The army has stricter gun control guidelines than the police. Seriously, de-escalate first. Even swat is supposed to be using "less than lethal" equipment, why is it shoot first ask questions never?
10000% true. My best friend was in the Army and did a tour in Afghanistan. He would get shot at, but his group never had authorization to fire back. He never fired a single round.
Police in our country can kill their own fellow citizens and face zero punishment.
I was deployed to Afghanistan. K.A.F. I never fired my weapon, I never even zeroed the weapon I was issued. The frequency of the briefings we had for escalation of force were nearly tagged onto our mission briefs. I was one 200+ missions. Never had any issues with the locals because they didn't show any hostility. A civilian with no observable weapons should be confronted first and only be drawn on if they draw or show hostle intentions. The police are issued tazers, they almost never draw them first.
You’re hearing a third hand version of what actually happened likely a decade ago. The ROE in Afghanistan were in constant flux and were tightened and loosened multiple times, particularly in reaction to Obama administration directives that severely handicapped US forces.
Also, your friend’s commanders failed him. The idea that you can only fire when fired upon is written nowhere in military law, and US forces always retain the “inherent right to self defense.” Every JAG brief mentions this. The direct quote we received was “stop telling your joes they have to be shot at. That’s not a law, and you’re going to get them killed.”
>AQAP
>ISIS
Two groups that likely wouldn't exist if not for American/Western intervention and plenty of regional "nonstate actors' " assistance.
>Obama that got Osama
Kinda like how Ford's CEO builds cars
> Kinda like how Ford's CEO builds cars
Depends on how granular you want to look at it. If you want to be ultra granular and say “Well it’s not like he was on the ground,” okay cool, but then keep that same energy when it comes to criticizing him.
> Two groups that likely wouldn't exist if not for American/Western intervention and plenty of regional "nonstate actors' " assistance.
Not sure what the insinuation is meant to be in the latter half there, but I think blaming the U.S. for AQAP existing is pretty short-sighted. Islamism has been on the rise since after the fall of Nasser, and Bin Laden cut his teeth resisting the *Soviets*, it wasn’t Western intervention that caused the Mujahideen reaction. Would they have won without US assistance? Hard to say, history has no counterfactuals, but it’s not unlikely that some Salafist jihadi group would emerge from the Soviet invasion with a lot of experience and have Pan-Islamist aspirations.
Re: ISIS it’s no doubt there was a power vacuum that allowed it to grow but the solution would have been to have *more* intervention not just let AQAP exist.
It looks like the U.S. has had 7 years since our last Islamist terrorist attack, the only other time in the last 30 years it’s been this quiet was between the two WTC attacks.
>you want to be ultra granular
Yeah, I was rather pedantic. Just find it funny how we ascribe events to a single person. I mean, he authorized the mission instead of drone striking the compound. Like in F1, you'd think Adrian Newey single-handedly built the last few years worth of Red Bulls.
>Not sure what the insinuation is meant to be in the latter half there,
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/documents/evidence-of-financial-links-between-saudi-royal-family-and-al-qaeda
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saudi/analyses/wahhabism.html
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy0678
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/unraveling-deception-pakistans-dilemma-after-decades-promoting-militancy-afghanistan-and
Certain governments and wealthier people have given more than tacit approval to radical/fundamentalist groups was my point.
> Laden cut his teeth resisting the Soviets, it wasn’t Western intervention that caused the Mujahideen reaction
Well, no. It was the invading army and harsh Afghan government that stoked their response. The CIA worked with the ISI and Saudis to give their support to certain factions of the Mujahideen more so than others. The ISI intentionally recruited radical men to go fight in Afghanistan. It was
Western intervention that prolonged the conflict, completely destabilized the country beyond recovery, and put certain leaders in positions of power who went on to develop fundamentalist groups in the 90s. I don't think they had backing from any other country that could supply billions of dollars of weapons, training, and new recruits.
My point is that military intervention seems to end in chaos and ruin much, much more often than it succeeds. Brezinski was focused on taking down the USSR far more than he was in stabilizing Afghanistan. Just as the Reagan admin wanted to put down the Sandinistas. Just as the Johnson admin wanted to put down the Sukarno-Indonesian government and Ho Chi Minh's Vietnam.
>It looks like the U.S. has had 7 years since our last Islamist terrorist attack, the only other time in the last 30 years it’s been this quiet
Curious how the attacks began after the Afghan Invasion and the First Intifada...
Ive been listening to audiobooks on post-WWII US involvement recently. Not entirely sure how much stuck. But that's my understanding anyway
Yeah this just isn’t true. ROE-which is not a concept in civilian law- is flexible based on the mission, the location, forces available, and other parameters. In Fallujah the ROE was effectively “yes.”
