Why in our news cycle do we need to rage before there is any significant information about a story, then wait for the information, then either rage some more… or possibly never hear anything again. I absolutely get it. You call the cops, you get shot, that is highly unexpected- to say the least. Maybe.
Perhaps the officer had her dead-to-rights and decided to pull the trigger. Perhaps she jumped out from behind a corner saying, “OH THANK GO…!”. Perhaps she thought the cop was the intruder and came after him with a bat, etc., etc., etc. The point is WE DON’T KNOW anything from this article.
Yet, we are all supposed to sit in the edge of our seats waiting for such information. I HATE it.
This article has no information other than,“Something really unexpected happened, more at 11!”
So, why aren’t we allowed to wait until there is actual information before we pick up news? Or before we post it to lemmy to upvote, invent narratives, and rage away while we wait for important details?
She was shot in the head. There is a fair chance it was through a window because cops don’t aim for the head unless it is the only thing visible.
While there is still a lot of info to come out, there is also a fair chance the cop didn’t know who he was shooting at and murdered the victim by mistake … because cops are trained to shoot first and ask forgiveness later.
That she was shot in the head is in the article btw.
Perhaps the officer had her dead-to-rights and decided to pull the trigger. Perhaps she jumped out from behind a corner saying, “OH THANK GO…!”. Perhaps she thought the cop was the intruder and came after him with a bat, etc., etc., etc
None of these scenarios should end with a bullet in her head, are you crazy?
The first two no. Which is exactly why I added them. Are you crazy? The last, who knows. Very likely not. But have you ever been hit in the head with a bat, or do you just like to sit on the couch and pretend what you would do if you were?
In any event, actual news about this event has since been reported. You can stop pretending you knew what happened and rage at what did happen.
So many of these stories are months or even years after the fact because unless the media gets on it, the incident gets buried immediately, and by the time the media gets ahold of it any investigation is challenging because it’s either so long after the fact or police “lost” evidence.
It being reported immediately starts the accountability and makes it much more likely that there will be an investigation in the first place. Either you are too young to remember or just weren’t noticing, but reports of police killing unarmed minorities was exceptionally rare a few decades ago. Cops got away with anything and everything. That’s where Black Lives Matter came from, getting the mainstream media (and the justice department) to care when a black person gets killed.
you would see I would like to wait until there is actual information about the shooting
They never release information.
They keep shooting people.
You keep calling everyone else a ‘stupid mother fucker’ while their family cries.
Your life adds up to being someone who defended systems of human authorities over human lives.
This is not something anyone misses.
You didn’t say ‘world’ or ‘power’ or ‘restrict’ or ‘consequences’ or ‘actions’ either, yet I used those words.
I was making a statement about why I don’t agree with you. If you want people who reply to you to only use vocabulary that you have, please state so in your comment.
My point was this: if we cannot judge without ‘enough’ information, we rely on those who control information to allow the possibility of judgement. They can simply restrict information, and you would say ‘well, we can’t judge’.
The army could start killing poor people in major cities, and official channels could present no information. Word-of-mouth could be present as scurrilous. Social media about the situation could be dissuaded (through murder of those observing) and account posting it banned.
“Of course,” you would say, “we don’t have the information to hand. Maybe nobody at all has died?”
This is not acceptable. I do not accept it. I do not accept the consequences of your statement. I repudiate your statement. I disagree with you. The act of the police killing the person who called them is very rarely going to be acceptable, and I do not need the police to explain their reasoning (which they may never do with any semblance of evidence) before I am upset about it.
Being autistic, you might find it hard to police my emotions, in a very general sense. Feel free to try!
I have been blocking so many people lately. I probably have more blocks (individuals and communities) than posts I’ve read. It’s one thing to disagree, that doesn’t get a block, but to just have zero empathy and then double down on your stupidity, that gets a block.
I’m about done with Lemmy, myself. Everyone’s opinions here are dialed up to 11, and if you try to inject any calls to reason or to dialing down rhetoric, you’re downvoted to oblivion.
I came here expecting Reddit and got 4chan instead. I’m out.
Well you highlighted there is a chance police dindu nuffin since people who control info didnt release it. These people also release such info when pig is in the clear, delay generally means they are working up a cover up based on prior precedent.
You trust these clowns yourself, clearly gen pop over “trust me bro”
Because everyone of you jumped on this article exactly as I explained. With rage. If you knew anything about psychology, you would know that is an entirely expected outcome to hearing what you don’t want to in that moment.
Frankly, I don’t give a shit, but I knew the same people who would jump to conclusions about what harkened in that house before any actual facts have been reported, would do EXACTLY the same with my post.
