Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackadar
I'm not giving anyone the benefit of the doubt. I am questioning the need to shoot an unarmed black male, at range in the middle of the street in broad daylight under any circumstances, especially given that this is not proper in the escalation of use of force that all departments have. I'm also questioning the lies told by the police department and their attempt at character assassination. I'm also questioning their reaction to the protest marches/looting with them trying to instigate things with protesters, firing rubber bullets and tear gas at the media, pointing sniper rifles from the tops of trucks at civilians and running around with assault weapons drawn and pointed at people like a poorly trained paramilitary force.
If that's the way the force is run, then why wouldn't Wilson gunning down an unarmed black man be such a stretch?
|
I don't quite understand the range thing. I'd think a point-blank shot would be much more suspicious. If someone is charging you, the idea would be to shoot them BEFORE they got close enough to do damage.
What lies has this department told in its official statements? It's possible I missed something.
As for Wilson "gunning down an unarmed black man", that's obviously not a stretch, it happened. But Wilson having the criminal intent to murder someone - that would be unusual enough statistically that I don't think how competent you think the department he works for is should tell us too much either way. You just said we're not assuming things about these people as individuals, but here, it seems like you're doing exactly that.
There's also a ton of potential ground here between totally justified, and murder. Like, poor judgment based on stress and a sincere fear for personal safety. Or just something that a better officer would have handled differently. That would still be potentially criminal as well, or civil liability if there was department policy violations, but it would definitely something different than the race-based execution a lot of people are assuming here. And it definitely makes a difference in terms of how we judge other officers based on this incident. And what it says about "society" or whatever. That middle possibility isn't even really considered because it doesn't fit so neatly into either side's narrative - whether he's either a racist murderer or a heroic cop.