# News & Current Events > Individual Rights Violations: Case Studies >  AZ - Unarmed man shot dead by cop for non-compliance

## Anti Federalist

Gainfully employed white man with a family, so do not expect to hear anything more about this either.


*Granbury wife wants answers after husband shot by Arizona police*

January 22, 2016

http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/local...lice/79159608/

Laney Sweet is still talking about her husband in the present tense. 

Hes really funny, hes really laid back, she says. Hes always the person to try and diffuse a situation, keep the peace.

She says its nearly impossible to wrap her head around the notion that 26-year-old Daniel Shaver of Granbury, the father of her girls, is gone. 

He was shot and killed by a police officer Monday night at a La Quinta Inn in Mesa, Arizona, where he was staying for work. 

Thats what I keep saying, Sweet says. This is not my life, this is not my life. Im 24. My husbands gone. Ive got two kids.

*Mesa police say Monday night, they were called to the hotel after people in the pool reported seeing a man on the fifth floor, pointing a rifle out of the window.

Theyre just really long guns, Sweet says, telling us Shaver had pellet rifles with him for his pest control job.*

*Police say when they went to Shavers hotel room to investigate, he and another person came out, but then Shaver kept concealing his hands behind him, despite orders not to. Police say one of the officers felt threatened and shot Shaver. The officer had been with the department for two-and-a-half years, and is currently reassigned during the investigation.*

*Police say Shaver turned out to be unarmed.* 

The pellet guns were found in the room.

I just feel like there's no reason possibly that could be justified for shooting him multiple times, and him dying in a hallway unarmed, Sweet says.

There is video of the incident, police say, but it wont be released yet. 

Sweet wants to know what it shows, why they didnt use a Taser on him first, and what witnesses saw.

I want answers to all of that, she says. And those answers right now are a thousand miles away.

Sweet has created a memorial page on Facebook and a GoFundMe page to help pay for funeral expenses -- and for an attorney to investigate the circumstances surrounding her husband's death.

The Mesa Police Department said Friday that its sympathy goes out to Shaver's family.

*"These types of situations are difficult for police officers.* The officer involved in this incident has been with the Mesa Police Department for two and a half years and is currently administratively reassigned per department protocol," the department said. "The investigation is currently on going and all evidence and statements are being completed to be presented to the Maricopa County Attorneys Office (MCAO) for an independent review. A key piece of evidence of this case is the on-body camera video which captured the incident. *The video will not be immediately released publicly until the investigation is completed and reviewed by MCAO."*

(Doesn't sound like sympathy to me. Sounds like, "$#@! Mundane should have complied, then we would not have to put our brave officer through the torture of a mock investigation." - AF)

----------


## sparebulb

Widow doesn't get it.

If she doesn't want her old man blown away for no reason, she should have married one of the good guys.

In B4 the Texican.

----------


## Mani

Body cam will take 3 years to come out, but if it's too damning it will have turned out to be "malfunctioned...."

----------


## heavenlyboy34

Phoenix PD was featured on the show "COPS" a few times. Fans of that show were/are psycho(in a bad way). This kind of $#@! is why. Sheriff Joe is a menace to society.

----------


## angelatc

> *"These types of situations are difficult for police officers.*


$#@! you for being dead .

----------


## sparebulb

> $#@! you for being dead .


I can't give you enough +rep lately.

----------


## SeanTX

Update: Officer charged with second degree murder.

I think I can provide the next update in advance : officer found not guilty, or a hung jury.  To be followed up with hundreds of thousands in back pay being awarded, re-hired or hired by a different dept. etc. 

It seems more and more cops are being charged, but VERY few convicted ...

http://www.wfaa.com/news/crime/mesa-...y-man/68241689




> GRANBURY — A Mesa, Ariz. officer who fatally shot a Granbury man has been charged with second degree murder, according to a statement released by Maricopa County officials late Friday.
> 
> Officer Philip Mitchell Brailsford has been ordered to appear in court at 9 a.m. on March 15.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Update: Officer charged with second degree murder.
> 
> I think I can provide the next update in advance : officer found not guilty, or a hung jury.  To be followed up with hundreds of thousands in back pay being awarded, re-hired or hired by a different dept. etc. 
> 
> It seems more and more cops are being charged, but VERY few convicted ...
> 
> http://www.wfaa.com/news/crime/mesa-...y-man/68241689


Color me shocked...

----------


## RJ Liberty

Honestly, I'm surprised the cop was charged with any crime. I doubt he'll be convicted of anything, but at least a cop was charged in this case. So sad.

----------


## mrsat_98

So the lawyers could bill hours to our nickel.

----------


## Occam's Banana

> Sweet wants to know what it shows, *why they didnt use a Taser on him first*, and what witnesses saw.


 _*heavy sigh*_

----------


## TheTexan

> Sweet wants to know what it shows, why they didn’t use a Taser on him first


Sweety, they already answered that:




> Police say one of the officers felt threatened

----------


## TheTexan

> but then Shaver kept concealing his hands behind him, despite orders not to


What is wrong with this guy, did he not go to public school?  This is Compliance 101.  Basic $#@!.

At least the Officer is OK.  Could have been a dangerous situation.

----------


## TheTexan

It's a good thing the Officers put an end to this situation before it could have theoretically become dangerous.

Safety first, ya know.

----------


## Suzanimal

"Please Don't Shoot Me," Man Begged Before Cop Shot and Killed Him



> Moments before a Mesa, Arizona, police officer killed Daniel Shaver with five shots from an AR-15, Shaver was on all fours, pleading with officers not to shoot him, according to a newly released police report from the incident.
> 
> Shaver, a twenty-six-year-old from Texas, was killed on January 18. Philip Brailsford, the two-year Mesa Police Department officer who allegedly killed him, was fired from the department and charged with second-degree murder.
> 
> Shaver was staying at a Mesa La Quinta Inn on a work-related trip when he was killed, according to a local ABC affiliate. The police report (viewable in full here) alleges that officers received a call about a man pointing a rifle out Shaver’s fifth-floor hotel window.
> 
> According to the police report, the officers who responded asked Shaver and a woman he was with to exit the room. Shaver exited, then raised his hands and dropped to his knees. An officer told him to lay on the ground, and he did. He was “obviously compliant and offered no resistance at that point,” the report reads. Then, Shaver was ordered to put his hands behind his head, cross his legs, and not move. If he moved, the officer told him, he would be considered a threat, and “may not survive it.”
> 
> The officers then ordered the woman Shaver was with to crawl towards them, and ordered Shaver back to a kneeling position. “If you do that again, we’re shooting you. Do you understand?” an officer asked him, apparently referencing Shaver’s failure to immediately raise his hands as he kneeled. “No, please don’t shoot me,” Shaver replied. At around this point, according to the report, he began sobbing.
> ...


http://gawker.com/please-dont-shoot-...ium=socialflow

----------


## Anti Federalist

> According to the police report, the officers who responded asked Shaver and a woman he was with to exit the room. Shaver exited, then raised his hands and dropped to his knees. An officer told him to lay on the ground, and he did. He was “obviously compliant and offered no resistance at that point,” the report reads. Then, Shaver was ordered to put his hands behind his head, cross his legs, and not move. If he moved, the officer told him, he would be considered a threat, and “may not survive it.”
> 
> The officers then ordered the woman Shaver was with to crawl towards them, and ordered Shaver back to a kneeling position. “If you do that again, we’re shooting you. Do you understand?” an officer asked him, apparently referencing Shaver’s failure to immediately raise his hands as he kneeled. “No, please don’t shoot me,” Shaver replied. At around this point, according to the report, he began sobbing.
> 
> Officers ordered Shaver to crawl toward them, and he complied, “audibly sobbing” as he did so. As he crawled, he briefly moved his hand toward his waist and back toward his body, and Officer Brailsford began shooting.


Words $#@!ing fail me...

OK, copsuckers, hankrichter I'm looking at you...$#@!ing defend this.

I $#@!ing dare you.

----------


## libertyjam

Arizona Judge Releases Body Cam Footage from Daniel Shaver Shooting Death

An Arizona judge finally released body cam footage from the shooting death of Daniel Shaver, which led to murder charges against Mesa police officer Philip “Mitch” Brailsford.
However, the videos are edited, removing the actual shooting of the unarmed man who died begging for his life.
But we already know Brailsford shot and killed Shaver after he was ordered to crawl towards police on his hands and knees.
And we already know that Brailsford was the only officer out of six that felt compelled to shoot.


Brailsford later told investigators that it was a “terrifying” experience for him as he watched the unarmed man crawling towards him  – essentially saying he was in fear for his life.
But it was Shaver who was in fear for his life.

“Please don’t shoot me,” Shaver said according to a witness, who was also ordered to crawl towards police.
But Mesa Police Sergeant Charles Langley never gave him that assurance.
“There is a very severe possibility that if you make another mistake you are going to get shot,” Langley said according to prosecutor Susie Charbel as she read the transcript of the body cam footage in court.
Shaver then tried to ask a question.
“Shut up. I’m not here to be tactful and diplomatic with you. You listen, you obey.”
The incident took place on January 18, 2016 inside a fifth-floor hotel room where Shaver was showing his pellet guns to two acquaintances.
_Mesa Police Officer Brailsford kneeling down in hallway niche with his AR-15 Rifle_
People downstairs saw a man through the window appearing to be pointing a gun from inside and called the front desk, who in turn, called police.
After police ordered them out the room, they issued several commands to Shaver, telling him to show his hands, then place his hands on his head, then come crawling towards them.
As he was crawling towards them, his shorts kept slipping off, so he reached back to pull them back up, only to be threatened with death by one officer, which was when Shaver begged them not to shoot him.
However, his shorts slipped off again, prompting him to pull them up again, which was when Bailsford fired five times, killing the 26-year-old man instantly.
Two videos were released, the first one showing officers arriving to the hotel, the second one showing officers standing in the fifth-floor hallway, ordering Shaver and his acquaintance to step outside.
“Listen to my instructions or it’s going to be very uncomfortable for you,” one cop yells.
The video then cuts to a clip showing the woman asking the officers if Shaver is dead, telling them she is very scared.
The videos can be seen here and here.
“It is unfortunate that the Mesa PD coverup continues,” said Shaver’s widow, Laney Sweet, in an email to _Photography is Not a Crime._
“My husband was brutally murdered while he begged for his life. Redacting the evidence won’t change the facts.”

----------


## jllundqu

I'm generally police-friendly on RPF... this is indefensible.  Murder any way you slice it.  No 'furtive gesture toward the waist' bull$#@! justifies this shooting.

----------


## fisharmor

> I'm generally police-friendly


You, and everyone else who is generally police-friendly, are the reason why this continues to happen.
What they did to this man is their job.
What they did to this man has always been their job.
Always.

If you are friendly to the idea of police, you are friendly to the fact that there is a caste of thugs in this country who get paid to do exactly what they did to Shaver.
You are ok with this.  You can pretend you're not, but as long as you're ok with the existence of cops, you're ok with this exact thing they did.  
And you're ok with the fact that it took TWO $#@!ING MONTHS to charge him.
You know what that means?  IT MEANS THERE WERE MULTIPLE OTHER COPS THERE WHO COULD HAVE TAKEN HIM INTO CUSTODY IMMEDIATELY.
They didn't.  That means they were ALL IN ON IT.
And you're ok with that.

