SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the "All-lives-matter."-President-Obama dept.
Snipers in Dallas: [5] Cops Dead; [6] More Cops Wounded
The Atlantic reports:
Two gunmen shot eleven police officers in Dallas, Texas [at 8:58 PM July 7], killing at least four of them.
[...] At a Thursday night press conference, Dallas Police Department Chief David Brown said [...] officers had one of the suspects "cornered", but did not offer further details.
"Tonight, it appears that two snipers shot ten police officers from elevated positions during the protest/rally", Brown said in an initial statement. "Three officers are deceased, two are in surgery, and three are in critical condition. An intensive search for suspect is currently underway." The police department later said an eleventh officer had also been injured and a fourth officer had been killed.
[...] The shootings occurred during a protest against police killings earlier this week in Louisiana and Minnesota. Hundreds rallied in downtown Dallas, near the corner of Main Street and Lamar Street. Local news footage captured what sounds like several gunshots being fired, and the crowd scattering.
[...] No motive has yet been established and it's unclear whether the shooting was related to the protest.
The New York Times just broke the story about the latest in the police killings of black men. It seems the tide has been turned. [Five] Dallas police officers were killed tonight at a protest in that city over these shootings.
I am not surprised, nor am I particularly shocked. No doubt there will be more to come on this topic as the evening progresses. Hopefully something good comes out of this, but I am inclined to doubt it.
takyon: Some more details: One suspect was killed by an explosion intentionally caused by a police robot. He reportedly told a negotiator that he was upset about Black Lives Matter, the recent police shootings, and wanted to kill white people, especially police officers. He said he was not affiliated with any groups and acted alone. Other suspects have been arrested, and a "person of interest" (often identified as a suspect by the news media) was arrested early in the night after he was photographed with his unloaded AR-15. He handed his weapon to an officer shortly after the shootings, and later turned himself into the police for questioning.
President Obama spoke about the shootings shortly after arriving in Poland for a NATO conference. In part, he mentioned that, "When people say 'black lives matter,' that doesn't mean blue lives don't matter, it just means all lives matter — but right now the big concern is the fact that the data shows black folks are more vulnerable to these kinds of incidents [...] This isn't a matter of us comparing the value of lives. This is recognizing that there is a particular burden that is being placed on a group of our fellow citizens. And we should care about that. And we can't dismiss it. We can't dismiss it."
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Saturday July 09 2016, @12:39AM
Your position creates confusion in the whole issue of cops killing unarmed black young men. Key word, "unarmed". There is far to much of that.
I am pissed that cops can shoot first, and ask questions later if ever. I'm pissed that young men with no weapons at all are almost routinely gunned down. It is outrageous that cowards can fire their weapons into a man's body, just because his hands were somewhere near his waistband. FFS, I'm six feet tall, and my hands are never much further than three feet from my waistband! According to cop's stories, I present a threat to them, just by existing.
Now, in this case, an armed man had already killed 4 (soon to be five) and put 7 others out of action. Sniper or not, he was at least moderately competent with his weapons. The cops are not obligated to put themselves at any further risk to talk the guy into surrendering. I have no problem at all with "executing" him. I am just surprised that they used a robot with a bomb.
Cops in general need to be brought under control, but there must always be an option to bring down a truly dangerous man. There is simply no point in being upset that this particular individual was gunned down, or blown up, or poisoned, or killed by whatever means.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by dry on Saturday July 09 2016, @03:40AM
As long as he was not an immediate threat, it seems wrong to allow the police to execute him with no due process. The cops had/have the resources to starve him out and summary execution is considered a no-no in all civilized countries. Especially in a country with so many armed people, allowing the cops to summarily execute people because they are a threat or perceived as a threat is a very slippery slope to embark on. Though I guess it can be argued that any armed person or person that might be armed is a threat and should be summarily executed, which seems to be the direction that America is headed.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday July 09 2016, @01:43PM
"The cops had/have the resources to starve him out"
You are making one huge assumption and/or presumption. We didn't know all this two nights ago, but the fact is, the man was a combat veteran. Starve him out? If/when he was ready to make a move, he fully intended to take some more cops with him. He wasn't surrendering. He stated clearly that he wanted to kill cops, especially white cops. A combat veteran need not be armed to be dangerous, and this one was armed. He refused to surrender, the cops couldn't just leave the next move to him. Doing so would have been criminally negligent. Mention was made of explosive devices - leaving him alive for an extended period of time, still armed, he may or may not have detonated his explosives.
Again, we didn't know this at the time, but his apartment was supposedly a stash for explosives. Knowing what we now know of him, a threat of explosives was a credible threat.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday July 10 2016, @03:28AM
As long as he was not an immediate threat, it seems wrong to allow the police to execute him with no due process.
But he was an immediate threat. He just killed people and he was still dangerous.
(Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Sunday July 10 2016, @02:43PM
The point was he was cornered enough for negotiations and phone delivery, so not much of an immediate threat. Though runaways comment about explosives is a good component.
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday July 10 2016, @11:46PM
The point was he was cornered enough for negotiations and phone delivery, so not much of an immediate threat.
How many more innocent lives should we gamble on the unwarranted assumption that he can't kill anyone else just because he's pinned down at the moment? I don't grant your assertion here because it's idiotic and insane. Police shouldn't be risking their lives in this way for someone who had already killed five armed people and shot a number of others. So no, as long as he didn't surrender, he remained an immediate threat. It would have been wrong to give him more time to figure out how to kill more people.
(Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Saturday July 09 2016, @06:10AM
The methods used and representation of society is important. No one is sorry this guy is dead, but its like standing up for freedom of speech even when you hate what someone else is saying. I would have to get a good account of the whole situation, did they communicate with him at all? What demands were then either way, etc. I for one would like to have sent him a tapped phone to hear who he'd call, what he'd say. You're kidding yourself if you think there aren't a dozen other ways they could handle the guy with little to no risk. This is the kind of story that could be so easily spun into a movie, hopefully Hollywood won't touch it out of respect for those whose lives were lost. There are always the extreme edges of every situation, its how we change our behavior after that is really important.
But aside from that, thanks for pointing out the killing of unarmed men. It is a very important distinction with events that many choose to ignore (or are zombified to not even see).
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday July 09 2016, @01:45PM
"did they communicate with him at all?"
I can't answer any of your other questions, but the Dallas police chief and the mayor both stated that they were in negotiations with the shooter for quite some time. Apparently, the demands on each side were rejected by the other side. Maybe we'll get to hear those negotiations in coming days.
(Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Saturday July 09 2016, @03:57PM
Yeah, ultimately I would probably support their choice to take him out. The only real point that bugs me (beyond the ideological issue with police killing people) is wanting to know what he would have done with a cell phone, and if he was going to call for "support" then it would also have been good to find out who his compatriots are since they may go down the same road.
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Saturday July 09 2016, @07:10PM
Maybe. Documents about the JFK killing "which could amount to tens of thousands of pages" are still secret.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2013/11/25/government-still-withholding-thousands-documents-jfk-assassination/PvBM2PCgW1H11vadQ4Wp4H/story.html [bostonglobe.com]
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2013/0817/50-years-later-sealed-JFK-files-still-raise-questions [csmonitor.com]