Black police officer shoots black man who was brandishing a gun sparks large black lives matter disorder where another black man is shot by a black man

First topic message reminder :


At a news conference on Wednesday, Kerr Putney, chief of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg police, said officers had found the gun that the police said Mr. Scott had brandished before an officer, who is also black, fatally shot him and were examining police video of the encounter that unfolded as Mr. Scott stepped out of a car.

Family members of Mr. Scott have said that he was unarmed and was holding only a book. Chief Putney said Wednesday morning, “We did not find a book.”

A second night of protests set off by the police killing of a black man spiraled into chaos and violence after nightfall here Wednesday when a demonstration was interrupted by gunfire that gravely wounded a man in the crowd. Law enforcement authorities fired tear gas in a desperate bid to restore order.

The city said on its Twitter account that the unidentified man was on life support after what officials said was a “civilian on civilian” confrontation. The authorities provided no further details.

Charlotte officials had said earlier that the man had been killed in the unrest. The Police Department reported that four officers had injuries that were not life-threatening.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/22/us/keith-scott-charlotte-police-shooting.html

Tommy Monk wrote:

She was also shouting 'don't do it' at her husband...

That could refer to anything. Don't open the window, don't swear at the police, don't show aggression. It could also refer to don't point the gun, but with nothing to back it up there is no way of knowing what she was referring him not to do.

He had a gun and she knew it... That's what I reckon...

Tommy Monk wrote:


He had a gun and she knew it... That's what I reckon...

I'd prefer to wait until the investigation is complete before I reckon anything specifically.

If only all those rioting blacks had the same idea...

Tommy Monk wrote:If only all those rioting blacks had the same idea...

I don't think the rioting is just about this fella.

Any excuse will do for some violent people...

Tommy Monk wrote:

Any excuse will do for some violent people...

Not that I believe rioting is justified, but there is vindication for ill feeling toward the police regarding their shooting people a little too much on the quick side.

It's like they have forgotten how to be police and have become judge, jury and executioner instead.

Shootings such as this one perhaps?

Thankfully the guy lived.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/21/florida-police-shoot-black-man-lying-down-with-arms-in-air

Blacks more likely to be victims or aggressors in ‘mass shootings’

Fear of escalating racial tensions may be why much of gun violence goes unaddressed in US society. A new analysis shows that African Americans constituted the majority of both casualties and perpetrators in 358 multiple shootings last year.

The New York Times found that of the 358 such shootings last year, among the 67 percent of cases where the races of those involved was reported, three-fourths of the victims and three-fourths of the alleged shooters were black..."

https://www.rt.com/usa/344153-blacks-victims-mass-shootings/



It's dangerous out there in America...


How many police have been shot and killed this year...?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Maybe slavery wasn't the way to go, too HT.  You and your ilk started this with inhumane and uncivilized practices even following slavery: peonage, KKK rapes and murders, separate but equal segregation and now, open racism as you just demonstrated.

Black Lives Matter would not exist if white police officers didn't start open season on black people.  It certainly shows us something when a white man, Ahmad Khan Rahami, can bomb NYC and half of New Jersey, get shot and still be living, but a black man in Tulsa gets shot and killed for cooperating and raising his hands, when he was just pushing a car off the street.

This is the kind of crap you are defending!  Its racism, and you are a racist.

It was you Americans who did all that, you're just in denial.

Bullshit, America didn't exist when slavery started. You could benefit from a grade school history class. Slavery started:

Wiki wrote:In 1619 twenty Africans were brought to the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia. Historians are undecided if the legal practice of slavery began there, since at least some of them had the status of indentured servant. Alden T. Vaughn says most agree that both Negro slaves and indentured servants existed by 1640.

"English colony"? Strike a chord? America didn't start the path to revolution until 1776, and it wasn't settled until 1787, when the Constitution was signed. From 1619 to 1787 is 168 years under English authority.

I swear, I don't know what they teach in English schools.

HoratioTarr wrote:

nicko wrote:What the fcuk has Slavery got to do with it?

It's as lame as excusing the bad behaviour of a Jewish person by blaming it on the Holocaust.  

The Blue Wall of Silence leads directly to the doorstep of racism in America. Blacks have been given police jobs in the south only recently, and then by massa's permission. At that point the skin color is irrelevant. It's the program that is in place: white = superior and privileged; black = inferior and obsequious.

Race is history...it's more than some mathematical calculus. That's something the British have yet to learn.

Oh... back to slavery I see...


Blacks had slaves too!!!

Who gives a fuck what you think, you post total bollocks about the British most of the time, as well as some of the other brain dead idiots on here.
fUCKING SICK OF IT. look to your own countries for a change. none of you are whiter than white.

