PA cop charged with homicide after she shoots man, 59, laying face down on the ground

originally posted by: highfromphoenix

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: highfromphoenix

not saying they shouldn't be armed. I am saying that EVERY. LAST. ONE. should have mandatory psych evals and the jocks with ssues weeded out before ANOTHER kid is killed because Officer McFriendly "feared for his life." And please, cease to use pejoratives in reference to me.

Fine. In my opinion you are "hopping on the latest bandwagon" against the government.

First it was the "we are 99" thing now it's cool to hate cops.

Grow up. (rolling my eyes).

I think most of us grew up hating the police. The rest are just understanding why so many people hate the police.

a reply to: SirKonstantin

I've never been 'stunned'.

The few times I talked with a police officer I showed them respect and surprise they didn't shoot me or fire any weapons.

Could it be the people are to blame? Sure there are bad cops but not all cops are bad.

originally posted by: highfromphoenix
a reply to: SirKonstantin

Could it be the people are to blame? Sure there are bad cops but not all cops are bad.

It's Both. And Yes. Not All are Bad.

Respect Earned,

a reply to: Ironhawke

At the time the constitution was written, they certainly didn't have the situations we face daily now. Cops are armed because the behavior and actions of the populace they "serve" require it. Unarmed cops in the USA would quickly turn into DEAD unarmed cops.

It will be interesting as to what specific charge she will be accused of at any arraignment, topside or downside, or piggy in the middle.

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: highfromphoenix

not saying they shouldn't be armed. I am saying that EVERY. LAST. ONE. should have mandatory psych evals and the jocks with ssues weeded out before ANOTHER kid is killed because Officer McFriendly "feared for his life." And please, cease to use pejoratives in reference to me.

Same approach taken for everyone right since we have no way of knowing who a criminal is? Mandatory psych evals and the jocks with issues weeded out before another victim gets robbed , raped or murdered.

a reply to: Anyafaj

There's just too many cases of police using deadly force against unarmed civilians. I always thought they had video training when and when not to fire their weapons.

You know the videos where the police officer is standing in front of a movie screen and a little old lady reaches into her jacket and pulls out a wallet. The police officer is supposed to constrain himself from firing his or her weapons until he is absolutely sure it's a gun. Just because this guy puts his hand in his pocket, doesn't mean he's going to pull out a gun! If the cop does not visually see a gun, they shouldn't be firing their weapons.

I understand it's a split second decision, but in this case, the guy was face down on the pavement! He would have to roll over first before getting off a shot.

originally posted by: highfromphoenix

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: highfromphoenix

not saying they shouldn't be armed. I am saying that EVERY. LAST. ONE. should have mandatory psych evals and the jocks with ssues weeded out before ANOTHER kid is killed because Officer McFriendly "feared for his life." And please, cease to use pejoratives in reference to me.

Fine. In my opinion you are "hopping on the latest bandwagon" against the government.

First it was the "we are 99" thing now it's cool to hate cops.

Grow up. (rolling my eyes).

Despite your obvious loathing of all things rational, this is not about hating cops, this is about HOLDING COPS TO ACCOUNT.

A police force only works through permission of the public, without that permission it is no longer a police force, it's an occupation.

Police forces have to be a part of their community, they have come from that community and work in that community, but most importantly they have to be ANSWERABLE TO THAT COMMUNITY.

When you have police officers murdering people in the street and getting away with it, you have a massive problem as a society. There are a lot of great cops out there, but there are far too many who think that they are an authority, rather than a public service.

None of this is going to change until people realize that the police are not the military in a war zone, they're not an authority, they are not a jury, judge or executioner. They do not have the right to kill people because they "feel threatened" (if you feel threatened and feel that the only way to respond is by murdering a person, you do not deserve to wear that uniform).

The job of a police officer in a civil society is to serve their public, investigate wrongdoing, prevent crime and deliver those suspected of crime to the justice system - not dispatch them in a body bag.

originally posted by: Ensinger23
a reply to: Ironhawke

At the time the constitution was written, they certainly didn't have the situations we face daily now. Cops are armed because the behavior and actions of the populace they "serve" require it. Unarmed cops in the USA would quickly turn into DEAD unarmed cops.

And at the time the U.S. constitution was signed the population was only about 4 million.

originally posted by: Brotherman
a reply to: Anyafaj

I'm actually from the area in Lebanon Pa which is 15 min east of Hummelstown, Believe it or not there is support for the officer in the area.

Sadly, I believe it.

a reply to: Anyafaj

There are a few things that make me question the motives of the journalist writing the article. I'm not attempting to judge the guilt or innocence of the officer. There are just a number of items in the article that are concerning.

