i have a guy that comes in periodically to my bar. ex-cop, veteran of a major southeast police department, quit because he couldn't handle the type of crap he dealt with on a day-to-day basis among other officers. he tells me of routine instances of cops looking for excuses to unload a clip into someone, especially if it's the black male criminal archetype. they call it "stepping on cockroaches." he's told me multiple stories of cops rolling up and wasting guys for supposedly reaching for a gun, and then other responders noting the lack of a gun, and then one magically appearing on the perp for evidence to collect. he himself had a justified chance to shoot a perp for jumping out of a closet towards him during a B&E call, but chose to take him down and save his life instead and caught untold amounts of poo from his peers for not just ending the guy's life.
this is anecdotal stuff, and i don't expect it to carry any weight other than to corroborate what we already can see: there's a problem when situations where lethal force could be technically justified legally leads to cops leaping at the opportunity to pull the trigger. in this case, the homeless guy touching the cop's gun (if he actually did) is legal justification for shooting him. but do you need to? do you need to empty your clip down into the guy's chest because he grabbed at your gun?
i'm always conflicted on these things because i grew up around LEO and in LE programs, and i know it's easy to demonize cops whenever these things happen, but i don't think a reasonable person can just shrug this off like it's not a problem, especially when it resonates through communities and breaks trust between the police and those they are supposed to protect. somehow that trust needs to be restored.
the defense of brutality typically entails a discussion of whether the victim deserved it rather than if it was ever necessary to kill him at all. the first places the responsibility on the apparent victim to not do anything that might force this just world to take his life while the second demands a higher level of responsibility of the trained professionals who already enjoy a massive disparity of power socially, psychologically, and structurally. you can probably guess through which of these lenses the authoritarian will view the killing of the powerless.
anyway, entertaining the idea that this wasn't just an excuse to legally murder someone, how fuging pathetic are you as a brave heroic police force if four officers can't subdue a homeless man without shooting him to death? why should i feel safe if i am, for example, being held hostage by crazed gunmen and my last line of defense is the hilariously inept police? even if this (to borrow your police friend's term) cockroach totally deserved to die, it's clear that police need a much higher barrier to entry and significant reform
once again, the liberal media has allowed everyone who lied about iraq (other than brian williams) to get away with it. ppl need to consider that either the media isn't as liberal as ppl think or ppl need to reconsider what it means to be liberal. im reading the liberal defence of murder at the moment and leaning toward the latter.
Ya know? What's to worry about? I'm sure this will blow over and we will look back and laugh at how silly this was. A group that is extremely well funded and just happend to get access to so many weapons and openly claims why they are killing people is a facade. In fact. I'm not even gonna comment anymore on this.