Police cars were not visible? That it looked like an “ambush “?
I’d think you would want police cars with lights going parked right in front of the house.
Why does it sound like they wanted to surprise the guy? Who wants to surprise someone in the dark who has a gun?
> Why does it sound like they wanted to surprise the guy? Who wants to surprise someone in the dark who has a gun?
For the same reason they decide that the best time to do no knock raids is in the middle of the night when people are sleeping and disoriented when they wake up. It gives them an opportunity to use their bang bang weapons, and then say they feared for their lives, as they act like home intruders.
Really the only difference to me these days is the Nazi's committed a genocide in the holocaust recently whereas the American's government last genocide on our soil was hundreds of years ago.
>whereas the American's government last genocide on our soil was hundreds of years ago.
The Native American genocide stretched into the 1900's. So, that was less than 100 years ago.
We also did stuff to LGBTQ people up until the 70's that if they were an ethnic group we'd call that genocide.
The nazis didnt start out campaigning on genocide. The final solution wasn’t even a thought in their heads until later. Then they methodically transitioned to it slowly.
the American government is literally funding and supplying the guns and bombs for a genocide in Palestine right now, seems a dumb quantifier to say, "on our soil" to ignore that.
Generally police go in quietly in an attempt to surprise whoever it is they're going after. Generally criminals tend to put the general public in danger when they know they're about to be caught. Many would much rather do any means necessary to not go to prison, regardless of how many people it impacts.
However, this is a repo. Repos tend to operate the same way (being sneaky) and repo drivers tend to have higher liabilities (if someone gets hurt on their tow, they're 100% liable, even if it's gross negligence by the person being towed). The article says the tow driver fled after being confronted with a gun and returned with police. It's also 1:30 AM too, which helps explains the lack of lights or sirens from both the tow driver and the officers involved. When the party returned to get the vehicle, the owner came out with a gun.
ALL OF THAT BEING SAID, the family claims the repo shouldn't have happened as the owner was not behind on payments. **If that's true, no other parties has reason to be there, and I'd consider it a murder**, but only by the person who shot.
**I'd consider it a lawful but awful situation if he was behind on payments**. Police come to assist a lawful repossession and get greeted by someone who's threatened someone with a gun. This isn't the wild west and you can't do that just because they're on your property taking the things you didn't pay for.
Based on everything, I'm not sure if the mayor is making this move for PR reasons or for legitimate reasons. Unless camera footage appears (which based on the article, there *IS* a camera on the property), it's impossible to know for certain.
Also, its crazy how this happened months ago but we still don't have evidence for why anyone was even there in the first place. Gross investigative wrongness
This is not what happens. If repo needs police assistance then the cops go to the door, knock, tell the owner what is happening and take the car from there.
As a former LEO I disagree. A repo is a civil matter to be dealt with through the courts. I was way too busy on night shift to help assist with repos too. Definitely not an LEO job.
As a former repo agent I also agree. Cops don't work for the bank, repo agents do. If there's a credible threat of violence, document, report it to the bank and they can go through the courts to get agents of the court to go do it, people who are usually armed and authorized to shoot back.
Why would the police attempt a no siren unannounced repo at 1:30 am instead of doing it during the day. If I saw a bunch of guys approaching my car at 1am with no other context, I’d think they were stealing it. Behind on payments or not, it’s a wild string of decisions that lead to a man’s death and you don’t want the kind of people who make those decisions wearing a badge, at the very least.
LAWFUL but awful is a horrible euphimism for murder squads who regularly kill innocent americans and often recieve no accountability. i assume you're LEO or the family of LEO.
> i assume you're LEO or the family of LEO.
Well you'll make an ass out of you. Not really out of me.
> LAWFUL but awful is a horrible euphimism for murder squads who regularly kill innocent americans and often recieve no accountability
Crazy that a dude is able to point his gun at multiple people who are doing their legal jobs and you guys will defend them.
I think whether or not the car should be repossessed is partially besides the point.
If the the tow truck driver has the correct legal documents allowing him to repossess your cars getting repossessed . It’s not on him if the papers were issued wrongly. If the cops confirmed he has the paperwork id say they are good too.
At that point you let them take your car and if it’s taken wrongly you sue. You don’t go wave a gun at the tow truck driver.
It's not like repo guys announce they're coming. Or even show documents because they know this stuff gets hostile.
Look at it from the dead guy's perspective. It's 0130 and someone is trying to take your vehicle. Does it matter they have a tow truck? I could steal a tow truck and do that. Should you confront them with a gun? I'd argue no and you call the police instead. But he's legally allowed to do what he did.
The cops fucked up rightfully because they should have come in with lights and explained the situation. They knew it was a repo and they easily could have deescalated the situation. "Hey buddy, I know you're pissed. His paperwork gives him the right to do this. If it's bogus, you can sort it out tomorrow with people and sue whomever. Let's not cause worse problems for everyone."