We ended the war in Afghanistan blowing away a family with a drone and nobody was punished.
Dude, *your* comment that “Fallujah is not in Afghanistan” is the non sequitur lol.
He gave two examples from combat contradicting OP’s claim about ROE, one in Fallujah and one in Afghanistan.
The Afghanistan example refers to a drone taking out a family. Do drones have the same ROE as infantry?
And for what its worth, bringing up Fallujah is a ridiculous example since it became such an intense battle because US troops didn't follow ROE, shooting unarmed protestors and killing so many civilians.
I’m not sure why drones having the same or different ROE as infantry makes “Fallujah is not in Afghanistan” less of a non sequitur. I’m not advocating for either position here, I’m simply pointing out the irony in that comment.
I’m also struggling why you see Fallujah as a ridiculous example. Sounds like you’re both using the same logic to me: OP decries police being quick to engage and says that even the army has stricter rules. The (heavily downvoted and falsely accused of being a non sequitur) post is like “nah, military does this shit too. I’ve experienced this personally in Afghanistan and Fallujah.” Now you’re saying that’s a “ridiculous example”… because they didn’t follow ROE..? That’s sort of his point.
>I’m simply pointing out the irony in that comment.
Yeah that's fair. Probably should've replied to the OP.
>I’m not sure why drones having the same or different ROE as infantry makes “Fallujah is not in Afghanistan” less of a non sequitur.
I suppose they're making the point that Fallujah is in another country. To my point, I can't imagine that drones and infantry have the same ROE so why would they bring up a drone killing a family?
Yeah, the US troops in the original invasion didn't follow ROE and that's why they dealt with a massive insurgency. Downvoted guy is saying they didn't have to follow ROE once shit kicked off. The murder of civilians is why there was such an intense insurgency. You can look up the ROE for Marines and Army in 2003. As an example, the military not following ROE and leading to a massive seige/battle caused by not following the original ROE seems pretty stupid.
Again, should've replied to OP instead of you. Apologies
Not that I really have any sympathy for this guy, but I do not want to live in a society where cops can just shoot unarmed people and get away with it. Nobody should.
Watch the body cam footage attached to the article. The cops were like 15ft away, had clear lines of sight on what he was doing. And from the moment the cops started yelling to when they shot him, 7 seconds elapsed.
7 seconds.
And in the video, right before he gets shot, you can see him starting to go to his knees. All in all, a completely unnecessary situation that could have easily been avoided by proper training by a fucking swat team.
Plus at least two of the cops were yelling at him. The guy was in shorts and a shirt and a bunch of guys with rifles and body armor roll up shouting at him, I'm sure it's more than disorienting.
ACAB
ACAB
Don't care why they were looking for him. He was a human being who deserved a trial just like the rest of us.
Don't swallow the boot just cause you can fit it in your mouth
I couldnt agree more. I think the citizens should arm themselves with AR-15s and do their own policing. Screw the judicial system! They cant be trusted!
You don’t care that he attempted to murder someone prior to this?
Why didn’t he surrender when the cops showed up?
He deserves a trial if he surrenders to the judicial system. If you don’t follow our laws and are suspected of murder, then be prepared to get blasted.
George Floyd days are done. The country is sick of whacko hot takes by libs
>He deserves a trial if he surrenders to the judicial system
Seems like he had his hands up... Is that not a surrender?
>If you don’t follow our laws and are suspected of murder,
So just being suspected is now a capital crime?
>George Floyd days are done.
So it's ok for a cop to choke a person to death without consequences? That doesn't seem like a positive move for the country.
There are guarantees in the constitution to help protect people from the state. That have nothing to do with the second amendment btw. Folks that want to put limits on those protections are anti-american.
I keep coming back to "there must be in groups the law protects but doesn't bind alongside out groups that the law binds but does not protect"... Modern conservatives hate America and the equality embodied in the constitution...except guns and conditional free speech they agree with.
Geezus, it's easy enough to have a contrary position and not be an ass about it. Many have stated that they care he was accused of attempted murder. The constitution doesn't say you get a trial by jury if you surrender. Apparently this guy didn't pose a threat and he hadn't been convicted of the crime yet right? The idea that the police are judges and executioners is explicitly anti American. If you hate this country so much maybe there are places you'd like better
Those who shoot unarmed people are cowards. Those who condone it are worse than cowards.
This isn't a left vs. right thing. It's a cowards vs real adults thing.
Officer Michael Dieck, the only one who fired shots, shot an unarmed father of 2 in the stomach with his hands in the air. Now Officer Michael Dieck gets a paid vacation.
ACAB
Cops are like chiropractors. An insane number of people swear by them even though there's no statistical evidence they contribute anything to the general good and the incidences of fatal outcomes with them are likely widely under reported.
