Michael Brelo, Cleveland Patrolman, Found Not Guilty In Deaths Of 2 Unarmed Suspects

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/23/michael-brelo-not-guilty_n_7427710.html

The murderer with a badge jumped on the hood of the car and emptied his gun,... and that is the correct way to do things.
America is sick. Real sick.

 

The evidence proves otherwise try learning it.

 

That's the case where some loser with a rap sheet a hundred miles long sped through 35 mph streets at like 120 mph with 50 or 75 cop cars chasing him. Refused to stop for any reason. Put thousands of pedestrian lives at stake all throughout Cleveland for like half an hour; as well as over 100 cop lives. Luckily, the whole thing was captured on video: [video=youtube;LMagP52BWG8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMagP52BWG8[/video]

 

Guess we'll be seeing another sidewalk sale , this time in Cleveland.

 

I wonder why they stopped.

This thug obviously deserved at least 500 rounds.

 

It almost seems like if those being stopped do not cooperate with the officers, the officers are justified in using deadly force. What if we were to turn this the other way around?

This is something that really needs to be thought about, when exactly deadly force and self defense is actually justified. Because I do not think there has been much actual public debate on this point.

 

That he jumped on the hood and unloaded his gun, is not being disputed.
Try to know what goes on before responding.

 

So an officer should be forced to go hand to hand with anyone that wants to fight them?

These guys have families you know, they shouldn't have to give the thugs more opportunity to hurt them.

<Mod Edit: Rule 3>

 

No of course not, but should it work the other way around? That's a big question right there.

I don't hate cops, but whatever solution we come up with it should work both ways. We can't be giving some classes of people more rights than others. If cops have to resort to shooting someone out of self defense, then fine, but that means it needs to work the other way around also.

I believe police power should work through superior numbers and imminent threat of force, not one-sided laws that punish after-the-fact.

 

Really?

So you believe that someone breaking the law, say kidnapping a little girl, has the right to shoot a cop because he fears for his life?

Wow

 

Just eavesdropping, but this is a debate I would like to see. When the police get the upper hand/control of a situation, they need to de-escalate the situation. Not carry out a death penalty.

 

Some members in this forum think it's okay for the police to shoot a suspect in the back if he's trying to flee.

 

There are basically around 40,000 arrests every day in the US. Supposing you hear about excessive force by police once a month that is somewhere around 0.00001%.

You are not going to EVER get a better statistic than that in any field.

Not sure why you want perfection but it will never happen.

 

It can always get better. Some of these situations are avoidable. For example...

 

A cop jumping on the hood of a car to unload his gun into 2 unarmed civilians, is a cop who stands there extreme exposed and is obviously not caring about his own safety. Besides that the people who the police murders have families too. What is wrong with you people supporting cops massacring unarmed civilians and pretend their life was at risk.

 

The thing is, that the police force accepts that they have extreme violent officers who massacres unarmed civilians. While the justice department finds cops murdering around totally justified. So this is not about that you can not do a thing about that people make mistakes, and that in such a large group there will always be some rotten apples.

 

The issue is not just about race. Even if all the officers in Black neighborhoods were Black, I think the problem would still be there.

 

NO, it will never get statistically better.

You ever take a stats class in college?

- - - Updated - - -

There are a few thousand police officers sitting in prison who would argue that point with you.

lol

 

The amount of unnecessary deaths by police can absolutely get better improving the stat even by a tiny fraction. Every bit helps.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/06/cleveland_police_fire_1_superv.html

 

No it cannot, the laws of mathematics prevent it and math does not lie.

You can never get to absolute zero, or even close to it in statistics. Right now is the best it will ever be.

And statistics show us that today is the better version because today we have cameras everywhere unlike say in the 1970's when they did not exist and police brutality was probably far, far higher than what we see today.

When you look at statistics you are not evaluating each event separately so your statement that we can improve it even slightly is wrong. Its like putting water into a bucket with a spoon. You are told you must put the contents of one bucket of water into the other until all the water is transferred. You are saying that we can actually put less water into the new bucket if we use half a spoonful instead of a full spoonful but we ultimately will transfer all the water with the spoon so it does not matter in the end.

That is how statistics works.

 

Absolutes are not the goal. Getting to it as close as possible is. In the scenarios we see play out in police brutality/death-by-police cases many of them are preventable. A shift in policy will reduce some of these encounters. For example, instead of giving chase to fleeing persons, acquire them later. Why risk the life of the police officer or the innocent-until-proven-guilty-fleeing person?

BTW arguing from a statistics position is brilliant in this debate (because it almost trivializes), except when people die, they die by the whole and not by the fraction.

 

The cop was justified-if you read up on the case and specifically on the very clearly worded legal findings of the court-you would know this.

But that doesn't fit the narrative, does it?

 

According to press reports the judge ruled that it could not be proved that the cop in question intended to kill the couple!
American 'justice' in action folks.

- - - Updated - - -

How were two unarmed people sitting in a car attempting to fight the cops-or in any position to do so? Explain why your country is looking more like a Central American banana republic every day.

 

There is a report out, about the policeforce of this city by the federal government that they are over the top violent. And a cop who jumps on the hood of a car to unload his gun in to 2 unarmed civilians, is still being found totally normal by the judge. While it is obvious that this cop is more like mentally insane.

- - - Updated - - -

Nope. The judge ruled that nobody could positively say without a doubt that the cop actually murdered the 2 unarmed civilians like that, because they might already got massacred by the other cops.