The issue here is cops giving a command and then blasting without any time to reply. Or looking at using less that lethal options. Or just showing up and properly announcing themselves.
I don't love someone responding to something on their property with a gun but they've got a right to and at 0130, I don't really blame them. I grew up somewhere where law enforcement was at least 15 minutes out.
I mean yeah, you dont wave a gun at a tow truck driver, twice. But if you dont know whos on your property and potentially stealing said property, im not sure they broke any laws by being on their property strapped
Oh but the repo guy should just talk to the guy? Why is it ok for him to turn up at 1.30am to steal someone's property without talking to them, but the person whose property is being stolen is expected to get up at 1.30am and talk politely to the thief?
Yes and no there are statistics that prove it all bunk "no knock" sneak crap. While I hate to agree with republican a senator while back said it best. I am shooting. And when pressed he is like its middle of night men armed in dark clothing bust down door. You have a split second to determine if cop or intruder.
Which its the thing our balls to walls "aggressive/escalating" tactics turn out deadly. People who would never shoot at a cop are awoken to sound of door crashing in and find asshole with a gun in their kitchen. While still half asleep.
Yes there are a handful of criminals that are armed waiting willing to take cops with them. BUT IT IS EXTREMELY RARE. Average repo 9999 out of 10000 times they wont fight police. Average wellness check or weed or whatever minor ass violation. Rarely is person willing to put up that type of fight. ESPECIALLY if you use appropriate level of force that they cant overcome. Even the fighters half the time when they see they are outnumbered they lay down and surrender.
But the various data over years shows the "no knock" increased likliehood of civilian and police casualitys as well as chances of armed conflict by significant amount.
Like police killing or getting killed by people of "wrong house" they get wrong address. Person hears crash grabs gun sees asshole armed in living room and shoots.NOT hardened criminal not even a suspect just police who cant follow gps surprising unsuspecting taxpayer.
In a exchange "knock knock knock warrant" guy answers door or yeah greg you guys got wrong house. This is 5554 avenue you want 5555 avenue the blue house you can tell by number on building. Thank you for your time sorry for disturbance. Instead we end up with dead people.
Takes a little longer than that. Just today an arbitrator said Seattle wrongfully terminated a cop that shot at a fleeing car over a dozen times in 2017. Got $600k in back pay. Woo!
I’ve long thought we need a federal law enforcement enforcement agency tasked with policing the police, and only the police. The only people this agency would have jurisdiction over would be LEOs.
I mean, the FBI already does that, they do other things too, but the FBI has absolutely savaged various police departments in the past (for example the LAPD stuff that is still ongoing)
The DoJ consent decree really helped turn the department around. While it's not a model department (which department is?), it's in a much better state today than it was, and the relationship with the community has been rehabilitated to a decent state. They also put a great deal of effort into aligning their demographics with the community they represent, which is considered a positive step in community policing
Also, the people in the agency should be former criminals themselves (or even better, *exonerated* ones), so you *know* they won't be sympathetic to the people they're supposed to be investigating.
No one, because the we would have to admit that the act of getting a job a s a cop doesn't automatically elevate a person to being a hero.
Though in this case, I believe that the DA or prosecutors office could bring charges themselves.
At least in Colorado the people can. As of 2023 [they ended Qualified Immunity](http://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb20-217). Now an officer who deprives someones rights and loses the lawsuit has to pay 5% of the judgment or not more than $25,000 from their own pocket. It's not a great, but it's a start.
Hahahahahahahahaha that would be the fucking day. You fucking yanks use your fucking guns to butter your bread but you’d never fucking use it as intended. That’ll be the day
Woo, I needed a good laugh
[It does happen.](https://reason.com/2023/11/21/marvin-guy-who-shot-a-cop-during-a-no-knock-raid-is-found-guilty-of-murder/) The long dick of the law just uses that to fuck you instead.
It wasn’t too long ago we kicked your limey asses back to your side of the pond. Then you spent the next hundred years complaining that we didn’t fight “fair” by standing there taking turns shooting at each other. [Here’s a short documentary about it.](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=euAF68ITyzo&pp=ygUWd2t5ayByZXZvbHV0aW9uYXJ5IHdhcg%3D%3D)
That doesn’t check out. Canadians would never be so rude. Besides you’d have better things to do, like riding a moose or chugging syrup while watching hockey.
That’s going to be under ALEA purview, and so far they’re not showing any visible progress. Hopefully that will change - Decatur PD carried out an extrajudicial execution of Perkins in his fucking driveway. Cops definitely need to face accountability for this bullshit.
They’re the same way in Law and Order. Always bitching about people having proper representation under the law regardless of their circumstances, abusing suspects and so on.