And you're ok with the fact that none of those other cops are going to get charged with accessory to murder.

And you're ok with the fact that Brailsford is either going to get a slap on the wrist, or walk free.

And you're ok with the fact that the training that created Brailsford isn't going to get changed in the slightest.

You're the problem.  It's not the gangster thug police.  It's the people who are their friends.

----------


## EBounding

Share this story with others.  But make sure to replace "officer" with "gunman":




> According to the police report, the gunmen who responded asked Shaver and a woman he was with to exit the room. Shaver exited, then raised his hands and dropped to his knees. A gunman told him to lay on the ground, and he did. He was “obviously compliant and offered no resistance at that point,” the report reads. Then, Shaver was ordered to put his hands behind his head, cross his legs, and not move. If he moved, the gunman told him, he would be considered a threat, and “may not survive it.”
> 
> The gunmen then ordered the woman Shaver was with to crawl towards them, and ordered Shaver back to a kneeling position. “If you do that again, we’re shooting you. Do you understand?” a gunman asked him, apparently referencing Shaver’s failure to immediately raise his hands as he kneeled. “No, please don’t shoot me,” Shaver replied. At around this point, according to the report, he began sobbing.
> 
> The gunmen ordered Shaver to crawl toward them, and he complied, “audibly sobbing” as he did so. As he crawled, he briefly moved his hand toward his waist and back toward his body, and gunman Brailsford began shooting.

----------


## bunklocoempire

> The movement of SHAVERs right arm in the recording was a very similar motion to someone drawing a pistol from their waist band, the report reads. However, it continues, SHAVERs underwear were clearly visible and it appeared his shorts had fallen partially down his leg at that point. SHAVERs motion was also consistent with attempting to pull his shorts up as they were falling off.


A hero flinched -_again._ 

When you are trained that flinching is acceptable, you are probably going to flinch.

----------


## ChristianAnarchist

> But definitely still gonna beat the $#@! out of you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Surrender mundane!!!  We got roids to sweat out!!
> 
> ...


"And now, they're incorporating the arrest..."  Hmmm, not exactly the way I would have put it...

----------


## William Tell



----------


## SeanTX

And , it's the usual outcome :  not guilty .  

If I remember right this cop had a dust cover on his AR-15 that had the words "You're F*cked" engraved on it, and neither that info or the body cam was allowed to be seen by the jury. 

A real "hands up,  don't shoot" type situation, and the killer still goes unpunished. 


https://www.azcentral.com/story/news...ing/927052001/




> EMesa Officer Philip Brailsford found not guilty of murder in shooting of unarmed man
> Uriel J. Garcia, The Republic | azcentral.com Published 4:18 p.m. MT Dec. 7, 2017 | Updated 7:51 p.m. MT Dec. 7, 2017
> 
> A Maricopa County jury on Thursdayfound former Mesa police Officer Philip "Mitch" Brailsford not guilty of second-degree murder charges in the 2016 shooting of an unarmed Texas man who was on his knees begging for his life.
> 
> Jurors deliberated for less than six hours over two days, finishing Thursday afternoon. *The eight-member jury also found Brailsford not guilty of the lesser charge of reckless manslaughter.*
> 
> The packed courtroom in Maricopa County Superior Court was quiet after one of Judge George Foster's clerks read the verdict.
> 
> ...

----------


## SeanTX

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mjr0Ts6yORE

----------


## Anti Federalist

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mjr0Ts6yORE


The murder takes place at 16:30.

Conflicting commands, confused suspect, equals dead at the hands of military enforcers.

Nothing will happen, white victim, white killer cop, jury of white copsuckers most likely.

Just another day in Amerika.




> “If this situation happened exactly as it did that time, I would have done the same thing," Brailsford said in his testimony.


Rot in hell, $#@!stick.

----------


## dean.engelhardt

> The murder takes place at 16:30.
> 
> Conflicting commands, confused suspect, equals dead at the hands of military enforcers.
> 
> Nothing will happen, white victim, white killer cop, jury of white copsuckers most likely.
> 
> Just another day in Amerika.
> 
> 
> ...


Really sad the jury did not get to see the video.  I have to wonder how the evidence got suppressed.  The video shows murder in the first degree.  It shows evidence of intent and planning.  Officers had ample opportunity to cuff and search the guy.  By choosing to instruct the guy to make numerous movements, creating plausible reason to shoot.

----------


## Schifference

What would be the reason the jury was not allowed to see the video? The truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth, but only a fraction of the evidence.

----------


## SeanTX

> The murder takes place at 16:30.
> Nothing will happen, white victim, white killer cop, jury of white copsuckers most likely.


I think this is Sheriff Joe's neck of the woods, so no surprise they could easily select the jury they wanted. At least if he was black there might be a slight chance of some justice involving federal civil rights charges.

"Crawl towards me, but keep your hands up, drop them and I'll f*cking kill you! Cross your left leg over your right -- hands up, if you fall it better be on your face, or I'll f*cking kill you!"  

An impossible game of "Simon Says"

----------


## SeanTX

Murder weapon , complete with the "You're F**ked" inscription :

----------


## Anti Federalist

> What would be the reason the jury was not allowed to see the video? The truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth, but only a fraction of the evidence.


Can't have the public's image of our _Ubermensch_ overlords tarnished in any way.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> "Crawl towards me, but keep your hands up, drop them and I'll f*cking kill you! Cross your left leg over your right -- hands up, if you fall it better be on your face, or I'll f*cking kill you!"  
> 
> An impossible game of "Simon Says"


This is very common.

Three or four or more 'roided and amped up $#@! cops scream contradictory "orders" at some hapless Mundane, who may be deaf, or intoxicated or mentally challenged and then, when said Mundane fails to comply with that which is uncompliable with, they ventilate the poor bastard.

----------


## Anti Federalist

The only positive thing I can say about this, are the comments in the youtube comment section.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mjr0Ts6yORE

They are worth a read.

More importantly, *cops* ought to start reading them.

When the number of people who have had similar experiences starts reaching the numbers it is now, and you cops continue to double down on the abuse heaped upon a heavily armed and on edge population like we have in AmeriKa right now, keeping up this course of action is likely to end up with you disemboweled and hanging from a streetlight.

----------


## angelatc

> The murder takes place at 16:30.
> 
> Conflicting commands, confused suspect, equals dead at the hands of military enforcers.
> 
> k.


He's visibly drunk, too.  Which added to his confusion.

One of these days someone should start fighting back.

----------


## TheTexan

> This is very common.
> 
> Three or four or more 'roided and amped up $#@! cops scream contradictory "orders" at some hapless Mundane, who may be deaf, or intoxicated or mentally challenged and then, when said Mundane fails to comply with that which is uncompliable with, they ventilate the poor bastard.


This is why I volunteer twice a year to teach Compliance courses for local public schools.  To provide more comprehensive training, than they already receive.

----------


## Anti Federalist

H/T to HB34

----------


## TheTexan

> H/T to HB34


Afghanistan Lives Matter

----------


## Brian4Liberty

I'd dare say this is an issue of training, and if local and State governments don't do anything about it, I'd be tempted to seek a Federal solution.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

Michael Savage is losing his mind over this right now...

----------


## CCTelander

//

----------


## CCTelander

> H/T to HB34



 "Because $#@! you, that's why." - Officer Unfriendly

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Really sad the jury did not get to see the video.  I have to wonder how the evidence got suppressed.


Prosecutors and cops are teammates.

----------


## Superfluous Man

Where are people getting that the jury wasn't shown the video? I don't see that in the article.

----------


## timosman

> I'd dare say this is an issue of training, and if local and State governments don't do anything about it, I'd be tempted to seek a Federal solution.


Give me a break. If training is the only thing preventing you from executing civilians then you are already $#@!ed up and should not be allowed to serve and protect.

----------


## timosman

> What would be the reason the jury was not allowed to see the video? The truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth, but only a fraction of the evidence.


Jury sees body-cam video of Mesa officer shooting unarmed man - https://www.azcentral.com/story/news...man/803368001/

----------


## SeanTX

> Michael Savage is losing his mind over this right now...


Meaning he doesn't agree with the verdict? He's usually a copsucker -- to the extreme.

----------


## RJB

> Meaning he doesn't agree with the verdict? He's usually a copsucker -- to the extreme.


He's a windsock.  Whichever way the wind blows...

----------


## sparebulb

> Prosecutors and cops *and judges* are teammates.


fixed

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Meaning he doesn't agree with the verdict? He's usually a copsucker -- to the extreme.


Ranting about "psycho" cops. Thinks it should be an easy murder one.




> He's a windsock.  Whichever way the wind blows...


He has been going on about Police violence lately. Is that in the wind these days?

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Meaning he doesn't agree with the verdict? He's usually a copsucker -- to the extreme.


Show starts about 7:50 if anyone wants to listen...

----------


## RJB

> He has been going on about Police violence lately. *Is that in the wind these days?*


I pray to God that is so.  Admittedly I haven't listened to him in years.  He was very pro-cop in the day.  My impression of him at the time was that he was a great showman who could play on the emotions of his listeners very well.  Even the way his rants build for the commercial breaks so you want to stick around.  If that is true, I hope that is what he is reading of his listeners.

On the other hand, it could be that this case was beyond the ordinary.  It should be a normal reaction for any sane person.  Instinctively, I usually have no respect for men who cry in public.  This video was an exception.  That poor man knew there was nothing he could do to save his life--  I can't imagine the fear, frustration, humiliation he felt in those last few minutes.  He was at the mercy of a psychopath.  That video wrenched my heart and I am usually pretty numb to these things these days.

Brailsford is pure evil.  It seems like all these psychopath killers have the eyes of snakes.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Give me a break. If training is the only thing preventing you from executing civilians then you are already $#@!ed up and should not be allowed to serve and protect.


So it's all good to train cops to view every citizen as a crazed killer with a gun, to escalate every situation, to yell and demand compliance, to intimidate, to shoot on the slightest twitch or failure to comprehend shouting and contradictory orders, and that everyone is the enemy? No changes in training needed then?

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> I pray to God that is so.  Admittedly I haven't listened to him in years.  He was very pro-cop in the day.  My impression of him at the time was that he was a great showman who could play on the emotions of his listeners very well.  Even the way his rants build for the commercial breaks so you want to stick around.  If that is true, I hope that is what he is reading of his listeners.
> 
> On the other hand, it could be that this case was beyond the ordinary.  It should be a normal reaction for any sane person.  Instinctively, I usually have no respect for men who cry in public.  This video was an exception.  That poor man knew there was nothing he could do to save his life--  I can't imagine the fear, frustration, humiliation he felt in those last few minutes.  He was at the mercy of a psychopath.  That video wrenched my heart and I am usually pretty numb to these things these days.
> 
> Brailsford is pure evil.  It seems like all these psychopath killers have the eyes of snakes.


Savage talks a lot about how psycho the person doing the shouting is. It seems to me that it was the senior officer doing the shouting, and this kid was the one who did the shooting. I'd place more blame on the shouter than the shooter in this case. Never underestimate the emotional dynamics that were created by the shouter (and the previous training). He whipped the entire situation into an out of control frenzy.

If the kid was the shouter and the shooter, than it's all on him.

----------


## SeanTX

Surprisingly (to me) this has been covered on the CBS Evening News and NBC Nightly News tonight, with them showing the worst parts of the body cam video, for millions to see. 

All the copsuckers I've seen online are circling the wagons and going on and on about how he "reached for his waist band, so the cop just had to shoot" -- but I doubt the people who saw the body cam footage in the news stories even noticed that part, since the part before is so horrifying. 

Every time this happens it's just more fuel for a potential fire at some point (it remains to be see if it will ever be lit off ) -- tick tock  ...

----------


## timosman

> So it's all good to train cops to view every citizen as a crazed killer with a gun, to escalate every situation, to yell and demand compliance, to intimidate, to shoot on the slightest twitch or failure to comprehend shouting and contradictory orders, and that everyone is the enemy? No changes in training needed then?


You are missing my point. The way they are trained is probably just a symptom of a bigger problem with the police. Why does the police see the population as enemy? Is this only because of the training they receive or is there a culture of violence which is tolerated or maybe even encouraged by the higher ups? This guy is at best a patsy and should not be the only one taking a fall for this.

----------


## AZJoe

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mjr0Ts6yORE



That was a straight up execution. The man was flat on the ground, face down, legs crossed, his hands on the back of his head, scared to the point of crying, and with a rifle fixed on his head. All the executioners had to do was have one go up cuff him while he was face down prone. 

But instead the idiot executioners bark confusing orders - put your hands flat on the ground, push yourself up, then screaming like a crazed maniac "put you hands in the air." At that point I could barely understand what the executioner was screaming. Then Brailsford orders him to crawl with his legs crossed. 

The orders gave the impression they were seeking to shoot the victim. He told the panicked victim several times "we are going to shoot you," "we will shoot you" if he got any barked out confusing orders wrong, especially while doing the crossed-legged yoga crawl while his pants were sliding down.

I guess the only positive is at least he was charged. It wasn't the police or the state that exonerated him but the jury.

----------


## fisharmor

> You are missing my point. The way they are trained is probably just a symptom of a bigger problem with the police. Why does the police see the population as enemy? Is this only because of the training they receive or is there a culture of violence which is tolerated or maybe even encouraged by the higher ups? This guy is at best a patsy and should not be the only one taking a fall for this.





> So it's all good to train cops to view every citizen as a crazed killer with a gun, to escalate every situation, to yell and demand compliance, to intimidate, to shoot on the slightest twitch or failure to comprehend shouting and contradictory orders, and that everyone is the enemy? No changes in training needed then?


Why, why, why, why, $#@!ING WHY?
Why do people on this site still act like this is not EXACTLY THE POINT OF HAVING COPS?

Come on guys, you've all seen the same cases as everyone else.  You've all had five times as long as the rest of us to figure this out.

THIS IS NOT A TRAINING ISSUE.
COPS HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR OVER A HUNDRED YEARS.
THIS IS A FUNDAMENTAL FEATURE OF POLICE WORK.

Take your heads out of the sand.

----------


## SeanTX

> I guess the only positive is at least he was charged. It wasn't the police or the state that exonerated him but the jury.


Yes, more and more are being charged, but virtually all are getting off on acquittals or hung juries. 

About the only case I can think of where there was some justice was with Michael Slaeger -- and if he hadn't taken a plea deal with the Feds he probably would have gotten off completely also. 

This has to be emboldening the really bad cops even more, knowing they can literally get away with just about anything. 

Example : paralyze an elderly man by slamming him down to the ground? The cop goes through two mistrials, a third trial gets dropped before it starts -- then he gets re-hired, with full back pay. On and on. 

However, yes, years ago before body cams he wouldn't have even been charged. All we would know is "he reached for something" and that would have been it.

----------


## pcosmar

> It wasn't the police or the state that exonerated him but the jury.


Refer to the Sanford Experiment.

especially the results.

----------


## pcosmar

> You are missing my point. The way they are trained is probably just a symptom of a bigger problem with the police. Why does the police see the population as enemy?


I see your point and raise ,,one perspective.

Why do people believe that police are necessary?? let alone acceptable.

----------


## Danke

He should have exited his hotel room naked. Then the cops would not be in fear that he had a concealed weapon.

----------


## nikcers

> Why, why, why, why, $#@!ING WHY?
> Why do people on this site still act like this is not EXACTLY THE POINT OF HAVING COPS?
> 
> Come on guys, you've all seen the same cases as everyone else.  You've all had five times as long as the rest of us to figure this out.
> 
> THIS IS NOT A TRAINING ISSUE.
> COPS HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR OVER A HUNDRED YEARS.
> THIS IS A FUNDAMENTAL FEATURE OF POLICE WORK.
> 
> Take your heads out of the sand.


Officer Hancock was cleared of all wrongdoing in the incident, and a court found that he had not infringed on Davidson's constitutional rights and that the officer used 'reasonable' force
LOL- I really didn't think this until one of my coworkers who used to be a cop matter of fact said this guy did the right thing because thats what they are trained to do because it could of been a weapon.

There is a big difference between what people think reasonable force for a cop should be and what it is by law. Reasonable force can't be because you didn't use reason. We can't trust cops to tell the truth when they don't have any incentive to tell the truth. 

I can't believe that this is reasonable force. I think we've gone past the point of being able to trust law enforcement not to abuse the power we have given them, because power corrupts absolutely and unchecked power is tyranny.

----------


## RJB

> He should have exited his hotel room naked. Then the cops would not be in fear that he had a concealed weapon.


About a decade ago I never would have thought a cop could shoot an unarmed guy on his knees for pulling up his pants and get away with it.  I won't put anything past some of them these days.

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> Why, why, why, why, $#@!ING WHY?
> Why do people on this site still act like this is not EXACTLY THE POINT OF HAVING COPS?
> 
> Come on guys, you've all seen the same cases as everyone else.  You've all had five times as long as the rest of us to figure this out.
> 
> THIS IS NOT A TRAINING ISSUE.
> COPS HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR OVER A HUNDRED YEARS.
> THIS IS A FUNDAMENTAL FEATURE OF POLICE WORK.
> 
> Take your heads out of the sand.


+MEGA REP. Doubt it will happen in my lifetime, but hopefully one day the masses will learn the difference between "security" and "law enforcement"/"police".

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> I see your point and raise ,,one perspective.
> 
> Why do people believe that police are necessary?? let alone acceptable.


In my experience, they can't imagine how "we" would be safe (in the broadest sense) without police supposedly "protecting" us. (even though SCOTUS has repeatedly ruled that's not actually what they're accountable for)

----------


## Occam's Banana

> About a decade ago I never would have thought a cop  could shoot an unarmed guy on his knees for pulling up his pants and get  away with it.  I won't put anything past some of them these  days.


And if it weren't for the ease of disseminating recorded video via the Internet, you probably still wouldn't think so.

fisharmor is right. This ain't nothing new:


> THIS IS NOT A TRAINING ISSUE.
> COPS HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR OVER A HUNDRED YEARS.
> THIS IS A FUNDAMENTAL FEATURE OF POLICE WORK.


The only difference now is that the Little Dutch Boys (public officials & police, their compliant mouthpieces in the media, etc.) can no longer keep all the holes plugged up and the evidence for how things really are (and really always have been) is finally getting out from behind the dykes they've constructed to keep the true state of affairs concealed ...

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Why, why, why, why, $#@!ING WHY?
> Why do people on this site still act like this is not EXACTLY THE POINT OF HAVING COPS?
> 
> Come on guys, you've all seen the same cases as everyone else.  You've all had five times as long as the rest of us to figure this out.
> 
> THIS IS NOT A TRAINING ISSUE.
> COPS HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR OVER A HUNDRED YEARS.
> THIS IS A FUNDAMENTAL FEATURE OF POLICE WORK.
> 
> Take your heads out of the sand.


That's all well and good, but in what universe will Police be disappearing any time soon? The leftists who have been on the verge of taking over the country love _their_ Police, and their revolutionary guard will be younger and quicker to shoot than the young cop who murdered this guy.

----------


## nikcers

> About a decade ago I never would have thought a cop could shoot an unarmed guy on his knees for pulling up his pants and get away with it.  I won't put anything past some of them these days.


For me it was watching TV, TV taught me to tell cops the truth, that they were good guys that like helping people.

----------


## Danke

> And if it weren't for the ease of disseminating recorded video via the Internet, you probably still wouldn't think so.
> 
> fisharmor is right. This ain't nothing new:The only difference now is that the Little Dutch Boys (public officials & police, their compliant mouthpieces in the media, etc.) can no longer keep all the holes plugged up and the evidence for how things really are (and really always have been) is finally getting out from behind the dykes they've constructed to keep the true state of affairs concealed ...



Not true.   Many cops back then had no guns, just big dudes with a billy club.  Even Bonnie and Clyde shot a cop pulling them over.  Or at least not drawing on them.   And other gangsters of that era shooting police.

----------


## misterx

Times have definitely changed. There have always been some crooked cops, but most police used to treat the people they serve with respect. I remember when police only had a handgun and a shotgun, and the shotgun was kept locked up. I remember when they knocked on doors and announced that they got a call for such and such reason, and discussed the situation. The way police relate with people has completely changed. It hasn't always been this way. It starts with hiring people who are on a power trip, and then training them like soldiers. The people in their communities, criminals included,  are not the "enemy". The community is not a war zone, you just don't treat the people you are charged with protecting like enemy soldiers. The police become more aggressive and people lose respect for them and feel threatened by them, and in return the police become even more aggressive. This military training HAS to stop. They need to be learning how to deescalate a situation rather than escalating it with no knock warrants, screaming, ridiculous commands, and pointing weapons at people. Most importantly, they need psychological profiling for officers. White knight, power tripping cowards should not be in law enforcement. That man's life had ZERO value to that cop. There was no reason to fire like that other than being too fearful to be in that passion, or just wanting to kill someone. If say both. It is really upsetting to me that he won't spend the rest of his life behind bars, or at least a good portion of it.

I can't imagine just having a good time, and all of a sudden someone is screaming at you to come out on your hands and knees, and you come out to see a bunch of guys dressed like military, aiming assault rifles at you. I can only imagine how shocked, confused, and scared he was, knowing he had not done anything and having this just happen out of nowhere. The police should've said why they were there. It's no wonder he couldn't follow their commands in such a state of mind. Not following commands should never be punishable by death. This makes me so sick. I actually stayed at that hotel before on the same floor. Had I been there that day, and they got the wrong room,  it very well could've been me dead. I've been searched by the police before when I hadn't done anything. I was pretty confused and agitated, and I put my hands down after they had told me to put them up, while they were still searching me. I realized my mistake and put them back up right away, but I was lucky I wasn't dealing with a pos cop like this guy. When you haven't done anything wrong and you know you're not a threat, it's easy to slip up like that and forget what it looks like to them. They have to be aware of that, and not be so quick to pull the trigger. He had plenty of time to see if there was a gun before firing. Hell, he shouldn't have even been in that situation. Knock on the damn door,  and announce yourself and why you're there in a way that doesn't create a situation where none exists. Even the way they did it, just go over and cuff him when he puts his hands on his head. There's no reason to have him crawl except to create another possibility for escalation. Everything about this response was designed to make sure that something bad would happen.

----------


## timosman

According to his job application, the LEO was a high school graduate, LDS missionary for 2 years in Quito, Ecuador and a HVAC technician at http://www.ontariorefrigeration.com/ - https://www.scribd.com/doc/306328500...mployment-File

One of his goals was to perform at least 1 arrest per day.

----------


## misterx

> According to his job application, the LE was a high school graduate, LDS missionary for 2 years in Quito, Ecuador and a HVAC technician at http://www.ontariorefrigeration.com/ - https://www.scribd.com/doc/306328500...mployment-File
> 
> One of his goals was to perform at least 1 arrest per day.


Nice goal. "Forget improving the community, let's see how many lives I can destroy". Dirtbag. I bet he got beat up a lot in high school.

----------


## Schifference

Would this have been murder had a citizen or local militia been making a citizen arrest against an officer they had reason to believe had done wrong?

----------


## ChristianAnarchist

> Jury sees body-cam video of Mesa officer shooting unarmed man - https://www.azcentral.com/story/news...man/803368001/


You can show the video of a cop raping a 4 year old and they will get off because they "feared for their lives"...

----------


## ChristianAnarchist

> Why, why, why, why, $#@!ING WHY?
> Why do people on this site still act like this is not EXACTLY THE POINT OF HAVING COPS?
> 
> Come on guys, you've all seen the same cases as everyone else.  You've all had five times as long as the rest of us to figure this out.
> 
> THIS IS NOT A TRAINING ISSUE.
> COPS HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR OVER A HUNDRED YEARS.
> THIS IS A FUNDAMENTAL FEATURE OF POLICE WORK.
> 
> Take your heads out of the sand.


Goons gonna goon...

----------


## Jan2017

This is about the worst of these I have ever seen posted . . . 
the victim was in a very difficult compliance to all orders, watching from 15:00 or so on - 
he's crawling toward them with the keeping of feet crossed 
being warned he would be shot . . .

----------


## Anti Federalist

> This is about the worst of these I have ever seen posted . . . 
> the victim was in a very difficult compliance to all orders, watching from 15:00 or so on - 
> he's crawling toward them with the keeping of feet crossed 
> being warned he would be shot . . .


I think there was a bodycam video of the cops killing Jeremy Mardis (the six year old autistic boy in Lousiania).

I recall not being able to watch that.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Officer Hancock was cleared of all wrongdoing in the incident, and a court found that he had not infringed on Davidson's constitutional rights and that the officer used 'reasonable' force
> LOL- I really didn't think this until one of my coworkers who used to be a cop matter of fact said this guy did the right thing because thats what they are trained to do because it could of been a weapon.


What I would like to ask anyone who says that is the following:

Suppose that man on the ground (the victim) did have a gun and did manage to draw it and shoot and kill the aggressor standing before him pointing a gun at him and threatening to kill him unjustly. Would that not have been fully justifiable as an act of self-defense?

I know, of course, that police apologists will say no. But they should be pressed to go on record proclaiming their belief that cops are immune to the moral standards that govern the rest of us.

----------


## Schifference

> He should have exited his hotel room naked. Then the cops would not be in fear that he had a concealed weapon.


Had he done that he would have certainly been charged with a sex/exposure crime.

----------


## RJB

> And if it weren't for the ease of disseminating recorded video via the Internet, you probably still wouldn't think so.


I am not that naive my friend.  I said I didn't think that would happen *and someone would get away with it.*  My mother told me from my earliest age that following orders is not an excuse to do evil.  I've always been aware that men with uniforms and badges under lawful missions from government, by far, committed the worst atrocities.

My naivety was mostly my trust in my fellow countrymen.  I was in 7th grade in the year 1984.  People said proudly Orwell's vision would never occur because we'd rise up.  People who suggested papers/ID checkpoints and the like were in our future were called kooks, because we would stand up to tyranny.  I believed that.  I even naively joined the Marines at 18 years of age to defend my country's freedom.

Now a lot of what the kooks predicted is here and very few even bats an eye.  When people "thank" me for my "service." I tell them I wasted that time of my life.  The only people rising up are those offended at someone with the audacity to assume that someone with a penis is a "he."

That man's death is not a wake up call, it is rather a promise of what is to come if people stay asleep.  That ending of crying on his knees, begging for his life as he complies and pulls up his pants is not a tragedy, it is simply a statistic in Soviet Amerika.

----------


## heavenlyboy34

@Anti Federalist especially Check it out-Not even neocon rag National Review is defending the cops on this one:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...-daniel-shaver
If you have the stomach for it, I want you to watch one of the most  outrageous and infuriating videos I’ve ever seen. It shows the police  shooting of Daniel Shaver in Mesa, Arizona. He was crawling on his hands  and knees, crying, and begging police not to shoot him. An officer shot  him anyway:  The background is simple. Shaver was a traveling pest control worker. He  was in his hotel room (a La Quinta Inn) showing off to guests a pellet  gun he used for work. Police responded to a 911 call claiming that a man  was pointing a rifle out a window.  When police arrived, Shaver was alone with a woman. They had been  drinking. The police ordered them out of the room, and they came out,  raised their hands, and got on their knees. So far, thing seem routine.  Police responded to a call from a concerned bystander, they were  concerned that the suspect may have a gun, so they demanded to clearly  see Shaver’s hands. That’s entirely fair and appropriate.   Then, however, things got strange — very strange — rather than asking  Shaver and his friend to keep their hands visible while police (who, at  this point, had guns pointing straight at both of them) approached and  applied handcuffs, they ask them to crawl towards police in a  highly-specific way. The Washington Post’s account is decent, but you  have to watch the video truly grasp the strangeness of the requests:      Langley tells Shaver to keep his legs crossed and push himself up  into a kneeling position. 

As Shaver pushes himself up, his legs come  uncrossed, prompting the officer to scream at him.     “I’m sorry,” Shaver says, placing his hands near his waist,  prompting another round of screaming.      “You do that again, we’re shooting you, do you understand?” Langley  yells.      “Please do not shoot me,” Shaver begs, his hands up straight in the  air.      At the officer’s command, Shaver then crawls down the hallway,  sobbing. At one point, he reaches back — possibly to pull up his shorts —  and Brailsford opens fire, striking Shaver five times.  In fact, the Post actually sugarcoats the encounter. At one point an  officer tells him “do not put your hands down for any reason,” even  saying, “If you think you’re going to fall, you better fall on your  face.” Then he says, “Crawl towards me.” How he can crawl without  putting his hands down, I don’t know.  As the sobbing man crawls, he reaches back towards his pants (perhaps to  pull them up) and is immediately shot dead. He had no weapon. He had  done nothing wrong. And now he’s dead.  Essentially, what the police told an innocent, law-abiding, intoxicated  American was this: Follow my highly-specific, very strange instructions  or die. There was no need to make him crawl. The police were in command  of the situation. At no point is there a visible weapon. I have seen  soldiers deal with al Qaeda terrorists with more professionalism and  poise. When a man is prone, his hands are visible, and your gun is  trained upon him, he is in your power.  At trial, the officer testified that he though the suspect was reaching  for his gun, and that if he had a chance to do things over, he’d make  the same decision again. In other words, he presented the classic  defense. He was afraid, so he fired.  

I’ve written about this before. Juries time and again acquit frightened  cops, regardless of whether the cop botched the situation or whether his  fear was objectively reasonable. I wrote this after the Philando  Castile verdict:      Legally, it’s not enough for an officer to show that he was actually  afraid for his life. He has to show that “a reasonably prudent person”  would also have the same fear. Clever defense lawyers twist this  standard into a line of argument that goes something like this: The  officer was afraid, and he can explain to you the reasons why he was  afraid. Therefore, it was reasonable that he was afraid. But real fear  isn’t always reasonable fear.  That’s especially true when the police — through their own incompetence —  create their own fear. Philando Castile was shot even as he followed  his killer’s instructions. Shaver died trying his best to comply with a  highly unusual, complicated set of commands while under extreme duress. 

 Scared cops still need to be competent cops, and members of the public  shouldn’t face death because a police officer can’t keep his emotions in  check.  Finally, I know that police have a dangerous job, but they’re not at  war. As I noted above, it’s infuriating to see civilian police exercise  less discipline than I’ve seen from soldiers in infinitely more  dangerous situations. Not one of the men I deployed with would have  handled a terrorist detention the way these officers treated American  citizens.   Arizona law defines second-degree murder as killing a person without  premeditation “under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to  human life, the person recklessly engages in conduct that creates a  grave risk of death and thereby causes the death of another person.” In  this instance, the charge fit the crime. The jury’s verdict was a gross  miscarriage of justice. My heart breaks for Daniel Shaver’s family. May  God have mercy on his soul.

 Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...-daniel-shaver

----------


## timosman

This is what puzzled me about this incident:




> How he can crawl without putting his hands down, I don’t know.


The LEO's communication skills are definitely subpar, despite what he claimed on his job application. His inability to express himself clearly cost another man's life. The crazy thing is the woman who was with the victim didn't have a problem obeying this unusual request, which probably gave the LEO a confidence boost about his peculiar request and justified, in his mind, the shooting.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> I am not that naive my friend.  I said I didn't think that would happen *and someone would get away with it.*  My mother told me from my earliest age that following orders is not an excuse to do evil.  I've always been aware that men with uniforms and badges under lawful missions from government, by far, committed the worst atrocities.
> 
> My naivety was mostly my trust in my fellow countrymen.  I was in 7th grade in the year 1984.  People said proudly Orwell's vision would never occur because we'd rise up.  People who suggested papers/ID checkpoints and the like were in our future were called kooks, because we would stand up to tyranny.  I believed that.  I even naively joined the Marines at 18 years of age to defend my country's freedom.
> 
> Now a lot of what the kooks predicted is here and very few even bats an eye.  When people "thank" me for my "service." I tell them I wasted that time of my life.  The only people rising up are those offended at someone with the audacity to assume that someone with a penis is a "he."
> 
> That man's death is not a wake up call, it is rather a promise of what is to come if people stay asleep.  That ending of crying on his knees, begging for his life as he complies and pulls up his pants is not a tragedy, it is simply a statistic in Soviet Amerika.


I cannot rep that enough, and I'm outta ammo.

Little help please?

----------


## Anti Federalist

From HB's story:




> Finally, I know that police have a dangerous job, but they’re not at war. As I noted above, it’s infuriating to see civilian police exercise less discipline than I’ve seen from soldiers in infinitely more dangerous situations. Not one of the men I deployed with would have handled a terrorist detention the way these officers treated American citizens.


http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...-daniel-shaver

No, they do *not*.

Statistically, being a cop is not even in the top ten of dangerous professions.

So, this $#@! skates, but you bet your ass, the city and the ever suffering taxpayers that have to support and get accosted and mulcted daily by the professional mercenary class of $#@! cops all around us, will pay through the $#@!ing nose on this one.

I see a seven figure settlement.

If I had my way, it would be a multi *billion* dollar settlement, to be paid by an immediate *catastrophic* raising of residential property taxes.

Maybe *that* will snap some Idiot AmeriKunts out of their slumber.

----------


## Anti Federalist

*Arizona “hero” Acquitted of What Was Obviously Murder*

https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2017...iously-murder/

By eric - December 9, 2017

About a year ago, 26-year-old Daniel Shaver was staying at a La Quinta hotel in Mesa, Arizona while working his job in pest control. He would himself be exterminated by two-legged vermin – in the form of trigger-happy cop Philip “Mitch” Brailsford.

Shaver – a regular guy with no criminal record – was apparently showing a woman he’d met earlier a pellet gun in his hotel room. There were no gunshots. No one had been threatened by Shaver.

He was not yelling or acting violently.

An “anonymous call” led to a body-armored thug scrum descending upon the La Quinta Inn, including AR-15 wielding Brailsford.

Without making any effort to ascertain whether Shaver was actually armed – let alone dangerous – the “heroes” scream orders at the clearly terrified man and his female companion as they walk out of their room, unaware of the presence of “heroes” with actual guns – AR-15 assault rifles – waiting for them in the hallway.

Both can be seen on the video – released after Brailsford’s acquittal – cringing in terror and immediately complying with the Shutzstaffel-style orders being screamed at them. But when Shaver – who was lying prone on the floor with his legs crossed and trying to get up in his knees as ordered by the “hero” – inadvertently fumbles behind him, he is summarily executed by Brailsford – who pumped five shots into him at near point-blank range out of an abundance of caution and fear for his safety.

Keep in mind that Shaver was on the ground and had been obeying every barked order – was in fact as supine as a piece of water-logged pasta – and had been begging the “heroes” not to shoot. 

*It was not enough to prevent his murder by Bailsford – whose AR-15 was inscribed with “You’re $#@!ed” on it  – and insufficient to convict this murderer of even a misdemeanor parking infraction.*

“If you move, we are going to consider that a threat,” the “heroes” state, as they draw down on the prone and clearly helpless and terrified man.

*That’s all it takes to get snuffed by a “hero” in America these days.*

Not to be an actual threat – but to be “considered” one, in the judgment of a “hero” looking for an excuse to kill someone.

Shaver is in the ground – but Brailsford is free to go. He will probably “serving” as a “hero” again.

*Perhaps in your town.*

----------


## Anti Federalist

Wonder how many kneeling foozballers know who Daniel Shaver is?

Or, that people that look like him are shot by cops more often than blacks?

----------


## CCTelander

> *Arizona hero Acquitted of What Was Obviously Murder*
> 
> https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2017...iously-murder/
> 
> By eric - December 9, 2017
> 
> About a year ago, 26-year-old Daniel Shaver was staying at a La Quinta hotel in Mesa, Arizona while working his job in pest control. He would himself be exterminated by two-legged vermin  in the form of trigger-happy cop Philip Mitch Brailsford.
> 
> Shaver  a regular guy with no criminal record  was apparently showing a woman hed met earlier a pellet gun in his hotel room. There were no gunshots. No one had been threatened by Shaver.
> ...



Feeling nice and safe now, Amerika? I thought so.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Feeling nice and safe now, Amerika? I thought so.


They'll get their daily dose of pro-cop propaganda from the government media organs tonight, and all will be well.

That is one of the fundamental things that has changed.

Years ago, cops were often portrayed as boobs, flatfoots, bumbling "civil servants" or corrupt maniacs.

Then came Jack Webb on radio and later in television and all that changed.

His, self admitted, pro cop entertainment shows like _Dragnet_ or _Adam-12_ set the stage for the hundreds of pro state enforcer propaganda shows that have followed, and tainted Idiot AmeriKa's thinking so badly, they won't won't even convict a "hero" under gross circumstances such as this.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Feeling nice and safe now, Amerika? I thought so.


They'll get their daily dose of pro-cop propaganda from the government media organs tonight, and all will be well.

That is one of the fundamental things that has changed.

Years ago, cops were often portrayed as boobs, flatfoots, bumbling "civil servants" or corrupt maniacs.

Then came Jack Webb on radio and later in television and all that changed.

His, self admitted, pro cop entertainment shows like _Dragnet_ or _Adam-12_ set the stage for the hundreds of pro state enforcer propaganda shows that have followed, and tainted Idiot AmeriKa's thinking so badly, they won't won't even convict a "hero" under gross circumstances such as this.

----------


## Occam's Banana

> I am not that naive my friend.  I said I didn't think that would happen *and someone would get away with it.*  My mother told me from my earliest age that following orders is not an excuse to do evil.  I've always been aware that men with uniforms and badges under lawful missions from government, by far, committed the worst atrocities.
> 
> My naivety was mostly my trust in my fellow countrymen.  I was in 7th grade in the year 1984.  People said proudly Orwell's vision would never occur because we'd rise up.  People who suggested papers/ID checkpoints and the like were in our future were called kooks, because we would stand up to tyranny.  I believed that.  I even naively joined the Marines at 18 years of age to defend my country's freedom.
> 
> Now a lot of what the kooks predicted is here and very few even bats an eye.  When people "thank" me for my "service." I tell them I wasted that time of my life.  The only people rising up are those offended at someone with the audacity to assume that someone with a penis is a "he."
> 
> That man's death is not a wake up call, it is rather a promise of what is to come if people stay asleep.  That ending of crying on his knees, begging for his life as he complies and pulls up his pants is not a tragedy, it is simply a statistic in Soviet Amerika.


_You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to RJB again._

----------


## Occam's Banana

> Not true.   Many cops back then had no guns, just big dudes with a billy club.  Even Bonnie and Clyde shot a cop pulling them over.  Or at least not drawing on them.   And other gangsters of that era shooting police.


It is true. It isn't about whether cops had guns "back then" or not. It's about the fact that, ever since the inception of "modern" police forces in the 19th century, cops have been the specially privileged enforcers of the state's statutory _malum prohibitum_ rules (and only incidentally the apprehenders of _malum in se_ offenders such as Bonnie & Clyde). That is what they do. That is what they are for. That is why they exist.

Human nature has not changed. "The job" has just as powerful an attraction to the same kinds of people today as it did "back then" - sociopaths, sadists and others who get off on aggressively exercising authority over others with little or no accountability for their actions. Things like "nickel rides" or murderous "jailhouse" neglect and abuse (or the "code of silence" among "brothers in blue" that routinely attends the lack of exposure of such brutalities) are not of recent vintage - and it does not take guns to do what was done to people like Kelly Thomas or Eric Garner, either now or "back then."

What is relatively new is the paramilitarization of police. But this did not create any of the aforementioned problems or the almost total lack of accountability for them. _Those problems already existed, from the very start_. (It is in the essential nature of the beast.) The paramilitarization of police has only served to exacerbate them, while _the ubiquity of video (and the ease of disseminating video via the Internet) has made them much more difficult for the authorities (and their lapdogs in the media) to excuse or conceal_. (The italicized bits here are the point of my original post.)

----------


## SeanTX

> This is what puzzled me about this incident:
> 
> The LEO's communication skills are definitely subpar, despite what he claimed on his job application.


I don't know if anyone else pointed it out, but apparently it was not the shooter giving the impossible commands, it was another officer,  a Sgt. Charles Langley. So there are two who should be in prison for this. 

https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreak..._who_murdered/




> A very important distinction.* The cop who murdered Daniel Shaver was not the guy screaming insane orders.* That was Sgt. Charles Langley, who’s psychotic escalation of the situation is even more to blame for Shaver’s death. He promptly retired 4 months later and left the country

----------


## ChristianAnarchist

If I am ever in a situation like this I hope I remember what happened here.  If I do remember it I think I will lay face down hands outstretched and simply scream that I am unable to move.  I'm frozen with fear or have a paralysis attack or something.  That would force the goons to do what they are supposed to do and that is cuff me so they wont have to kill me because my prone body causes them to "fear for their life"...

But who can even think straight in a situation like that anyway??

----------


## charrob

Black Lives Matter Supporters Call Attention to Graphic Video of Arizona Shooting


"Consider that Shaver might well be alive if only the Mesa police department had long ago adopted reforms of the sort that Black Lives Matter suggests."

Black Lives Matter activists were among those who used social media on Friday and Saturday to call attention to the case of Daniel Shaver, a 26-year-old man who was shot to death by a police officer in Mesa, Arizona in January 2016.

A disturbing, graphic video of the shooting was released shortly after the officer who killed Shaver, who was white, was acquitted of second-degree murder.

The video shows Shaver following the officer's instructions to crawl toward him and begging him not to shoot.

The officer had come to Shaver's hotel room after another guest reported that Shaver was pointing a rifle out of his window; he was actually showing a pellet gun he owned to a friend.

Prominent Black Lives Matter supporters including Shaun King and DeRay McKesson, as well as others who have drawn attention to police killings of black Americans, posted on Twitter about the case:




> The Brutal Police Execution of Daniel Shaver
> 
> Sadly I've studied 100s of videos of American police executing non-violent, unarmed people. This is one of the worst I've ever witnessed.
> 
> This happened in January of 2016, but the judge just released the video.
> 
> A grave injustice. pic.twitter.com/O3UjLb3mZJ
> 
>  Shaun King (@ShaunKing) December 8, 2017





> #DanielShaver should be alive today.
> 
>  deray (@deray) December 8, 2017





> There is no excuse for this pattern of police brutality--how many videos of unarmed people being gunned down by cops do we need to see before policies change? #DanielShaver and his family deserve justice. https://t.co/yneLzMcLqJ
> 
>  Rashad Robinson (@rashadrobinson) December 8, 2017





> the American criminal justice system, as currently constructed, is not designed to indict or convict on-duty police officers who shoot and kill people -- no matter the circumstances of the shooting #DanielShaver https://t.co/DLjAdXePtP
> 
>  Wesley Lowery (@WesleyLowery) December 9, 2017


The Black Lives Matter movement has fought to bring attention to cases of unarmed African-Americans who have been killed by police officers, and to advocate for law enforcement reforms that would reduce police killings. Black men are nearly three times as likely to be killed by an officer than white men. In addition to drawing attention to this serious issue, the movement has argued that police reforms would keep all Americans safer from police violence.

Through their platform Campaign Zero, released in 2015, Black Lives Matter has urged comprehensive reforms including the establishment of disciplinary police commissions and civilian complaint offices, strengthening of use of force policies, and investment in rigorous and sustained training for police officers on engaging with the public.

At the Atlantic, Conor Friedersdorf argued that the case of Daniel Shaver should serve as a rallying call for Americans who have previously viewed Black Lives Matter as divisive.

"If you're horrified by Daniel Shavers untimely death, yet against Black Lives Matter, consider that Shaver might well be alive if only the Mesa police department had long ago adopted reforms of the sort that Black Lives Matter suggests," he wrote.

Meanwhile, others on social media noted that groups which might be expected to jump to Daniel Shaver's defensethe NRA, which supports Arizona's open-carry laws that allowed Shaver to have a firearm and the "All Lives Matter" movement which ostensibly hopes to draw attention to the killings of white Americanshave been silent about Shaver's death.




> The insanely heavy-handed police response to Daniel Shaver came after someone reported seeing him with a rifle. (it was a pellet gun).
> 
> Arizona is open carry, including for long guns.
> 
> So the NRA will denounce this verdict and demand better training for Mesa police, right?
> 
>  Radley Balko (@radleybalko) December 8, 2017





> #DanielShaver was killed in cold blood by a trigger happy cop.
> 
> His death was completely avoidable and should be protested. Plus, the cop was found not guilty. As usual.
> 
> But where are the #AllLivesMatter hashtags?
> 
> You don't actually care. You only use it as a rebuttal to #BLM pic.twitter.com/hSiJozT45m
> 
>  #BulletzGotBeatz (@100Bulletz) December 8, 2017





> The fact that #AllLivesMatter is so stunning quiet about #DanielShaver tells you everything you already knew about what their agenda was in the first place.
> 
>  Black Wolverine (@WolveyJohnson) December 9, 2017


https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...izona-shooting

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

See article for embedded links.

----------


## Anti Federalist

Good ^^^

----------


## ChristianAnarchist

Perhaps we can start a rallying point to bring together black and white on this anti-goon violence thing. 

Sometimes I call talk radio and many years ago I told one host about my dream to bring together black power and the KKK so we could all fight our common enemy - the goonerment.  Maybe that day has arrived.

----------


## SeanTX

This is right before 5 rounds were fired into him, you see his open and EMPTY hand coming back down after having been behind his back for an instant.

I read elsewhere that the shooter felt that he was crawling towards him to gain a "tactical advantage" 

"follow orders and you won't get shot" , or so they say 

I think it was AF a long time ago who said the best thing to do in a situation like this is to just lay down in the prone with arms spread out wide, while hoping for the best.

----------


## charrob



----------


## Anti Federalist

> I think it was AF a long time ago who said the best thing to do in a situation like this is to just lay down in the prone with arms spread out wide, while hoping for the best.


Yah, that was me.

What else can you do, when a bunched of amped up $#@! cops with itchy trigger fingers are screaming confusing and contradicting orders at you?

----------


## Brett85

This is the worst one of these incidents I've ever seen.  Absolutely outrageous.  It's simply unbelievable how biased our judicial system is towards the police.

----------


## pcosmar

> It's simply unbelievable how biased our judicial system is towards the police.


No.
It is not.

----------


## navy-vet

Did the cop(s) see any of them standing in the window with the tricked out pellet rifle when they arrived I wonder? That would have set the tone.
So, if I understand this, the cops objective was to secure the suspects in the hall and then enter a room and confront another suspect(s)?
A two and half year rookie punk ass that is itching for action... a dumb ass drunken exterminator....a recipe for disaster for sure.

----------


## Anti Federalist

How is the exterminator a dumb ass?

----------


## GunnyFreedom

For the first time *ever*, I am seeing cops, neocons, and statoloters on fedbook roundly condemning the shooter in this event.  The 'justifiers' are barely meeping their excuses almost like they are ashamed to.

----------


## GunnyFreedom

> Yah, that was me.
> 
> What else can you do, when a bunched of amped up $#@! cops with itchy trigger fingers are screaming confusing and contradicting orders at you?


Pretty much.  I was just thinking while watching this video yesterday (I finally brought myself to watch it) that if I am ever in such a situation I will literally fall on my face spread-eagle and just freakin wait even if it takes days.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Pretty much.  I was just thinking while watching this video yesterday (I finally brought myself to watch it) that if I am ever in such a situation I will literally fall on my face spread-eagle and just freakin wait even if it takes days.


Which will more than likely result in a beating for non-compliance, but it's better than being ventilated.

----------


## buck000

> Which will more than likely result in a beating for non-compliance, but it's better than being ventilated.


But then you will instinctively curl up and pull your arms in to protect ribs, head, etc., and guess what:  "I thought he was reaching for a weapon."

----------


## dean.engelhardt

> Did the cop(s) see any of them standing in the window with the tricked out pellet rifle when they arrived I wonder? That would have set the tone.
> So, if I understand this, the cops objective was to secure the suspects in the hall and then enter a room and confront another suspect(s)?
> A two and half year rookie punk ass that is itching for action... a dumb ass drunken exterminator....a recipe for disaster for sure.


I don't have the answer to your question, but I moved to Mesa AZ in 1994 and lived there until 2001.  When I was there, Mesa was open carry, so there is nothing illegal with having a rifle.  Having moved from California, it took some getting used to see guys walking in the store with a handgun in their jean's pocket.  It was not an issue at all.

The area is famous for dove and quail hunting.  During dove and quail season the hotels are full of hunters.  They all have shot guns.  Most hotels in that area provide rags for gun cleaning so hunter don't soil the towels.  

So back to your question,  if the cops where responding to call that somebody had a rifle in a hotel room; I can't see why they would act like it was an active shooter situation.  Matter of fact, I don't understand why they even responded to the call at all.

----------


## PursuePeace

> Did the cop(s) see any of them standing in the window with the tricked out pellet rifle when they arrived I wonder? That would have set the tone.
> So, if I understand this, the cops objective was to secure the suspects in the hall and then enter a room and confront another suspect(s)?
> *A two and half year rookie punk ass that is itching for action*... a dumb ass drunken exterminator....*a recipe for disaster for sure.*



If you remove "a dumb ass drunken exterminator", then I would agree with your statement.

----------


## fisharmor

> What is relatively new is the paramilitarization of police.


For those of you who think likewise, here's a thought I had very recently, and it sounds like you have too, OB.

These are two logically identical statements.

1) The problem with police is that they have military weaponry now.  That's the reason why they are attacking people.

2) Individual citizens should not have military weaponry, because possessing that type of weapon makes one more likely to commit violence.


If someone claims to be pro-2A and agrees with statement #1, he's not making any sense.

If someone is so pro-2A that he recognizes that dirtbags are gonna dirtbag, then he can't claim that militarization of police is a problem in and of itself.

----------


## fisharmor

> For the first time *ever*, I am seeing cops, neocons, and statoloters on fedbook roundly condemning the shooter in this event.  The 'justifiers' are barely meeping their excuses almost like they are ashamed to.


And I (and presumably Occam's too) are there saying the same thing we've been saying for years:
Welcome to the $#@!ing party already.  Now take that last little half-step to where we are, recognize that Brailsford did his job exactly as defined, and that this has always been the case, and let's go push to have something meaningful done, like complete and immediate abolition of the constabulary.

----------


## CCTelander

> And I (and presumably Occam's too) are there saying the same thing we've been saying for years:
> Welcome to the $#@!ing party already.  Now take that last little half-step to where we are, recognize that Brailsford did his job exactly as defined, and that this has always been the case, and let's go push to have something meaningful done, like complete and immediate abolition of the constabulary.



There isn't enough +rep available to properly reward this post. Bravo!

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Did the cop(s) see any of them standing in the window with the tricked out pellet rifle when they arrived I wonder? That would have set the tone.
> ...


Setting the tone is important, and it is usually the same in these cases. Concerned citizen calls about someone pointing a dangerous looking gun around, police dispatcher translates that to active shooter with automatic weapon scenario, police blindly rush to what they imagine is Mogadishu in the movie Black Hawk Down.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> I don't know if anyone else pointed it out, but apparently it was not the shooter giving the impossible commands, it was another officer,  a Sgt. Charles Langley. So there are two who should be in prison for this. 
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreak..._who_murdered/


Yeah, it's strange how the impression that it was just one cop continues to persist.

----------


## Jan2017

The end seems like a video game . . . execute the guy crawling toward you all and just walk by to the locked door behind.
Not enough tokens/points left to get in through the door . . . go back.

Conditioning has been going on for this police state.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> The end seems like a video game . . . execute the guy crawling toward you all and just walk by to the locked door behind.
> Not enough tokens/points left to get in through the door . . . go back.
> 
> Conditioning has been going on for this police state.


Yeah, that was my take too. The guy acted like he was playing a video game.

----------


## charrob

> I don't have the answer to your question, but I moved to Mesa AZ in 1994 and lived there until 2001.  When I was there, Mesa was open carry, so there is nothing illegal with having a rifle.  Having moved from California, it took some getting used to see guys walking in the store with a handgun in their jean's pocket.  It was not an issue at all.
> 
> The area is famous for dove and quail hunting.  During dove and quail season the hotels are full of hunters.  They all have shot guns.  Most hotels in that area provide rags for gun cleaning so hunter don't soil the towels.  
> 
> *So back to your question,  if the cops where responding to call that somebody had a rifle in a hotel room; I can't see why they would act like it was an active shooter situation.  Matter of fact, I don't understand why they even responded to the call at all.*



^^^This.  (+ rep).  That has been my belief all along.  Where does the "innocent until proven guilty" even come in here?  Pointing a gun out the window in an open carry state is not the same thing as shooting it or pointing it at people.  Did the police even look from the outside first to see if he was still pointing a gun out the window when they got there?  My gut says they didn't.

----------


## ChristianAnarchist

> ^^^This.  (+ rep).  That has been my belief all along.  Where does the "innocent until proven guilty" even come in here?  Pointing a gun out the window in an open carry state is not the same thing as shooting it or pointing it at people.  Did the police even look from the outside first to see if he was still pointing a gun out the window when they got there?  My gut says they didn't.


Bodycam videos should be streamed live to a public archive site.

----------


## Occam's Banana

> Pointing a gun out the window in an open carry state is not the same thing as shooting it or pointing it at people.


Did he actually point the gun out the window? Or was he merely seen through the window from outside while he was handling the gun inside the room?

I was under the impression that it was the latter, though I may be wrong. If he _was_ pointing it out a window, then it is not entirely unreasonable for an onlooker to have thought that he might also have been about to fire the gun. (Why else point a gun out a window?) This raises an interesting question: what if you were an open-carrying mundane (or a concealed-carrying mundane, for that matter) and you saw someone waving or pointing a gun out a window? What would you do? Yanking out your gun and popping off rounds at the guy might be an overreaction (or maybe not, depending on what else you think is going on), but nonchalant indifference doesn't seem appropriate, either.

Whatever one might do in such a situation, the upshot is surely that it not wise to point guns out of windows ... (especially in publicly trafficed areas like hotels ...)

(DISCLAIMER: As anyone familiar with my posting history will already know, none of this should be construed as an attempt to suggest that the actions of the cops were in any way justified or excusable - or indeed, that their actions were anything but those of rabidly deranged killers.)

----------


## charrob

> Bodycam videos should be streamed live to a public archive site.


Yes, i completely agree.  Too many opportunities for videos to be "edited" or otherwise withheld from evidence if not streamed live to a public archive site.

----------


## charrob

> Did he actually point the gun out the window? Or was he merely seen through the window from outside while he was handling the gun inside the room?
> 
> I was under the impression that it was the latter, though I may be wrong. If he _was_ pointing it out a window, then it is not entirely unreasonable for an onlooker to have thought that he might also have been about to fire the gun. (Why else point a gun out a window?)


He apparently was showing two other people he met at the hotel his pesticide gun.  Maybe the hotel room was dark and he could see more clearly closer to the window and he didn't want to aim it at the other people in his room so he aimed it out the window?  Since the pesticide gun was used to kill birds that get in grocery stores, maybe he was aiming it at a bird outside?  He was on the 5th floor and presumably pointing it out straight, not down toward people.