I don’t care if this woman pulled a Eustace and went “Ooga Booga Booga,” mask and all. A officer’s default reaction should not be “shoot in the head.” And they’re not releasing the footage, which they would happily do of they believed it was in their favor.
Even if she came out with a bat/knife, they didn’t try to hit anything else? Leg, arm, shoulder, nothing? Neither officer had injuries, so who was shooting at them? Clearly it wasn’t this woman, but the article says they reported shots fired. Did they even get the intruder? I’m not going to say that every case is the same, but I’ve seen plenty of standoff videos where cops plead with people to drop the weapon, give multiple warnings, etc., and STILL don’t shoot to kill.
There have been many, many cases of officers shooting first and asking questions later. And they usually just get a paid vacation. We will continue to rage until they understand that this is not okay, and that being an officer doesn’t give you carte blanche to shoot people when you get startled. If you can’t handle that, you shouldn’t be a officer
Signed,
Someone who shouldn’t be an officer because I also startle easy
Even if she came out with a bat/knife, they didn’t try to hit anything else? Leg, arm, shoulder, nothing?
Aiming for center of mass is a pretty universal bit of firearm training. Doesn’t excuse their reaction, but it is what you should be doing if you’re gonna fire on someone. Going for legs or arms or a headshot means you’re more likely to miss.
Even civilian concealed carry training has some hands-on courses to teach why it is trained this way. You’re also taught, “only draw your weapon if you have intent to kill,” which is sobering in and of itself.
This leads to the bigger question: why does US cop training paint every scenario as “time to pull out the hammer, I see a nail!”? That’s fundamentally wrong at its very core. “Oh, shit, an acorn! blam! blam! blam!”
It seems the very antithesis of the US legal tenet “innocent until proven guilty” as one can’t be innocent nor proven guilty if they’re already dead.
Yeah, the issue isn’t that the cops didn’t shoot an arm or a leg, but that they shot at all. There’s the whole “Be sure of your target and what’s behind it” that they didn’t seem to learn.
Aiming for center of mass is a pretty universal bit of firearm training. Doesn’t excuse their reaction, but it is what you should be doing if you’re gonna fire on someone. Going for legs or arms or a headshot means you’re more likely to miss.
Since Sonya Massey was shot in the head, that implies three things:
There was an exchange of gun fire and Sonya was caught in the crossfire.
The police showed up and started shooting randomly, killing Sonya.
Well, because you’re going to hear about it one way or another, and the people making these decisions (about releasing information) have no right answer. Somehow, the information will get out; if the pigs say nothing, they’ll be accused of covering it up. So they try to get in front of the news and control what they can.
I don’t know why we’re this way, why the news organizations compete to be first to report on something, even with almost no information.
However: unless it turns out that the cops showed up and she started blasting at them, there’s no justification for you to be murdered just because you called for help. Whether or not you jump-scared a cop; whether or not you have dementia and a kitchen knife, or a baseball bat. Heck even if she had a gun. Pigs have training, backup, bullet-proof vests; these victims have fear, adrenalin, often mental health issues, and an expectation that the people they call for help aren’t going to show up and murder them.
I don’t know why we’re this way, why the news organizations compete to be first to report on something, even with almost no information.
I mean, I’m mostly okay with them posting to let the community know they are digging into it. To let other outlets know. This is all on the up and up. I think what I get pissed at is how people (just look around these posts) take that very limited information and invent their own narrative. That becomes their reality no matter what future reporting shows. It’s sickening how fickle and susceptible people are to nudging towards a belief, and an entire belief system, based on very little actual facts.
Are there shit bag cops out there? YES. Are there systemic issues with the way we police? YES.
But, FUCK. Let’s at least wait until there are actual facts about a story to pull out pitch forks. Buncha fucking rage junkies.
Why in our news cycle do we need to rage before there is any significant information about a story, then wait for the information, then either rage some more… or possibly never hear anything again. I absolutely get it. You call the cops, you get shot, that is highly unexpected- to say the least. Maybe.
Perhaps the officer had her dead-to-rights and decided to pull the trigger. Perhaps she jumped out from behind a corner saying, “OH THANK GO…!”. Perhaps she thought the cop was the intruder and came after him with a bat, etc., etc., etc. The point is WE DON’T KNOW anything from this article.
Yet, we are all supposed to sit in the edge of our seats waiting for such information. I HATE it.
This article has no information other than,“Something really unexpected happened, more at 11!”
So, why aren’t we allowed to wait until there is actual information before we pick up news? Or before we post it to lemmy to upvote, invent narratives, and rage away while we wait for important details?