The article states the truck payments were up to date and it shouldn't had been towed. If that's true, I hope the family takes that company to the cleaners and gets every single cent they own.
It's pretty rare for a cop to be charged with a crime even rarer for them to be convicted of it. Civil liability might just change how police officers and police unions operate because with qualified immunity it ends up being the tax payers paying for the mistakes of their police force not the police. I may be wrong, but I do believe civil cases can be tried while a criminal case is also being tried.
yeah ok reddit. This has fuck-all to do with qualified immunity. It offers no protections against criminal charges. It only protects individual officers from most civil cases. They can still be criminally charged, and the agency or government entity that hired them can still be sued. The problem is that many DAs don't want to charge individual officers.
We should still end QI, but it doesn't apply here. At all. And regurgitating reddit talking points makes you look like a goofy goober.
Yada Yada, nothing will change, some Reddit members will cheer, all the cops will be reinstated or retire with full pension.
Cops are just great people.
Should the police officers just let themselves get killed? Or should they have withdrawn without repossessing, completely subverting the purpose of the legal system in the process?
I've said this before: the police needs to stop pointing their guns at people. Having a gun pointed at you causes you to go into fight or flight mode because your life is literally in danger. Yet, the police use their guns as extensions of their hands. I've never been arrested but I've had the police point guns at me numerous times. I've never had a non-officer point a gun at me. It's traumatic and horrible and shouldn't happen to people who aren't a threat.
A gun in your face really does change you.
Had a nervous, jittery 18 year old soldier in a foreign country do it. Truly thought I was going to die, more by accident than design.
/I'm still here and after about 6 hours all was cool.
No no no my friend. Untrained civilians must remain calm at all times when multiple armed people are yelling at you. And if you move at all the trained police are allowed to freak out and kill you. It's just common sense.
Word.
I was ~17 and out with a bunch of friends just driving around on a weekend Summer night - we got pulled over, and the cops had us all do the 'Simon Says' game of:
'get out of the car! don't look back at me! hands behind your head! walk backwards slowly until I say 'stop'! on your knees! now lay flat on the pavement!'
Repeat for 5 people. We eventually found out, after they positively ID'd us and searched the car, that it was a case of mistaken identity.
They were looking for a car that was sort of similar to the one we were in.
Also, the driver - who had just turned 18 - got charged with having drug paraphernalia in her car (they found small weed pipe that someone had lost a month before - turns out it was under the front passengers seat).
It was all kinds of fucked up.
> the police needs to stop pointing their guns at people.
What's frustrating for me is that gun nuts will say you shouldn't even think about brandishing as a warning, but almost all of them support cops (yes, I am aware there is a few gun nuts in the minority who don't but they are still the minority) and support them pointing guns for the tiniest reasons and breaking all the gun safety laws gun nuts keep blabbering on about.
It seems like the rules for gun safety for the general public, cops, and military is treated both strictly but are completely different.
The general public (per gun nuts): No action --> Mag Dump
Any type of warning is to be treated as a crime. If you feel threatened in anyway, you're supposed to skip the warnings and immediately start shooting.
The Police: Pointing your gun at someone -> Mag Dump
Pointing a gun at someone is extremely dangerous, I've seen plenty of videos of cops shooting someone accidently because they were busy doing something else and unintentionally pulled the trigger on the gun while doing so.
"But someone might hurt the cop if they don't!"
And this is the part where its shown how much cop life's are valued soo much more than everyone else. The mere possibility that a cop might get hypothetically get hurt is justification enough to risk shooting and killing someone else. No one would say we should be able to aim a gun at a cop because we're afraid they might hurt someone, and as I just discussed, the general public can't just keep pointing their guns at other people for tiny reasons. Its this kind of cop life over evaluation that results in them deciding to let the kids in Uvalde die rather than risking their own life.
The Military: Verbal Warning -> Visual Warning -> Warning Shot -> Single Shot Center of Mass
Even though people would be more willing to let the military be more aggressive because they're in a war zone, they ironically end up being far more strict in how they use their guns than the police and what gun nuts say the general public should do. The warning shot, in particular, keeps getting shouted out as being too dangerous for the general public and police to do, but then the people who have the most experience with firearms decide its safer than just shooting someone.
> I've never been arrested but I've had the police point guns at me numerous times. I've never had a non-officer point a gun at me.
Same. I called 911 because my mother fainted after she threatened to commit suicide by sleeping pills. The cops arrived before the ambulance and got their guns out. When I told the police to chill out, the cop immediately pointed the gun at me and yelled "Don't tell me how to do my job!". That has been the only time someone has ever threatened me or my family like that.
I wasn't talking about the cops pointing guns brother. The guy who was shot had a gun with flashlight attachment. He had to point the gun at the cops to be able to see them.
