Motivational wrote

Obscurum wrote OK. I understand now that the thing to do when videos like this come out is immediately to blame the police.
I'm just going to give a few reasons why I don't think we can do that at this point.

These officers were responding to an anonymous call which said that a man was pointing a gun at someone and telling them to leave the property.
What do we expect officers to do if they encounter a suspected armed person who is resisting arrest?
They tased him and told him to get on the ground twice, he didn't. Their 'aggressive' take down makes sense in my opinion.
Keep in mind that these two officers are responding to a call that someone is armed and threatening people.
Their caution and aggression was completely warranted, in my opinion.

Alton was on the ground and being held down with one of his arms restrained. One officer shouted, "He's got a gun" and the other tells him not to move.
At this point in the video, we can't see Alton's right hand but it looks like it is down by his side.
In this position he could have tried to grab his gun. The officers didn't instantly shoot him when they saw the gun either.
They noticed the gun, informed each other that he had one, and then continued trying to restrain him without shooting him for at least another 5 seconds, also telling him not to move, before one of them saw something happen which made them think it was OK to shoot him.

I could be wrong, but I think it even sounds like one of them shouts something along the lines of, "He's going for the... [inaudible]"
The amount of time between the recognition of the gun and the gunshots shows quite clearly that the gun simply existing in that space isn't what made them start shooting.
Something else must have happened for those police officers to start shooting.

This is all speculation of course, but think about what we are saying if we entirely blame the police at this point.
Are we saying that no black man could ever, while being arrested, reach for his gun? Is that what we are trying to say?
Similarly, if we take the police's side entirely at this point, are we saying that a police officer couldn't have a moment of panic and shoot a suspect because it looks like they might be going for their gun when they actually weren't?

More information is needed, I think that should be obvious to anyone who takes a good look at that video.

You can't determine who is in the wrong here based on that video.

Before I am called a racist, police loving, alpha-male-wannabe [insert generic SJW and Black Lives Matter insults here] - I have condemned the police for the deaths of Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, Walter Scott and Freddie Gray. I don't love or hate the police, I don't love or hate black people, I think people are people. Sometimes the police screw up and kill people, sometimes black people screw up and are killed by the police. It happens, legally and illegally.

These officers were responding to an anonymous call which said that a man was pointing a gun at someone and telling them to leave the property.
What do we expect officers to do if they encounter a suspected armed person who is resisting arrest?

I'm not denying what the article said, but they seemed completely shocked when they shouted "He's got a gun" and they proceaded to draw their weapons and point them at the man. It wasn't a sort of calm "Hand us over your firearm sir", or "We've heard reports of you holding a weapon, could you please hand it over?". They seemed completely oblivious to the fact that they were dealing with an armed man.

We also have to take into consideration that police calls are not 100% reliable and the police couldn't have been sure that he was armed or that he had even threatened anyone. They literally appeared there and tasered him, then proceaded to viciously tackle him to the ground. You can see throughout the video that they treat him horribly, pushing his head into the ground.

They tased him and told him to get on the ground twice, he didn't. Their 'aggressive' take down makes sense in my opinion.

They failed to take into account how a taser actually works. It causes the muscles in the body to contract, meaning that you cannot move. Of couse there are exceptions to this, if you're a big guy, the taser will be less effective and what not. But the majority of people tasered are unable to move, since there muscles are fully contractecd.

Also the man was leaning against a car, that's not the ideal place to make an arrest, they should of tried to pull him away from the car first before tasering him because as you can see in the video, he leans against the car when tasered because it's the only thing keeping him standing. If you fall when tasered, you cannot use your arms to cover your face and you could really hurt yourself.

How the hell, did they expect him to get down on the ground when he physically cannot move? They also tasered him twice, judging by the video. You can also hear the man saying, "I didn't fking do anything" around 10 seconds into the video. They should have told him to get down or he would be tasered down and I'm sure he would have listened.

If two police officers approached someone and asked me to get down on the ground, the majority of people would not happily get down to be arrested and searched when they haven't done anything and more importantly, there's no proof of them doing anything.

This situation could have been handled far better. Something along the lines of this:

"Excuse me sir, we believe you are carrying a weapon and are threatening civilians. Could you please hand over your weapon and then we can discuss what happened?"

I honestly think that they used ridiculously violent force but more importantly, they saw the weapon and considered what was happening and they used completely unreasonable force. The idea of self defence is that you're defending yourself, how are two men that are completely protected by bodyarmour and by both holding firearms protecting themself from someone who hasn't even fired a shot?

The strangest thing in the whole video that I find, is the ten second delay between the first two shots being fired and next two. Did it take them ten seconds to decide that it would be less complicated if he was dead than alive? Surely the first two shots would have kept him down.

There's no way, the a man pinned down was going to try and shoot his way out when two police officers were holding him to the ground with weapons pointed in his face.

I think that the colour of the man is irrelavent in this video but that the force used is completely unjustifed and it's blatant murder.

The taser was created as a way to not have to use a firearm in some circumstances, I don't get why they didn't just taser him instead of shooting him? He couldn't reach for his gun if he was tasered.