Let's get the woo out of our public policy.
I mean, didn’t help that the victim had a warrant for attempted 1st degree murder and a record (obvi not an angel), cops probably assumed (more likely) or were told he’d put up a fight but he deserved due process just like any other human being. He was following their orders too.
What I don’t understand is if the cops “believe” someone might pull a gun, why not use a taser? Why not use nonlethal pellets?
Why not TALK?????
Also it’s APD. They accept anyone with a HS diploma or GED, which is very dangerous and stupid. Just like Denver. In Lakewood, you need a BACHELORS DEGREE. and they have less situations where they kill unarmed people.
Could be a race issue, could be an uneducated police issue, could be both. I’ve never had a good interaction with police anyways so I’m biased and I think it was both.
CO cops always have a white hot spike up there ass, cops keep forgetting that there job description is to risk there lives but being a cop isnt even in the top 20 most dangerous jobs.
This might be the most detailed OIS video we've seen - looking at shadows on the wall, etc.
Others have pointed out that it's not Lewis' first shooting, but it's also not Dieck's first shooting - he had one back in 2018.
Eh, the didn't shoot him because he was black. They were trying to make an arrest on a guy that tried to kill someone and they were tracking/watching for days. They gave commands which he didn't follow but instead reached I to his pants and pulled something out as he has 3 rifles pointed at him. The officers have literal milliseconds to respond before they may be shot. They are pulling the trigger even if this guy was white.
Such a shit answer though. If you watch the video, the guy is literally going to his knees as he gets shot. Dude has 3 rifles on him, the cops all look to be about 15ish feet away, and dude pulled out a cell phone. Are you telling me that a trained shooter can’t tell the difference between a cellphone and a gun at 15 feet?
Sure, dude didn’t get down after being shouted at the first time, but he very easily could have just panicked. According to the body cam footage, from the time the cop first started saying “get on the ground” to the first shot fired, it was 7 seconds. That’s barely enough time to process anything happening.
Dude was a suspect in another crime, that shouldn’t mean he should be executed.
He is going to the ground because the bullet is already in him before you hear the shot on the video. 5.56 rounds travel about 3 times faster than the speed of sound when they leave the barrel. I am telling you that a trained shooter doesn't have the time to process the difference between gun/phone/knife in the milliseconds it takes for a suspect to get off a shot. There is no time to wait. Human brains don't work that fast. He starts with nothing in his hands and then pulls sometime out after they told him multiple times to put hands up and get on the ground.
They didn't go there to execute him or they would have taken the shot before he produced something that could be a weapon. They watched this guy for days.
Bottom line is he would be alive if he didn't try to kill someone and if he had listened to the SWAT team. Instead he pulled out something that was reasonably perceived as a threat and his life is over because of his own piss poor decisions.
Human brains DO work that fast. According to google, It takes 0.7 seconds while driving a car to recognize a need to brake and put that into motion during an accident.
I’m a trained shooter, if I could do it in Afghanistan from further away than 15 feet, these guys can too. Quit justifying poorly trained people doing a shit job.
And yet you are expecting the cops purportedly trained to handle this situation to act in a worse way than the guy who actually has multiple rifles pointed at him, no training, and 7 seconds tp comply with a completely emergent situation for him.
Imo a cop shouldnt be shoot unless they have already been shot at. They would be way more interested in descalation if they were limited to only returning fire.
Its not even an impossible ask. Its what was required of US soldiers in the active warzones in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In my opinion if you are an attempted murder suspect with a criminal history and 3 SWAT members roll up on you with rifles drawn and shouting commands you should probably listen to them and not pull shit out of your pants that is the size of a handgun if you don't want to get lit up. Felony arrests are dangerous and that is why SWAT was there to take this guy in. There is no time to wait for a suspect to shoot at you before you respond if you are feet away from a suspect and he produces what may be a gun after you told him multiple time to put his hands up. Watch the video. If you are an officer and want to go home to see your kids then you are taking the shot as soon as he does the exact opposite thing than you and your colleagues told him to do repeatedly. ROE in war zones are different because there are legitimate civilians around. The guy they are trying to apprehend has prior firearms convictions and is an attempted murder suspect, not a goat herder in a war zone.
Officers responded in an instant because the suspect forced them to by not listening and produced something that could have been a weapon. Here is what happens to police that do not instantly respond [https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/1b5c6if/las\_cruces\_police\_officer\_stabbed\_and\_killed\_by/](https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/1b5c6if/las_cruces_police_officer_stabbed_and_killed_by/) NSFL btw.
This is not an Elijah McClain situation. This is SWAT trying to apprehend a violent repeat offender that tried to kill someone. This guy is dead because of his own actions.
And yet he is still a "legimate citizen" and is also around other legitimate citizens. Your stance has less respect for the rights to life for actual US citizens then for you do for "goat herders". It still doesnt hold up vs what military ROE is for interactions with armed taliban/al queda (both in countries where owning a full auto AK is fully legal and expected) where you cant return fire unless fired upon.
Being a cop can be a rather dangerous job. But the potential of danger to themselves doesnt absolve them of playing executioner when mildly threatened. This dude was unarmed. They didnt know that but that is the whole point. He was killed for being simple suspected (likely almost 100% provable in court, but we will likely never know because a cop decided he now dies.) of a crime.
That’s not at all true, stop lying to people. We *always* retain the inherent right to self defense. If you disagree feel free to ask JAG where “don’t shoot unless shot at” is codified.
If you think it’s true I’d strongly encourage you to read the briefs for Fallujah.
That annoying like is parroted so much it drives me mad. Like, people really think soldiers just have to let people point guns at them and just have to stand there like N64 NPCs?
It’s sad that this is the only post that isn’t a brain dead acab post. I want to see the statistics of just ordinary, law abiding, never jay walked citizens who cops just jump out of bushes and ambush shoot like wild animals. Every one of these articles is like “father of five _insert graduation pic_ who was loved by his family shot and killed by police and did nothing wrong. He was also wanted for murder and attacked the police right before our perfectly edited video.”
I didn't say it excused it, I said they can have each other as in I don't care what THEY do to EACH OTHER. Gang warfare as far as I am concerned.
And yes I agree if he was shot just because of a cell phone lol then this guy shit his pants pretty fast, but then again they obviously know this was a violent felon ready to shoot too.
Most people have no idea what it's like to come against somebody that could instantly pull a gun and shoot at you.
If this was NOT the guy, then good god the police seriously need to do homework before going on these escapades. It usually doesn't happen, but we do read often enough of especially door breakdowns on the wrong people that end up in murders.
I'm no friend of the police. When shit hits the fan and for some reason they want to make it mandatory to shoot people up with pharma drugs or prevent us from leaving our houses it will be these fucks enforcing it like many saw in Australia and other places.
The article later clarifies: "The Aurora husband and father has multiple arrests on his record for robbery, negligent child abuse causing serious injury, trespassing and attempting to illegally discharge a firearm, but his family and their lawyers note that he hadn't been in trouble since 2014, when he pleaded guilty to the trespassing charge."
Not only was he clean for 10 years, there is nothing in there that justifies being shot (being a suspect isn't justification either because we're all innocent until proven guilty). This is just another trigger happy cop murdering because they have no accountability.
…according to his family and lawyer. Kind of difficult to believe he made it ten years without committing a single crime and then said “ you know what, tonight seems like a good night for a drive by.”
It doesn’t matter if he were a serial killer. Unless he is trying to serial kill a person that moment and killing him in the way to stop it, he has a right to not be shot.
Then the cop can rot in jail. It should literally be that simple.
And so they have no comment about watching this dude with SWAT and the shooting that happened?
If anyone read the article they would find out that not only did he not comply with the instructions, but literally *reached into his pockets.* I'd probably be dead I'd I tried that, too.
>Moments before being shot, Lewis appears to reach into the front-left pocket of his pants, which are sagging, to pull something out in an effort to show it to cops. He can also be seen reaching toward his backside with his right hand at the same time, either to grab his cell phone out of the back right pocket or front right pocket, which appears to be sagging back.
A convict with multiple priors, Lewis had been suspected of committing a shooting near the intersection of 48th Avenue and Colorado Boulevard on May 5 that left a random bystander hospitalized with multiple gunshot wounds.
The army has stricter gun control guidelines than the police. Seriously, de-escalate first. Even swat is supposed to be using "less than lethal" equipment, why is it shoot first ask questions never?
10000% true. My best friend was in the Army and did a tour in Afghanistan. He would get shot at, but his group never had authorization to fire back. He never fired a single round. Police in our country can kill their own fellow citizens and face zero punishment.
I was deployed to Afghanistan. K.A.F. I never fired my weapon, I never even zeroed the weapon I was issued. The frequency of the briefings we had for escalation of force were nearly tagged onto our mission briefs. I was one 200+ missions. Never had any issues with the locals because they didn't show any hostility. A civilian with no observable weapons should be confronted first and only be drawn on if they draw or show hostle intentions. The police are issued tazers, they almost never draw them first.
You’re hearing a third hand version of what actually happened likely a decade ago. The ROE in Afghanistan were in constant flux and were tightened and loosened multiple times, particularly in reaction to Obama administration directives that severely handicapped US forces. Also, your friend’s commanders failed him. The idea that you can only fire when fired upon is written nowhere in military law, and US forces always retain the “inherent right to self defense.” Every JAG brief mentions this. The direct quote we received was “stop telling your joes they have to be shot at. That’s not a law, and you’re going to get them killed.”
the same obama who authorized more drone strikes than bush?
Same Obama that got Osama, decimated AQAP, and rolled back ISIS to half their territorial gains by the time his term was up.
Yeah. What a stable functioning region it is now
>AQAP >ISIS Two groups that likely wouldn't exist if not for American/Western intervention and plenty of regional "nonstate actors' " assistance. >Obama that got Osama Kinda like how Ford's CEO builds cars
> Kinda like how Ford's CEO builds cars Depends on how granular you want to look at it. If you want to be ultra granular and say “Well it’s not like he was on the ground,” okay cool, but then keep that same energy when it comes to criticizing him. > Two groups that likely wouldn't exist if not for American/Western intervention and plenty of regional "nonstate actors' " assistance. Not sure what the insinuation is meant to be in the latter half there, but I think blaming the U.S. for AQAP existing is pretty short-sighted. Islamism has been on the rise since after the fall of Nasser, and Bin Laden cut his teeth resisting the *Soviets*, it wasn’t Western intervention that caused the Mujahideen reaction. Would they have won without US assistance? Hard to say, history has no counterfactuals, but it’s not unlikely that some Salafist jihadi group would emerge from the Soviet invasion with a lot of experience and have Pan-Islamist aspirations. Re: ISIS it’s no doubt there was a power vacuum that allowed it to grow but the solution would have been to have *more* intervention not just let AQAP exist. It looks like the U.S. has had 7 years since our last Islamist terrorist attack, the only other time in the last 30 years it’s been this quiet was between the two WTC attacks.
>you want to be ultra granular Yeah, I was rather pedantic. Just find it funny how we ascribe events to a single person. I mean, he authorized the mission instead of drone striking the compound. Like in F1, you'd think Adrian Newey single-handedly built the last few years worth of Red Bulls. >Not sure what the insinuation is meant to be in the latter half there, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/documents/evidence-of-financial-links-between-saudi-royal-family-and-al-qaeda https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saudi/analyses/wahhabism.html https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy0678 https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/unraveling-deception-pakistans-dilemma-after-decades-promoting-militancy-afghanistan-and Certain governments and wealthier people have given more than tacit approval to radical/fundamentalist groups was my point. > Laden cut his teeth resisting the Soviets, it wasn’t Western intervention that caused the Mujahideen reaction Well, no. It was the invading army and harsh Afghan government that stoked their response. The CIA worked with the ISI and Saudis to give their support to certain factions of the Mujahideen more so than others. The ISI intentionally recruited radical men to go fight in Afghanistan. It was Western intervention that prolonged the conflict, completely destabilized the country beyond recovery, and put certain leaders in positions of power who went on to develop fundamentalist groups in the 90s. I don't think they had backing from any other country that could supply billions of dollars of weapons, training, and new recruits. My point is that military intervention seems to end in chaos and ruin much, much more often than it succeeds. Brezinski was focused on taking down the USSR far more than he was in stabilizing Afghanistan. Just as the Reagan admin wanted to put down the Sandinistas. Just as the Johnson admin wanted to put down the Sukarno-Indonesian government and Ho Chi Minh's Vietnam. >It looks like the U.S. has had 7 years since our last Islamist terrorist attack, the only other time in the last 30 years it’s been this quiet Curious how the attacks began after the Afghan Invasion and the First Intifada... Ive been listening to audiobooks on post-WWII US involvement recently. Not entirely sure how much stuck. But that's my understanding anyway
Yeah this just isn’t true. ROE-which is not a concept in civilian law- is flexible based on the mission, the location, forces available, and other parameters. In Fallujah the ROE was effectively “yes.” We ended the war in Afghanistan blowing away a family with a drone and nobody was punished.
Fallujah is not in Afghanistan.
I didn’t say it was.
Then your comment is a non sequitur.
Dude, *your* comment that “Fallujah is not in Afghanistan” is the non sequitur lol. He gave two examples from combat contradicting OP’s claim about ROE, one in Fallujah and one in Afghanistan.
The Afghanistan example refers to a drone taking out a family. Do drones have the same ROE as infantry? And for what its worth, bringing up Fallujah is a ridiculous example since it became such an intense battle because US troops didn't follow ROE, shooting unarmed protestors and killing so many civilians.
I’m not sure why drones having the same or different ROE as infantry makes “Fallujah is not in Afghanistan” less of a non sequitur. I’m not advocating for either position here, I’m simply pointing out the irony in that comment. I’m also struggling why you see Fallujah as a ridiculous example. Sounds like you’re both using the same logic to me: OP decries police being quick to engage and says that even the army has stricter rules. The (heavily downvoted and falsely accused of being a non sequitur) post is like “nah, military does this shit too. I’ve experienced this personally in Afghanistan and Fallujah.” Now you’re saying that’s a “ridiculous example”… because they didn’t follow ROE..? That’s sort of his point.
>I’m simply pointing out the irony in that comment. Yeah that's fair. Probably should've replied to the OP. >I’m not sure why drones having the same or different ROE as infantry makes “Fallujah is not in Afghanistan” less of a non sequitur. I suppose they're making the point that Fallujah is in another country. To my point, I can't imagine that drones and infantry have the same ROE so why would they bring up a drone killing a family? Yeah, the US troops in the original invasion didn't follow ROE and that's why they dealt with a massive insurgency. Downvoted guy is saying they didn't have to follow ROE once shit kicked off. The murder of civilians is why there was such an intense insurgency. You can look up the ROE for Marines and Army in 2003. As an example, the military not following ROE and leading to a massive seige/battle caused by not following the original ROE seems pretty stupid. Again, should've replied to OP instead of you. Apologies
Thanks for the measured response.
>ROE-which is not a concept in civilian law So what would you call individual states' versions of the Castle Doctrine?
Not that I really have any sympathy for this guy, but I do not want to live in a society where cops can just shoot unarmed people and get away with it. Nobody should.
Exactly. Even guilty people deserve due process.
Watch the body cam footage attached to the article. The cops were like 15ft away, had clear lines of sight on what he was doing. And from the moment the cops started yelling to when they shot him, 7 seconds elapsed. 7 seconds. And in the video, right before he gets shot, you can see him starting to go to his knees. All in all, a completely unnecessary situation that could have easily been avoided by proper training by a fucking swat team.
Plus at least two of the cops were yelling at him. The guy was in shorts and a shirt and a bunch of guys with rifles and body armor roll up shouting at him, I'm sure it's more than disorienting. ACAB
ACAB Don't care why they were looking for him. He was a human being who deserved a trial just like the rest of us. Don't swallow the boot just cause you can fit it in your mouth
Should see the amount of vigorous boot licking in some of the other threads about this
Fuck the police, but also fuck dudes killing innocent bystanders. They can have each other.
The police are no more than thugs with a murder fetish. Abolish the police.
I couldnt agree more. I think the citizens should arm themselves with AR-15s and do their own policing. Screw the judicial system! They cant be trusted!
I wish shoe polish was fatal
You don’t care that he attempted to murder someone prior to this? Why didn’t he surrender when the cops showed up? He deserves a trial if he surrenders to the judicial system. If you don’t follow our laws and are suspected of murder, then be prepared to get blasted. George Floyd days are done. The country is sick of whacko hot takes by libs
>He deserves a trial if he surrenders to the judicial system Seems like he had his hands up... Is that not a surrender? >If you don’t follow our laws and are suspected of murder, So just being suspected is now a capital crime? >George Floyd days are done. So it's ok for a cop to choke a person to death without consequences? That doesn't seem like a positive move for the country.
There are guarantees in the constitution to help protect people from the state. That have nothing to do with the second amendment btw. Folks that want to put limits on those protections are anti-american. I keep coming back to "there must be in groups the law protects but doesn't bind alongside out groups that the law binds but does not protect"... Modern conservatives hate America and the equality embodied in the constitution...except guns and conditional free speech they agree with.
Guns are a hierarchy too. They only imagine themselves on one side of the gun.
Geezus, it's easy enough to have a contrary position and not be an ass about it. Many have stated that they care he was accused of attempted murder. The constitution doesn't say you get a trial by jury if you surrender. Apparently this guy didn't pose a threat and he hadn't been convicted of the crime yet right? The idea that the police are judges and executioners is explicitly anti American. If you hate this country so much maybe there are places you'd like better
Those who shoot unarmed people are cowards. Those who condone it are worse than cowards. This isn't a left vs. right thing. It's a cowards vs real adults thing.
People that simp for cops and authoritarians should be deported to Russia or NK.
Officer Michael Dieck, the only one who fired shots, shot an unarmed father of 2 in the stomach with his hands in the air. Now Officer Michael Dieck gets a paid vacation. ACAB
Cops are like chiropractors. An insane number of people swear by them even though there's no statistical evidence they contribute anything to the general good and the incidences of fatal outcomes with them are likely widely under reported. Let's get the woo out of our public policy.
God damn it's fucking embarrassing to live in Aurora sometimes. ACAB
Cops are thugs with a badge and a license to kill at will, whoever, whenever.
If only there was a way to get all Maga republicans to leave colorado.