We need to rage because far too often it’s the cops murdering people who called for help … no maybe about it.
Then let’s wait until we find out that’s what happened?
She was shot in the head. There is a fair chance it was through a window because cops don’t aim for the head unless it is the only thing visible.
While there is still a lot of info to come out, there is also a fair chance the cop didn’t know who he was shooting at and murdered the victim by mistake … because cops are trained to shoot first and ask forgiveness later.
That she was shot in the head is in the article btw.
Maybe cops shouldn’t just shoot people at first sight, just because they think it’s a suspect.
Use of deadly force should require caution.
Maybe you shouldn’t make up facts that haven’t been reported.
Pretty sure she got shot by the cops.
None of these scenarios should end with a bullet in her head, are you crazy?
The first two no. Which is exactly why I added them. Are you crazy? The last, who knows. Very likely not. But have you ever been hit in the head with a bat, or do you just like to sit on the couch and pretend what you would do if you were?
In any event, actual news about this event has since been reported. You can stop pretending you knew what happened and rage at what did happen.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
So many of these stories are months or even years after the fact because unless the media gets on it, the incident gets buried immediately, and by the time the media gets ahold of it any investigation is challenging because it’s either so long after the fact or police “lost” evidence.
It being reported immediately starts the accountability and makes it much more likely that there will be an investigation in the first place. Either you are too young to remember or just weren’t noticing, but reports of police killing unarmed minorities was exceptionally rare a few decades ago. Cops got away with anything and everything. That’s where Black Lives Matter came from, getting the mainstream media (and the justice department) to care when a black person gets killed.
As I’ve said already, I’m not opposed in the least to the immediate reporting. I’m opposed to the assumptions made based on that limited reporting.
They never release information.
They keep shooting people.
You keep calling everyone else a ‘stupid mother fucker’ while their family cries.
Your life adds up to being someone who defended systems of human authorities over human lives. This is not something anyone misses.
Lies and hyperbole are your reasoning. I’ll leave you to them.
Removed by mod
Women: Calls Cops for Help. Cops: Murder Women. You: We need to give the cops the Benefit of the Doubt!
See? You just made that up. Please tell me where in this article that is explained.
You GOT me! She wasn’t Murdered! She was just Shot In The Head with a Gun for No Reason and Died for Unrelated Reasons! Ah Shucks! You’re a Smart One!
I don’t want a world where those in power restrict all information in order to never face the consequences of their actions.
Where did I say “never”?
You didn’t say ‘world’ or ‘power’ or ‘restrict’ or ‘consequences’ or ‘actions’ either, yet I used those words.
I was making a statement about why I don’t agree with you. If you want people who reply to you to only use vocabulary that you have, please state so in your comment.
My point was this: if we cannot judge without ‘enough’ information, we rely on those who control information to allow the possibility of judgement. They can simply restrict information, and you would say ‘well, we can’t judge’.
The army could start killing poor people in major cities, and official channels could present no information. Word-of-mouth could be present as scurrilous. Social media about the situation could be dissuaded (through murder of those observing) and account posting it banned. “Of course,” you would say, “we don’t have the information to hand. Maybe nobody at all has died?”
This is not acceptable. I do not accept it. I do not accept the consequences of your statement. I repudiate your statement. I disagree with you. The act of the police killing the person who called them is very rarely going to be acceptable, and I do not need the police to explain their reasoning (which they may never do with any semblance of evidence) before I am upset about it.
Being autistic, you might find it hard to police my emotions, in a very general sense. Feel free to try!
Removed by mod
Well, yes, I do have a block button.
I have been blocking so many people lately. I probably have more blocks (individuals and communities) than posts I’ve read. It’s one thing to disagree, that doesn’t get a block, but to just have zero empathy and then double down on your stupidity, that gets a block.
Give it up, man. The lynch mob has spoken.
I’m about done with Lemmy, myself. Everyone’s opinions here are dialed up to 11, and if you try to inject any calls to reason or to dialing down rhetoric, you’re downvoted to oblivion.
I came here expecting Reddit and got 4chan instead. I’m out.
You, figuratively:
“What if she deserved to be shot in the head?”
You, literally:
“I didn’t verbatim say that! So you’re wrong! Checkmate!”
Go find some rope, holy shit.
Lol, it didn’t say ANYTHING. Which is what I actually said. No “verbatim” about it, dumbass.
Look at this guy “trusting the process”
He must be living on a different time line then the rest of us where pigs are the good guys lol
Oh- did I say I trusted the process? Please point that out, because I can’t find it.