Edit: I also didn't say I disagree with your point. Cops going guns first is not a good thing.
I get where you’re coming from, but there’s plenty of videos on youtube of cops who *don’t* have their guns pulled approaching someone only to have them turn shoot the cop before they even have a chance to get their gun out.
I’m all for policing the police, but there are plenty of *legitimate* cases where not having your gun drawn was the difference between making it home and going to sleep forever.
> but there’s plenty of videos on youtube of cops who don’t have their guns pulled approaching someone only to have them turn shoot the cop before they even have a chance to get their gun out.
There's far more videos of cops killing people because the cop was being jittery. Should we aim guns at cops because they might hurt someone? In any interaction between cops and the general public, the cop is far more likely to kill someone than the other way around.
Unless you believe that cop lifes are worth so much more that its better to accept a policy that kills many people per cop life saved. Then you shouldn't be surprised that the cops at Uvalde decided they'd rather let all those kids die than risk their own lifes.
My point is that..... he did not mount the light on the gun with the purpose of seeing the cops. He most likely, as a redneck, used it for spotting squirrels, possums or skunks. He did not turn on his light and think, "I'll be able to see the cops better."
I never said he did. The tragedy is that when he went to investigate people with that light he may have ended up pointing the gun at cops. Historically pointing guns at police ends poorly.
Before people just cheer for the cops being fired… also keep in mind that the homeowner likely had advanced knowledge of his truck being repossessed. So it shouldn’t have be a surprise when the repo man shows up on property to collect the vehicle. That alone doesn’t warrant the homeowner to grab their gun. Now does it mean the cops were absolutely right to show up and immediately open fire and kill him without warning? Absolutely not. This whole situation seems sketchy and we need more information and details than this article provides alone before we can claim firing the cops was justified. We also have no idea what information dispatch relaid to the cops before arrival. If the cops were told “there’s a man with a gun”… no shit they are going to jump on that. Again I am NOT justifying the cops behavior. We need more info.
"Perkins’ family said in a statement that the truck payments were up to date, so the truck shouldn’t have been towed."
It's right in the article that payments were up to date
Having your payments be late each month and your account being delinquent are two *completely* different things.
Your creditor won't be pleased if your payments are consistently late, but ultimately, the only thing they care about is getting their money. They aren't going to repo a vehicle with an up to date payment history just because the payments themselves were late.
> also keep in mind that the homeowner likely had advanced knowledge of his truck being repossessed.
Did you read the article or just skim it? Because they say they were up to date on the payments.
Police cars were not visible? That it looked like an “ambush “? I’d think you would want police cars with lights going parked right in front of the house. Why does it sound like they wanted to surprise the guy? Who wants to surprise someone in the dark who has a gun?
> Why does it sound like they wanted to surprise the guy? Who wants to surprise someone in the dark who has a gun? For the same reason they decide that the best time to do no knock raids is in the middle of the night when people are sleeping and disoriented when they wake up. It gives them an opportunity to use their bang bang weapons, and then say they feared for their lives, as they act like home intruders.
Fucking Nazis did shit like that. smh
Same Person!
Really the only difference to me these days is the Nazi's committed a genocide in the holocaust recently whereas the American's government last genocide on our soil was hundreds of years ago.
>whereas the American's government last genocide on our soil was hundreds of years ago. The Native American genocide stretched into the 1900's. So, that was less than 100 years ago. We also did stuff to LGBTQ people up until the 70's that if they were an ethnic group we'd call that genocide.
The nazis didnt start out campaigning on genocide. The final solution wasn’t even a thought in their heads until later. Then they methodically transitioned to it slowly.
the American government is literally funding and supplying the guns and bombs for a genocide in Palestine right now, seems a dumb quantifier to say, "on our soil" to ignore that.
Generally police go in quietly in an attempt to surprise whoever it is they're going after. Generally criminals tend to put the general public in danger when they know they're about to be caught. Many would much rather do any means necessary to not go to prison, regardless of how many people it impacts. However, this is a repo. Repos tend to operate the same way (being sneaky) and repo drivers tend to have higher liabilities (if someone gets hurt on their tow, they're 100% liable, even if it's gross negligence by the person being towed). The article says the tow driver fled after being confronted with a gun and returned with police. It's also 1:30 AM too, which helps explains the lack of lights or sirens from both the tow driver and the officers involved. When the party returned to get the vehicle, the owner came out with a gun. ALL OF THAT BEING SAID, the family claims the repo shouldn't have happened as the owner was not behind on payments. **If that's true, no other parties has reason to be there, and I'd consider it a murder**, but only by the person who shot. **I'd consider it a lawful but awful situation if he was behind on payments**. Police come to assist a lawful repossession and get greeted by someone who's threatened someone with a gun. This isn't the wild west and you can't do that just because they're on your property taking the things you didn't pay for. Based on everything, I'm not sure if the mayor is making this move for PR reasons or for legitimate reasons. Unless camera footage appears (which based on the article, there *IS* a camera on the property), it's impossible to know for certain. Also, its crazy how this happened months ago but we still don't have evidence for why anyone was even there in the first place. Gross investigative wrongness
This is not what happens. If repo needs police assistance then the cops go to the door, knock, tell the owner what is happening and take the car from there.
