• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Video Shows Officer Shooting Unarmed Black Man in South Carolina

Status
Not open for further replies.
solletica said:
Legally (and technically), it isn't. But for all practical purposes, it is, obviously. And I like it that way :)



Cops shouldn't be entitled to the same rights as people.
Click to expand...



Ohhhhhhhh... I see. A hater.
 
JANFU said:
Heard on the news (TV) that the Mayor is preparing to procure or increase the use of body cameras.
Click to expand...
Body cams should be a nation wide law enforcement policy_

Such transparency would result in far more professional policing_

jet57 said:
Yeah, I saw the video online when the story was just breaking. This morning I saw that same video on a 55" screen and one can clearly see the taser line, but like you said, teh cop is screwed anyway. The department has fired him, his lawyer left him and he's gonna get fried.
Click to expand...

Those are minor setbacks compared to what his future holds in store_

He'll either be a star attraction in some prison shank gallery for a decade_

Or they'll be merciful and put him in one of those posh country club facilities_

Either-Or; he'll likely do some serious time!
 
Chainsaw said:
There is legal precedence and justification for shooting at a fleeing suspect.
Click to expand...

If you were after me with that chainsaw in your avitar, or even if you were a cop with a gun who was "fixen" to shoot me, I would run away also. The fact that the cop shot the guy 8 times in the back validates that the guy SHOULD have been running away (he just should have ran a lot faster).
 
ObamacareFail said:
I started getting those invitations in the mail even before I turned 50. I am 61 now. Since they still insist on sending them out with prepaid envelopes....I either send back the empty envelope or include a printed article berating them for going along with obamacare. Either way, they get stuck with the postage.
Click to expand...

Brilliant. I should really try to be more creative.
 
Chainsaw said:
If the perp had just killed/shot/stabbed another individual, a reasonable person/cop would believe letting him get away could endanger others in the community.
Click to expand...

While I agree, did the officer indicate this in his own report? Of not, do you think your comment has anything to do with this case or were you just making a general statement?
 
knowing few facts other than the video I will still give the cop the benefit of the doubt until I hear more.

the man killed had an arrest warrant out for him. Don't we need to know if the warrant was for a violent crime(or worse) before we call the man innocent?

don't jump to conclusions like some did on Ferguson only to end up with egg on their face.
 
csbrown28 said:
While I agree, did the officer indicate this in his own report? Of not, do you think your comment has anything to do with this case or were you just making a general statement?
Click to expand...

The video clearly shows you how much the police officer felt his life was in danger. If the dead man was that menacing that the cop thought his life was in danger do you think he would just casually walk over to the still alive man?

No, if there is dangerous individual you would approach with caution and gun drawn.

It is actually kind of creepy how methodical the police officer was.
 
jmotivator said:
So you assume that what this video captured is the normal behavior of police officers?
Click to expand...

I'm not assuming anything. I'm posing a question: black folks have been screamin abut this kind of thing and low and behold, one shows up on video. It's like proving a UFO.
 
stonewall50 said:
That changes things a little. A taser line? If the guy had ahold of the taser still. Would have to watch the video again.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it doesn;t look like he has anything in his hands when he runs away and CBS enlarged and slowed down the drop, and it's a taser.

The department fired him today.
 
imagep said:
According to AARP they are. I got my AARP "invitation" card a few weeks before I turned 50 and my wife got hers a few weeks after she turned 50. I took great pride in tossing mine into the trash can.
Click to expand...
Thats where mine went.
 
Tettsuo said:
Why is Scott even out of the car? It's just broken taillight...
Click to expand...

Probably because he had warrants out, mostly for failing to pay child support. Nothing violent (that I remember).
 
Crosscheck said:
It is actually kind of creepy how methodical the police officer was.
Click to expand...
It's thanks their training. Cops are trained to say "he reached for my gun" and to put "performed CPR" on the police reports after they shoot people. Burger flippers in McDonald's have higher quality control standards.
 
imagep said:
The fact that the cop shot the guy 8 times in the back validates that the guy SHOULD have been running away (he just should have ran a lot faster).
Click to expand...

Neva heard of anyone outrunning a bullet.
 
JoeTrumps said:
knowing few facts other than the video I will still give the cop the benefit of the doubt until I hear more.

the man killed had an arrest warrant out for him. Don't we need to know if the warrant was for a violent crime(or worse) before we call the man innocent?

don't jump to conclusions like some did on Ferguson only to end up with egg on their face.
Click to expand...

