US: Black man shot dead in San Diego just after police arrived

[Acharn]

6 hours ago, ALLSEEINGEYE said:

A Darwin award winner here.

These protesters need to get a grip. Sometimes it's justified when someone gets shot.

Learn to pick your battles. Or perhaps they just enjoy the riot party and free excuse to loot.

 

People need to learn not to call the police for help. This is the usual result. I recall one case where a woman called because her brother was suffering a seizure from not taking his insulin. Never, never, call for help with a mentally disabled person. 

[ClutchClark]

5 hours ago, chilli42 said:

I understand that in a country where guns are easily available, and in many states you are allowed to carry concealed weapons, the police are on edge and often over react.  That said, the first reaction to any provocation can not be to pump 3 or 4 rounds into a kill zone at close range.  Certainly being in law enforcement entails risk.  That risk can be mitigated by using a taser or targeting less lethal body parts as a first recourse.  If these people have no balls for taking risk then they should not be in law enforcement.

 

The police did not over-react. 

 

They were talking (de-escalting) the situation until the man presented himself in an intentionally threatening manner to make it appear he had a firearm.

 

Lets say you are standing in line at a Starbucks and someone who was acting crazy reached into his pocket and removed an object quickly and went into a shooting stance directly at you.

 

All in a matter of a second.

 

Would you stand there and talk? Would you dive for cover? 

 

At the split second that a man presents a firearm and points it at another person...or in this case...mimicks that action, then the rules of engagement change. 

 

These events are unfortunate and unsettling to us folks who live in the rational and safe world of our daily lives. We are shocked by these outcomes but put yourself in the position of the officers and think aboit your own reaction. What would it be? 

 

When it takes a fraction of a second for this guy to pull the trigger are you really going to spend 1-2 seconds making sure its a gun in his hand? 

 

And the idea of shooting less lethal body parts is ridiculous. Its Hollywood. Injured people can still pull the trigger. Besides the ability to hit any target is made far more difficult in a firefight. You train to react in a split second because thats how long it takes to be shot. Training muscle memory needs to become impulsive. Its not a time to think leg, arm or chest.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 29, 2016 by ClutchClark

[ClutchClark]

10 minutes ago, Acharn said:

 

People need to learn not to call the police for help. This is the usual result. I recall one case where a woman called because her brother was suffering a seizure from not taking his insulin. Never, never, call for help with a mentally disabled person. 

 

police respond to 100's of these calls every day around the country. Multiply that by 365.

 

This is not the "usual result" or we would read about it 100's of times a day.

 

Try to calm down and use logic and reason.

[Strange]

Video Of El Cajone Police Chief making a statement to the public.

 

 

 

Picture provided by witness of the shooting showing Mr Olango in shooting position:

 

 

[JetsetBkk]

6 minutes ago, Strange said:

 

 

Looks like "suicide by cop".

 

[lungmi]

Every country has his special kind of "euthanasie"

The USA develop  a new old style, with Trump as cheerleader.

[ClutchClark]

1 minute ago, lungmi said:

Every country has his special kind of "euthanasie"

The USA develop  a new old style, with Trump as cheerleader.

 

The important thing to remember is that this guy chose this method--in fact, he insisted on it. 

 

Sadly he did not simply jump off a balcony like in LOS.

[ClutchClark]

Based on the Chiefs statements, it sounds like it was the black officer who killed the suspect. 

 

So will claims of racism still be heard?

[Ulysses G.]

Of course.

[212Roger]

I always tell my friends that in America I am far more afraid of the police than I am of a criminal.  The police can ruin your life.  They can take your kids away from you.  They can break up your marriage and/of family.  They can arrest you and take your freedom, leaving you in jail until you can prove your innocence.  Lastly, never call the police; they are never there when needed because they show up after the fact...  Personally, I've had numerous conflicts with the police and zero conflicts with a criminal!

[Publicus]

1 minute ago, ClutchClark said:

 

He was "atypical" in that he did not actually have a firearm. 

 

How many rounds does a police officers firearm hold? You must have this answer if you are so certain an officer always empties his magazine. The fact is your statement is incorrect. 

 

You are correct about one thing and it seems common sense would make no explanation necessary but if you want to stay alive when someone has a gun and is acting aggressively towards you--it is best to shoot first rather than second. The time for questions have passed.

 

 

 

Don't know what you might be carrying on about but you're sure you're on to something.

 

Police get a lot of latitude and even a leeway in the laws and from the courts on up to Scotus to be judge, jury, executioner, all rolled in to one trigger finger. No one else in ordinary civilian society is entrusted with all of that truly awesome power, authority, presumed legitimacy. 

