http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/ ... do-castile


Hadn't heard much about Philando Castille lately, this was interesting.

That event merited a lot more attention than it got I think.

That guy had that many traffic stops and never lost his temper and got arrested for contempt of cop? He must have been a very patient man.

?!?

I mean yeah he had his hands up but he was ignoring the officers and then he reached into the car. I'm not saying he should've been shot-- I feel like the taser was probably enough, and she literally jumped the gun-- but presenting it as "he had his hands up and they still shot him" is sort of disingenuous

And another. North Carolina.

This one is going to be interesting how it plays out. The police and eyewitnesses are saying he absolutely had a gun not a book like his family is claiming. And they haven't found a book at the scene. Also, the officer that shot him is black.

By all accounts he had a gun. one of the family members (?) brought up a fairly good point how the police were able to shoot, not kill, and bring in the Bombing Suspected Terrorist guy for questioning, but apparently most cops aren't trained enough to do that to black men in such instances. Shoot. Kill.

Good point. But the whole unrest in Charlotte overnight was because they said he was unarmed and only had a book.

THe unrest in Charlotte last night is more than just last nights incident. Much like the unrest in other similar cities is due to more than just a singular incident.

Right, but it would not have happened without this current incident.

I'm assuming different departments (depending on state and rural vs urban) train their police forces a little differently, but in regards to shooting at a human being: if you are deciding to pull the trigger, you are shooting at center mass to stop them. There is no "taking out a kneecap" or shoulder shots like the movies. There are way too many variables and it would require far too much training, coupled with exceptional skill, to shoot to disable.

So, if a cop decides to pull the trigger, they are doing so knowing the consequences are very likely death.

Since when has proof and eye witnesses ever changed anyone's mind?

We don't know all that much so far, but the Tulsa shooting so far seems more riot worthy than the Charleston one. Maybe it'll turn out that the guy in Charleston was legally carrying his gun or something, but I assume that BLM is going nuts over the more justified shoot just because its in their nature.

On the other hand, I didn't read anything about the Charleston's decedent having a criminal record, and police departments are surprisingly fast at unearthing criminal histories when they shoot someone.

This presumes that they are a competent shot, which remains to be demonstrated by many departments. Someone or something is going to get hit by the bullets they fire, but it may or may not be their target.

Looting, assaulting reporters, trying to throw photographers into bonfires, and dragging and beating people because of their race may not be the best way to show moral superiority, but hey, someone's gotta enact all that "social justice".

How can we encourage more people to assault cnn reporters?

Yeah such a odd situation. Riots are typically very calm affairs. This is just my opinion but when people lash out at a city it's due to a belief that there will not be 'social justice.' Hence the riot.