones


Police State, Ahso! Won't be long before we're the same here.....

It's a vicious spiral...

He may have a gun.

I'd better get a bigger gun.

He's getting a bigger gun - I'd better get a bigger one still.

etc.

Fortunately the UK takes the opposite tack. The UK Police are opposed to being routinely armed because while they remain unarmed criminals are less likely to be armed themselves because they have no need to be.

FourPart;1489177 wrote: It's a vicious spiral...

He may have a gun.

I'd better get a bigger gun.

He's getting a bigger gun - I'd better get a bigger one still.

etc.

Fortunately the UK takes the opposite tack. The UK Police are opposed to being routinely armed because while they remain unarmed criminals are less likely to be armed themselves because they have no need to be.


The individual concerned didn't have any kind of gun. Even with overwhelming numbers, equipment AND firepower, the police weren't prepared to try the 'block him in approach' first. State-sanctioned murder, IMO. Shoot first, ask later is the motto (at best).

A few years ago a friend of one of my daughters was arrested for disagreeing with a cop for being stopped. She said the humiliation she endured was horrific. They strip searched her and closely examined every part of her body. She said she felt raped. She was spoken to in a very demeaning way and then put in a cell with men until they put her with another female who was abusive.

She said she never wanted to experience that again. Not only does she now know how humiliating that is but every one of her friends and relatives do as well. I know this girl and she is not abusive with language nor is she intimidating in any sense of the word.

That is trauma that lasts a long time if not forever for people. Just a shame.

Ahso!;1489180 wrote: A few years ago a friend of one of my daughters was arrested for disagreeing with a cop for being stopped. She said the humiliation she endured was horrific. They strip searched her and closely examined every part of her body. She said she felt raped. She was spoken to in a very demeaning way and then put in a cell with men until they put her with another female who was abusive.

She said she never wanted to experience that again. Not only does she now know how humiliating that is but every one of her friends and relatives do as well. I know this girl and she is not abusive with language nor is she intimidating in any sense of the word.

That is trauma that lasts a long time if not forever for people. Just a shame.


It's nothing short of a criminal abuse of power that's probably left the poor girl scarred for life! 'Pigs' is definitely the right word for 'officers' who behave like this. If and when they fall from grace, and are jailed, maybe their previous occupation should be announced when they join their prison 'wing', then they'd have some idea what it feels like to feel frightened and helpless! Not that I'm at all vengeful....:sneaky:

Ahso!;1489180 wrote: A few years ago a friend of one of my daughters was arrested for disagreeing with a cop for being stopped. She said the humiliation she endured was horrific. They strip searched her and closely examined every part of her body. She said she felt raped. She was spoken to in a very demeaning way and then put in a cell with men until they put her with another female who was abusive.

She said she never wanted to experience that again. Not only does she now know how humiliating that is but every one of her friends and relatives do as well. I know this girl and she is not abusive with language nor is she intimidating in any sense of the word.

That is trauma that lasts a long time if not forever for people. Just a shame.


Do your police not get sued for wrongful arrest? In reality over here most people don't pursue the matter since they have to prove the police acted with malice but from the description it sounds like she has a good case although mouthing off to the police when stopped probably doesn't help matters. Refusing to give name and address after being told the reason why you have been stopped is an offence.

Ahso!;1489172 wrote: The US police have taken the approach to send the message of don't run, don't resist, and don't disagree. They're getting away with it too. I think it's deplorable, but it is what it is. Anyone who stands up to them is being castrated by the police.

Top Cop Union Threatens Quentin Tarantino | Mother Jones


To me, that threat should be seriously investigated by an independent commission.

The job of the Police is to apply the law impartially - the whole tone of that interview was "we don't like you and we're coming to get you" which is totally unacceptable in any Police force.

That's a clear threat to a member of the public how come he hasn't been sacked over it? More to the point if they feel they can abuse their authority against a high profile member and actually boast about it to the press what re the doing to ordinary members of the public.

America has become a nation of obedience, in fact our Pledge of Allegiance should be renamed Pledge of Obedience. It should read

I pledge obedience to the authorities of the United States of America, to whatever authorities they may be. If they wear a uniform with a badge and carry a gun, they have all necessary authority under the sun.... Feel free to add on.

"And to the Republic, for Richard Stands, one nation, under God, if a cop tells you to do something, you'd better be quick to comply or you might wind up dead. In fact, you might wind up dead anyway. Or tasered."

Cops have always been a bit on the edge.

When I was growing up it was known that you just didn't poke the Bear. Some friends and I one time got tired of walking and decided to sit on the sidewalk for a minute. Suddenly, from seemingly nowhere can a sheriff's car, up on the sidewalk, stopping just before hitting Beanie. two more cops came running from across the park.