Well you highlighted there is a chance police dindu nuffin since people who control info didnt release it. These people also release such info when pig is in the clear, delay generally means they are working up a cover up based on prior precedent.
You trust these clowns yourself, clearly gen pop over “trust me bro”
Again, making shit up. Where did I say I trusted anyone?
Clearly everyone read your post like that… You tell me why people would feel that way from what you said haha
JFC…
Because everyone of you jumped on this article exactly as I explained. With rage. If you knew anything about psychology, you would know that is an entirely expected outcome to hearing what you don’t want to in that moment.
Frankly, I don’t give a shit, but I knew the same people who would jump to conclusions about what harkened in that house before any actual facts have been reported, would do EXACTLY the same with my post.
Cool… Bye
I don’t care if this woman pulled a Eustace and went “Ooga Booga Booga,” mask and all. A officer’s default reaction should not be “shoot in the head.” And they’re not releasing the footage, which they would happily do of they believed it was in their favor.
Even if she came out with a bat/knife, they didn’t try to hit anything else? Leg, arm, shoulder, nothing? Neither officer had injuries, so who was shooting at them? Clearly it wasn’t this woman, but the article says they reported shots fired. Did they even get the intruder? I’m not going to say that every case is the same, but I’ve seen plenty of standoff videos where cops plead with people to drop the weapon, give multiple warnings, etc., and STILL don’t shoot to kill.
There have been many, many cases of officers shooting first and asking questions later. And they usually just get a paid vacation. We will continue to rage until they understand that this is not okay, and that being an officer doesn’t give you carte blanche to shoot people when you get startled. If you can’t handle that, you shouldn’t be a officer
Signed, Someone who shouldn’t be an officer because I also startle easy
Aiming for center of mass is a pretty universal bit of firearm training. Doesn’t excuse their reaction, but it is what you should be doing if you’re gonna fire on someone. Going for legs or arms or a headshot means you’re more likely to miss.
Even civilian concealed carry training has some hands-on courses to teach why it is trained this way. You’re also taught, “only draw your weapon if you have intent to kill,” which is sobering in and of itself.
This leads to the bigger question: why does US cop training paint every scenario as “time to pull out the hammer, I see a nail!”? That’s fundamentally wrong at its very core. “Oh, shit, an acorn! blam! blam! blam!”
It seems the very antithesis of the US legal tenet “innocent until proven guilty” as one can’t be innocent nor proven guilty if they’re already dead.
Yeah, the issue isn’t that the cops didn’t shoot an arm or a leg, but that they shot at all. There’s the whole “Be sure of your target and what’s behind it” that they didn’t seem to learn.
another reason I shouldn’t be a copThank you for the info. I didn’t realize about the center mass part. Always good to get new info 👍🏾
Since Sonya Massey was shot in the head, that implies three things:
None of these outcomes look good on the Police.
Yeah, as I said in another comment the fact that they shot at all is the problem.
I totally agree. The Police shouldn’t be shooting at a drop of a hat.
Well, because you’re going to hear about it one way or another, and the people making these decisions (about releasing information) have no right answer. Somehow, the information will get out; if the pigs say nothing, they’ll be accused of covering it up. So they try to get in front of the news and control what they can.
I don’t know why we’re this way, why the news organizations compete to be first to report on something, even with almost no information.
However: unless it turns out that the cops showed up and she started blasting at them, there’s no justification for you to be murdered just because you called for help. Whether or not you jump-scared a cop; whether or not you have dementia and a kitchen knife, or a baseball bat. Heck even if she had a gun. Pigs have training, backup, bullet-proof vests; these victims have fear, adrenalin, often mental health issues, and an expectation that the people they call for help aren’t going to show up and murder them.
Cops don’t need justification, they have qualified immunity. (The only thing they are really qualified for, now that I think about it)
I mean, I’m mostly okay with them posting to let the community know they are digging into it. To let other outlets know. This is all on the up and up. I think what I get pissed at is how people (just look around these posts) take that very limited information and invent their own narrative. That becomes their reality no matter what future reporting shows. It’s sickening how fickle and susceptible people are to nudging towards a belief, and an entire belief system, based on very little actual facts.
Are there shit bag cops out there? YES. Are there systemic issues with the way we police? YES.
But, FUCK. Let’s at least wait until there are actual facts about a story to pull out pitch forks. Buncha fucking rage junkies.
https://apnews.com/article/illinois-sheriffs-deputy-charged-cf164189d678f921deff05fa3789d3a2
Enough details for you to be upset now, or do you think the pot of water possibly had a gun?
Nope, that’s exactly the level of detail people should have been waiting for.