New York Firearms Forum banner
1 - 20 of 42 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,159 Posts
The kid actually had a baton that he was assaulting the officer with. That's when he was shot. He was not shot for being a smart ass.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,365 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I was posting more for the fact they used a picture from a completely different report, probably for more of a shock value
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,077 Posts
Sure looks familiar

Same Pic from another thread. I think it was a boarder patrol checkpoint.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,140 Posts
I was NOT there. I don't know what happened. BUT, the reporting from some web sites is meant to stir up emotions, not report the truth.

Alamo Heights, Texas (CNN) -- Those who know him call him the "gentlest person," but campus police said Monday that a 23-year-old student at a San Antonio-area Christian college took an officer's police baton and struck him before the officer fatally shot him.

There is no dashboard video available, according to the university.
The incident began when Cpl. Christopher Carter, a police officer with the University of the Incarnate Word in Alamo Heights, saw Robert Cameron Redus near campus "driving erratically at a high rate of speed" Friday, a university statement said.
"Carter was obligated to pull the suspect over to ensure the public's safety," the statement said.
Redus pulled into an apartment complex, and Carter followed, mistakenly reporting the wrong street location to police dispatchers, which prompted his call to be routed from the Alamo Heights Police Department to its San Antonio counterparts, the statement said. This caused a delay of several minutes in response time.
"During the wait for assistance, the officer tried to restrain the suspect who repeatedly resisted," the statement said. "During the struggle, the officer attempted to subdue the suspect with his baton. ... The baton was taken by the suspect who used it to hit the officer.
"The officer drew his firearm and was able to knock the baton from the suspect who continued to resist arrest. Shots were fired."
Redus did not identify himself, the university said, and there is "no evidence" the officer knew he was a student or where Redus lived.
University police vehicles are typically equipped with dashboard cameras, but Carter's vehicle joined the fleet two days before the incident, and its camera fell off the next day when a temperature change prevented the glue from setting, the school said.
"Officers had made arrangements to have it remounted," the statement said.
Carter, who has "an extensive law enforcement background," has been placed on administrative leave -- standard procedure in these types of incidents, a university statement said, adding that all campus officers "are licensed and trained as certified peace officers by the state of Texas."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,076 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,161 Posts
I was NOT there. I don't know what happened. BUT, the reporting from some web sites is meant to stir up emotions, not report the truth.

I'll go you one further, ScoSgt, "...the reporting from some websites, most papers, most tv stations, and many radio stations is meant to stir up emotions, not report the truth."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,414 Posts
Unless it was a revolver 5-6 shots is not "emptying a gun" into someone.

How can they even legally publish this crap with this headline? Isn't it slander? The kid attacked the cop with a ****ing weapon, simple as that.
 

·
Postmaster General
Joined
·
23,073 Posts
"University police vehicles are typically equipped with dashboard cameras, but Carter's vehicle joined the fleet two days before the incident, and its camera fell off the next day when a temperature change prevented the glue from setting, the school said."

Not one thing fishy about that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,391 Posts
This is exactly why you have to question what your told by the press ,Not because everything is a damm conspiercy, but because they are constantly being decietfull. We know this pic has absolutely nothing to do with the story, We know it came from a completely different story at a different place and different time but that fact was never mentioned. The person placeing this picture from the press pool was fully aware that it was not from the story they are describeing as the press pool pics are dated and documented.

I dont have a problem with them useing pics from a pool, so long as the relationship to the story is described and the pic documented.

Psychological manipulation is a type of social influence that aims to change the perception or behavior of others through underhanded, deceptive, or even abusive tactics.

Excerpts from Manufacturing Consent
Noam Chomsky interviewed by various interviewers
Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, 1992

QUESTION: You write in Manufacturing Consent [(Pantheon, 1988)] that it's the primary function of the mass media in the United States to mobilize public support for the special interests that dominate the government and the private sector. What are those interests?
CHOMSKY: Well, if you want to understand the way any society works, ours or any other, the first place to look is who is in a position to make the decisions that determine the way the society functions. Societies differ, but in ours, the major decisions over what happens in the society -- decisions over investment and production and distribution and so on -- are in the hands of a relatively concentrated network of major corporations and conglomerates and investment firms. They are also the ones who staff the major executive positions in the government. They're the ones who own the media and they're the ones who have to be in a position to make the decisions. They have an overwhelmingly dominant role in the way life happens. You know, what's done in the society. Within the economic system, by law and in principle, they dominate. The control over resources and the need to satisfy their interests imposes very sharp constraints on the political system and on the ideological system.