Spindleshanks wrote:The guy in this case had suffered a traumatic brain injury in a car crash, his wife videoed some of what occurred although you don't see much of what happened or the shooting.

It does make me wonder why the police won't release the dash cam or body cam footage though.

It's a cover-up.  Of course, we'll not be certain until the authorities in North Carolina release the tape, but if that is a gun in the picture offered by the wife, why is it initially so far from the victim's feet--at least until the police officer reaches down and picks it up to place it nearer.  Furtive behavior?  

I won't be satisfied until someone releases the chain of ownership of the gun.  Bet some cop owns it.  Then there's the chain of custody matter...in whose possession is the gun right now?

North Carolina, like South Carolina and Mississippi, is a KKK state.  I'd feel a whole lot better if the Feds were conducting this investigation.  Otherwise, it's going to be whitewash after whitewash.

Tommy Monk wrote:



Blacks more likely to be victims or aggressors in ‘mass shootings’

Fear of escalating racial tensions may be why much of gun violence goes unaddressed in US society. A new analysis shows that African Americans constituted the majority of both casualties and perpetrators in 358 multiple shootings last year.

The New York Times found that of the 358 such shootings last year, among the 67 percent of cases where the races of those involved was reported, three-fourths of the victims and three-fourths of the alleged shooters were black..."

https://www.rt.com/usa/344153-blacks-victims-mass-shootings/



It's dangerous out there in America...


How many police have been shot and killed this year...?

38. Police have killed over 700 people this year, putting them slightly under their pace from 2015.

Original Quill wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

It's as lame as excusing the bad behaviour of a Jewish person by blaming it on the Holocaust.  

The Blue Wall of Silence leads directly to the doorstep of racism in America.  Blacks have been given police jobs in the south only recently, and then by massa's permission.  At that point the skin color is irrelevant.  It's the program that is in place: white = superior and privileged; black = inferior and obsequious.  

Race is history...it's more than some mathematical calculus.  That's something the British have yet to learn.

Then that is something your country needs to address, isn't it? It's no use blaming another country for your own country's shortcomings. After all, you've had over 200 years to sort yourselves out. You got your independence, so everything after that was your own responsibility. No good stamping your trotters and blaming Blighty when it's all going tits up! And you can't blame your gun culture on anyone but yourselves.

Spindleshanks wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

http://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/sources-keith-scotts-fingerprints-dna-blood-found-on-gun-at-charlotte-police-shooting-scene/449405173

Yes, I know what has been said about a gun being found.

But the gun is most probably a plant.  That is why I referred to the story about Walter Scott in South Carolina.  It's an example.  Officer Michael Slater, in that Scott case, planted a weapon (taser) on the ground in order to support his story that the victim had a weapon and was threatening him.

Cops do this all the time.  It's called "dropsy" testimony, after a Supreme Court case Mapp v. Ohio, because it's evidence that they, themselves have "dropped":

Outskirts Press wrote:Dropsy testimony refers to a false testimony given by a police officer that a fleeing suspect dropped an illegal substance which was then confiscated by the police and used as probable cause for arresting the suspect. Dropsy testimony is sometimes given when an arrest has been made without probable cause, as when illegal substances have been found through an improper search.

In Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, (U.S. 1961), the Supreme Court held that the federal exclusionary rule in search and seizure cases was binding on the states. The exclusionary rule suppresses at trial evidence that was illegally obtained usually in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Police officers have been fabricating grounds of arrest in narcotics cases in order to circumvent the requirements of Mapp. Such lies came to be known as “dropsy” testimony since the police testified that those charged with drug possession were now dropping illicit drugs on the ground rather than keeping them where they were. Prior to Mapp, evidence obtained from unlawful searches of the person was admissible, even when illegally obtained.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/d/dropsy-testimony/

Tommy Monk wrote:On her own video footage she is shouting that he didn't have a gun...

But he did... it had his fingerprints and dna all over it...

And it's been in police custody all this time. That's why I question the lack of candor on the part of the police. I'll bet they don't want to release the ownership records on the gun (among other things).

Spindleshanks wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:On her own video footage she is shouting that he didn't have a gun...

But he did... it had his fingerprints and dna all over it...

As she would if she didn't know he had one.

And I'll still bet he didn't!

Tommy Monk wrote:If only all those rioting blacks had the same idea...

If only the police would release the evidence...especially the video from the policecams. You know they are withholding something they don't want the public to see.

Spindleshanks wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

Any excuse will do for some violent people...

Not that I believe rioting is justified, but there is vindication for ill feeling toward the police regarding their shooting people a little too much on the quick side.

