Cop's Dying on the Job is at like a 20 year low The 10 Deadliest Jobs: Deaths per 100,000 1. Logging workers: 128.8 2. Fishers and related fishing workers: 117 3. Aircraft pilot and flight engineers: 53.4 4. Roofers: 40.5 5. Structural iron and steel workers: 37 6. Refuse and recyclable material collectors: 27.1 7. Electrical power-line installers and repairers: 23 8. Drivers/sales workers and truck drivers: 22.1 9. Farmers, ranchers, and other agricultural managers: 21.3 10. Construction laborers: 17.4 Out of approximately one million police and law enforcement personnel, with 126 deaths per year, the death rate for police is 12.6 per hundred thousand. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/blake-fleetwood/how-dangerous-is-police-w_b_6373798.html Rocket River
I think part of it is about how much control you have. Being killed by another person is always going to be scarier for people than being killed in accident. With accidents, most people think they have control or are smart enough/safe enough to avoid accidents, so they don't spend a whole lot of time worrying about it. I remember back when the DC Sniper was happening, there was an article that said something like you're still much more likely to die in a car accident today than be shot by the DC sniper. Did that have any effect on people? Hell no. Everyone was scared ****less to go out, because they felt they had really no control of whether they would get shot or not. But driving, "people tell themselves hey I can avoid the accident because I'll be aware of what's going on the road...I'm in control." Anyway, if we're using to use statistics like that to say cops shouldn't have any fear for their jobs, it would be pretty easy to turn it around and list all of the things that are more likely to kill blacks than cops, and then ask, "so why are you so fearful of cops?" I think it's just human nature to be more scared of being killed by another person than by an accident.
I'm beginning to think cops shouldn't be allowed to carry firearms. They should only be allowed to carry tranquilizer guns. Then, assuming tranquilizer gun technology allows for a single gun to shoot multiple darts (versus the old tranquilizer dart guns that were single shot), the cops should also carry a drug to counteract any overdose that is sure to happen because the cops kept firing tranquilizer darts into the victim when they should have stopped after the first shot. Some cops are just really stupid, trigger happy people. There's no way around it. I mean...what more can a person do to prove they are no threat than to be on the ground with hands in the air? Yet, he still gets shot up.
Honestly it looks like an accidental shooting - which would explain why there was only 1 shot and the officers response. Thankfully this poor guy looks like he'll recover. I think the cop should lose his job, but it wasn't attempted murder by any means. a low percentage. Here's an even lower percentage..Out of all the interactions between police and civilians, 0.049% of those end in gunfire. that's less than a 1/2 percent.
Never mind - I just read a more comprehensive report in the other thread - the police shot three times - will read more into the story.
If it makes you feel any better, I don't think it was the black guy lying on his back that spooked the cop, but the hispanic (?) autistic man sitting on his butt and playing with a toy truck. That makes it a little better. Right?
No defense here...The police officer deserves to lose his badge and have criminal/civil charges put on him.
Just read the lengthier article - Just the facts version: So basically the cops are told theres a man with a gun in the street threatening suicide - they respond with guns drawn (because people with guns threatening suicide can easily turn the gun on others). The caretaker does the right thing. The cops see the other guy not responding (they don't know he's autistic yet). The autistic guy makes some kind of move and the cops fire three times at him (and luckily miss). A stray bullet hits the caretaker's leg. The caretaker is currently negotiating a settlement with the city - and he should get one I think the officers were a little jumpy in this situation, but it doesn't warrant attempted murder by any means - but its really easy for us to play Monday -morning quarterback with more facts than the cops had. I agree with amaru on this - negligent discharge of a firearm - officers should be punished and fired.
Here's what I took from this incident: Black man LYING on ground with BOTH hands in the air COMPLYING with the police while explaining the situation about his patient gets shot at three times ending up with a leg wound. It was ONLY by the grace of God that he wasn't killed in cold blood. He's then handcuffed and left lying on the street for 20 MINUTES before receiving medical assistance. (This is what pissed me off most) White man sitting next to black man holding a metallic object is noncompliant and yelling at everyone to shut up. He's unharmed. There's simply no way this can be defended but I'm sure there will be some who will give it a try. It also reinforces what we saw happen to Philando Castille who also complied with the police only to be shot dead. So as I understand it: If you run away when you see police (as did Freddie Gray), you can end up dead (broken neck) or shot in the back (as was Walter Scott). If you comply with their orders, you can still be shot. Is there any wonder why people like myself are now telling their children to use every available means possible to avoid interacting with the police?
The article states the officer fired when the autistic man didn't comply. I can't speak for the officer, but he more than likely was aiming at the autistic man and not at the caretaker.
So now we're talking about cops who not only have jumpy trigger fingers, but they can't even hit an immobile target sitting on the ground?? This story just gets more and more pathetic as more facts come out.
I'm forced to agree. That artistic guy is sitting upright right in front of him yet he somehow manages to hit the black guy lying on the ground and we're expected to believe that he was actually aiming for the white guy? That's BS - he had to be clearly aiming at the black guy. It's just a miracle he didn't shoot him in the head. If he's that pathetic a shot, WTF is he doing on the force? I mean, he could just as easily shoot another policeman couldn't he? Then what? And another thing: the autistic guy is holding a shiny metallic object in his hand which could be easily mistaken for a weapon but it's the black guy who has NOTHING in both hands winds up getting shot. There's no amount of "official" PR bull**** can explain this away. I'm just stunned at how blatant some police have gotten when shooting black people.
anyway. From where the cop was standing given the angle and distance, IF he was aiming for the black guy (center mass like they're trained to do) he missed the black guys center mass by about 2 feet. If he's aiming at the autistic guy (center mass) then he could miss the body by less than an inch and the direct line of path would take the bullet straight to the black guys leg. This is much more likely. This does not make the shooting right by any means, but I seriously doubt he was aiming for the guy that was complying.
"Why did you shoot me?" "I don't know." - cop Ummmmm, wtf? http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/man-shot-police-miami-charles-kinsey-1.3688753
"No, no, no... I wasn't aiming for the black guy, I was aiming for the autistic guy with a toy car!" Yeah, that's a much better excuse...
It's not an excuse to justify the shooting. It's to dismiss the silly claims of racist cops aiming for black citizens. It's also silly to expect perfect marksmanship.