QUESTION: When we talk about manufacturing of consent, whose consent is being manufactured?

CHOMSKY: To start with, there are two different groups, we can get into more detail, but at the first level of approximation, there's two targets for propaganda. One is what's sometimes called the political class. There's maybe twenty percent of the population which is relatively educated, more or less articulate, plays some kind of role in decision-making. They're supposed to sort of participate in social life -- either as managers, or cultural managers like teachers and writers and so on. They're supposed to vote, they're supposed to play some role in the way economic and political and cultural life goes on. Now their consent is crucial. So that's one group that has to be deeply indoctrinated. Then there's maybe eighty percent of the population whose main function is to follow orders and not think, and not to pay attention to anything -- and they're the ones who usually pay the costs.

QUESTION: ... You outlined a model -- filters that propaganda is sent through, on its way to the public. Can you briefly outline those?

CHOMSKY: It's basically an institutional analysis of the major media, what we call a propaganda model. We're talking primarily about the national media, those media that sort of set a general agenda that others more or less adhere to, to the extent that they even pay much attention to national or international affairs.
Now the elite media are sort of the agenda-setting media. That means The New York Times, The Washington Post, the major television channels, and so on. They set the general framework. Local media more or less adapt to their structure.
And they do this in all sorts of ways: by selection of topics, by distribution of concerns, by emphasis and framing of issues, by filtering of information, by bounding of debate within certain limits. They determine, they select, they shape, they control, they restrict -- in order to serve the interests of dominant, elite groups in the society.

The New York Times is certainly the most important newspaper in the United States, and one could argue the most important newspaper in the world. The New York Times plays an enormous role in shaping the perception of the current world on the part of the politically active, educated classes. Also The New York Times has a special role, and I believe its editors probably feel that they bear a heavy burden, in the sense that The New York Times creates history.

That is, history is what appears in The New York Times archives; the place where people will go to find out what happened is The New York Times. Therefore it's extremely important if history is going to be shaped in an appropriate way, that certain things appear, certain things not appear, certain questions be asked, other questions be ignored, and that issues be framed in a particular fashion. Now in whose interests is history being so shaped? Well, I think that's not very difficult to answer.

Now, to eliminate confusion, all of this has nothing to do with liberal or conservative bias. According to the propaganda model, both liberal and conservative wings of the media -- whatever those terms are supposed to mean -- fall within the same framework of assumptions.
In fact, if the system functions well, it ought to have a liberal bias, or at least appear to. Because if it appears to have a liberal bias, that will serve to bound thought even more effectively.

In other words, if the press is indeed adversarial and liberal and all these bad things, then how can I go beyond it? They're already so extreme in their opposition to power that to go beyond it would be to take off from the planet. So therefore it must be that the presuppositions that are accepted in the liberal media are sacrosanct -- can't go beyond them. And a well-functioning system would in fact have a bias of that kind. The media would then serve to say in effect: Thus far and no further.

We ask what would you expect of those media on just relatively uncontroversial, guided-free market assumptions? And when you look at them you find a number of major factors determining what their products are. These are what we call the filters, so one of them, for example, is ownership. Who owns them?

The major agenda-setting media -- after all, what are they? As institutions in the society, what are they?

Well, in the first place they are major corporations, in fact huge corporations. Furthermore, they are integrated with and sometimes owned by even larger corporations, conglomerates -- so, for example, by Westinghouse and G.E. and so on.

So what we have in the first place is major corporations which are parts of even bigger conglomerates. Now, like any other corporation, they have a product which they sell to a market. The market is advertisers -- that is, other businesses. What keeps the media functioning is not the audience. They make money from their advertisers. And remember, we're talking about the elite media. So they're trying to sell a good product, a product which raises advertising rates. And ask your friends in the advertising industry. That means that they want to adjust their audience to the more elite and affluent audience. That raises advertising rates. So what you have is institutions, corporations, big corporations, that are selling relatively privileged audiences to other businesses.

