Quote:
Originally Posted by molson
If he just reached across the counter to steal cigars it would only be misdemeanor theft. Again, crimes are determined by the legislature, not what feels right, or what anyone's personal morals or expectations feel that an act should be. That's pretty important to due process.
And he wasn't even charged with anything yet. He was identified as a robbery suspect. Because there was a video of him committing robbery.
We have no idea what kind of "vigor" the cops pursued him with. This officer that shot him did not stop him because of the robbery.
But again, despite these known facts and your inferences not making sense, you're assuming that because law enforcement is involved, there must be racism. Do you make the same assumption about me? Or the cops you buy coffee for?
|
I'm going to separate my response and put the non-essential stuff in italics so that hopefully it can be put to bed.
I understand that the legislature determines what is what type of crime. I'm not an idiot, and that really doesn't even matter in this situation. Me saying that this is a pretty weak "robbery" doesn't really have anything to do with whether he gets shot or not - it's more a commentary on how the law is a bit crazy, but was also before I saw the video fully and heard about him reaching over the counter for the cigars (which I have said sounds more like a "robbery" as I would think of it). I get that you have your legal hat on, but take it off for a second hmm?
I also understand he was just a suspect, and furthermore that the stop wasn't even connected to him being a robbery suspect it sounds like.
I'm not assuming there must be racism because there's law enforcement involved - I'm assuming it because of the details that have come to light so far of the shooting (to whit - unarmed, at a distance, perhaps with hands in the air). Whether or not there was a prior scuffle with the officer or not, the fact that the officer's ultimate response was to draw their weapon and shoot an unarmed person, rather than going for a taser/calling for backup/whatever just speaks to really poor judgement on the part of the officer.
If it was over an unarmed robbery that would be a poor judgement as far as the level of force in the response. The fact that it was apparently over the guy walking in the street and blocking traffic or something, or giving lip to the officer, that's even worse judgement.
Now do I think that the judgement may have been colored by race (ie that a white person in a similar situation would not have been treated so aggressively by the cops), yes. But that's only natural as this police force has shown some shockingly poor judgement, and apparently has a history of shady behavior (this whole thing that's come out about them arresting the wrong guy on a warrant mistake, beating him, and then charging him with destruction of property for bleeding on their uniforms as they beat him, and then perjuring themselves over it).