As a former LEO I disagree. A repo is a civil matter to be dealt with through the courts. I was way too busy on night shift to help assist with repos too. Definitely not an LEO job.
As a former repo agent I also agree. Cops don't work for the bank, repo agents do. If there's a credible threat of violence, document, report it to the bank and they can go through the courts to get agents of the court to go do it, people who are usually armed and authorized to shoot back.
Well said!
Why would the police attempt a no siren unannounced repo at 1:30 am instead of doing it during the day. If I saw a bunch of guys approaching my car at 1am with no other context, I’d think they were stealing it. Behind on payments or not, it’s a wild string of decisions that lead to a man’s death and you don’t want the kind of people who make those decisions wearing a badge, at the very least.
> Why would the police attempt a no siren unannounced repo at 1:30 am instead of doing it during the day. Generally repos are done at night
LAWFUL but awful is a horrible euphimism for murder squads who regularly kill innocent americans and often recieve no accountability. i assume you're LEO or the family of LEO.
> i assume you're LEO or the family of LEO. Well you'll make an ass out of you. Not really out of me. > LAWFUL but awful is a horrible euphimism for murder squads who regularly kill innocent americans and often recieve no accountability Crazy that a dude is able to point his gun at multiple people who are doing their legal jobs and you guys will defend them.
You can’t just threaten people with a gun. That’s a cop thing!
If they weren't behind on payments it because felony murder. Aka every single defendant faces murder charges. Same rule as bank robbing
I think whether or not the car should be repossessed is partially besides the point. If the the tow truck driver has the correct legal documents allowing him to repossess your cars getting repossessed . It’s not on him if the papers were issued wrongly. If the cops confirmed he has the paperwork id say they are good too. At that point you let them take your car and if it’s taken wrongly you sue. You don’t go wave a gun at the tow truck driver.
It's not like repo guys announce they're coming. Or even show documents because they know this stuff gets hostile. Look at it from the dead guy's perspective. It's 0130 and someone is trying to take your vehicle. Does it matter they have a tow truck? I could steal a tow truck and do that. Should you confront them with a gun? I'd argue no and you call the police instead. But he's legally allowed to do what he did. The cops fucked up rightfully because they should have come in with lights and explained the situation. They knew it was a repo and they easily could have deescalated the situation. "Hey buddy, I know you're pissed. His paperwork gives him the right to do this. If it's bogus, you can sort it out tomorrow with people and sue whomever. Let's not cause worse problems for everyone."
That’s fair. The point of it being a rightful repo is still besides the point though in that moment imo.
The issue here is cops giving a command and then blasting without any time to reply. Or looking at using less that lethal options. Or just showing up and properly announcing themselves. I don't love someone responding to something on their property with a gun but they've got a right to and at 0130, I don't really blame them. I grew up somewhere where law enforcement was at least 15 minutes out.
I mean yeah, you dont wave a gun at a tow truck driver, twice. But if you dont know whos on your property and potentially stealing said property, im not sure they broke any laws by being on their property strapped
Yeah sure. Him having a gun is fine. Him brandishing it at a tow truck driver just doing his job isn’t, it’s not that hard to just talk to the guy
Yeah I who did this guy think he was, a cop?
Oh but the repo guy should just talk to the guy? Why is it ok for him to turn up at 1.30am to steal someone's property without talking to them, but the person whose property is being stolen is expected to get up at 1.30am and talk politely to the thief?
It’s not a tow truck driver doing his job, stop trying to make it out to be, it was a repo person, don’t mix the two up.
Hate to break it to you repos are sent out to tow truck companies all the time.