When we asked what that was all about, the guy said, "It's illegal to sit on the sidewalk." I piped up, "So is driving on it." This I knew because I had just passed my driver's exam the day before. Next thing I knew, I was eating grass while two of them sat on top of me, twisting my arms around to fit the handcuffs. There was a rather large lump on my head, growing more painful by the second. When Beanie asked why they did that. they hit him, too.

We were off to jail, and it was 4 AM before they allowed us to call our folks to come make bail. Fortunately for me, Dad worked the midnight shift and he came down to pick us up when he got off work.

Well, that was our first practical lesson in Cop relations. I collected a few more lumps before the lesson really set in.

Cops aren't all bad, but many of them don't seem to have a grip on their emotional security, and don't like it when their judgement is questioned.

And, of course, they seem to have a knack for taking themselves WAY too seriously.

My most recent run-in was not unlike some of those you see on You-Tube. The guy stopped me for an illegal change of lanes, and wanted me to get out of my car so he could search it, because he thought he smelled Pot. I told him he could not, because my smoking days ended 30-some years ago, because I decided breathing was much better than not.

He threatened to pull me out through the window. I mentioned that he would have a lot harder time than the thought, doing that, and he reached in a tried.

Fortunately, his supervisor came along. This was good for a number of reasons. Firstly, the supervisor had no emotional attachment to the situation, and secondly, he was my neighbor from down the street. We sit a drink beer together, now and again. It is a good thing to have a cop with whom you can enjoy and nice cold micro-brew, now and again.

I apologized to the officer, and promised to mind my lane changes, and he apologized to me for being so grumpy, and we all went on our way.

Unfortunately, not everybody has a cop for a neighbor, and even fewer can sit down a drink a beer with a cop.

Most cops are really good people, but sometimes, they just don't use the best judgment.

I think the world would be a much better place if all cops were required to take up Zen Meditation.

It was in 1985 that a very good friend of ours was a member of a travellers' convoy on their way for the Summer Solstice gathering at Stonehenge. They were a peaceful and well behaved group of people who lived in converted double-decker buses, single-deck coaches, ambulances and vans etc. and moved around the countryside running fairs and holding musical get-togethers.

At this point I must say that most of those travellers did not claim benefits or unemployment - they had their own work and earned their own living. Our friend was a magician/clown and in the 'Magic Circle' and was quite able to finance her life.

The permission to gather at the Stonehenge stones had been cancelled in 1985, and when information that there was a convoy of travellers heading for Stonehenge, the police organised themselves into riot squad gear, alerted neighbouring county forces and activated the police helicopter.

Apparently there were about 1500 police officers in the vicinity, many of them had removed their collar numbers so that press and media could not identify them. Bear in mind that this happened in 1985 and it took around 6 years to force a court case and sue the police for criminal damage, grievous bodily harm, wrongful arrest etc. Those travellers had their homes destroyed by those out-of-control police officers. As they were smashing windscreens and side windows of the travellers' homes, women were screaming that there were babies and toddlers inside the vehicles and the glass was showering all over them ! They had taken sanctuary in a field owned by Lord Cardigan, hoping that the police would not enter the field. It was called 'The Bean Field'.

The police did not stay out, but came in and trashed the vehicles and dragged the drivers out of the vehicles, often by their hair. Our friend was one of those who was being dragged through a broken side window by her long hair. She was terrified that she was going to be cut to shreds on the remaining shards of glass still sticking out of the window frame, but Lord Cardigan had seen it all happen and shouted for the police to leave her alone. It was at this point that she shouted that another officer was trying to drag her out of the driver's door by her leg !! She was being pulled in two different directions !

The police acted in a most savage manner with all the travellers, putting lives at risk and causing grievous injuries to a lot of people. Jeopardising the safety of babies and small children.

The travellers managed, after several years of pushing, to bring the cases against the police to court. They managed to win the cases and were awarded £25,000 damages (a fraction of the true amount needed for the replacement of their homes), and all of that went in legal costs anyway ! That was 30 years ago and I don't think the police attitude has altered much ! Justice ? Where ?

I remember the incident well, and I know several folk who were in that convoy when it was trashed by psychopigs! The last vehicle to stop moving was the 'Rastabus'. Much of the evidence, and many of the charges were pure fabrication. Lucky the Earl of Cardigan stepped in by offering the hippies sanctuary on his land, otherwise there would have been a lot more injuries, or even fatalities.

A shameful chapter in our police's recent history, though not quite as bad as Hillsborough....