Baltimore: Black woman shot dead by police during alleged standoff while holding son

originally posted by: RobotBomb

Convenient that the footage of her loading the shot gun was edited out.

Maybe they will use am elementary school photo of her for the next propaganda piece.

If the gun was loaded or not loaded is irrelevant, nobody has disputed if she fired her weapon, ironically except you, so tell us more of what you know.

originally posted by: Iamthatbish
a reply to: RobotBomb

Are you aware that the police have the arrest record available to them before they go to serve warrants? Wouldn't it be a wonderful world if the people interacting with the public were properly trained for the public in all of our differences?

No. Not only is there no justification for loss of life there's reason to believe they should have known better and taken steps to prevent it.

If the kid had been killed and she lived, she'd have made Millions. Try and pretend that never crossed her mind.

Videos posted on Gaines’ Instagram page appear to have been taken during the standoff.

In one, Gaines can be heard asking her son who is outside and the boy responds: “The police”. Gaines then asks “and what are they trying to do?” And the boy replies: “They’re trying to kill us.”

Seems that child was thought if the police arrive, it's to kill you. She made that come true.

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
Do all criminals deserve to die in the US? Aren't the police trained to disable at all? Surely she could have been shot in the leg or arm or wherever but not killed? I've seen some very very petty reasons for police killing some people when a disabling shot would have worked just as well. Some crimes really don't deserve a death penalty

Shooting people in the arms and legs is a common Hollywood movie misconception. The police are trained to shoot to STOP the threat. Shooting someone in the arm or leg will do nothing in most cases to prevent them from continuing whatever they were doing that was threatening in the first place.

Sure, "some" people will give up after being hit anywhere, but that is a psychological stop. Police are not psychic to know what will stop guy number one, will stop guy number two. Handguns are not death rays either like in the movies. There are many cases, where even after being hit 10+ times, with many of those in vital organs, the person still continued to fight.

The only reliable way to "stop" someone is a hit to the head (that has failed in some cases) or enough hits in vital organs to cause enough blood loss where the person losses consciousness. Unfortunately, many times this is often fatal. That is just the real world and how it works.

a reply to: bbarkow


What "extended standoff"?? Sounds like it all happened pretty quick to me. I'm glad the policeman who shot her was a good aim. I hate it when children are murdered..by anybody. I hope the little guy has a dad to raise him.

a reply to: Iamthatbish

Actually, in the state of Maryland it is possible to be arrested solely for resisting arrest. So, this means nothing.

i'm gonna call bs, and demand that you show me the statue.
now if you disobey a lawful order i can see that, but you can't resist arrest if you are not in a interaction with the police.

originally posted by: Iamthatbish
a reply to: paperdoll
I have lived in both good and bad neighborhoods in my life thank you very much. I also know that as long as you choose who you wish to value and respect you don't need to know any more about me.

Like I said in my post, I asked if you live in a nice neighborhood to gauge your experience with types of people. Not to determine whether I value you.. Anyway..

That attitude is part of the problem, and you may want to reread what you typed to see if that's how you really feel. Either way, I'm done with you.

That's a disappointing response. But to address it, I reread my post quite a few times as I don't like typos. Done with me? OK... It would've been nice if you would've answered my question about how this type of situation is supposed to be handled. I mean, you can bash the cop who did this but can't say what other course of action should happen other than "send in experts". I just think you should be able to elaborate on that.

a reply to: anton74

We both know we can only guess what she was thinking. I don't really understand how this escalated. Why was she so afraid of traffic violations that payment arrangements or 30 days would have resolved?

I can honestly say that I'm upset with the way both parties behaved. However, I am resolved with the conclusion that the ultimate fault is with the leo because they are the ones being paid to protect and serve.

Protect and serve all the jerks, crazies, and people that don't appreiciate the work they do. If they don't like it they need to quit. They certainly need to stop whining about the very public they knew was crazy jerks before they took the psycheck.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

I've been arrested for resisting arrest and if you have the time you can check my post history. I've laughed about it before.

Eta : I felt the need to elaborate.

The arresting officers charge a person with anything they think is close and its up to the defendant to prove innocence. That's the legal system. There is no justice system. The hated big corporations play the legal game. We need to catch up.

Yup, it sounds like she wrote her own script for the ending of this encounter...at this point, without a whole lot more information known, it sounds like a clean shoot, especially after negotiators tried to talk her down so that they could arrest her.

Plus, the fact that she was just sitting on the floor with a shotgun and her son while apparently making videos where it seems that she was brainwashing her son into thinking that the whole reason the police were there was to try and kill them is really sad and disheartening. This is where this false narrative originates--parents or people of authority train children to believe that LEOs are only out to kill them. It's really terrible, and it is the actual pendulum that keeps this perpetual BS going from generation to generation.