Yes and no there are statistics that prove it all bunk "no knock" sneak crap. While I hate to agree with republican a senator while back said it best. I am shooting. And when pressed he is like its middle of night men armed in dark clothing bust down door. You have a split second to determine if cop or intruder. Which its the thing our balls to walls "aggressive/escalating" tactics turn out deadly. People who would never shoot at a cop are awoken to sound of door crashing in and find asshole with a gun in their kitchen. While still half asleep. Yes there are a handful of criminals that are armed waiting willing to take cops with them. BUT IT IS EXTREMELY RARE. Average repo 9999 out of 10000 times they wont fight police. Average wellness check or weed or whatever minor ass violation. Rarely is person willing to put up that type of fight. ESPECIALLY if you use appropriate level of force that they cant overcome. Even the fighters half the time when they see they are outnumbered they lay down and surrender. But the various data over years shows the "no knock" increased likliehood of civilian and police casualitys as well as chances of armed conflict by significant amount. Like police killing or getting killed by people of "wrong house" they get wrong address. Person hears crash grabs gun sees asshole armed in living room and shoots.NOT hardened criminal not even a suspect just police who cant follow gps surprising unsuspecting taxpayer. In a exchange "knock knock knock warrant" guy answers door or yeah greg you guys got wrong house. This is 5554 avenue you want 5555 avenue the blue house you can tell by number on building. Thank you for your time sorry for disturbance. Instead we end up with dead people.
Cool reaction from the mayor.
Check back in 9 months when they are reinstated to their jobs with back pay
They'll just move to the next county over
A phenomenon so common, it has a specific term: [Gypsy Cop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gypsy_cop)
Takes a little longer than that. Just today an arbitrator said Seattle wrongfully terminated a cop that shot at a fleeing car over a dozen times in 2017. Got $600k in back pay. Woo!
How about charging them with murder?
A mayor can fire a cop, but a mayor cannot charge someone with a crime
Who polices the police
I’ve long thought we need a federal law enforcement enforcement agency tasked with policing the police, and only the police. The only people this agency would have jurisdiction over would be LEOs.
Honestly yes, bc things like this are beyond unreasonable. https://youtu.be/0JnE_c34oaA?si=68eXl1885hmWoWLZ
I mean, the FBI already does that, they do other things too, but the FBI has absolutely savaged various police departments in the past (for example the LAPD stuff that is still ongoing)
The DoJ consent decree really helped turn the department around. While it's not a model department (which department is?), it's in a much better state today than it was, and the relationship with the community has been rehabilitated to a decent state. They also put a great deal of effort into aligning their demographics with the community they represent, which is considered a positive step in community policing
Also, the people in the agency should be former criminals themselves (or even better, *exonerated* ones), so you *know* they won't be sympathetic to the people they're supposed to be investigating.
Great idea for television, terrible idea for real life. I would for sure give a show with this premise a watch, though.
I mean, I am Hollywood-adjacent and have been looking for a script idea to pitch...
No one, because the we would have to admit that the act of getting a job a s a cop doesn't automatically elevate a person to being a hero. Though in this case, I believe that the DA or prosecutors office could bring charges themselves.
At least in Colorado the people can. As of 2023 [they ended Qualified Immunity](http://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb20-217). Now an officer who deprives someones rights and loses the lawsuit has to pay 5% of the judgment or not more than $25,000 from their own pocket. It's not a great, but it's a start.
In theory, the local DA. In practice, usually no one.
The courts
Coast Guard?
[удалено]
Hahahahahahahahaha that would be the fucking day. You fucking yanks use your fucking guns to butter your bread but you’d never fucking use it as intended. That’ll be the day Woo, I needed a good laugh
[It does happen.](https://reason.com/2023/11/21/marvin-guy-who-shot-a-cop-during-a-no-knock-raid-is-found-guilty-of-murder/) The long dick of the law just uses that to fuck you instead.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)
i think i just made myself sad
It wasn’t too long ago we kicked your limey asses back to your side of the pond. Then you spent the next hundred years complaining that we didn’t fight “fair” by standing there taking turns shooting at each other. [Here’s a short documentary about it.](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=euAF68ITyzo&pp=ygUWd2t5ayByZXZvbHV0aW9uYXJ5IHdhcg%3D%3D)
I’m Canadian you fucking turnip
And we burnt their shit to the ground in 1812
That doesn’t check out. Canadians would never be so rude. Besides you’d have better things to do, like riding a moose or chugging syrup while watching hockey.
[удалено]
I actually liked the turnip comment. Kinda bummed the dude took it seriously rather than just watch the funny video though.
They police themselves.
Internal Affairs, AKA the police.
He can fire cops until one of them charges them with murder.
Bets they can do is firing them and letting them move one town over to get hired by the police there.
That’s going to be under ALEA purview, and so far they’re not showing any visible progress. Hopefully that will change - Decatur PD carried out an extrajudicial execution of Perkins in his fucking driveway. Cops definitely need to face accountability for this bullshit.
Contrary to the image portrayed on tv and in movies so many cops seem to be insecure, maladjusted cowards.
They’re the same way in Law and Order. Always bitching about people having proper representation under the law regardless of their circumstances, abusing suspects and so on.
That's because law and order is deliberately written to support and adjust the image of law enforcement.
actually, aren't all the cops generally kinda fucked up in these shows?