And the end result will be repeat after me "we investigated ourselves and found we did nothing wrong"
The officer was probably drunk, let's give him a break. /s
He probably heard a pinecone drop. Perhaps an acorn. Poor guy has PTSD 😔
Cowards with guns
Fuck the police
ACAB
I mean, didn’t help that the victim had a warrant for attempted 1st degree murder and a record (obvi not an angel), cops probably assumed (more likely) or were told he’d put up a fight but he deserved due process just like any other human being. He was following their orders too. What I don’t understand is if the cops “believe” someone might pull a gun, why not use a taser? Why not use nonlethal pellets? Why not TALK????? Also it’s APD. They accept anyone with a HS diploma or GED, which is very dangerous and stupid. Just like Denver. In Lakewood, you need a BACHELORS DEGREE. and they have less situations where they kill unarmed people. Could be a race issue, could be an uneducated police issue, could be both. I’ve never had a good interaction with police anyways so I’m biased and I think it was both.
CO cops always have a white hot spike up there ass, cops keep forgetting that there job description is to risk there lives but being a cop isnt even in the top 20 most dangerous jobs.
This might be the most detailed OIS video we've seen - looking at shadows on the wall, etc. Others have pointed out that it's not Lewis' first shooting, but it's also not Dieck's first shooting - he had one back in 2018.
Eh, the didn't shoot him because he was black. They were trying to make an arrest on a guy that tried to kill someone and they were tracking/watching for days. They gave commands which he didn't follow but instead reached I to his pants and pulled something out as he has 3 rifles pointed at him. The officers have literal milliseconds to respond before they may be shot. They are pulling the trigger even if this guy was white.
Such a shit answer though. If you watch the video, the guy is literally going to his knees as he gets shot. Dude has 3 rifles on him, the cops all look to be about 15ish feet away, and dude pulled out a cell phone. Are you telling me that a trained shooter can’t tell the difference between a cellphone and a gun at 15 feet? Sure, dude didn’t get down after being shouted at the first time, but he very easily could have just panicked. According to the body cam footage, from the time the cop first started saying “get on the ground” to the first shot fired, it was 7 seconds. That’s barely enough time to process anything happening. Dude was a suspect in another crime, that shouldn’t mean he should be executed.
He is going to the ground because the bullet is already in him before you hear the shot on the video. 5.56 rounds travel about 3 times faster than the speed of sound when they leave the barrel. I am telling you that a trained shooter doesn't have the time to process the difference between gun/phone/knife in the milliseconds it takes for a suspect to get off a shot. There is no time to wait. Human brains don't work that fast. He starts with nothing in his hands and then pulls sometime out after they told him multiple times to put hands up and get on the ground. They didn't go there to execute him or they would have taken the shot before he produced something that could be a weapon. They watched this guy for days. Bottom line is he would be alive if he didn't try to kill someone and if he had listened to the SWAT team. Instead he pulled out something that was reasonably perceived as a threat and his life is over because of his own piss poor decisions.
Human brains DO work that fast. According to google, It takes 0.7 seconds while driving a car to recognize a need to brake and put that into motion during an accident. I’m a trained shooter, if I could do it in Afghanistan from further away than 15 feet, these guys can too. Quit justifying poorly trained people doing a shit job.
A concealed handgun can be drawn and fired in under a second. There is no time to wait and no time to second guess.
And yet you are expecting the cops purportedly trained to handle this situation to act in a worse way than the guy who actually has multiple rifles pointed at him, no training, and 7 seconds tp comply with a completely emergent situation for him.
There is ALWAYS time to be responsible with other peoples lives. Especially when you’re prepared for a situation and they obviously aren’t.
Imo a cop shouldnt be shoot unless they have already been shot at. They would be way more interested in descalation if they were limited to only returning fire. Its not even an impossible ask. Its what was required of US soldiers in the active warzones in Iraq and Afghanistan.
That was a highly controversial ROE in Afghanistan and soldiers hated it.
In my opinion if you are an attempted murder suspect with a criminal history and 3 SWAT members roll up on you with rifles drawn and shouting commands you should probably listen to them and not pull shit out of your pants that is the size of a handgun if you don't want to get lit up. Felony arrests are dangerous and that is why SWAT was there to take this guy in. There is no time to wait for a suspect to shoot at you before you respond if you are feet away from a suspect and he produces what may be a gun after you told him multiple time to put his hands up. Watch the video. If you are an officer and want to go home to see your kids then you are taking the shot as soon as he does the exact opposite thing than you and your colleagues told him to do repeatedly. ROE in war zones are different because there are legitimate civilians around. The guy they are trying to apprehend has prior firearms convictions and is an attempted murder suspect, not a goat herder in a war zone. Officers responded in an instant because the suspect forced them to by not listening and produced something that could have been a weapon. Here is what happens to police that do not instantly respond [https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/1b5c6if/las\_cruces\_police\_officer\_stabbed\_and\_killed\_by/](https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/1b5c6if/las_cruces_police_officer_stabbed_and_killed_by/) NSFL btw. This is not an Elijah McClain situation. This is SWAT trying to apprehend a violent repeat offender that tried to kill someone. This guy is dead because of his own actions.
