[Maru]

Notice: Please do not post off-topic matters relating to the elections, riots or BLM-related controversy. This is not an election thread or politics or about protests. Let's just keep it on police and civil matters as it relates to human rights. You can bring up points made by protest groups or politicians that you feel are relevant here, but only to support your answer to this thread's question... if you don't obey these rules, I may vote for your least favorite presidential candidate Thank you and it is appreciated.

I want to start off by referencing the developments related to Terrence Crutcher's killing in Charlotte, NC.

Tulsa police shooting investigated by Justice Department
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/20/us/okl...lice-shooting/
**It will help if you watch the videos, especially the helicopter one...**

CNN)From different angles, the videos show the same scene.
An unarmed black man walks on a Tulsa, Oklahoma, road with his hands in the air. Police officers follow closely behind him as he approaches his vehicle. He stands beside the car, then falls to the ground after one officer pulls the trigger.

Now 40-year-old Terence Crutcher is dead. Crutcher's sister is demanding that prosecutors charge the officer who shot him. And the police videos of the incident are fueling criticism about the case.

Federal, state and local authorities are investigating the Friday night shooting.

Crutcher's family says he was waiting for help on the road after his SUV broke down.

The officer's attorney says she was afraid Crutcher was reaching for a weapon when she opened fire. Attorney Benjamin Crump, part of the legal team representing Crutcher's family, countered at a Tuesday news conference that Crutcher's window was rolled up, making it unlikely he was reaching into the car.

Further developments in this case...

Terence Crutcher Shooting: Tulsa County District Attorney Charges Officer Shelby With Manslaughter
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...shelby-n652856

The affidavit:

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

For me, the affidavit writes more succintly what I was trying to explain to my husband when we had this discussion the other night (we had watched the videos). He works in detentions in the mental health unit so he is constantly having to curb the line between unreasonable and reasonable use of force.

Naturally, **** happens so when comes home with an injury or he calls me to let me know "he is alright", we have this discussion more often than we probably want to... We get bursts of weekly letters from Workmans Comp and their insurance company for things as minor as urine being thrown on him, other contact with bodily fluids, finger being cut or more serious ones, etc... he always prefers to talk them down but there are always times when he doesn't have that choice. Of course we would love to reduce the amount of confrontation... I'd worry less and so would every other person out there in the world with a family member who is in or works detentions or on the street.

When I watched the video of the Terrence Crutcher shooting, I told him I didn't think that she had good reason to shoot him from my initial watch. Clearly something was amiss, he was doped up and doing unpredictable things, it didn't spell threat, but then it could've easily had been a mental disorder...

He told me that, honestly, every situation is variable and unless he was there himself, he couldn't say what he would've done or if what she did was correct. They pretty much have to react using their best judgement they have at the time but that every situation is different and you can only plan so much. It's impossible to provide set guidelines for every situation because rules can't always be applied the same every single time. Hence, why creating a specific training regime to combat the innate fear that officers experience is difficult... because they must also rely on the same fear to keep them alive.

My thought, she should've used non-lethal force first (i.e. OC spray). There was distance and she had time to do as much. May have not been the perfect solution either, but he would've been alive. She could've retreated to her car until more back up arrived... but then, what if he drives off and starts a police chase? There's risks associated with that. What if he T-bones someone? What if?...

He said that is normally the way it does work (he read off the official steps which I don't remember relating to use of force). He agreed that from what we could see, and if the window was not drawn down as some had suggested at the time, that it would seem to be the case she over-reacted (especially since the second officer had done so simultaneously)... though, he said in training and in videos, the concern with the guy getting into the window is that a lot of people will have weapons stored on the dash accessible that way and will pull out and fire. People have been killed this way in the past and it's something they are made aware of during training. So there is that.

Personally for me it is still not clear-cut. I'm not 100% on everything I feel. My opinion could change. Though as I suggested alternatives, my husband would provide examples of why that would not work. It was very hard to find a solution that would work better in every case...

What I think may have compounded the situation in the case of this shooting (and perhaps others) is the prominent 'you' or 'me' mentality in law enforcement... i.e. it's either you or me (who gets hurt/goes home alive). That's to say... if the officer is trained to protect him and his companions, then likewise they are always looking for observable threats and constantly examining for details and reacting accordingly.

