This ENTIRE interaction was unnecessary. The man wasn't even doing anything, and now he's dead. You can ride your high horse as much as you'd like, but this is an epidemic and it's only getting worse.

 

I'm not going to argue with you about the laws of New York. They are what they are, and it's not up to the police to make them.

 

As for your "high horse" comment, I'm not sure what that means. Regarding this "epidemic"? More non sense. Do some research before you believe everything you hear on TV. Here, I'll do it for you.

 

An epidemic is typically something that is widespread, right? I googled it, here's the definition.

 

a widespread occurrence of an infectious disease in a community at a particular time.

 

So you are saying this is a widespread thing? Police killing people? Not just that, but police killing innocent people?

 

In 2012 the FBI reported that police arrested 12,196,959 people. That same year, police shot and killed 461 people. Based on those numbers, police shot and killed someone in .0003% of arrests. Hardly an epidemic. Not even really close when you consider the fact that a.) most of those were probably justified and b.) the 12,196,959 arrests doesn't even account for the number of accounts police had with people that did not end in arrest. If you consider that most police encounters probably don't end in arrest, that number probably gets multiplied by 10, (probably actually more). That would be 121,969,590 encounters with the public, where only 461 people were killed. That would mean that in .000000377 % of all encounters with police, someone was shot and killed by police.

 

Still think it's an epidemic?

Get ready for the next one!

 

Rookie NYPD cop texted union before calling 911 after accidentally shooting innocent man - AOL.com

 

Some people don't deserve to wear the badge. Plain and simple!

 

Thanks for that info

I'm not going to argue with you about the laws of New York. They are what they are, and it's not up to the police to make them.

 

As for your "high horse" comment, I'm not sure what that means. Regarding this "epidemic"? More non sense. Do some research before you believe everything you hear on TV. Here, I'll do it for you.

 

An epidemic is typically something that is widespread, right? I googled it, here's the definition.

 

a widespread occurrence of an infectious disease in a community at a particular time.

 

So you are saying this is a widespread thing? Police killing people? Not just that, but police killing innocent people?

 

In 2012 the FBI reported that police arrested 12,196,959 people. That same year, police shot and killed 461 people. Based on those numbers, police shot and killed someone in .0003% of arrests. Hardly an epidemic. Not even really close when you consider the fact that a.) most of those were probably justified and b.) the 12,196,959 arrests doesn't even account for the number of accounts police had with people that did not end in arrest. If you consider that most police encounters probably don't end in arrest, that number probably gets multiplied by 10, (probably actually more). That would be 121,969,590 encounters with the public, where only 461 people were killed. That would mean that in .000000377 % of all encounters with police, someone was shot and killed by police.

 

Still think it's an epidemic?

 

If it makes you feel better, I used "epidemic" incorrectly. My bad... I wasn't an English major by any means.

 

If you don't think that too many citizens are dying at the hands of police, then we need not even acknowledge each others posts on this matter. We will simply never see eye to eye. "Only 461 people were killed." Really? Only?

I'll go with "not kill the guy in the first place".

 

Completely ignored my point, but okay. I was talking about investigation/prosecution of the police officer involved. I realize many expect police to be absolutely perfect, but they darn sure can't go back and change things that have already happened.

If it makes you feel better, I used "epidemic" incorrectly. My bad... I wasn't an English major by any means.

 

If you don't think that too many citizens are dying at the hands of police, then we need not even acknowledge each others posts on this matter. We will simply never see eye to eye. "Only 461 people were killed." Really? Only?

 

The argument that this is a widespread issue is garbage. It's not a widespread issue. It's not a growing trend.

 

I don't think anyone should die at the hands of police. Having said that, I understand that the police are allowed to protect themselves from harm/death and that sometimes they have to kill people. I also realize most deaths at the hands of police are justified.

The argument that this is a widespread issue is garbage. It's not a widespread issue. It's not a growing trend.

 

I don't think anyone should die at the hands of police. Having said that, I understand that the police are allowed to protect themselves from harm/death and that sometimes they have to kill people. I also realize most deaths at the hands of police are justified.

 

We just disagree. Just because you don't have a problem with it doesn't mean others can't. I am one of the people that has a problem with those numbers, and with the lack of effort to change it.

We just disagree. Just because you don't have a problem with it doesn't mean others can't. I am one of the people that has a problem with those numbers, and with the lack of effort to change it.

 

I have a suggestion that might make the number decrease. Unfortunately, it's something I doubt will change.

 

People could stop trying to kill or injure police officers. They could also comply with police when they are arrested.

 

To expand on the statistics I provided earlier, in 2012 52,901 police officers were assaulted. That's probably only cases where an officer was injured. I'm sure there were thousands of attempted assaults that don't count in those statistics.

People could stop trying to kill or injure police officers. They could also comply with police when they are arrested.

 

I have never and will never disagree with this... Fighting with cops is beyond stupid. I think I've said that several times in several different threads.

I have never and will never disagree with this... Fighting with cops is beyond stupid. I think I've said that several times in several different threads.

 

So then you agree that some, if not most, of the people who die at the hands of police bear some responsibility for their own death?

 

Not including this case. That seems like it was either negligence, stupidity, or murder based on my limited knowledge.

So then you agree that some, if not most, of the people who die at the hands of police bear some responsibility for their own death?

 

Not including this case. That seems like it was either negligence, stupidity, or murder based on my limited knowledge.

 

Yes, I do agree with that. I won't say most, but definitely some. Again, I don't think I've ever said that none of those people deserved to be shot...

If it makes you feel better, I used "epidemic" incorrectly. My bad... I wasn't an English major by any means.

 

If you don't think that too many citizens are dying at the hands of police, then we need not even acknowledge each others posts on this matter. We will simply never see eye to eye. "Only 461 people were killed." Really? Only?

 

It is obviously bad when anyone is killed but when you live in a country of over 300 million people and have millions of police/criminal interactions every year, I think the term "only 461" is probably accurate.

I believe it was the daughter of Garner who was on CNN a fee hours ago, she said it's not a black and white issue.

He was either selling illegal cigarettes or he wasn't... There hasn't been anything published to indicate that was going on at the time of the interaction. Just because a person has committed a crime in the past doesn't mean they are every time you see them.

 

If evidence is produced that he was selling or had sold recently, then the interaction was justified. At this point, I don't believe that's happened. You can't just walk up to someone and arrest them on a whim...

 

You just said no facts have been presented to prove or disprove if he was selling cigarettes. You automatically assume he was doing nothing. Why don't you wait to form your opinion until the facts are in evidence?

You just said no facts have been presented to prove or disprove if he was selling cigarettes. You automatically assume he was doing nothing. Why don't you wait to form your opinion until the facts are in evidence?

 

I said there hasn't been any evidence provided that he WAS selling. Meaning he wasn't selling at the time...

I said there hasn't been any evidence provided that he WAS selling. Meaning he wasn't selling at the time...

 

And none has been provided that he wasn't. Like I said, why not wait until it is confirmed one way or the other. Too many jump to conclusions.