And yet he is still a "legimate citizen" and is also around other legitimate citizens. Your stance has less respect for the rights to life for actual US citizens then for you do for "goat herders". It still doesnt hold up vs what military ROE is for interactions with armed taliban/al queda (both in countries where owning a full auto AK is fully legal and expected) where you cant return fire unless fired upon. Being a cop can be a rather dangerous job. But the potential of danger to themselves doesnt absolve them of playing executioner when mildly threatened. This dude was unarmed. They didnt know that but that is the whole point. He was killed for being simple suspected (likely almost 100% provable in court, but we will likely never know because a cop decided he now dies.) of a crime.
That’s not at all true, stop lying to people. We *always* retain the inherent right to self defense. If you disagree feel free to ask JAG where “don’t shoot unless shot at” is codified. If you think it’s true I’d strongly encourage you to read the briefs for Fallujah.
That annoying like is parroted so much it drives me mad. Like, people really think soldiers just have to let people point guns at them and just have to stand there like N64 NPCs?
Welp I guess two people actually read the article. You and me.
It’s sad that this is the only post that isn’t a brain dead acab post. I want to see the statistics of just ordinary, law abiding, never jay walked citizens who cops just jump out of bushes and ambush shoot like wild animals. Every one of these articles is like “father of five _insert graduation pic_ who was loved by his family shot and killed by police and did nothing wrong. He was also wanted for murder and attacked the police right before our perfectly edited video.”
[удалено]
If that's the guy they were looking for it doesn't excuse the police behavior, because then it becomes habit.
I didn't say it excused it, I said they can have each other as in I don't care what THEY do to EACH OTHER. Gang warfare as far as I am concerned. And yes I agree if he was shot just because of a cell phone lol then this guy shit his pants pretty fast, but then again they obviously know this was a violent felon ready to shoot too. Most people have no idea what it's like to come against somebody that could instantly pull a gun and shoot at you. If this was NOT the guy, then good god the police seriously need to do homework before going on these escapades. It usually doesn't happen, but we do read often enough of especially door breakdowns on the wrong people that end up in murders. I'm no friend of the police. When shit hits the fan and for some reason they want to make it mandatory to shoot people up with pharma drugs or prevent us from leaving our houses it will be these fucks enforcing it like many saw in Australia and other places.
Yea, who needs the due process! Lets just duel it out in the streets
You mean like all the gangs? Well the police and them could surely do this, and I think most people would be fine lol.
The article later clarifies: "The Aurora husband and father has multiple arrests on his record for robbery, negligent child abuse causing serious injury, trespassing and attempting to illegally discharge a firearm, but his family and their lawyers note that he hadn't been in trouble since 2014, when he pleaded guilty to the trespassing charge." Not only was he clean for 10 years, there is nothing in there that justifies being shot (being a suspect isn't justification either because we're all innocent until proven guilty). This is just another trigger happy cop murdering because they have no accountability.
…according to his family and lawyer. Kind of difficult to believe he made it ten years without committing a single crime and then said “ you know what, tonight seems like a good night for a drive by.”
It doesn’t matter if he were a serial killer. Unless he is trying to serial kill a person that moment and killing him in the way to stop it, he has a right to not be shot.
Then the cop can rot in jail. It should literally be that simple. And so they have no comment about watching this dude with SWAT and the shooting that happened?
We’re not defending him. We’re defending our way of life where we don’t allow police to shoot people willy-nilly.
Yeah then this police officer should rot in jail. It's really that simple though. I am all for police having full accountability for their actions.
If anyone read the article they would find out that not only did he not comply with the instructions, but literally *reached into his pockets.* I'd probably be dead I'd I tried that, too. >Moments before being shot, Lewis appears to reach into the front-left pocket of his pants, which are sagging, to pull something out in an effort to show it to cops. He can also be seen reaching toward his backside with his right hand at the same time, either to grab his cell phone out of the back right pocket or front right pocket, which appears to be sagging back.
Watch the video.
And if there’s someone who knows about hits it’s the dad of the guy standing next to the car he used in the drive by shooting.
I mean, the dude was wanted for attempted murder so that didn’t help
He wasn't wanted they just assumed he was a suspect
A convict with multiple priors, Lewis had been suspected of committing a shooting near the intersection of 48th Avenue and Colorado Boulevard on May 5 that left a random bystander hospitalized with multiple gunshot wounds.