GOP wrote

Motivational wrote

Obscurum wrote OK. I understand now that the thing to do when videos like this come out is immediately to blame the police.
I'm just going to give a few reasons why I don't think we can do that at this point.

These officers were responding to an anonymous call which said that a man was pointing a gun at someone and telling them to leave the property.
What do we expect officers to do if they encounter a suspected armed person who is resisting arrest?
They tased him and told him to get on the ground twice, he didn't. Their 'aggressive' take down makes sense in my opinion.
Keep in mind that these two officers are responding to a call that someone is armed and threatening people.
Their caution and aggression was completely warranted, in my opinion.

Alton was on the ground and being held down with one of his arms restrained. One officer shouted, "He's got a gun" and the other tells him not to move.
At this point in the video, we can't see Alton's right hand but it looks like it is down by his side.
In this position he could have tried to grab his gun. The officers didn't instantly shoot him when they saw the gun either.
They noticed the gun, informed each other that he had one, and then continued trying to restrain him without shooting him for at least another 5 seconds, also telling him not to move, before one of them saw something happen which made them think it was OK to shoot him.

I could be wrong, but I think it even sounds like one of them shouts something along the lines of, "He's going for the... [inaudible]"
The amount of time between the recognition of the gun and the gunshots shows quite clearly that the gun simply existing in that space isn't what made them start shooting.
Something else must have happened for those police officers to start shooting.

This is all speculation of course, but think about what we are saying if we entirely blame the police at this point.
Are we saying that no black man could ever, while being arrested, reach for his gun? Is that what we are trying to say?
Similarly, if we take the police's side entirely at this point, are we saying that a police officer couldn't have a moment of panic and shoot a suspect because it looks like they might be going for their gun when they actually weren't?

More information is needed, I think that should be obvious to anyone who takes a good look at that video.

You can't determine who is in the wrong here based on that video.

Before I am called a racist, police loving, alpha-male-wannabe [insert generic SJW and Black Lives Matter insults here] - I have condemned the police for the deaths of Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, Walter Scott and Freddie Gray. I don't love or hate the police, I don't love or hate black people, I think people are people. Sometimes the police screw up and kill people, sometimes black people screw up and are killed by the police. It happens, legally and illegally.

These officers were responding to an anonymous call which said that a man was pointing a gun at someone and telling them to leave the property.
What do we expect officers to do if they encounter a suspected armed person who is resisting arrest?

I'm not denying what the article said, but they seemed completely shocked when they shouted "He's got a gun" and they proceaded to draw their weapons and point them at the man. It wasn't a sort of calm "Hand us over your firearm sir", or "We've heard reports of you holding a weapon, could you please hand it over?". They seemed completely oblivious to the fact that they were dealing with an armed man.

We also have to take into consideration that police calls are not 100% reliable and the police couldn't have been sure that he was armed or that he had even threatened anyone. They literally appeared there and tasered him, then proceaded to viciously tackle him to the ground. You can see throughout the video that they treat him horribly, pushing his head into the ground.

They tased him and told him to get on the ground twice, he didn't. Their 'aggressive' take down makes sense in my opinion.

They failed to take into account how a taser actually works. It causes the muscles in the body to contract, meaning that you cannot move. Of couse there are exceptions to this, if you're a big guy, the taser will be less effective and what not. But the majority of people tasered are unable to move, since there muscles are fully contractecd.

Also the man was leaning against a car, that's not the ideal place to make an arrest, they should of tried to pull him away from the car first before tasering him because as you can see in the video, he leans against the car when tasered because it's the only thing keeping him standing. If you fall when tasered, you cannot use your arms to cover your face and you could really hurt yourself.

How the hell, did they expect him to get down on the ground when he physically cannot move? They also tasered him twice, judging by the video. You can also hear the man saying, "I didn't fking do anything" around 10 seconds into the video. They should have told him to get down or he would be tasered down and I'm sure he would have listened.

If two police officers approached someone and asked me to get down on the ground, the majority of people would not happily get down to be arrested and searched when they haven't done anything and more importantly, there's no proof of them doing anything.

This situation could have been handled far better. Something along the lines of this:

"Excuse me sir, we believe you are carrying a weapon and are threatening civilians. Could you please hand over your weapon and then we can discuss what happened?"

I honestly think that they used ridiculously violent force but more importantly, they saw the weapon and considered what was happening and they used completely unreasonable force. The idea of self defence is that you're defending yourself, how are two men that are completely protected by bodyarmour and by both holding firearms protecting themself from someone who hasn't even fired a shot?

The strangest thing in the whole video that I find, is the ten second delay between the first two shots being fired and next two. Did it take them ten seconds to decide that it would be less complicated if he was dead than alive? Surely the first two shots would have kept him down.

There's no way, the a man pinned down was going to try and shoot his way out when two police officers were holding him to the ground with weapons pointed in his face.

I think that the colour of the man is irrelavent in this video but that the force used is completely unjustifed and it's blatant murder.

The taser was created as a way to not have to use a firearm in some circumstances, I don't get why they didn't just taser him instead of shooting him? He couldn't reach for his gun if he was tasered.