We do know....mostly for not paying for child support and nothing violent.
 
jet57 said:
I'm not assuming anything. I'm posing a question: black folks have been screamin abut this kind of thing and low and behold, one shows up on video. It's like proving a UFO.
Click to expand...

What's the question?
 
Goshin said:
I have no problem with civilians filming cops while they are conducting public operations; it should be entirely legal everywhere and encouraged.


Bear in mind civilian videos can be biased too, though, in what they show and what they don't, and can be edited.
Click to expand...

Despite court rulings, people are still getting arrested for recording on-duty cops

When you see one of these stories, please remember that it is perfectly legal to record on-duty police in every state in the country. That includes states that require all parties to a conversation to consent in order for that conversation to be recorded. Those laws all also contain a provision that the non-consenting party has a reasonable expectation of privacy. So far, every court to rule on this issue has found that on-duty cops in public spaces have no expectation of privacy and that recording them is protected by the First Amendment.​
 
VanceMack said:
This happens. Not all the time, but it does happen. And when it does, it SHOULD be investigated, prosecuted where warranted, and punished accordingly.

But the only time it matters (and the OP so very clearly illustrates it) is when it is a WHITE cop and a black victim.

Not a ton of outrage when it is a white guy shot by a cop. or a Latino. And if the cop is black? Fuggedaboudit....




But what do the headlines say in THIS case?

"Video Shows Officer Michael Slager Shooting Unarmed Black Man In The Back In South Carolina"

Cause it only matters when the victim is a black man.
Click to expand...


Not true. A homeless white guy here in New Mexico (James Boyd) was shot and killed by police officers and the cops were arrested for murder... because it was caught on video. Made national news and everything.

 
JoeTrumps said:
knowing few facts other than the video I will still give the cop the benefit of the doubt until I hear more.

the man killed had an arrest warrant out for him. Don't we need to know if the warrant was for a violent crime(or worse) before we call the man innocent?

don't jump to conclusions like some did on Ferguson only to end up with egg on their face.
Click to expand...

Oh dear God. I can see it now. "his facebook page shows him smoking pot. He's not an 'innocent' person" defense for the cop... looks to be already forming.
 
JoeTrumps said:
knowing few facts other than the video I will still give the cop the benefit of the doubt until I hear more.

the man killed had an arrest warrant out for him. Don't we need to know if the warrant was for a violent crime(or worse) before we call the man innocent?

don't jump to conclusions like some did on Ferguson only to end up with egg on their face.
Click to expand...

All that matters is what the officer reasonably believed to be true, thus if Walker did have warrants for murder but the officer didn't know at the point he shot Walker, then the warrant would be irrelevant regardless of what it was for, likewise, if the dispatcher had mistakenly told the officer that he had warrants for murder, but Walker , in fact, did not, then you could make the argument he had sufficient justification to shoot. Having said that, I believe the warrants (at least some of them) were for unpaid child support, but don't quote me on that.
 
JoeTrumps said:
knowing few facts other than the video I will still give the cop the benefit of the doubt until I hear more.

the man killed had an arrest warrant out for him. Don't we need to know if the warrant was for a violent crime(or worse) before we call the man innocent?

don't jump to conclusions like some did on Ferguson only to end up with egg on their face.
Click to expand...

Warrants are based upon probable cause, but do not have any bearing on guilt or innocence.

That is why courts exist.

He is innocent until proven otherwise, period.

His warrants, BTW, were for non-payment of child support, not that it matters.
 
Last edited:
csbrown28 said:
All that matters is what the officer reasonably believed to be true, thus if Walker did have warrants for murder but the officer didn't know at the point he shot Walker, then the warrant would be irrelevant regardless of what it was for, likewise, if the dispatcher had mistakenly told the officer that he had warrants for murder, but Walker , in fact, did not, then you could make the argument he had sufficient justification to shoot. Having said that, I believe the warrants (at least some of them) were for unpaid child support, but don't quote me on that.
Click to expand...

Even with a warrant for murder, the actor is a suspect, and innocent under the law until proven otherwise.
 
Empirica said:
Body cams should be a nation wide law enforcement policy_

Such transparency would result in far more professional policing_



Those are minor setbacks compared to what his future holds in store_

He'll either be a star attraction in some prison shank gallery for a decade_

Or they'll be merciful and put him in one of those posh country club facilities_

Either-Or; he'll likely do some serious time!
Click to expand...

No, those guys have scruples. If SC doesn't kill him, which is what I think is coming down the pike, the guys inside will just kill'em like they did that guy who held those three women for 10 years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom