• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Officer Barney Fife mistakes gun for a tazer in shooting a black man. Biden calls for peace.

Heyo

Veteran Member
This was pretty major. But we are of course discussing this from a legal point of view.
Yes, when people get hurt or killed it is always major. And that is why this case better not end with the result "accident" because that would indicate that such a thing can happen again any day and no-one cares.
I don't say that the officer is guilty, but someone is. At least responsible. At the end someone has to take that responsibility and say "we did this and that wrong and we gonna change it".
 

We Never Know

No Slack
It depends upon the prosecutor.
Some are pro-armed self defense.
Some (where I live) are not.
Even if one is tried & found not guilty,
I wouldn't call this being "off scot free".

Note that the "S" in "scot" should not be capitalized.
(Nothing to do with Scotsmen or Dred Scott.)
The term, "scot", once meant a tax.

"It is time to stop digging" :rolleyes:
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Yes, when people get hurt or killed it is always major. And that is why this case better not end with the result "accident" because that would indicate that such a thing can happen again any day and no-one cares.
I don't say that the officer is guilty, but someone is. At least responsible. At the end someone has to take that responsibility and say "we did this and that wrong and we gonna change it".
I think that I have pointed out that more training appears to be the solution. I have heard law enforcement people decry the lack of proper training for most officers. For example if you want police not to use deadly force then one has to provide reasonable alternatives. Training in unarmed combat would help immensely. Police could use a fair amount of training in mixed martial arts. Just knowing how to control someone by lying on top of them, And that does not mean resting one's body weight on the neck of a person that is already cuffed.

The number one cause of the excessive deaths is underfunding of police, not overfunding.
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
Its sad that many use these shootings to riot, loot and destroy business. They aren't doing anything to help the cause. They are actually harming the cause.
Is it so hard to conceptualize the notion that people may become genuinely angry or outraged over situations like this one, and that riots may be genuine collective outbursts of such outrage or anger in very public spaces?

They may not help their case - and we may disagree on how laudable their political goals are - but I think it is not particularly sensible to immediately turn towards painting violent protests as disingenuous or motivated by cynicism rather than real emotion.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
From the article...
Potter, who had previously served as president of the local police
union and whose duties included training other officers, had
initially been placed on administrative leave, but pressure had
grown from community members to fire her.
Critics had raised questions of how someone responsible for
police training could have mistaken a Taser for a handgun.
 

NewGuyOnTheBlock

Cult Survivor/Fundamentalist Pentecostal Apostate
I always find it amusing that people who have never been in a situation where they have to make split secondlife-and-death situations believe they are qualified to criticize those who have, and who make a mistake.

After watching some of the body cam footage, my opinions have changed.

Dante was trying to flee. She was not in eminent danger and neither were her partners. She announced that she was going to tase him, I think twice, and before she pulled the trigger, she announced, "Taser Taser Taser".

I believe that she did not intend to shoot him with a taser and shooting him with a gun was a mistake.

However, she is a public servant. When you are given the public trust and the weapons to use deadly force, you simply are not allowed to make mistakes like that. If a fleeing suspect rattled her to the point that she made this kind of mistake, then she was in the wrong line of work.

I do feel sorry for her, but I do feel that she should be held accountable. I don't think that charges indicating intent or premeditation are appropriate, though.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
There's a larger issue here that should be chilling, ie,
that fellow cops thought she did no wrong. She is
described as a good cop. So good cops do this, &
approve of this? It can lead one to believe that all
cops are bad, but that most believe they're good.

Kim Potter guilty of manslaughter in Daunte Wright death | WTOP News
Excerpted....
.... testimony from some other officers who described Potter as a good person or said they saw nothing wrong in her actions: “The defendant has found herself in trouble and her police family has her back.”
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
In the news....
Ex-cop Kim Potter guilty of manslaughter in Daunte Wright killing

She should spend a long time in prison. Remember that
a truck driver recently got a 110 year sentence for an
accident that killed 4 people. Civilians pay for their
mistakes that harm others. Cops should too.
Yep. I just see all the cases where cops got of scot free for even more reckless behaviour (and not just incompetence).
It doesn't feel right, but that's water under the bridge. Let's hope that this case gives some precedent for the future.
 
Top