It's like they have forgotten how to be police and have become judge, jury and executioner instead.

Um...it's North Carolina, Spindle. Home of the KKK.

Look at it this way: it was a lynch party, riding down a black man to hang him. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

nicko wrote:Who gives a fuck what you think,   you post total bollocks about the British most of the time,  as well as some of the other brain dead idiots on here.
fUCKING SICK OF IT.   look to your own countries for a change. none of you are whiter than white.

The Brits hate America, too nicko. They're jealous.

Get used to it.

I don't hate America, what gave you that idea?

What I do hate are posters who continually try to put us down, citing things that we are supposed to have done a hundred or more years ago.
I'v said before you cannot hold us responsible for what my father or grandfather did, it's just winds me up! I know we did some unforgiveable things, but why do you and others keep bringing it up?..

Original Quill wrote:

Spindleshanks wrote:

Not that I believe rioting is justified, but there is vindication for ill feeling toward the police regarding their shooting people a little too much on the quick side.

It's like they have forgotten how to be police and have become judge, jury and executioner instead.

Um...it's North Carolina, Spindle.  Home of the KKK.  

Look at it this way: it was a lynch party, riding down a black man to hang him.  The more things change, the more they stay the same.

It's not just happening there though is it?

I'm not even referring to a specific skin colour. About 1000 or so people died at the hands of the police in the US last year, about 1 in 4 of them were unarmed, not all of those that were armed were carrying guns. The youngest killed I think was about 12 years old, the oldest about 80.

Quite shocking statistics really.

Spindleshanks wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Um...it's North Carolina, Spindle.  Home of the KKK.  

Look at it this way: it was a lynch party, riding down a black man to hang him.  The more things change, the more they stay the same.

It's not just happening there though is it?

I'm not even referring to a specific skin colour.  About 1000 or so people died at the hands of the police in the US last year, about 1 in 4 of them were unarmed, not all of those that were armed were carrying guns.  The youngest killed I think was about 12 years old, the oldest about 80.

Quite shocking statistics really.

I agree that the US is probably a border-line police state.  It's probably due to the prevalence of guns in America.

But a survey look at all these shootings shows that they are appearing in the south, or in pockets in the north where a southern migration took place.

The migration took place in the 60's and brought southerners north to work in the automobile factories of the industrial mid-western north.  Not that it is proof, but this migration was memorialized by a CW song, I Wanna Go Home, sung by Bobby Bare and covered by Tom Jones (under the title Detroit City).  Play close attention to the lyrics, about "driftin' north", dreams of "cotton fields" and going on a "southbound freight":



Yes, these incidents are happening everywhere as a result of this migration in the 1960's. Particularly in the industrial belt from western Pennsylvania to Minneapolis, from Cleveland to St. Louis, MO, it's not just in the south, but it has to do with southerners.  And while that song puts them in a sympathetic light, the fact is that that stock is a large part of southern, racist America.

America is a racist country.  We can't shed that in a decade or two, not even a century or two.  Racism is a huge chunk of culture, not a mathematical calculus.  These people continue to populate even the rural parts of liberal California.  America has a racial problem.

Spindleshanks wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Um...it's North Carolina, Spindle.  Home of the KKK.  

Look at it this way: it was a lynch party, riding down a black man to hang him.  The more things change, the more they stay the same.

It's not just happening there though is it?

I'm not even referring to a specific skin colour.  About 1000 or so people died at the hands of the police in the US last year, about 1 in 4 of them were unarmed, not all of those that were armed were carrying guns.  The youngest killed I think was about 12 years old, the oldest about 80.

Quite shocking statistics really.

Not really... considering there are about a million police in a country of over 300 million people, with a high rate of crime by large numbers of the population, and with a high prevalence of guns, and with each officer dealing with a multitude of incidents every day...

Tommy Monk wrote:

Spindleshanks wrote:

It's not just happening there though is it?

I'm not even referring to a specific skin colour.  About 1000 or so people died at the hands of the police in the US last year, about 1 in 4 of them were unarmed, not all of those that were armed were carrying guns.  The youngest killed I think was about 12 years old, the oldest about 80.

Quite shocking statistics really.

Not really... considering there are about a million police in a country of over 300 million people, with a high rate of crime by large numbers of the population, and with a high prevalence of guns, and with each officer dealing with a multitude of incidents every day...

The overall crime rate is lower than it used to be. Must check out to see if police shootings have increased in the same time frame.

Check out crime categories too while you're at it...

Tommy Monk wrote:

Spindleshanks wrote:

It's not just happening there though is it?