Excerpts from Manufacturing Consent, Noam Chomsky interviewed by various interviewers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,391 Posts
Unless it was a revolver 5-6 shots is not "emptying a gun" into someone.

How can they even legally publish this crap with this headline? Isn't it slander? The kid attacked the cop with a ****ing weapon, simple as that.
Unfortuenately, not that simple, the story states that the officer had knocked the baton from the suspect hand, the witness'es claim the man wasnt doing anything at the time he was shot. Its going to be up to the officer to explain why he felt his life was in imminent danger of death at the moment he fired. Then its going to be up to a court to decide wether acted in accordance of the law. Which may or may not be the case, We dont have all the info so we dont know, A lot like the Zimmerman case . We need to have the facts before we rush to judgement .

On the officers behalf he may have been a puzzy ,(not all cops are tough guys) and the suspect may have been a football player who trained in mixed martial arts , If the suspect began to move forward saying ""what are you going to do, shoot me?"", the officer after already haveing his baton taken from him, knew he could not subdue the suspect. He now had to be concerned that if he didnt fire, his weapon would be taken from him and possibly used against him . Proveing that is another matter.

The other side of the story is , this cop just had his azz handed to him by a young kid who stole his baton and hit him with with it, then threw the baton on the ground because he didnt need the baton to whip the officers azz. It maybe the embarrassed officer lost his head for a moment and opened fire .

We can assume either one, but the facts of the case are not clear enough at this point to say for certain.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,140 Posts
Unfortuenately, not that simple, the story states that the officer had knocked the baton from the suspect hand, the witness'es claim the man wasnt doing anything at the time he was shot. Its going to be up to the officer to explain why he felt his life was in imminent danger of death at the moment he fired. Then its going to be up to a court to decide wether acted in accordance of the law. Which may or may not be the case, We dont have all the info so we dont know, A lot like the Zimmerman case . We need to have the facts before we rush to judgement .

On the officers behalf he may have been a puzzy ,(not all cops are tough guys) and the suspect may have been a football player who trained in mixed martial arts , If the suspect began to move forward saying ""what are you going to do, shoot me?"", the officer after already haveing his baton taken from him, knew he could not subdue the suspect. He now had to be concerned that if he didnt fire, his weapon would be taken from him and possibly used against him . Proveing that is another matter.

The other side of the story is , this cop just had his azz handed to him by a young kid who stole his baton and hit him with with it, then threw the baton on the ground because he didnt need the baton to whip the officers azz. It maybe the embarrassed officer lost his head for a moment and opened fire .

We can assume either one, but the facts of the case are not clear enough at this point to say for certain.
I think you are on the right track here. The one thing I question is how badly was he hurt when he was struck with the baton. If he was groggy or seeing stars, he was acting in classic self defense at that point, since he was unable to defend himself in any other way, and DPF had in fact been used against him.
OTOH, if he was "tapped" on the leg and got a minor bruise, it would be hard to justify his use of DPF.

So the one thing that stands out is that he has not been charged. Cops who shoot unarmed people without proper cause generally are quickly arrested and charged. That would be the one thing that tells me he may have been incapacitated when he fired.

Remember, witnesses are only good if they are IMPARTIAL. People with an agenda are not reliable witnesses. That also seems to be a factor in this case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,339 Posts
So the one thing that stands out is that he has not been charged. Cops who shoot unarmed people without proper cause generally are quickly arrested and charged. That would be the one thing that tells me he may have been incapacitated when he fired.
Sine this thread started with a pic from the Doner search I have to ask this. Where the LAPD cops that shot those women in the blue truck fired or arrested? I don't think they were. There seems to be a broad definition for "proper cause" lately.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,140 Posts
Sine this thread started with a pic from the Doner search I have to ask this. Where the LAPD cops that shot those women in the blue truck fired or arrested? I don't think they were. There seems to be a broad definition for "proper cause" lately.
I don't know anything about that case so no comment can be made.

There ARE bad shootings by Police (the unarmed cab driver in Suffolk comes to mind) and they should be prosecuted if they were not acting in good faith (drunk tends to show bad faith BTW).
 
1 - 20 of 42 Posts
Top