If the state is open carry, and hunters who kill quail and doves regularly pack hotel rooms in Mesa Arizona with rifles to the point that hotels give their hunting guests rags to clean their rifles, I would think it would be unusual for people in that area to get upset with seeing a gun unless that gun was actually pointed at people on the ground.  I don't think this was the case here and i don't think police even checked before running into the hotel to see if he was still pointing a gun out the window.  My gut says by the time cops got to the hotel, Shaver had finished showing his guests his pesticide gun and had put it away.  This whole case is ridiculous and horrifying.

----------


## Schifference

What if:
The police showed up and a team went onto the floor of the hotel while a police negotiator or whatever they call these guys nowadays was dispatched thru to the room where the man allegedly was pointing a gun. A team is on the floor ready for the worst case scenario while a diplomat is contacting the alleged suspect to get their perspective and arrange for the occupants in the room to come out willingly and peacefully.

Regardless the problem does not lie with whether that happened or not and does not lie with the shooter or person in charge of the squad. It is one thing when one egregious police shooting happens and the justice systems fails. It is egregious when the justice system rarely ever functions.

----------


## charrob

_
_
Looks like the ACLU are adding their voice to the conversation.  Which does bring up the question:  
*Brailsford cannot be tried again for murder in AZ because of "double jeopardy".  But could the Feds charge him with violation of Shaver's civil liberties?*




> ‘You’re $#@!ed’: The Acquittal of Officer Brailsford and the Crisis of Police Impunity
> 
> 
> By Jeffery Robinson, ACLU Deputy Legal Director and Director of the Trone Center for Justice and Equality
> 
> Two words stick in my mind when I think of the video of Daniel Shaver begging for his life before he was shot and killed by Officer Philip Brailsford of the Police Department in Mesa, Arizona. The two words were written on the dust cover of the AR-15 rifle Braisford used to kill Shaver:
> 
> “You’re $#@!ed.”
> 
> ...


https://www.aclu.org/blog/criminal-l...d#comments-top

----------


## charrob

_
_







> Wife of man killed in Arizona police shooting speaks out
> 
> 
> Last Updated Dec 12, 2017 8:36 PM EST
> 
> A graphic video of a controversial police shooting in 2016 was released last week. The officer was fired for violating police procedures but acquitted of charges that he murdered 26-year-old Daniel Shaver. *On Tuesday, Shaver's widow spoke out in her first interview since the verdict.*
> 
> "I've been fighting for two years and screaming. Finally, now, it took people watching my husband die a very horrible inhumane death for people to care," his wife, Laney Sweet, said.
> 
> ...


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/daniel-...lice-shooting/

----------


## charrob

> Sergeant In Command HAD PRIOR DISCIPLINE FOR ABUSIVE BEHAVIOR
> 
> 
> The Sergeant who repeatedly threatened to kill Daniel Shaver in the moments leading up to his death was under review for his abusive attitude ... TMZ has learned.
> 
> Charles Langley was the supervisor on scene in January 2016 when officer Philip Brailsford gunned down Shaver at a Mesa, Arizona hotel. You hear Langley bark a series of threats, including, "You do that again we're shooting you, do you understand?!"
> 
> Turns out Langley was disciplined back in 2010 for bad behavior. Internal affairs reprimanded him for "personal behavior, conduct and attitude toward coworkers and superiors, defaming or discrediting coworkers," and most significantly -- "failure to lead subordinates consistent with the mission and vision of the Mesa Police Department" ... this according to police documents obtained by TMZ.
> 
> ...

----------


## ChristianAnarchist

This kind of crap makes me sick.  I struggle to understand these goons.  It used to be goons wouldn't shoot until they were shot at (we're talking the 60's now...)

----------


## SeanTX

> This kind of crap makes me sick.  I struggle to understand these goons.  It used to be goons wouldn't shoot until they were shot at (we're talking the 60's now...)


No body cams, dash cams, etc in the 1960s.  

Just imagine how many times the cops must have claimed they were "shot at" , when they weren't. 

Back then they would have just planted a drop gun on Shaver and then they would have said that he reached for it. There was nothing more noble about the "old school" cops -- actually a lot of today's officers are probably downright "nice" compared to those guys. 

Now it's more transparent, and juries can literally see a cop commit murder or manslaughter -- and yet they will give their seal of approval, with very rare exceptions. 

This was a perfectly legal killing, based upon the precedents set by past juries. The precedent has been set that if you fail to obey just one "command" or make one "wrong move" -- then it's legal for a police officer to kill you, if he or she so chooses, based upon their feelings at the moment. 

Of course "legal" does not mean right or just . The concept of what's acceptable to be a "legal police killing" needs to change, but it won't.

----------


## ChristianAnarchist

> No body cams, dash cams, etc in the 1960s.  
> 
> Just imagine how many times the cops must have claimed they were "shot at" , when they weren't. 
> 
> Back then they would have just planted a drop gun on Shaver and then they would have said that he reached for it. There was nothing more noble about the "old school" cops -- actually a lot of today's officers are probably downright "nice" compared to those guys. 
> 
> Now it's more transparent, and juries can literally see a cop commit murder or manslaughter -- and yet they will give their seal of approval, with very rare exceptions. 
> 
> This was a perfectly legal killing, based upon the precedents set by past juries. The precedent has been set that if you fail to obey just one "command" or make one "wrong move" -- then it's legal for a police officer to kill you, if he or she so chooses, based upon their feelings at the moment. 
> ...


Believe me, it's way worse now than then.  Yes, goons have always been goons and they did some bad sheit back then too but the percentage of evil has increased to the point that you can't find any good at all...  Believe it our not there were a lot of "Barney Feif's" years ago.  They would take verbal abuse and try to work out a situation.  They were not trained to dominate like they are today.  It's the training that pollutes their minds to the extent that they turn into Mr. Hide when they put on that uniform.  

Yeah, it's a LOT different now!

----------


## Occam's Banana

> It isn't about whether cops had guns "back then" or not. It's about the fact that, ever since the inception of "modern" police forces in the 19th century, cops have been the specially privileged enforcers of the state's statutory _malum prohibitum_ rules (and only incidentally the apprehenders of _malum in se_ offenders such as Bonnie & Clyde). That is what they do. That is what they are for. That is why they exist.
> 
> Human nature has not changed. "The job" has just as powerful an attraction to the same kinds of people today as it did "back then" - sociopaths, sadists and others who get off on aggressively exercising authority over others with little or no accountability for their actions. Things like "nickel rides" or murderous "jailhouse" neglect and abuse (or the "code of silence" among "brothers in blue" that routinely attends the lack of exposure of such brutalities) are not of recent vintage - and it does not take guns to do what was done to people like Kelly Thomas or Eric Garner, either now or "back then."


I just saw the quote below in a necro-bumped thread from almost ten years ago (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...king-Bicyclist) and it reminded me ot what I was talking about above. The poster claimed to be a cop - so this is "straight from the horse's mouth," as it were ...




> That's what I find terribly ironic, people here call for the "good old  days" where there was "no police abuse", but  the reality is, back then,  police abused their powers much more and could get away with it.  Another officer told me the story of this one cop, who's now deceased,  who made it a game beating up black people for fun back in the 70's. He  could get away with it, his department didn't even care, fact the chief  probably even encouraged it. Wouldn't be surprised if he also sold  drugs, just like the example you gave.
> 
> Stuff like that just wouldn't fly today.
> 
> If you people think "police brutality" is so bad now, it was a lot worse  "back then" in the "good ol days" that you long for so much.


CTSRP says "stuff like that just wouldn't fly today." Of course, "stuff like that" can and does "fly today" (Exhibit A: the failure to convict the murderer of Daniel Shaver).

Whatever extent to which it doesn't "fly" is largely due to things like the Internet and the ubiquity of video (Exhibit A: the prosecution of the murderer of Daniel Shaver).

(What I find "terribly ironic" is that CTSRP's shuck-and-jive attempt to defend cops occurred in the context of - you guessed it - the posting of a video to the Internet ...)

----------


## RJB

I was born in 1971. One difference that I see was that back then cops didn't harass honest citizens over stupid crap like seatbelts and such.  Warnings were more likely than tickets, and the SWAT wasn't called for speeding tickets.  Cops didn't freak out about gun racks in pick up trucks and my dad would get out of the car and have a polite conversation when he was pulled over.

Usually the beat downs were reserved for those who actually broke the law or undesirables from out of town.




> I just saw the quote below in a necro-bumped thread from almost ten years ago (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...king-Bicyclist) and it reminded me ot what I was talking about above. The poster claimed to be a cop - so this is "straight from the horse's mouth," as it were ...
> 
> 
> 
> CTSRP says "stuff like that just wouldn't fly today." Of course, "stuff like that" can and does "fly today" (Exhibit A: the failure to convict the murderer of Daniel Shaver).
> 
> Whatever extent to which it doesn't "fly" is largely due to things like the Internet and the ubiquity of video (Exhibit A: the prosecution of the murderer of Daniel Shaver).
> 
> (What I find "terribly ironic" is that CTSRP's shuck-and-jive attempt to defend cops occurred in the context of - you guessed it - the posting of a video to the Internet ...)

----------


## Occam's Banana

> I was born in 1971. One difference that I see was that back then cops didn't harass honest citizens over stupid crap like seatbelts and such.  Warnings were more likely than tickets, and the SWAT wasn't called for speeding tickets.  Cops didn't freak out about gun racks in pick up trucks and my dad would get out of the car and have a polite conversation when he was pulled over.
> 
> Usually the beat downs were reserved for those who actually broke the law or undesirables from out of town.


I don't disagree - though I suspect that incidents of unwarranted police violence have always been more common than most people like to think (and even when confronted with evidence of such violence, both now and "back then," many people reflexively presuppose that the target must have done something to "deserve" it, based on nothing other than the "say so" of the cops ...)

But as I mentioned before (post #101), there are a number of problems that have always existed since the inception of "modern" police forces (and they always will exist as long as such police forces do - it's in the nature of the beast). Among these problems are the fact that "the job," by its nature, attracts the kind of people  who incline to aggressively exercising authority over others while enjoying special privileges with little or no accountability, and the fact that police do not exist - and never have existed - to  "serve and protect" (as the system's own courts have explicitly and  repeatedly confirmed), but rather to enforce the state's petty _malum prohibitum_ rules (such as concern "stupid crap like seatbelts and such").

Those already-existing problems - which are inherent in the nature of the police as an institution - have been greatly exacerbated by the relatively recent militarization of police, combined with things such as the replacement of policies geared toward non-belligerent deescalation with "circular force continuum" polices which encourage "officer safety _über alles_" and "submit and comply or else!" attitudes on the part of cops (even when dealing with mere _malum prohibitum_ offenders such as those caught not wearing seat belts, or selling "loose" cigarettes. or etc. _ad nauseam_). This has resulted in SWAT-o-matic cops who are far more likely than they once were to "harass honest citizens" and "freak out" at the least thing, with murderously lethal results. But the problems at the root of the matter are the same as they have always been ...

----------


## Anti Federalist

Circular Force Continuum.

The, literal, license to kill.

----------


## pcosmar

> I was born in 1971.


I was born in 1957.
I was 16 when a cop cocked a pistol at my head as I was walking to get a pizza.
SWAT did not exist.
and crime was rare and petty for he most part.

