Your little cut and paste article answers your own question within the first sentence:
"A seminal 1985 Supreme Court case, *Tennessee vs. Garner*, held that the police may not shoot at a fleeing person unless* the officer reasonably believes that the individual poses a significant physical danger to the officer"* (Emphasis Added) On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 12:11 PM, plainolamerican <[email protected] > wrote: > there's seldom an excuse for shooting an unarmed suspect in the back. > > A seminal 1985 Supreme Court case, Tennessee vs. Garner, held that the > police may not shoot at a fleeing person unless the officer reasonably > believes that the individual poses a significant physical danger to the > officer or others in the community. That means officers are expected to > take other, less-deadly action during a foot or car pursuit unless the > person being chased is seen as an immediate safety risk. > > In other words, a police officer who fires at a fleeing man who a moment > earlier murdered a convenience store clerk may have reasonable grounds to > argue that the shooting was justified. But if that same robber never fired > his own weapon, the officer would likely have a much harder argument. > > “You don’t shoot fleeing felons. You apprehend them unless there are > exigent circumstances — emergencies — that require urgent police action to > safeguard the community as a whole,” said Greg Gilbertson, a police > practices expert and criminal justice professor at Centralia College in > Washington state. > > Gilbertson said he thought the video of the shooting of Walter Scott in > North Charleston, South Carolina, was “insane” given what he said was the > apparent lack of justification. > > Though the legal standard has been established, courts continue to hear > cases involving use of force against fleeing felons under a variety of > circumstances. Just last year, the Supreme Court sided with police officers > who were sued over a high-speed, two-state chase in Arkansas that ended > with the deaths of the fleeing driver and his passenger. > > *In cases where police officers are not supposed to use deadly force > against a fleeing person, what should they do?* > > Each case involving a suspect who flees the police, whether in a car or on > foot, poses a balancing test for an officer, said Chuck Drago, a police > practices expert and former Oviedo, Florida, police chief. > > “Am I creating more of a danger by chasing this person than if I let this > person stay at large?” Drago said. “Especially in a vehicle pursuit, is it > worth risking everyone on the road to catch this guy?” > > In a pursuit on foot, the more reasonable option might be to call for > backup, including perhaps with a police dog, so that other officers can set > up a perimeter and trap the suspect, Drago said. > > In the South Carolina case, the former lawyer for the North Charleston > officer, Michael Slager, said Monday that Slager felt threatened and had > fired because Scott was trying to grab his stun gun — an older model that > would have had to have been manually reloaded. But if the stun gun was on > the ground at the time Scott fled, Drago said, then “there is no longer a > threat. The threat is gone.” > > There’s also no indication on the video that after the physical encounter > between the men, where the officer has said he believed Scott had tried to > get ahold of his stun gun, that he shouts any instructions. > > On Tuesday, July 12, 2016 at 10:57:12 AM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote: >> >> Maybe not if the guy just jacked you up with 50,000 watts and is now >> running away with the guide wires still attached to your chest..... >> >> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:52 AM, plainolamerican <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Have you heard >>> --- >>> that shooting an unarmed man in the back is the act of a coward? >>> >>> On Monday, July 11, 2016 at 4:07:38 PM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote: >>>> >>>> Obviously, the initial media reports are incorrect. Scott somehow >>>> wrested control of the taser from Slager during the altercation and shot >>>> Slager: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This becomes obvious with the enhanced video, and I will make it easy >>>> for you: >>>> >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5em7GcDTg8U >>>> >>>> The taser guide wire is clearly visable from Slager's chest; as Scott >>>> runs after shooting Slager. (If you can, try to watch this on a full >>>> screen PC/laptop. It may be difficult to see if you are viewing from a >>>> cell phone. >>>> >>>> Other questions that you should ask yourself Plain Ol': >>>> >>>> Have you seen Officer Slager’s report? >>>> >>>> Have you heard the radio calls made by Officer Slager? >>>> >>>> Have you heard the radio traffic from the responding officers who were >>>> trying to aid an officer in a fight with a suspect? >>>> >>>> Have you heard from the passenger that was riding with Scott? >>>> >>>> Have you heard from the mysterious “car selling” neighbor (that Scott >>>> initially told Slager regarding the purchase of the vehicle) ? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 4:24 PM, plainolamerican <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> ok ... not exactly. >>>>> >>>>> According to the incident report and city officials, Slager then >>>>> fired his Taser, hitting Scott.[20] >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott#cite_note-WaPo.Charged-21> >>>>> Scott >>>>> fled, and Slager drew his handgun, firing eight rounds at him from behind. >>>>> [7] >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott#cite_note-NYTimes.Charged-8> >>>>> The >>>>> coroner's report stated that Scott was struck a total of five times: three >>>>> times in the back, once in the upper buttocks, and once on one of his >>>>> ears. >>>>> [21] >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott#cite_note-NYTimes.Federal-22> >>>>> Official >>>>> autopsy reports have not been released.[7] >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott#cite_note-NYTimes.Charged-8> >>>>> >>>>> Immediately following the shooting, Slager radioed a dispatcher, >>>>> stating, "Shots fired and the subject is down. He took my Taser."[20] >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott#cite_note-WaPo.Charged-21> >>>>> >>>>> When Slager fired his gun, Scott was approximately 15 to 20 feet (5 to >>>>> 6 m) away and fleeing.[7] >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott#cite_note-NYTimes.Charged-8> >>>>> In >>>>> the report of the shooting filed before the video surfaced, Slager said he >>>>> had feared for his life because Scott had taken his Taser,[7] >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott#cite_note-NYTimes.Charged-8> >>>>> and >>>>> that he shot Scott because he "felt threatened".[22] >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott#cite_note-23> >>>>> >>>>> On Monday, July 11, 2016 at 3:01:40 PM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Well not exactly. It seems that Walter Scott shot Slager with a >>>>>> taser; twice; and then ran with him still holding the taser/cartridge >>>>>> with >>>>>> the taser guide-wires still in Slager's chest. This was after the two >>>>>> had >>>>>> been in a scuffle, where Scott was clearly on top of Slager; apparently >>>>>> winning. >>>>>> >>>>>> Not nearly as clean and neat as it was sold to the public. >>>>>> >>>>>> (Watch the videos in the links provided Plain Ol') >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 3:21 PM, plainolamerican < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Michael Slager stopped Walter Scott >>>>>>> <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/09/us/former-south-carolina-officer-is-indicted-in-death-of-walter-scott.html?_r=1> >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> a busted taillight and then fatally shot him >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> he shot the unarmed man 8 times in the back. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Monday, July 11, 2016 at 8:48:16 AM UTC-5, MJ wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [ALL people ... actually] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> September/October 2015 issue >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Police Shootings Won't Stop Unless We Also Stop Shaking Down Black >>>>>>>> People * >>>>>>>> *The dangers of turning police officers into revenue generators. *Jack >>>>>>>> Hitt >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In April, several days after North Charleston, South Carolina, >>>>>>>> police officer Michael Slager stopped Walter Scott >>>>>>>> <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/09/us/former-south-carolina-officer-is-indicted-in-death-of-walter-scott.html?