 

It's life and death. Which is why we need independent police review boards. We don't know for instance whether the shooter police had college degrees or were the typical high school grad police (or its equivalent). Or a mixture of each. College grad police have a vastly lower rate of disciplinary procedures against 'em than do the high school grad only cops.

 

Bottom line is that the police will investigate and report on this shooting death. However, police investigating police is but little different from the fox investigating the fox.

[Strange]

8 minutes ago, 212Roger said:

I always tell my friends that in America I am far more afraid of the police than I am of a criminal.  The police can ruin your life.  They can take your kids away from you.  They can break up your marriage and/of family.  They can arrest you and take your freedom, leaving you in jail until you can prove your innocence.  Lastly, never call the police; they are never there when needed because they show up after the fact...  Personally, I've had numerous conflicts with the police and zero conflicts with a criminal!

 

And you tell people this? Seriously? 

 

Fear monger much? 

 

Care to explain some of these "Conflicts with the Police" that you have had? 

[Strange]

5 minutes ago, Publicus said:

Don't know what you might be carrying on about but you're sure you're on to something.

 

Police get a lot of latitude and even a leeway in the laws and from the courts on up to Scotus to be judge, jury, executioner, all rolled in to one trigger finger. No one else in ordinary civilian society is entrusted with all of that truly awesome power, authority, presumed legitimacy. 

 

It's life and death. Which is why we need independent police review boards. We don't know for instance whether the shooter police had college degrees or were the typical high school grad police (or its equivalent). Or a mixture of each. College grad police have a vastly lower rate of disciplinary procedures against 'em than do the high school grad only cops.

 

Bottom line is that the police will investigate and report on this shooting death. However, police investigating police is but little different from the fox investigating the fox.

 

Ok now you are just flogging opinion. 

[ClutchClark]

7 minutes ago, Publicus said:

 

Don't know what you might be carrying on about but you're sure you're on to something.

 

Police get a lot of latitude and even a leeway in the laws and from the courts on up to Scotus to be judge, jury, executioner, all rolled in to one trigger finger. No one else in ordinary civilian society is entrusted with all of that truly awesome power, authority, presumed legitimacy. 

 

It's life and death. Which is why we need independent police review boards. We don't know for instance whether the shooter police had college degrees or were the typical high school grad police (or its equivalent). Or a mixture of each. College grad police have a vastly lower rate of disciplinary procedures against 'em than do the high school grad only cops.

 

Bottom line is that the police will investigate and report on this shooting death. However, police investigating police is but little different from the fox investigating the fox.

 

I have no idea what you are trying to get at but you are certainly on something.

 

Do you understand that the FBI will investigate this police shooting?

 

You think creating a review board of people who hate the police is somehow unbiased?

 

And this drama of "judge, jury, executioner" is incorrect....but it sure makes a great soundbite when you are talking with your friends over your half-decaf organic soy latte, eh?

 

 

[Publicus]

6 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

I have no idea what you are trying to get at but you are certainly on something.

 

Do you understand that the FBI will investigate this police shooting?

 

You think creating a review board of people who hate the police is somehow unbiased?

 

And this drama of "judge, jury, executioner" is incorrect....but it sure makes a great soundbite when you are talking with your friends over your half-decaf organic soy latte, eh?

 

 

 

Some people like theirs bitter. 

 

I see this side over here winning a bit more each day, day after day.

[ClutchClark]

25 minutes ago, Publicus said:

 

Some people like theirs bitter. 

 

I see this side over here winning a bit more each day, day after day.

 

Sides?

 

Well if there are sides then I am on the side of "Law & Order" and police having the right to protect themselves from harm. 

 

I am not on the side of the group that riots when a black man breaks all the rules of society which I follow. 

 

Perhaps BLM should spend time holding classes on respectful behavior around Law Enforcement and the importance of following police instructions. then a course on responsible and "legal" gun ownership would also help. maybe another one on not participating in the trade of illegal narcotics? 

 

Open to ideas here Publicus. 

 

cheers

[ClutchClark]

25 minutes ago, Publicus said:

 

Some people like theirs bitter. 

 

I see this side over here winning a bit more each day, day after day.

 

Sides?

 

Well if there are sides then I am on the side of "Law & Order" and police having the right to protect themselves from harm. 

 

I am not on the side of the group that riots when a black man breaks all the rules of society which I follow. 

 

Perhaps BLM should spend time holding classes on respectful behavior around Law Enforcement and the importance of following police instructions. then a course on responsible and "legal" gun ownership would also help. maybe another one on not participating in the trade of illegal narcotics? 

 

Open to ideas here Publicus. 

 

cheers

[metisdead]

Off topic obfuscation posts and replies have been removed.