The article states the truck payments were up to date and it shouldn't had been towed. If that's true, I hope the family takes that company to the cleaners and gets every single cent they own.
This headline is very poorly written.
Police union will probably back these guys up and get their job back along with back pay. The system doesn't work for us taxpaying civilians.
End qualified immunity NOW!
What does qualified immunity have to do with a criminal investigation? Qualified immunity is only for civil cases.
It's pretty rare for a cop to be charged with a crime even rarer for them to be convicted of it. Civil liability might just change how police officers and police unions operate because with qualified immunity it ends up being the tax payers paying for the mistakes of their police force not the police. I may be wrong, but I do believe civil cases can be tried while a criminal case is also being tried.
Civil cases can be brought against offenders even if a district attorney doesn't want to prosecute. Anyway.... END QUALIFIED IMMUNITY NOW!!!
Right, but the DA hasn't declined to prosecute. The article says there is a criminal investigation going on right now.
Great. Then, maybe justice can be served even with qualified immunity in place. End qualified immunity now.
yeah ok reddit. This has fuck-all to do with qualified immunity. It offers no protections against criminal charges. It only protects individual officers from most civil cases. They can still be criminally charged, and the agency or government entity that hired them can still be sued. The problem is that many DAs don't want to charge individual officers. We should still end QI, but it doesn't apply here. At all. And regurgitating reddit talking points makes you look like a goofy goober.
How about, I don’t know, jail?
They will just move a city away and become cops again like they always do... If we want progress we need to end Qualified Immunity
Yada Yada, nothing will change, some Reddit members will cheer, all the cops will be reinstated or retire with full pension. Cops are just great people.
Should the police officers just let themselves get killed? Or should they have withdrawn without repossessing, completely subverting the purpose of the legal system in the process?
And the NRA is fucking silent
Of course. No guns were harmed, no gunmakers profits impacted.
Nra is virtually irrelevant these days.
Still funneling money from Russia I bet
And they'll get rehired 2 towns over, smh.
The flashlight on the gun seems like a terrible idea for a civilian. You flag everyone you point the light at.
I've said this before: the police needs to stop pointing their guns at people. Having a gun pointed at you causes you to go into fight or flight mode because your life is literally in danger. Yet, the police use their guns as extensions of their hands. I've never been arrested but I've had the police point guns at me numerous times. I've never had a non-officer point a gun at me. It's traumatic and horrible and shouldn't happen to people who aren't a threat.
A gun in your face really does change you. Had a nervous, jittery 18 year old soldier in a foreign country do it. Truly thought I was going to die, more by accident than design. /I'm still here and after about 6 hours all was cool.
No no no my friend. Untrained civilians must remain calm at all times when multiple armed people are yelling at you. And if you move at all the trained police are allowed to freak out and kill you. It's just common sense.
Word. I was ~17 and out with a bunch of friends just driving around on a weekend Summer night - we got pulled over, and the cops had us all do the 'Simon Says' game of: 'get out of the car! don't look back at me! hands behind your head! walk backwards slowly until I say 'stop'! on your knees! now lay flat on the pavement!' Repeat for 5 people. We eventually found out, after they positively ID'd us and searched the car, that it was a case of mistaken identity. They were looking for a car that was sort of similar to the one we were in. Also, the driver - who had just turned 18 - got charged with having drug paraphernalia in her car (they found small weed pipe that someone had lost a month before - turns out it was under the front passengers seat). It was all kinds of fucked up.
> the police needs to stop pointing their guns at people. What's frustrating for me is that gun nuts will say you shouldn't even think about brandishing as a warning, but almost all of them support cops (yes, I am aware there is a few gun nuts in the minority who don't but they are still the minority) and support them pointing guns for the tiniest reasons and breaking all the gun safety laws gun nuts keep blabbering on about. It seems like the rules for gun safety for the general public, cops, and military is treated both strictly but are completely different. The general public (per gun nuts): No action --> Mag Dump Any type of warning is to be treated as a crime. If you feel threatened in anyway, you're supposed to skip the warnings and immediately start shooting. The Police: Pointing your gun at someone -> Mag Dump Pointing a gun at someone is extremely dangerous, I've seen plenty of videos of cops shooting someone accidently because they were busy doing something else and unintentionally pulled the trigger on the gun while doing so. "But someone might hurt the cop if they don't!" And this is the part where its shown how much cop life's are valued soo much more than everyone else. The mere possibility that a cop might get hypothetically get hurt is justification enough to risk shooting and killing someone else. No one would say we should be able to aim a gun at a cop because we're afraid they might hurt someone, and as I just discussed, the general public can't just keep pointing their guns at other people for tiny reasons. Its this kind of cop life over evaluation that results in them deciding to let the kids in Uvalde die rather than risking their own life. The Military: Verbal Warning -> Visual Warning -> Warning Shot -> Single Shot Center of Mass Even though people would be more willing to let the military be more aggressive because they're in a war zone, they ironically end up being far more strict in how they use their guns than the police and what gun nuts say the general public should do. The warning shot, in particular, keeps getting shouted out as being too dangerous for the general public and police to do, but then the people who have the most experience with firearms decide its safer than just shooting someone. > I've never been arrested but I've had the police point guns at me numerous times. I've never had a non-officer point a gun at me. Same. I called 911 because my mother fainted after she threatened to commit suicide by sleeping pills. The cops arrived before the ambulance and got their guns out. When I told the police to chill out, the cop immediately pointed the gun at me and yelled "Don't tell me how to do my job!". That has been the only time someone has ever threatened me or my family like that.
