Graphic video shows Daniel Shaver sobbing and begging officer for his life before 2016 shooting

Quit dodging the question.

Tell us what commands you didn't understand.

I found them all to be clear and precise.

 

So being less smart than me is deserving of death? You've just condemned 99% of America, yourself included...

 

Okay, so it seems we do have to go over what was said in detail, since you continue to play dumb and misrepresent the situation.

Officer: STOP RIGHT THERE! STOP! GET ON THE GROUND! BOTH OF YOU LAY DOWN ON THE GROUND! LAY DOWN ON THE GROUND!

[They both stop and lay face down on the ground]

Officer: Who else is in the room?

Shaver: Nobody.

Officer: Nobody else is in the room-

Shaver: Nobody.

Officer: -are you positive?

Shaver: Nobody. Absolutely positive.

Officer: Okay, so it's apparent we have a failure for you to comprehend simple instructions. I'm going to go over some of them again.

Allow me to stop here for a moment to make a few points and perhaps reality will finally set in for you.

Already we see that the situation is more complicated than your simplistic description of "Get on the floor, cross your legs, put your hands out."

We also see that they complied with the orders they were given, as the orders given up to that point were fairly simple and easy to understand.

However, with the last line, we see a clear problem in the officer's communication AND tactics. Not only is his communication unnecessary, the information he is conveying is INCORRECT. They DID comprehend his instructions and comply with them. At that point, he had achieved virtually 100% tactical dominance of the situation. All he had to do was simply move up the hall with his team and detain them. Instead, he begins a rambling lecture interspersed with threats to kill them, and instructions that become increasingly confusing and ambiguous.

Do I REALLY need to keep transcribing this for you and everyone else who is reading our exchange, or will you just stop being ridiculous and admit Shaver was legitimately under a ton of stress and that the officer was not skilled in his handling of the situation?

 

Oh the hubris.

 

Any reasoning to go with that, or is that just based on how you feel?

How are they unconstitutional?

 

WTF is the matter with you people ?
The instructions were NOT only CONTRADICTORY but they were next to physically IMPOSSIBLE
to follow, especially that these ridiculous instructions were given by a SCREAMING PSYCHOPATH
who has repeatedly threatened to murder you for the slightest breach of his instructions, that
he maniacally & abusively SCREAMS out at him - It is no wonder the victim was crying -
It must have seemed to him that the PIG had already decided to kill him -

As indeed to would seem to any fair broker


Review:

Cop - Screams - Stop right there !

Shaver - with hands up, gets on his knees

Cop - Still Screaming - Stop! get on the ground - Lay down on the ground! - Cocks his gun

Shaver - lays down with hands outstretched

It would have been perfectly safe to cuff the man at this point - But NO the PIGS must play their stupid games

Cop - Who else is in the room?

Shaver - Nobody absolutely --------

Cop - Ok we have a failure to comprehend simple instructions I gotta go over some of them again.
...........Can you both hear and understand them ? - To date Shaver has done everything asked of him
..........by this raging PIG

Woman - Yes

Cop - Alright - If you make a mistake, another mistake (NOTE: to date Shaver has made NO mistakes)
there is a very severe possibility you are both going to get shot, do you understand that?

Shaver - Yes

Woman - says something

Cop - Yes alright

Shaver - Tries to say something

Cop - Shut Up! - I am not here to be tactful and diplomatic with you . You listen, you obey

Shaver - draws his hands to his head

Cop - for one thing did tell you to move young man?

Shaver - returns his hands out front of him

Cop -(says something unintelligible, then) put both you hands on top of your head and interlace your fingers

Shaver - complies

Cop - take your feet and cross your left foot over your right foot

Shaver - complies

Cop - who else is in the room?

Shaver - Nobody

Cop - Are you both drunk?

Shaver - (unintelligible)

Woman - no

Cop - you are not going to have any problems understanding anything I tell you, right

Shaver & Woman - right

Woman - asks something

Cop - (No mam you --unintelligible blah blah)----- are to come towards us

Cop - young man you are not to move you are to put your eyes down and look down at the carpet
you are to keep your fingers interlaced behind your head, you are to keep your feet crossed.
If you move we're going to consider that a threat and we are going to deal with it and you may not
....................................................................................................................survive. Do you understand it

Shaver - yes sir - he complies

Cop - young lady, shut up and listen

Cop - You are to keep your feet crossed take both of your hands put them flat in front of you.
You are to push yourself up into a kneeling position, now put both hands in the air, crawl towards us

Woman - complies

Cop - stop - they cuff her - unintelligible blah blah


Cop - OK young man listen to my instructions and do not make a mistake. you are to keep your legs crossed -
do you understand me ? - He has already been warned that to uncross them means he will be shot

Shaver - ok

Cop - You are to put both your hands down straight out in front of you,

Shaver - complies

Cop - Push yourself up into a kneeling position

Shaver - complies

Cop - FREAKING SCREAMING! - I SAID TAKE YOUR LEGS CROSSED ! - the cop becomes illiterate in his raging demands

Shaver - places hands on carpet

Shaver - Obviously terrified and confused , Shaver puts hands behind back waiting to be cuffed

Cop - SCREAMING INCOHERENTLY - I didn't say to --- more incoherent screaming

Shaver - puts hands up in the air

Cop - SCREAMING you do that again we are shooting you - do you understand

Shaver - please don't shoot me

Cop - ABUSIVELY - then listen to my instructions

Shaver - I'm trying to ......