I hope that this boy considers the (apparent) facts as to how his mom acted in deciding later in life if it really is the police who are the bad guys in the world. Maybe a mother who is willing to keep her son in a deadly situation might--just maybe--be the bad variable this time around. Hopefully when he looks at the scar from the bullet (or shot) wound for the rest of his life, he remembers that his mother was (apparently) willing to make him a martyr for her (apparent) hatred of police officers.

OK.. I'm watching a Fox News segment on this story now. They didn't have to kill her! Dammit!!

a reply to: Iamthatbish

were you involved in a interaction with the police? did they give you a lawful order and you not comply?
or did they come up and say your under arrest for resisting arrest, with no provocation, ie just picked you out of the crowd?

a reply to: SlapMonkey

You are confused.

If the police were so justified why didn't they want it documented? To eliminate any narrative but their own means preclude a them from having to argue facts. They just lie to those that want to beLIEve them.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
i'm gonna call bs, and demand that you show me the statue.
now if you disobey a lawful order i can see that, but you can't resist arrest if you are not in a interaction with the police.

§ 9-408. Resisting or interfering with arrest.

That literally took me 5 seconds to search and find on Google.

§ 9-408. Resisting or interfering with arrest.

(a) "Police officer" defined.- In this section, "police officer" means an individual who is authorized to make an arrest under Title 2 of the Criminal Procedure Article.

(b) Prohibited.- A person may not intentionally:

(1) resist a lawful arrest; or

(2) interfere with an individual who the person has reason to know is a police officer who is making or attempting to make a lawful arrest or detention of another person.

(c) Penalty.- A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and is subject to imprisonment not exceeding 3 years or a fine not exceeding $5,000 or both.

(d) Unit of prosecution.- The unit of prosecution for a violation of this section is based on the arrest or detention regardless of the number of police officers involved in the arrest or detention.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: bbarkow


I hope the little guy has a dad to raise him.

Not me. I hope he gets taken farrr away from anyone that chose to be around someone who is ignorant enough to threaten police with a weapon while holding a child. I'm guessing he's surrounded by a lovely group of people... not.
I hope the kids get adopted by people who love them and are able to share with them the wonderful gift of intelligence. Apparently it's hard to get through life without it. I too, am glad the kid didn't die during this. Obviously the cop cared more about the boy than his own mother did.

originally posted by: Iamthatbish
a reply to: RobotBomb

Are you aware that the police have the arrest record available to them before they go to serve warrants? Wouldn't it be a wonderful world if the people interacting with the public were properly trained for the public in all of our differences?

No. Not only is there no justification for loss of life there's reason to believe they should have known better and taken steps to prevent it.

How about this, don't point a shotgun at the police while holding your kid..

Nah I know it's never the criminals fault.

We should just stop arresting black people.

Problem solved.

a reply to: SlapMonkey


(1) resist a lawful arrest; or
this involves resisting the arrest of the original infraction, ie your under arrest for DUI. and you resist.

(2) interfere with an individual who the person has reason to know is a police officer who is making or attempting to make a lawful arrest or detention of another person.

this means your trying to stop the police from arresting someone else.

in both the person is involved in a interaction with the police, not just standing on the corner watching something.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Without being too specific, I was witnessing an altercation ( verbal disagreement) involving a family member and every time I spoke up to say a person was lying I was told not to speak. The police weren't even called, they were walking around a mall we were in. We were speaking to mgt, and what do you know police just butted in.

The police arresting me ending up proving my family member was telling the truth because after I was almost thrown off a second floor half glass wall by the police, while I was pregnant the person admitted they were lying because they were afraid the police would do the same to them..

Anne Arundle Mills. I mean it when I say I've been thrown out of better places! And I have no regrets.

a reply to: Iamthatbish

Yes...I am confused. You figured me out.

The police are justified for multiple reasons, two of the main ones being (a) the lady had a weapon pointing at them and was not complying with demands, and (b) threatened to kill them.

Now, like I said, I'm basing my comment on the one-sided, limited info that we have from the story in the OP. If more information comes out to dispute what is noted in The Guardian, my opinion may change accordingly.

But I'm not confused at all--if it's one thing that I understand relatively well (because it was [and still is, to a limited amount] my career) is how to interpret the law.

I am concerned, however, with their apparent lack of caution since there was a child in the line of fire. It's disappointing that the child was injured, but I'm happy that it seems to be non-life-threatening.