[NanLaew]

16 hours ago, Gary A said:

If I had been that cop, I would have shot the guy. The device the dead guy was holding looked very much like a zip gun. A zip gun can kill you just as dead as a powerful hand gun. In case you don't know what a zip gun is, it's a home made tube with bullet cartridge in it. The cop had absolutely no time to make up his mind. If the dead guy was so harmless, why didn't his family take care of him  and forget about calling the cops? Since the cops were called they had to think he was dangerous.

What about the other cop who didn't feel sufficiently threatened and chose to tazer the guy instead? This is a repeat of the Tulsa Takedown and the cop that chose lethal force over tazer in that incident has been rightfully charged with manslaughter.

[Publicus]

5 hours ago, Strange said:

<<snip>>

 

This poster is not trying to quote the poster Strange but that is who this poster got trying to quote Clutch Clark. This very screwup which cannot be corrected at this end has recently become a persistent interposition, whether technical or otherwise. A return of the "Cancel Post" option would be welcome.

 

 

In the meantime...

 

To Clutch Clark, to whom I am trying to reply but cannot due to technical or other interpositions:

 

It is good to see your are in favor of Law 'n Order. That makes you a good American. You've a lot to be proud of. Keep up the great patriotism. Nevermind Black Lives Matter. They don't do they.

 

Carry on. 

[ClutchClark]

28 minutes ago, Publicus said:

 

This poster is not trying to quote the poster Strange but that is who this poster got trying to quote Clutch Clark. This very screwup which cannot be corrected at this end has recently become a persistent interposition, whether technical or otherwise. A return of the "Cancel Post" option would be welcome.

 

 

In the meantime...

 

To Clutch Clark, to whom I am trying to reply but cannot due to technical or other interpositions:

 

It is good to see your are in favor of Law 'n Order. That makes you a good American. You've a lot to be proud of. Keep up the great patriotism. Nevermind Black Lives Matter. They don't do they.

 

Carry on. 

 

If your first paragraph was intended to be humorous then it was a success.

 

Let me clarify my earlier statement so it is not misunderstood, I support "Law & Order" and the protections it provides for all Americans regardless of race, gender, religion, etc.. (That includes african-americans as individuals).

 

I do not support groups that congregate to protest when their demonstrations so often to turn to violence and riot. I do not think any group has any inherent right to block public roadways, destroy private and public property, steal from semi trucks or businesses or assault police officers. (This would include a group such as BLM).

 

I support the professional law enforcement community and recognize they have a difficult job to do in a higly dynamic environment and understand they have to make split second decisions that can result in the loss of their own life or those of the public. I recognize these first responders run towards emergency situations at personal risk to their lives when guys like you & me have the freedom to run away from such events. I recognize they are hated by large segments of the communities they serve and protect whether its white liberals in their gated communities or blacks stuck in a broken paradigm of violence and illegal activities. 

 

If you are still confused then please feel free to contact me. 

 

And again, nice wordplay in first paragraph.

[ClutchClark]

49 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

What about the other cop who didn't feel sufficiently threatened and chose to tazer the guy instead? This is a repeat of the Tulsa Takedown and the cop that chose lethal force over tazer in that incident has been rightfully charged with manslaughter.

 

Your assumption is incorrect.

 

The officer with the taser already had the taser out of its holster and was pointed at the suspect when the suspect reached in his pocket and quickly jumped into a threatening stance so that officer deployed the taser since it was immediately available versus setting the taser aside and drawing his firearm from its holster. In the time that would have taken his partner would be dead. 

 

The reason he had the taser out of its holster and aimed at the suspect was because the suspect did not display a weapon during the initial phase of this engagement and the police hoped they could subdue the suspect without the need for deadly force. 

The terms of engagement changed, the escalation of the use of force occured at the moment the suspect made the decision to pretend he was armed with a firearm. 

 

I hope that helps you to understand. 

[daveAustin]

The States is a shambles regards it's gun crime and the police are trigger-happy, but notice how the tabloids always sensationalize the killing of black people?

 

Quote

The fatal shooting happened just weeks after black men were shot and killed by police in Tulsa

 

Meanwhile, how many white people have been killed by cops in the interim?

[Publicus]

16 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

If your first paragraph was intended to be humorous then it was a success.

 

Let me clarify my earlier statement so it is not misunderstood, I support "Law & Order" and the protections it provides for all Americans regardless of race, gender, religion, etc.. (That includes african-americans as individuals).

 

I do not support groups that congregate to protest when their demonstrations so often to turn to violence and riot. I do not think any group has any inherent right to block public roadways, destroy private and public property, steal from semi trucks or businesses or assault police officers. (This would include a group such as BLM).

