• http://reason.com/archives/2013/10/09/who-cares-ab
How did the District of Columbia’s chief of police describe the behavior of cops who shot an unarmed woman to death in front of her one-year-old daughter because she tried to hit a barrier and reportedly knocked over a Secret Service agent with her car? They “acted heroically.” Jack Dunphy, an LAPD officer who blogs pseudonymously, admitted Carey “was neither a terrorist nor a hardened criminal,” before adding that, nevertheless, police couldn’t have known that because “[w]hen she fled from that initial encounter, rather than drive into a random neighborhood in Northwest Washington, she drove straight to the Capitol.” Dunphy calls Carey’s car a 3,600-pound “weapon.” After being shot at, Dunphy points out she went “skirting the Capitol grounds” before getting a block away from the Supreme Court. What reasonable officer, asks Dunphy, would not think a terrorist attack was taking place?
Please look at the video below when police lost control of the situation with MiriamCarey was at the very beginning of the encounter none of the officers involved stopped her when they had options. They only pointed their guns at the suspect when the suspect fled NONE of them shot the tires out or the suspect if she was an immediate threat; however they allowed her to flee and only then to shoot at least 10 shots at the fleeing car?
These men are not heroes they are incompetent and it lead to this women being killed.
Unfortunately other officers were forced engage and ultimately to stop and shoot unarmed women in front of her child in cold blood as they were acting on “shots fired” after the situation escalated.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Q1J8QyLKG4
Comment by PureTrust
Entered on:
The article lists several people killed by police in their line of duty. But the comparison is like apples and oranges. There's a difference between killing people who are in their own home, who call police for help, who are NOT armed and dangerous or even a threat, and killing dangerous people to protect the public.
Miriam Carey was armed. That car was heavy and dangerous. It appears that she was a threat by the way she was driving.
Were there other ways to stop her? A coordinated effort by police could have hemmed her car in so that it could not move. There would have been damage to police vehicles if they had done this. But something like this takes time to set up. And who knows how much harm or damage Carey would have done by the time the police were ready?
The article tries to imply that the police acted improperly. NOT THIS TIME, except that the facts of the incident are not being reported in their entirety. That doesn't mean that police DON'T act improperly at multitudes of other times. They do. But in this case they probably acted correctly.
2 Comments in Response to Who Cares About Miriam Carey? The epidemic of police violence in America is largely ignored. By Ed
Please look at the video below when police lost control of the situation with MiriamCarey was at the very beginning of the encounter none of the officers involved stopped her when they had options. They only pointed their guns at the suspect when the suspect fled NONE of them shot the tires out or the suspect if she was an immediate threat; however they allowed her to flee and only then to shoot at least 10 shots at the fleeing car?
The article lists several people killed by police in their line of duty. But the comparison is like apples and oranges. There's a difference between killing people who are in their own home, who call police for help, who are NOT armed and dangerous or even a threat, and killing dangerous people to protect the public.
Miriam Carey was armed. That car was heavy and dangerous. It appears that she was a threat by the way she was driving.
Were there other ways to stop her? A coordinated effort by police could have hemmed her car in so that it could not move. There would have been damage to police vehicles if they had done this. But something like this takes time to set up. And who knows how much harm or damage Carey would have done by the time the police were ready?
The article tries to imply that the police acted improperly. NOT THIS TIME, except that the facts of the incident are not being reported in their entirety. That doesn't mean that police DON'T act improperly at multitudes of other times. They do. But in this case they probably acted correctly.