_r=1> >>>>>>>> for a busted taillight and then fatally shot him, the usual cable-news >>>>>>>> transmogrification of victim into superpredator ran into problems. The >>>>>>>> dash >>>>>>>> cam >>>>>>>> <http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/04/09/tsr-dash-cam-walter-scott-police-shooting.cnn> >>>>>>>> showed Scott being pulled over while traveling at a nerdy rate of >>>>>>>> speed, >>>>>>>> using his left turn signal to pull into a parking lot and having an >>>>>>>> amiable >>>>>>>> conversation with Slager until he realized he'd probably get popped for >>>>>>>> nonpayment of child support. At which point he bolted out of the car >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>> hobbled off. Slager then shot him. Why didn't the cop just jog up and >>>>>>>> grab >>>>>>>> him? Calling what the obese 50-year-old Scott was doing "running" >>>>>>>> really >>>>>>>> stretches the bounds of literary license. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But maybe the question to ask is: Why did Scott run? The answer >>>>>>>> came when the *New York Times* revealed >>>>>>>> <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/20/us/skip-child-support-go-to-jail-lose-job-repeat.html> >>>>>>>> Scott to be a man of modest means trapped in an exhausting hamster >>>>>>>> wheel: >>>>>>>> He would get a low-paying job, make some child support payments, fall >>>>>>>> behind on them, get fined, miss a payment, get jailed for a few weeks, >>>>>>>> lose >>>>>>>> that job due to absence, and then start over at a lower-paying job. >>>>>>>> From >>>>>>>> all apparent evidence, he was a decent schlub trying to make things >>>>>>>> work in >>>>>>>> a system engineered to make his life miserable and recast his best >>>>>>>> efforts >>>>>>>> as criminal behavior. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Recently, two more deaths of African Americans that have blown up >>>>>>>> in the media follow a pattern similar to Scott's. Sandra Bland >>>>>>>> <http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/texas-waller-county-sandra-bland-racial-tensions> >>>>>>>> in Texas and Samuel DuBose >>>>>>>> <http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/video-shows-police-shooting-samuel-dubose> >>>>>>>> in Cincinnati were each stopped for minor traffic infractions (failing >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> use turn signal, missing front license plate), followed by immediate >>>>>>>> escalation by the officer into rage, and then an official story that is >>>>>>>> obviously contradicted >>>>>>>> <http://gawker.com/video-of-sam-duboses-death-drastically-different-from-t-1720896658> >>>>>>>> by the video (that the officer tried to "de-escalate" the tension with >>>>>>>> Bland; that the officer was dragged by DuBose's car). In both cases, >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> perpetrator of a minor traffic offense died. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> When incidents of police violence come to light, the usual defense >>>>>>>> is that we should not tarnish all the good cops just because of "a few >>>>>>>> bad >>>>>>>> apples." No one can argue with that. But what is usually implied in >>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>> phrase is that the "bad" officers' intentions are malevolentthat they >>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>> morally corrupt and racist. And that may be true, but they are also >>>>>>>> bad in >>>>>>>> the job-performance sense. These men are crummy cops, sometimes >>>>>>>> profoundly >>>>>>>> so. Slager had a record for gratuitously using his Taser. Timothy >>>>>>>> Leohmann, >>>>>>>> who leapt from his car and instantly killed 12-year-old Tamir Rice >>>>>>>> <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cleveland-officer-shot-tamir-rice-within-seconds-of-pulling-up-in-patrol-car/>, >>>>>>>> had been deemed "weepy" and unable to "emotionally function" by a >>>>>>>> supervisor at his previous PD job, who added: "I do not believe time, >>>>>>>> nor >>>>>>>> training, will be able to change or correct these deficiencies." >>>>>>>> Ferguson's >>>>>>>> Darren Wilson was also fired >>>>>>>> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/darren-wilsons-first-job-was-on-a-troubled-police-force-disbanded-by-authorities/2014/08/23/1ac796f0-2a45-11e4-8593-da634b334390_story.html> >>>>>>>> from his previous jobactually, the entire police force of Jennings, >>>>>>>> Missouri, was disbanded for being awful. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> When you ask why such "bad" cops are nevertheless armed and allowed >>>>>>>> to patrol the streets, one begins to see that lurking beneath this >>>>>>>> violence >>>>>>>> is a fiscal menace: police departments forced to assist city officials >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>> raising revenue, in many cases funding their own salariesredirecting >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> very concept of keeping the peace into underwriting the budget. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We saw a glimpse of this when the Justice Department released its >>>>>>>> report >>>>>>>> <http://www.motherjones.com/documents/2191006-doj-ferguson-report> >>>>>>>> on Ferguson in March. In his statement, then-Attorney General Eric >>>>>>>> Holder >>>>>>>> referenced a lady in town whose life sounded Walter Scott-like. She had >>>>>>>> received two parking tickets totaling $151. Her efforts to pay those >>>>>>>> fines >>>>>>>> fell so behind that she eventually paid out more than $500. At one >>>>>>>> point, >>>>>>>> she was jailed for nonpayment andeight years laterstill owes $541 in >>>>>>>> accrued fees. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The judge largely responsible for the extraction of these fees from >>>>>>>> Ferguson's poor, Ronald J. Brockmeyer >>>>>>>> <http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/06/ferguson-judge-owes-unpaid-taxes-ronald-brockmeyer>, >>>>>>>> owed $172,646 in back taxes, a sum orders of magnitude greater than any >>>>>>>> late fine coming before his bench. Even as he was jailing black ladies >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> parking tickets, Brockmeyer was allegedly erasing citations for white >>>>>>>> Ferguson residents who happened to be his friends. After the report's >>>>>>>> publication, he resigned so that Ferguson could "begin its healing >>>>>>>> process." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But consider: In 2010, this collaboration between the Ferguson >>>>>>>> police and the courts generated $1.4 million in income for the city. >>>>>>>> This >>>>>>>> year, they will more than double that amount$3.1 millionproviding >>>>>>>> nearly >>>>>>>> a quarter of the city's $13 million budget, almost all of it extracted >>>>>>>> from >>>>>>>> its poorest African American citizens. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Evidence also suggests that this new form of raising >>>>>>>> revenuepoliciteering?goes far beyond Ferguson. Remember the recent >>>>>>>> Oklahoma case involving Robert Bates >>>>>>>> <http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/volunteer-tulsa-deputy-robert-bates-sold-company-went-back-to/article_7f23ccc3-4bcb-52a4-826d-c06103a42786.html>, >>>>>>>> a 73-year-old millionaire insurance broker with scant law enforcement >>>>>>>> background who was allowed to go out on patrollikely because he had >>>>>>>> donated lots of money and equipment to the local sheriff's office? He >>>>>>>> killed an unarmed black suspect when he grabbed his gun instead of his >>>>>>>> Taser. In the days that followed, we learned that other deputies had >>>>>>>> long >>>>>>>> resented this guy's freelance incompetence. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Essentially, these small towns in urban areas have municipal >>>>>>>> infrastructure that can't be supported by the tax base, and so they >>>>>>>> ticket >>>>>>>> everything in sight to keep the town functioning," said William >>>>>>>> Maurer, a >>>>>>>> lawyer with the Institute for Justice who has been studying the sudden >>>>>>>> rise >>>>>>>> in "nontraffic-related fines." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Take the St. Louis suburb of Pagedale, where, among other Norman >>>>>>>> Rockwell-worthy features deemed illegal, "you can't have a hedge more >>>>>>>> than >>>>>>>> three feet high," Maurer says. "You can't have a basketball hoop or a >>>>>>>> wading pool in front of a house. You can't have a dish antenna on the >>>>>>>> front >>>>>>>> of your house. You can't walk on the roadway if there is a sidewalk, >>>>>>>> and if >>>>>>>> there is not a sidewalk, they must walk on the left side of the >>>>>>>> roadway. >>>>>>>> They must walk on the right of the crosswalk. They can't conduct a >>>>>>>> barbecue >>>>>>>> in the front yard and can't have an alcoholic beverage within 150 feet >>>>>>>> of a >>>>>>>> barbecue. Kids cannot play in the street. They also have restrictions >>>>>>>> against pants being worn below the waist in public. Cars must be >>>>>>>> within 500 >>>>>>>> feet of a lamp or a source of illumination during nighttime hours. >>>>>>>> Blinds >>>>>>>> must be neatly hung in respectable appearance, properly maintained, >>>>>>>> and in >>>>>>>> a state of good repair." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Where did this Kafkaesque laundry list come from? Maurer explains >>>>>>>> that in 2010, Missouri passed a law that capped the amount of city >>>>>>>> revenue >>>>>>>> that any agency could generate from traffic stops. The intent was to >>>>>>>> limit >>>>>>>> small-town speed traps, but the unintentional consequences are now >>>>>>>> clear: >>>>>>>> Pagedale saw a 495 percent increase in nontraffic-related arrests. "In >>>>>>>> Frontenac, the increase was 364 percent," Maurer says. "In Lakeshire, >>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>> was 209 percent." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This racket now has many variants. South Carolina hosts " >>>>>>>> Operation Rolling Thunder >>>>>>>> <http://ij.org/south-carolina-police-seized-nearly-100-000-in-crackdown-but-stopped-few-criminals>," >>>>>>>> an annual dragnet in which 21 different law enforcement agencies swarm >>>>>>>> stretches of I-85 and I-26 in the name of catching drug dealers. In >>>>>>>> 2013, >>>>>>>> this law enforcement Bonnaroo netted 1,300 traffic citations and 300 >>>>>>>> speeding tickets. But after everyone had paid up, the operation boasted >>>>>>>> exactly one felony conviction. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A different strategy in San Diego simply tacks on various fees to >>>>>>>> an existing fine. A 2012 *Union Tribune* investigation >>>>>>>> <http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&biw&bih&q=cache:gLaPZ1TIbc0J:http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2012/aug/18/courts-how-your-35-speeding-ticket-becomes-a-235/%2BCourt+officials+say+that+San+Diego+County+law+enforcement+agencies+have+recently+been+issuing+fewer+tickets+than+in+the+past&gbv=2&&ct=clnk> >>>>>>>> revealed that while speeding is a simple $35 fine, other government >>>>>>>> agencies can tack on as many as 10 other surcharges, including: a state >>>>>>>> penalty assessment, $40; county penalty assessment, $36; court >>>>>>>> construction, $20; state surcharge, $8; DNA identification, $16; >>>>>>>> criminal >>>>>>>> conviction fee, $35; court operations, $40; emergency medical air >>>>>>>> transportation penalty, $4; and night court, $1. When it's all said and >>>>>>>> done, that $35 ticket comes to $235. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Another report >>>>>>>> <http://cdn.sandiegouniontrib.com/news/documents/2015/02/25/SDPD_traffic_stops_report.pdf> >>>>>>>> released earlier this year connects the dots: African Americans and >>>>>>>> Latinos >>>>>>>> make up less than a third of San Diego's population but represent 64.5 >>>>>>>> percent of those searched during a traffic stop. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is still no comprehensive study to determine just how many >>>>>>>> cities pay their bills by indenturing the poor, but it is probably no >>>>>>>> coincidence that when you examine the recent rash of police killings, >>>>>>>> you >>>>>>>> find that the offenses they were initially stopped for were >>>>>>>> preposterously >>>>>>>> minor. Bland's lane change signal, DuBose's missing plate. Walter >>>>>>>> Scott had >>>>>>>> that busted taillightwhich, we all later learned, is not even a crime >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>> South Carolina. Eric Garner was selling loose cigarettes. When Darren >>>>>>>> Wilson was called to look into a robbery >>>>>>>> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/08/15/ferguson-police-releasing-name-of-officer-who-shot-michael-brown/>, >>>>>>>> the reason he initially stopped Michael Brown was for walking in the >>>>>>>> streetin Ferguson, an illegal act according to Section 44-344 >>>>>>>> <https://www.municode.com/library/mo/ferguson/codes/code_of_ordinances?searchRequest=%7B%22searchText%22:%22manner%20of%20walking%20in%20roadway%22,%22pageNum%22:1,%22resultsPerPage%22:25,%22booleanSearch%22:false,%22stemming%22:true,%22fuzzy%22:false,%22synonym%22:false,%22contentTypes%22:%5B%22CODES%22%5D,%22productIds%22:%5B%5D%7D&nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH44TRMOVE_ARTVIIPE_S44-344MAWAALRO> >>>>>>>> of the local code. Between 2011 and 2013, 95 percent of the >>>>>>>> perpetrators of >>>>>>>> this atrocity were African American, meaning that "walking while >>>>>>>> black" is >>>>>>>> not a punch line. It is a crime. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And not just a crime, but a crime that comes with fines that are >>>>>>>> strictly enforced. In 2014, Ferguson's bottom-line-driven police force >>>>>>>> issued 16,000 arrest warrants to three-fourths of the town's total >>>>>>>> population of 21,000. Stop and think about that for a moment: In >>>>>>>> Ferguson, >>>>>>>> 75 percent of all residents had active outstanding arrest warrants. >>>>>>>> Most of >>>>>>>> the entire city was a virtual plantation of indentured revenue >>>>>>>> producers. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Back in Pagedale, *St. Louis Post-Dispatch* reporter Jennifer Mann >>>>>>>> recently calculated >>>>>>>> <http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/municipalities-ticket-for-trees-and-toys-as-traffic-revenue-declines/article_42739be7-afd1-5f66-b325-e1f654ba9625.html> >>>>>>>> a 500 percent increase in petty fines over the last five years. >>>>>>>> "Pagedale >>>>>>>> handed out 2,255 citations for these types of offenses last year," Mann >>>>>>>> wrote, "or nearly two per household." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Once the system is primed for maximizing revenuestarting with >>>>>>>> fines and fine enforcement," Holder said apropos Ferguson, "the city >>>>>>>> relies >>>>>>>> on the police force to serve, essentially, as a collection agency for >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> municipal court rather than a law enforcement entity." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In Alabama, a circuit court judge, Hub Harrington, wrote a >>>>>>>> blistering opinion >>>>>>>> <http://www.motherjones.com/documents/2191007-court-order-in-dana-burdette-v-town-of> >>>>>>>> three years ago asserting that the Shelby County Jail had become a >>>>>>>> kind of >>>>>>>> "debtors' prison" and that the court system had devolved into a >>>>>>>> "judicially >>>>>>>> sanctioned extortion racket." This pattern leads to a cruel paradox: >>>>>>>> One >>>>>>>> arm of the state is paying a large sum to lock up a person who can't >>>>>>>> pay a >>>>>>>> small sum owed to a different arm of the state. The result? Bigger >>>>>>>> state >>>>>>>> deficits. As the director of the Brennan Center's Justice Program put >>>>>>>> it, >>>>>>>> "Having taxpayers foot a bill of $4,000 to incarcerate a man who owes >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> state $745 or a woman who owes a predatory lender $425 and removing >>>>>>>> them >>>>>>>> from the job force makes sense in no reasonable world." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> When the poor come to understand that they are likely to be >>>>>>>> detained and fined for comically absurd crimes, it can't be a surprise >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> the police that their officers are viewed with increasing distrust. In >>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>> environment, running away from a cop is not an act of suspicion; it's >>>>>>>> common sense. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cops like to talk about "good police." They say, "That guy is good >>>>>>>> police"a top compliment, by which they mean cool under the pressure >>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>> street and cunning at getting people to give up the details of a crime. >>>>>>>> Good police look bad when sharing the street with crummy police. But >>>>>>>> when >>>>>>>> budgetary whims replace peacekeeping as the central motivation of law >>>>>>>> enforcement, who is more likely to write up more tickets, the good cop >>>>>>>> or >>>>>>>> the crummy one? When the mission of the entire department shifts from >>>>>>>> "protect and serve" to "punish and profit," then just what constitutes >>>>>>>> good >>>>>>>> police? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/police-shootings-traffic-stops-excessive-fines >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>>>>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >>>>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>>>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>> -- >>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>>>> >>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>> -- >>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>> >>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>> >>> --- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