Cop - still SCREAMING - don't talk listen - hands straight up in the air

Shaver - complies

Cop - do not put your hands down for any reason, If you think you are going to fall,
you better fall on your face, your hands go back into the small of your back or down
we are going to shoot you, do you understand me

Shaver - really scared chokingly responds - yes

Cop - Crawl towards me

AN IMPOSSIBLE TASK BEING HIS LEGS ARE CROSSED AND HE HAS BEEN TOLD HE WILL BE SHOT
IF HE UNCROSSES THEM OR DOES ANYTHING THAT HE HAS NOT BEEN INSTRUCTED TO DO

Shaver - Begins to attempts to crawl with his legs crossed - using his hands on the floor

Cop - Literally FREAKS OUT - Crawl towards me

Shaver - Now crying - he attempts to comply with this request, but as his encumbered legs seem to cause him
to stumble - his left hand recedes as his body move forward - He begins to fall forward


The PIGS then Murder him

 

It was merely mocking your silly argument. Actually, it would not be correct to call your comments thus far an "argument". Rather, they are just a disjointed series of assertions and tangents that I'm supposed to cobble together into something resembling an argument so I can actually respond to you in a way that makes sense.

You're basically saying that not knowing something gives police officers permission to use deadly force. Do you have any idea how tortured and ridiculous that logic is?

Is there some reason police in American should have more relaxed rules of engagement than Marines patrolling the Sunni Triangle? Because I sure as hell cannot see one it.

 

If I got the jury that cop did, I might get away with it.

 

The constitution does not say the US government has the power to prohibit drugs. Ergo, drug prohibition is not constitutional. Even the big government socialists and puritans who prohibited alcohol in the 1920's knew there was no constitutional power to prohibit drugs, which is why they passed an AMENDMENT. You remember those, right? They're how we change the constitution. Simply passing a piece of legislation or getting a stamp of approval from some judges is not enough to render something constitutional. The specific power has to be ENUMERATED. And any exercise of power must not run afoul of the bill of rights, which protects, among other things, LIBERTY. You know what liberty is, right? And that it necessarily entails the right to control your body, including what goes into it? Did you ever wonder why there were no federal drug laws between 1776 and 1914? Have you ever seen a reference to the US government prohibiting drugs in any writings of the founders? Say, in the federalist papers?

 

There are several possible explanations.

(1) They are cops themselves. Cops generally stick together, even when they're totally wrong. This pretty much everyone knows, including the cops themselves.
(2) They have family members who are cops and view all cops as an extension of their family member. Like the cops themselves, they are driven purely by love for cops.
(3) They are people who identify strongly with authority and authority figures.

The thing they all have in common is that they are driven almost exclusively by emotions and feelings.

 

Obviously, Portugal is in Europe and the US is in North America. Do you have a point?

I'm calling it what it is, an opioid epidemic. Do you have a point?

 

Internet jockeys are really brave behind their keyboards.

 

Yes, I made the point already. The current opioid epidemic is a small sample of what it would look like to legalize all drugs.

 

No. It's not the norm.

 

No, according to the Constitution. It provides no authority to government to prosecute anyone for possessing what is not stolen property. The 10th Amendment prohibits the federal government from asserting powers not explicitly granted to the federal government. Those powers belong to the states or to the people.

Any number of judges can say whatever they want to say, it doesn't change the Constitution. Only an Amendment can do that. SCOTUS has also "interpreted" the Constitution such that corporations (a paper created fiction) have the same rights as human beings and that money is speech. SCOTUS regularly "interprets" the Constitution as it pleases. They seized that power for themselves in Marbury v Madison (1803). So much for these racketeers.

Yeah but they did say cops can lie to you with impunity, can shoot your dog if it barks and have no obligation to protect you. SCOTUS just loves a good Police State.

 

Then get down on you knees "Spooky" !
Now, keeping your legs crossed
Put your hands in the air, up over your head
Remembering - if you uncross your legs, or if you let your arms drop, you will be Shot Dead
Now CRAWL forward down the hall with a gun to your head held by some Psycho
who is screaming irrational demands & threats at you, and who seems to want an excuse to kill you

BOOM BOOM ! - Are you Dead yet "Spooky"?
- 'simon says' - by the rules of their stupid game you should be

 

So your feelings are hurt?

 

You haven't made any point that I'm aware of.

Drugs are not legal in the US, they are in Portugal. Apples and oranges. Portugal is a living sample of what it looks like when drugs are decriminalized, the US is a living sample of what it looks like when they're illegal. Get it yet or still confused?

 

Does that mean you don't have anything more to say about the subject at hand
You now want to discuss my personal feelings regarding your stupid games crack ?

 

2 different countries and 2 different cultures.

Look at Germans and French. Their most distant citizens are less than half the distance away from each other than residents of Miami and Seattle, yet they have vastly different cultures.

 

It's not really an "epidemic" though. The amount of people who died from opiod overdoses in 2015 is roughly the same amount of people who died from falling down. So unless you think there is an "epidemic" of people falling down, I'm not sure how you can justify that description of the situation. In any case, what is the point of bringing up these opiod deaths? What is it supposed to prove? Do you think we should ban those drugs? Do you think making drugs illegal stops people from abusing them?

 

So what cultural differences specifically do you think are relevant to the issue at hand? Why is decriminalization in Portugal a good idea but a bad idea in the USA?

 

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes? Common sense. I'm more interested in why you are so hurt. Fess up.

 

A person got nervous and made a mistake... what an IDIOT! I'm sure you've never had that happen to you before, being perfect and all...

 

Got nervous and made an innocent mistake = Idiot who deserved to die