Quote:
Originally Posted by jyl
These events don't become flashpoints in isolation. They become flashpoints because they are perceived to be part of a pattern.
When a unarmed young black man is shot dead by a police officer, that alone isn't a flashpoint. But when dozens or hundreds of unarmed young black men are shot dead by police every year for years and years, then at some point the next one becomes a flashpoint. If not Michael Brown, it would have been another one.
If police were gunning down white male hostages every week or every month, for years and decades, then there might be the "outrage" you want. But they aren't, so it is just a tragic, bizarre, and isolated accident.
The fact that you, the OP, don't grasp the difference shows how little you understand the emotions and anger surrounding the Brown shooting.
|
As a retired Police Officer I understand very well the difference in these two situations. In the case I listed an innocent man was gunned down because someone was fast to pull a trigger. In the Brown case a Police Officer was being attacked by someone twice his size that had just robbed a store and the officer defended himself using his last resort. Do you see the difference? Have there been shootings involving both races that I have sat and wondered what could have caused this yes but the Brown case is not one of them. I have been in that situation before and luckily in NYC help is on the scene in seconds because there are over 35,000 police officers here. When you work in a small police force help can be 10 minutes away by that time you can be dead.
There is no law or even a department policy that states an officer may only use deadly physical force when a subject is armed. There is however a long list of times when an officer may use it to prevent or terminate serious physical injury to themselves or others. I believe that when all of the facts of this case come out the officer will be proven to have acted within his justifiable rights.