The best officers I think are able to act as a social worker in some cases and even provide some form of psychological assistance (to ease the nerves of some people confronting a uniform). Even that can't be applied in every situation.

What people don't really realize either is these officers usually see the worst of the worst. Many of them become jaded, especially if they start off in detentions. My husband has stories too, but ironically enough, they're not stories most people would easily beleive. It's very hard not to become emotionally invested in their work and it's also hard not to bring it home. Law enforcement has a high rate of divorce, suicide and depression for that very same reason.

I think though that one problem in the field is that it should not be 'me' vs 'you'... the goal should be to get everyone home. The concern on my husband's end is where that thinking can get you killed. My thought is if law enforcement together had adopted this thinking more predominantly... perhaps there would be less altercations, more peaceful resolutions and in the end less need for use-of-force...

You versus Me

As it is now, it is 'you' versus 'me'. The other concept to add onto this is the justice system becomes the unfortunate safety net for issues that our government is too incompetent or unwilling to tackle or resolve. We got this way because we neglected lower income communities. We got this way because we took away the infrastructure for a person without means dealing with psychological disorders... so they often turn to crime to survive.

Naturally, these people are not treated well by society for various reasons, because you versus me mentality is prominent not only throughout law enforcement... but throughout our communities and even the current political psyche.

A little off-topic, but not quite: I get annoyed by how quickly some people are willing to abandon their original communities because they're more "challenging" (i.e. "different" (more ethnic), more crime, anti-comfort zones...) to deal with than the brand new suburbs up the road... only issue with that locally in Houston is that the more you build out, the less flood plain, so neighborhoods inside start flooding more often than they ever used to. We know with New Orleans, flooding is a major problem (they might as well re-zone that area for global warming) and is a huge source of pain for the poor living there... (as well as here). If your home is re-zoned in a flood plain, then you have to have very expensive flood ins... and if you have that flood ins, even if your home is paid off, you can't sell and move because the new homeowner will require it to mortgage the property. If they can even afford to move.

Our city is doing fine I think (for now), but places like Baltimore and further up north, they don't have the space to grow out, so the money eventually leaves. That includes jobs, big business, other sources of govt support, educational opportunities, etc... the people left holding the bill and stuck in poor living conditions are the least wealthy.

Houston's demographic is heavily mixed and I guess because we've adjusted to having a majority-minority demographic and we can continue to spread out for many years to come, all these different communities don't fall into the conditions of some other areas where space/development opportunities are limited and so though they are poorer neighborhoods, they still have great access to jobs, education, cheap cost of living, so we don't have that much of a strain because there is still upward mobility for many...

TLDR: My point overall... I don't think that fixing this solution is simply more training for law enforcement (if it were that easy, then they'd done it already if it were a matter of neglect), use magic and somehow remove all the incompetent officers in law enforcement who may overreact (many of these people are dedicated and are only human beings)... but it needs to be an across the board change throughout all fabrics of society... all of society needs to adapt to the changes in cultural demographics (their subdivisions and schools becoming more mixed), deal better with culture clash and older communities may need extra support (not just a source of cheap labor for the top 10% pet projects) so they don't just fall off the map because they're not "hot properties" like they used to... if we give those areas more support, make them feel more included and give them better access to jobs and opportunities, then perhaps society as a whole will be less knee jerky and law enforcement agencies as well can relax their policing because they're not the first and last defense against falling living conditions and all other forms of social discourse that the government and the rest of society would prefer to ignore...

Just think... some of us in better communities will meet business owners, well-dressed doctors, polite and engaging shopkeepers, people of what is considered good standing... whereas in a lesser areas... the first uniformed role model a child may see is a police officer... and maybe not in the best of circumstances. Some don't have easy access to the same role models/model living conditions as you, much less to health care nor can they afford to go to nice shops. Consider that when you wonder why some of these people, who already feel systematically victimized, may not react as you would do to an authority figure...


Anyway, enough of my thoughts... what are your thoughts about what we could do better as a country?