I'm not even referring to a specific skin colour.  About 1000 or so people died at the hands of the police in the US last year, about 1 in 4 of them were unarmed, not all of those that were armed were carrying guns.  The youngest killed I think was about 12 years old, the oldest about 80.

Quite shocking statistics really.

Not really... considering there are about a million police in a country of over 300 million people, with a high rate of crime by large numbers of the population, and with a high prevalence of guns, and with each officer dealing with a multitude of incidents every day...

I love the way you make statistical arguments by setting up premises, without drawing the logical conclusions. You are saying absolutely nothing.

Tommy Monk wrote:Check out crime categories too while you're at it...

We do it all the time, tommy. Next point?

Original Quill wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

Not really... considering there are about a million police in a country of over 300 million people, with a high rate of crime by large numbers of the population, and with a high prevalence of guns, and with each officer dealing with a multitude of incidents every day...

I love the way you make statistical arguments by setting up premises, without drawing the logical conclusions.  You are saying absolutely nothing.

I'm just providing the facts... people can draw their own logical conclusions...

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

It was you Americans who did all that, you're just in denial.

Bullshit, America didn't exist when slavery started.  You could benefit from a grade school history class.  Slavery started:

Wiki wrote:In 1619 twenty Africans were brought to the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia. Historians are undecided if the legal practice of slavery began there, since at least some of them had the status of indentured servant. Alden T. Vaughn says most agree that both Negro slaves and indentured servants existed by 1640.

"English colony"?  Strike a chord?  America didn't start the path to revolution until 1776, and it wasn't settled until 1787, when the Constitution was signed.  From 1619 to 1787 is 168 years under English authority.

I swear, I don't know what they teach in English schools.

They should teach children to be very wary of Americans who hate the Brits - like you.

Raggs, y'all seem to have a right surplus of irrational fear, I wouldn't worry about needing to institutionalize it or anything.

Ben Reilly wrote:Raggs, y'all seem to have a right surplus of irrational fear, I wouldn't worry about needing to institutionalize it or anything.

Fear of what? I daresay they think that teaching children about the history of Britain is more useful than banging on about something which happened in America.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:Raggs, y'all seem to have a right surplus of irrational fear, I wouldn't worry about needing to institutionalize it or anything.

Fear of what? I daresay they think that teaching children about the history of Britain is more useful than banging on about something which happened in America.

Ah, they have to be taught about how the monarchy lost an entire continent to a ragtag group of guerrilla rebels, surely. Would you say that was the beginning of the end of British greatness on the global stage? Certainly seems so.

And as we're the most powerful nation in the world now, both economically and militarily, you'd better be covering at least the basics to give British children their best chance at success.

Have you forgotten that America is Trillions of Dollars in debt,mostly caused by your irresponsible wan.....Bankers?

Ben Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Fear of what? I daresay they think that teaching children about the history of Britain is more useful than banging on about something which happened in America.

Ah, they have to be taught about how the monarchy lost an entire continent to a ragtag group of guerrilla rebels, surely. Would you say that was the beginning of the end of British greatness on the global stage? Certainly seems so.

And as we're the most powerful nation in the world now, both economically and militarily, you'd better be covering at least the basics to give British children their best chance at success.

I see your latent nationalism is finally coming to the surface.

So the dash cam and body cam (or parts of it anyway) has been released.

Bit of a rubbish video though.

According to a Charlotte police statement, two plain-clothes officers in an unmarked car were preparing to serve an arrest warrant on an unrelated subject when Scott parked his SUV beside them.

Those officers saw that Scott was “rolling what they believed to be a marijuana ‘blunt’,” the police department said in a statement released with the video on Saturday, but “did not consider Mr Scott’s drug activity to be a priority”.

Then an officer “observed Mr Scott hold a gun up”, the department said. “Due to the combination of illegal drugs and the gun Mr Scott had in his possession, officers decided to take enforcement action for public safety concerns.”

The officers returned with marked vests and approached Scott, giving verbal commands to drop the gun, according to the statement. A third officer arrived in uniform and Scott exited his car, backing away from it. According to the department, officer Brentley Vinson “perceived Mr Scott’s actions and movements as an imminent physical threat to himself and the other officers”, and fired.

According to police, witness interviews confirm that officers shouted at Scott to comply, and a lab analysis “revealed the presence of Mr Scott’s DNA and his fingerprints on the gun”.

“The investigation also revealed that Mr Scott was wearing an ankle holster at the time of the event,” the department said. Police released photos of the gun, holster and blunt.


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/24/video-keith-scott-shooting-charlotte-police




Oh dear...

Because this is a high-profile police shooting, you're never going to get the true facts now.