From the article:

1) The suspect lead the officer on a pursuit and then exited the car on foot
*This situation would put any police officer on high alert for danger. Why did she not call for back-up, or if she did, where was her back-up?

2) The police officer used her tazer, the suspect was laying face down on the ground with his hands underneath him. The officer then attempted to remove the "tazer stickers" sic.
*Is it common practice for police to attempt to remove the "stickers" before a suspect is handcuffed? Again, where was her back-up?

3) "the stun gun recorded portions of the encounter"
*Stun guns/Tazers have cameras? (This point might just be ignorance on my part, but this is a news to me)

This article leaves too many holes to draw any conclusions IMO. It does however do an excellent job of eliciting an emotional response from readers who are prone to manipulation.

originally posted by: Bigburgh
a reply to: Anyafaj

This is not the first time either. Well not for your case here. Just a few years back. In the Township of Millvale ( Pittsburgh pa ).. a similar case. But no one died. This case got a little personal for me. I had some friends in that department. Not anymore.

This one is before the verdict. With video of teaser event.

m.wtae.com...

Here's the results.

triblive.com...

I have to run but thought I'd share.


Edit: my links are mobile format. If you want to look farther .. it's officer Nichole Murphy. Of Millvale police department. Tasering a mentally ill man.

We need to get rid of ALL cops like that. It's a shame that man had to go through that.

a reply to: opethPA

easy way to tell who the criminal is - he's the thug with a badge and gun. Check the news....

originally posted by: Ettenurb
a reply to: Anyafaj

There are a few things that make me question the motives of the journalist writing the article. I'm not attempting to judge the guilt or innocence of the officer. There are just a number of items in the article that are concerning.

From the article:

1) The suspect lead the officer on a pursuit and then exited the car on foot
*This situation would put any police officer on high alert for danger. Why did she not call for back-up, or if she did, where was her back-up?

2) The police officer used her tazer, the suspect was laying face down on the ground with his hands underneath him. The officer then attempted to remove the "tazer stickers" sic.
*Is it common practice for police to attempt to remove the "stickers" before a suspect is handcuffed? Again, where was her back-up?

3) "the stun gun recorded portions of the encounter"
*Stun guns/Tazers have cameras? (This point might just be ignorance on my part, but this is a news to me)

This article leaves too many holes to draw any conclusions IMO. It does however do an excellent job of eliciting an emotional response from readers who are prone to manipulation.

I didn't know about Tazer cameras either. I always thought EMTs removed Tazer tags/stickers/whatever. I don't know now. Any LEO want to help us here?

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: opethPA

easy way to tell who the criminal is - he's the thug with a badge and gun. Check the news....

Agreed..Those damn thugs with badges and guns..
The most recent cases from Philly prove your point..

www.philly.com...
www.philly.com...

Oh boy this just keeps getting better and better. It's the way they're justifying any and all of this, rather than retracting, confessing a mistake, apologizing, or even lying. That seems to be the salient intent. Most. Worrying.

One of the wiser things I've read lately is

"Anyone who wants to be a cop shouldn't be allowed to be a cop"

It would become as odd as hearing someone declare "I want to become a spy"

Every time I see this it's like dying a little bit. It tolls for you and me

sure sure odds against a direct hit are astronomical
a simple poisson distribution
more likely you are hit
sleeping there, along the oval perimeter

That's what we're seeing.

Who is going to defend this, again?
Should not Posse Comitatus have a star down feature? Just to send a message, for the ahem common good?

Unless you're colorblind, this is just brownshirts.
After that, bolshevik retreads. These same cops will be performing state assisted looting/retribution.
What really happened at the end of 2 and decades after glossed over, again
I do accuse the architects of offering
It takes the heat off of them
When they set us against ourselves

reply to: Anyafaj

# 400

a reply to: Ironhawke

The news is poorly written (or written with an agenda). DA's, Judges, and LEO's are capable of corruption. Citizens who do not live in the imaginary safe world depicted in commercials, by-and-large do not trust the police.

Body cams, body cams, body cams...one on each shoulder, both with wide angle lenses and a microphone. Activated everytime an officer exits their car, and cannot be disabled by the officer. We have this tech available, we need to demand this as CITIZENS!!!

a reply to: opethPA

Sigh..here we go again... Try reading my previous posts. I do not trust the police, for the simple fact that they keep killing innocent people.

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: opethPA

Sigh..here we go again... Try reading my previous posts. I do not trust the police, for the simple fact that they keep killing innocent people.

Yet you trust civilians who keep killing innocent people?

Are their horrible, evil cops..100% yes.
Are their horrible , evil civilians..100% yes.

Does that mean all cops and civilians are evil, not even close.

a reply to: opethPA

Ironhawke never claimed to trust all civilians. What are you trying to add to the discussion about the 59 year old PA man who was shot in the back during an arrest?