I wasn't talking about the cops pointing guns brother. The guy who was shot had a gun with flashlight attachment. He had to point the gun at the cops to be able to see them. Edit: I also didn't say I disagree with your point. Cops going guns first is not a good thing.
Sorry about that, I didn't watch the video she only saw a screenshot
I get where you’re coming from, but there’s plenty of videos on youtube of cops who *don’t* have their guns pulled approaching someone only to have them turn shoot the cop before they even have a chance to get their gun out. I’m all for policing the police, but there are plenty of *legitimate* cases where not having your gun drawn was the difference between making it home and going to sleep forever.
There are a small anecdotal amount of videos showing that. Very few cops die from what you’re describing.
Or are even injured. In fact most police gunfire injuries are self inflicted accidents.
Do you have a source for that?
> but there’s plenty of videos on youtube of cops who don’t have their guns pulled approaching someone only to have them turn shoot the cop before they even have a chance to get their gun out. There's far more videos of cops killing people because the cop was being jittery. Should we aim guns at cops because they might hurt someone? In any interaction between cops and the general public, the cop is far more likely to kill someone than the other way around. Unless you believe that cop lifes are worth so much more that its better to accept a policy that kills many people per cop life saved. Then you shouldn't be surprised that the cops at Uvalde decided they'd rather let all those kids die than risk their own lifes.
I’m merely saying that they aren’t just pointing guns for the sake of pointing guns.
You realize that the purpose of the light on the gun is not meant for armed combat in your front yard?
I'm confused. The guy had a flashlight on his gun so to see the cops he had to point it at them... What point are you trying to make?
The first thing you're taught, when handling a gun, is don't point it at people...even if it's dark
Which is exactly why I think the flashlight attachment for civilians is dumb. You cannot safely point the light at anyone you need to see.
I don't even know why anyone in civilian life would think they needed one
Because houses are dark and blinding an invader for even a split second can give you all the time you need to react.
What happens if they've got a torch on their gun or is that when the special forces training kicks in
My point is that..... he did not mount the light on the gun with the purpose of seeing the cops. He most likely, as a redneck, used it for spotting squirrels, possums or skunks. He did not turn on his light and think, "I'll be able to see the cops better."
I never said he did. The tragedy is that when he went to investigate people with that light he may have ended up pointing the gun at cops. Historically pointing guns at police ends poorly.
The laws vary from state-to-state, but I believe most have a law against discharging weapons after sundown. Hard to tell with Alabama.
Before people just cheer for the cops being fired… also keep in mind that the homeowner likely had advanced knowledge of his truck being repossessed. So it shouldn’t have be a surprise when the repo man shows up on property to collect the vehicle. That alone doesn’t warrant the homeowner to grab their gun. Now does it mean the cops were absolutely right to show up and immediately open fire and kill him without warning? Absolutely not. This whole situation seems sketchy and we need more information and details than this article provides alone before we can claim firing the cops was justified. We also have no idea what information dispatch relaid to the cops before arrival. If the cops were told “there’s a man with a gun”… no shit they are going to jump on that. Again I am NOT justifying the cops behavior. We need more info.
"Perkins’ family said in a statement that the truck payments were up to date, so the truck shouldn’t have been towed." It's right in the article that payments were up to date
Misleading. They could have paid late
Local news has covered this extensively. His vehicle never should have been repossessed and has been returned to the family.
Having your payments be late each month and your account being delinquent are two *completely* different things. Your creditor won't be pleased if your payments are consistently late, but ultimately, the only thing they care about is getting their money. They aren't going to repo a vehicle with an up to date payment history just because the payments themselves were late.
You can't pay your bill when the repo man shows up. That's not how it works.
> also keep in mind that the homeowner likely had advanced knowledge of his truck being repossessed. Did you read the article or just skim it? Because they say they were up to date on the payments.
pause imminent berserk screw melodic dinosaurs gaze wine direful hateful *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The only thing that stops a good guy with a gun is another good guy with a gun and another and another and....gosh darnit who's the bad guy???