Tommy Monk wrote:

According to a Charlotte police statement, two plain-clothes officers in an unmarked car were preparing to serve an arrest warrant on an unrelated subject when Scott parked his SUV beside them.

Those officers saw that Scott was “rolling what they believed to be a marijuana ‘blunt’,” the police department said in a statement released with the video on Saturday, but “did not consider Mr Scott’s drug activity to be a priority”.

Then an officer “observed Mr Scott hold a gun up”, the department said. “Due to the combination of illegal drugs and the gun Mr Scott had in his possession, officers decided to take enforcement action for public safety concerns.”

The officers returned with marked vests and approached Scott, giving verbal commands to drop the gun, according to the statement. A third officer arrived in uniform and Scott exited his car, backing away from it. According to the department, officer Brentley Vinson “perceived Mr Scott’s actions and movements as an imminent physical threat to himself and the other officers”, and fired.

According to police, witness interviews confirm that officers shouted at Scott to comply, and a lab analysis “revealed the presence of Mr Scott’s DNA and his fingerprints on the gun”.

“The investigation also revealed that Mr Scott was wearing an ankle holster at the time of the event,” the department said. Police released photos of the gun, holster and blunt.


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/24/video-keith-scott-shooting-charlotte-police




Oh dear...

Backing away from his car is perceived as a threat?

No mention of him holding a gun in his hand though, but it isn't clear from the videos if he was or wasn't although it was pretty clear his arms were down and didn't appear to be aiming at anyone.

I can see what appears to be a holster on his ankle, if the gun was in the holster, would it be justifiable to shoot him?

I don't think so.

They saw him with the gun in his hand... it says so in the article...


Failing to comply with police instructions... failing to drop the gun...


Brought it on himself!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:

They saw him with the gun in his hand... it says so in the article...


Failing to comply with police instructions... failing to drop the gun...


Brought it on himself!!!

In the car yes, according to the article.

Did he still have it in his hand when he got out is what I would like to know.

If he didn't then why shoot him?

This is America where a significant proportion of the population carry guns on their person, if carrying a gun in a holster (if that is the case) is now going to be grounds for the police to shoot people then perhaps the population being allowed to carry guns about their person needs to be reviewed.

If he had it in his ankle holster while in the car then police would never have seen it...


He had it in his hand...


He was being told to drop the gun...


He didn't...

Gun crime is rife in the USA, blacks have a reputation for using gunz and crime, what is the policemen supposed to do, let the black shoot him or he shoot the black.

How many of you on here have EVER faced a HOSTILE gun?????, I mean FACED????

Don't bother blabbing on about whitiz and gunz, it won't wash, we know.

Survival of the fittest.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Bullshit, America didn't exist when slavery started.  You could benefit from a grade school history class.  Slavery started:



"English colony"?  Strike a chord?  America didn't start the path to revolution until 1776, and it wasn't settled until 1787, when the Constitution was signed.  From 1619 to 1787 is 168 years under English authority.

I swear, I don't know what they teach in English schools.

They should teach children to be very wary of Americans who hate the Brits - like you.

Rest assured, the feeling is mutual.

nicko wrote:Have you forgotten that America is Trillions of Dollars in debt,mostly caused by your irresponsible wan.....Bankers?

Caused by irresponsible wars, waged on foreign babies! But I'll take your point...you're half right.

Tommy Monk wrote:If he had it in his ankle holster while in the car then police would never have seen it...


He had it in his hand...


He was being told to drop the gun...


He didn't...

That isn't what I said.

Is it impossible that he reholstered it before he got out of the car?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Fear of what? I daresay they think that teaching children about the history of Britain is more useful than banging on about something which happened in America.

Ah, they have to be taught about how the monarchy lost an entire continent to a ragtag group of guerrilla rebels, surely. Would you say that was the beginning of the end of British greatness on the global stage? Certainly seems so.

And as we're the most powerful nation in the world now, both economically and militarily, you'd better be covering at least the basics to give British children their best chance at success.

I see your latent nationalism is finally coming to the surface.

How is reciting facts nationalistic?

Spindleshanks wrote:So the dash cam and body cam (or parts of it anyway) has been released.

Bit of a rubbish video though.

The video still just shows an unjustified shooting. I want to work on the angle of the alleged gun this African citizen had. Owner? Any photo of the victim holding it? Why does it appear so far from the victim? Does it have a serial number (cops often file off the serial numbers of their dropsy's)?

And while we are on the subject of deception, why are the police in unmarked cars and wearing no uniforms? What would you think if a gang of hoodlums roared up, firing guns? At the very least, anyone would be confused.