Less police is always more freedom,,, from my perspective.

----------


## RJB

> I was born in 1957.
> I was 16 when a cop cocked a pistol at my head as I was walking to get a pizza.
> SWAT did not exist.
> and crime was rare and petty for he most part.
> 
> Less police is always more freedom,,, from my perspective.


I don't disagree with what you said.

----------


## Schifference

I have a suggestion that could eliminate many deaths.

A surrender chamber. A chamber that can accommodate an individual and provide safety for everyone else. The surrendering individual enters the chamber willingly and is confined until a threat assessment can be determined. So basically bring in the chamber or whatever you call it. The  individual can enter to ensure that they don't get shot.

----------


## RJB

> I have a suggestion that could eliminate many deaths.
> 
> A surrender chamber. A chamber that can accommodate an individual and provide safety for everyone else. The surrendering individual enters the chamber willingly and is confined until a threat assessment can be determined. So basically bring in the chamber or whatever you call it. The  individual can enter to ensure that they don't get shot.


We should also wear those clothes that strippers wear so that you can be totally naked with just a quick tug on the clothing.

----------


## Danke

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/...icers-10058446

----------


## fisharmor

> Believe me, it's way worse now than then.


Come on, man.
Remember when Freddie Gray was murdered and they called it a "nickel ride"?  They were still calling it that because it mimicked dangerous carnival rides that cost a nickel.
How long has it been since carnival rides were dangerous?
How long has it been since they cost a nickel?
That's all the proof you need.  They've not only been doing that since the 1930s (at the latest!), but they've done it frequently enough to have passed the terminology down to subsequent generations of cops.

Read the beginning of this article discussing a situation - also, ironically, in Arizona - that happened in 1903, involving Sheriffs entering a property without a warrant and after being specifically told they are not welcome, and gunning down the owner.
https://www.americanrifleman.org/art...ut-at-gunsite/

----------


## ChristianAnarchist

> Come on, man.
> Remember when Freddie Gray was murdered and they called it a "nickel ride"?  They were still calling it that because it mimicked dangerous carnival rides that cost a nickel.
> How long has it been since carnival rides were dangerous?
> How long has it been since they cost a nickel?
> That's all the proof you need.  They've not only been doing that since the 1930s (at the latest!), but they've done it frequently enough to have passed the terminology down to subsequent generations of cops.
> 
> Read the beginning of this article discussing a situation - also, ironically, in Arizona - that happened in 1903, involving Sheriffs entering a property without a warrant and after being specifically told they are not welcome, and gunning down the owner.
> https://www.americanrifleman.org/art...ut-at-gunsite/


No one is saying that these things never happened in the past. I heard of a guy who was beaten within an inch of his life and then hung on a cross some 2000 years ago so yes, you are right these are not new tricks and yes they did them in the 30's and in the 60's.  What I'm telling you (and I was there) is that it was no where near as bad then (the 60's and 70's) as it is today.  Take it or leave it I stand by that statement and if you were there please tell me some examples.  I can tell you of several examples where the "peace officers" back then did NOT abuse people I knew (or me) and they did not.

It's my experience.

----------


## timosman

> No one is saying that these things never happened in the past. I heard of a guy who was beaten within an inch of his life and then hung on a cross some 2000 years ago so yes, you are right these are not new tricks and yes they did them in the 30's and in the 60's.  What I'm telling you (and I was there) is that it was no where near as bad then (the 60's and 70's) as it is today.  Take it or leave it I stand by that statement and if you were there please tell me some examples.  I can tell you of several examples where the "peace officers" back then did NOT abuse people I knew (or me) and they did not.
> 
> It's my experience.


Thank you globalists.

----------


## Anti Federalist

CA is correct.

So is Fish.

There was never a time when you might find yourself getting a "wood shampoo" from a cop fro no good reason.

But things now are without a doubt worse, due to CFC and military style training.

We are no longer citizens to be served and protected, even if it was only mouthing words in the past.

We are now threats to be neutralized, if we so much as twitch funny or exhibit the slightest "Contempt of Cop".

----------


## Anti Federalist

https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2018...not-complying/

Anti Federalist January 27, 2018 at 8:04 pm

Highlanderjuan asked:




> “So, tell me – why are American cops so murderous in the 21st century when they were not so murderous in earlier time periods?”


As I mentioned in a previous post: it is the result of the use of force guidelines being changed.

Twenty years ago cops were held to a “rules of engagement” or vertical force continuum that was less likely to result in deadly force being used right out of the gate. A cop was (in theory and legally anyway) only permitted to use whatever force was needed to stop a suspect from using force against them and achieve compliance. Simply put, if you used your fists a cop could a nightstick and no more.

That has all been thrown out the window post 9/11

The use of force continuum is now circular, with the cop in the center, and any and all means of force in a circle to choose from at any given time, as long as the magic phrase is uttered: “I feared for my safety”.

This has created the practical reality that means that cops can pretty much blow you away ANY TIME THEY FEEL LIKE IT, for little or no reason at all: “He twitched strangely and I feared for my safety – BOOM”

Why has this training been adopted?

Two reasons: the feds push it from the top, the better to manhandle us and push us around.

Second and more important: it is the deadly side of the “Cult of Safety”. Officer Safety trumps the life of any single Mundane. They are trained day and night that they are at war with us, that only their quick thinking and fast action will be what saves them every day.

Lawyers and the insurance mafia love this as well. Simply put, it is cheaper for the state to pay out whatever pittance they have to, to pay off a dead Mundane’s family, than it is to pay for the medical and disability claims of a privileged porker that threw his back out wrestling some suspect to the ground rather than just blowing him away.

This is a volatile and deadly combination, which is why you see more and more of these stories.

Your best defense is to avoid cops like the plague, have nothing to do with them, do not call them for any reason, and do everything in your power to get rid of them if they do encroach on your life, as annoying as it is don’t escalate or confront in any way, get them down the road and away from you.

MGTOW for cops.

----------


## pcosmar

> I can tell you of several examples where the "peace officers" back then did NOT abuse people I knew (or me) and they did not.
> 
> It's my experience.


Mine too,, I have not been abused by all of them.

but I have also learned to avoid the abuse.

----------


## navy-vet

> Mine too,, I have not been abused by all of them.
> 
> but I have also learned to avoid the abuse.


lol, yeah it's often better to avoid a confrontation so that one might live to fight another day.

----------


## kahless

Former Mesa PD Officer Phillip Brailsford was rehired and then promptly fired with full pension of $31,000 a year, a million dollar payout over one's lifetime for killing unarmed father of two, Daniel Shaver.
https://thefreethoughtproject.com/ph...tires-pension/
July 11, 2019

Mesa cop fired, rehired and then retired with $31,000-a-year pension
https://www.12news.com/article/news/...b-a96bf4d5172d



> Officer Philip Brailsford was terminated after shooting an unarmed businessman in a hotel. After jury acquittal, he was rehired so he could apply for disability.

----------


## Schifference

> Former Mesa PD Officer Phillip Brailsford was rehired and then promptly fired with full pension of $31,000 a year, a million dollar payout over one's lifetime for killing unarmed father of two, Daniel Shaver.
> https://thefreethoughtproject.com/ph...tires-pension/
> July 11, 2019
> 
> Mesa cop fired, rehired and then retired with $31,000-a-year pension
> https://www.12news.com/article/news/...b-a96bf4d5172d


Can't blame the cop for any of that. Jury acquitted. Department rehired.

----------


## SeanTX

I don't know if it's true, but I read elsewhere that Brailsford declared bankruptcy to avoid being sued by the family. The one thing he asked to be exempted and protected as far as his assets was the AR-15 he used to commit the killing. His PTSD from the event is so bad he wants to keep the tool he used to do it with.

----------


## phill4paul

Will riots be forthcoming?




> *Daniel Shaver: Police officer not guilty of murder*
> 
>   A police officer charged with the murder of an unarmed man in the US state of Arizona has been found not guilty.
> 
> Philip Brailsford shot and killed 26-year-old Daniel Shaver in the hallway of a hotel in early 2016.
> 
> Bodycam footage of the incident, released after the verdict, showed Mr Shaver on his knees asking officers not to shoot him just before he was killed.
> 
> *Mr Brailsford was acquitted of murder and a lesser manslaughter charge.*
> ...


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-ca...nwkhp5dOb0xF6I

----------


## RJB

I am pretty jaded, but that video still both enrages me and breaks my heart.

----------


## jmdrake

> Will riots be forthcoming?
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-ca...nwkhp5dOb0xF6I


I know this is a rhetorical question, but of course they won't.  His death doesn't fit anybody's narrative.  For the left it doesn't fit the narrative that police brutality is something that uniquely happens to white people.  For the right it doesn't fit the narrative that the only reason people die at the hands of the police is because they bring it on themselves.  @Anti Federalist and I talk about this all the time.  When Rush Limbaugh was on the Breakfast Club he (Rush) mentioned that if what happened to George Floyd happened to a white person you wouldn't have heard about it.  And that's true.  But why doesn't *he* talk about it?  Another rhetorical question.

----------


## Occam's Banana

> When Rush Limbaugh was on the Breakfast Club he (Rush) mentioned that if what happened to George Floyd happened to a white person you wouldn't have heard about it.  And that's true.  But why doesn't *he* talk about it?  Another rhetorical question.


BOOM! _You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to jmdrake again._

Someone let me know if Rush ever starts routinely criticizing police for unjustly killing people (white, black or other) without having an ulterior motive for doing so. Until then, I will continue considering Limbaugh to be a cynical opportunist who doesn't really care about police brutality, and who is just cynically trying to score some points against the other "side" by pretending that he gives a damn about police-on-white brutality while they don't ...

----------


## Anti Federalist

> BOOM! _You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to jmdrake again._
> 
> Someone let me know if Rush ever starts routinely criticizing police for unjustly killing people (white, black or other) without having an ulterior motive for doing so. Until then, I will continue considering Limbaugh to be a cynical opportunist who doesn't really care about police brutality, and who is just cynically trying to score some points against the other "side" by pretending that he gives a damn about police-on-white brutality while they don't ...


He doesn't...none of them (talking heads) ever did.

They were too busy copsucking, for whatever reason.

Had they started speaking up about this ten years ago, we might have been able to turn this around.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2018...not-complying/
> 
> posted by Anti Federalist January 27, 2018 at 8:04 pm
> 
> Highlanderjuan asked:
> 
> As I mentioned in a previous post: it is the result of the use of force guidelines being changed.
> 
> Twenty years ago cops were held to a “rules of engagement” or vertical force continuum that was less likely to result in deadly force being used right out of the gate. A cop was (in theory and legally anyway) only permitted to use whatever force was needed to stop a suspect from using force against them and achieve compliance. Simply put, if you used your fists a cop could a nightstick and no more.
> ...


What that guy said.

----------


## Occam's Banana

> Gainfully employed white man with a family, so do not expect to hear anything more about this either.
> 
> *Granbury wife wants answers after husband shot by Arizona police*
> 
> January 22, 2016
> 
> http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/local...lice/79159608/
> 
> Laney Sweet is still talking about her husband in the present tense. 
> ...


https://twitter.com/ThaddeusRussell/...25696660094976

----------