 

I support the professional law enforcement community and recognize they have a difficult job to do in a higly dynamic environment and understand they have to make split second decisions that can result in the loss of their own life or those of the public. I recognize these first responders run towards emergency situations at personal risk to their lives when guys like you & me have the freedom to run away from such events. I recognize they are hated by large segments of the communities they serve and protect whether its white liberals in their gated communities or blacks stuck in a broken paradigm of violence and illegal activities. 

 

If you are still confused then please feel free to contact me. 

 

And again, nice wordplay in first paragraph.

 

My posts are experiencing technical problems today. The first part of the post you quoted disappeared in the posting. (It had been unwanted anyway.)

 

I'm going to chill a while to check things out...

[ClutchClark]

800,000 Sworn Law Enforcement Officers on Actice Duty right now.

 

"Trigger happy" would require exponentially more police invilved shootings.

 

Please try and be rational.

 

[Publicus]

37 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

If your first paragraph was intended to be humorous then it was a success.

 

Let me clarify my earlier statement so it is not misunderstood, I support "Law & Order" and the protections it provides for all Americans regardless of race, gender, religion, etc.. (That includes african-americans as individuals).

 

I do not support groups that congregate to protest when their demonstrations so often to turn to violence and riot. I do not think any group has any inherent right to block public roadways, destroy private and public property, steal from semi trucks or businesses or assault police officers. (This would include a group such as BLM).

 

I support the professional law enforcement community and recognize they have a difficult job to do in a higly dynamic environment and understand they have to make split second decisions that can result in the loss of their own life or those of the public. I recognize these first responders run towards emergency situations at personal risk to their lives when guys like you & me have the freedom to run away from such events. I recognize they are hated by large segments of the communities they serve and protect whether its white liberals in their gated communities or blacks stuck in a broken paradigm of violence and illegal activities. 

 

If you are still confused then please feel free to contact me. 

 

And again, nice wordplay in first paragraph.

 

Let me clarify my earlier statement so it is not misunderstood

 

You are not misunderstood Clutch. You are a Law 'n Order Guy. We over here understand you perfectly.

 

Do try to deal with 2% of the 800,000 cops who, as Chief Beary says as president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police are the screwups. 

 

I reiterate Chief Beary has said for years that 98% of police do the right thing 98% of the time. It's the two percenters that the 100% of the rightwhinge ignore and pretend do not exist. The first step of a cure is to acknowledge the illness or disease. The right cannot do this so it is stuck in the mire indefinitely.

[chuckd]

Just in case some of you news hawks might have missed this, but the victim was an illegal alien that they had tried to deport two times previously.

 

His native Uganda refused to issue travel documents.  They didn't want him either.

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

 

Man shot by El Cajon police was illegal alien ordered deported twice
Associated Press September 29, 2016 at 11:55 am 52 Lead Stories, News

U.S. authorities tried twice to deport the unarmed black man fatally shot by police in El Cajon, California, but his native Uganda refused to take him.

 

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement said Thursday in a statement to The Associated Press that Alfred Olango stopped reporting to officers in February 2015. Spokeswoman Virginia Kice didn’t know if officers tried to find him after that.

 

 

http://www.gopusa.com/?p=15426?omhide=true

Edited October 4, 2016 by metisdead
Edited as per fair use policy.

[Steely Dan]

Of course it goes without saying that the numbers shot after the police arrive are dwarfed by the numbers shot before. As with many other situations the newsworthiness of a life is a function partly based on who got shot but mainly on who did the shooting.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[Sunderland]

I was in San Diego 2 years ago and saw a white guy behaving in a very similar manner. Quite disturbing. However, he wasn't shot.

[NanLaew]

5 hours ago, ClutchClark said:

 

Your assumption is incorrect.

 

The officer with the taser already had the taser out of its holster and was pointed at the suspect when the suspect reached in his pocket and quickly jumped into a threatening stance so that officer deployed the taser since it was immediately available versus setting the taser aside and drawing his firearm from its holster. In the time that would have taken his partner would be dead. 

 

The reason he had the taser out of its holster and aimed at the suspect was because the suspect did not display a weapon during the initial phase of this engagement and the police hoped they could subdue the suspect without the need for deadly force. 

The terms of engagement changed, the escalation of the use of force occured at the moment the suspect made the decision to pretend he was armed with a firearm. 

 

I hope that helps you to understand. 

And you gained that detailed play-by-play from the same herky-jerky smartphone and bodycam video that's widely available.

 

...or is it some detailed knowledge from the San Diego PD's own training manual on when to tazer and when to shoot?

 

PS. I hear the Tulsa PD are re-writing theirs.