I know it is early to comment, this just seems fairly straight-forward, with not a lot of room to interpret…
I have stayed mainly silent on the subject of police shootings. My default setting is something like ‘don’t break the law, don’t be an ass, and you are pretty much immune to being shot by cops’. Police officers are not, emphatically not, out ‘hunting black people’, as some idiots claim. While that is true, there have been instances that are not justified, or may have been but not as they played out. As always, there is no way to know how something looks to a police officer before they join the 12%(ish) that ever draw their weapon outside the range.
Keep that in mind – roughly 12% of all active police officers will ever fire a weapon. The stats are not well defined, and that number comes from 2011 . So the vast majority of officers will never fire their weapon in the line of duty.
An as-yet-unnamed officer in North Miami, on the other hand, has. And he shot an unarmed man lying with his hands in the air.
Are you fucking kidding me?
One of the most annoying things about the Black Lives Matter movement is the chant of ‘hands up, don’t shoot’. Referencing the false testimony (recanted, no less) that Michael Brown was shot with his hand up in pose of surrender. He wasn’t. He was shot attacking the officer that stopped him after he committed strong-arm robbery. Did he deserve it? Not for me to judge – I wasn’t there, and can’t make the officer’s decision for him. But his hands were not up.
Therapist Charles Kinsey, on the other hand, had his hands up. He was lying down. He was unarmed (hell, his hands were open!). And he got shot. In the leg.
This means a few things beyond what the media, BLM, and the political left will glom onto.
- The officer’s aim sucks. You are never taught to aim at the leg, always center mass His aim really sucks, since the odds are he was aiming at the autistic guy with a toy truck. But hey, since he has issues aiming, no one died, so maybe…well, not silver…perhaps an aluminium lining?
- Seriously, in what universe were either men a threat to the officer? One is fairly obviously mentally disabled (autistic – but to the observer that may not be obvious), the other, again, laying on his back with his hands up. In what way was there any threat to anyone? How the hell is that a justified shooting? Simple – it is not.
- You know, why have guns, much less a rifle, in the first place? Where was the imminent threat to anyone’s life, property, etc.? I know the video isn’t the full encounter, but I don’t see a threat here, and cannot fathom how anyone see a threat. By way of comparison, in the Laquan McDonald shooting, I can see how the officer could think he was in danger. Not ‘shoot the kid lying in the street’ danger, but I can see how he would feel the need to shoot. I also disagree with it, especially since the on-scene officers didn’t feel the same need. But this? How?
I can’t see how this is in any way justifiable. There is no threat, no danger, no risk, and (as far as I can see) no crime being committed. None. I wonder about the caller too…
The chief said officers responded following reports of a man with a gun threatening to kill himself, and the officers arrived “with that threat in mind” — but no gun was recovered from the scene. –Tribune News Services
Huh. The truck as gun, I suppose, but threats to kill themselves? I guess I just don’t see it.
This is exactly the kind of thing that tars all police officers, and empowers anti-police sentiment. That alone makes the officer who fired the shots an idiot. The next police officer shot in an ambush could well be on him.
He should be fired, and prosecuted for this. He broke the law, and he is not above the law because he has a uniform and badge.