SFist: Angry BART Police Poster Posted on Train

polymergirl

Thu, 08 Jan 2009 08:51:25 -0800

Travin said, "He didn't just casually draw his gun and it happed to go off--the safety would have to be off. " Cop handguns don't have safeties, only those for us civilians do.

manys

Thu, 08 Jan 2009 02:04:29 -0800

It may be strange to hear, but the evidence in those cases are much weaker without video.

clockmaster

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 21:55:45 -0800

It's all insane -the incident and the aftermath. I watched the video a few times. My assessment is what happened was a horrible mistake made by a rookie cop. I didn't see anything that told me he simply wanted to kill this guy. Accident or not, I don't know why the cop hasn't been arrested yet. If I accidentally shot and killed someone I'd be in jail at least one night. Self defense, accident or murder -I'd be in jail. Now, the people ripping up my city, GO FUCK YOURSELVES!!!

spysea

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 21:07:38 -0800

How Come no one protested the other 100+ "BLACK MEN" who were shot in OAKLAND in 2008? Strange I love the selective protests which to me mean nothing except idiots breaking the law and burning cars and wasting resources. Go back to your caves in BERKELEY....

Eric von Schonberg

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 21:03:35 -0800

Since the officer backed up and took a shooting stance, it's pretty clear he intended to shoot the victim. Immediately afterwards, the officer expressed surprise or shock from what he had done. It's possible he knew he was firing his gun and not a taser in the first place, and that his surprise was due to hearing the sound of his own gun and realizing he had rashly decided for whatever reason to kill the man. Another more likely possibility is that he thought he had his taser in his hands, and that the surprise was in realizing he had made a mistake. Even if it was a mistake, the officer is not innocent. The victim was already subdued by another officer's foot to the victims neck, so there was no reason to taser the victim. The problem goes beyond this one officer's decision to taser the victim unnecessarily. The trouble is that there are no consequences when an officer tasers a victim. Hopefully, law enforcement organizations will make officers more accountable for unnecessary use of force. If this doesn't happen it is up to the public to do something about the problem. Unfortunately, that could get ugly in the form of people taking vigilante action against police.

Eric von Schonberg

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 21:01:39 -0800

Eric von Schonberg

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 21:00:00 -0800

manys

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:19:28 -0800

Is that some kind of fancy new non-switched safety switch? Mind you, historically safety mechanisms were designed to prevent the trigger from being pulled accidentally. Do tell, though, I'm kind of out of the loop with modern service firearms.

withak

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 18:54:20 -0800

Pretty sure the gun in question doesn't have the on/off switch type of safety. The safety is that it is impossible for it to go off unless you squeeze the trigger. And he didn't have time to brandish it because it looked like it fired as soon as he was able to reach the trigger.

travin

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 18:03:44 -0800

I hear ya but I'm going by what we actually see in the video, not a supposition to his motives or what might have happened. He didn't just casually draw his gun and it happed to go off--the safety would have to be off. There was no "he brandished it to scare the guy" b.s. like you're saying. First of all, that's illegal and a report has to be written whenever a gun is brandished. That's how serious gun handling is taken. The intense training cops are supposed to get dictates that you NEVER draw the gun, much less take the safety off and put your finger on the trigger, unless you intend to use deadly force. Period. There was no reason for the gun to be drawn, no reason for the safety to be off, much less to be shot. For no other reason for safety, you don't draw a gun when you're on the ground struggling with a suspect. Especially when another cop is right on top of the guy. There are so many things wrong with this situation.

withak

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:48:30 -0800

It looked a lot more like stupidity to me. I think: the shot went off too fast after he drew for him to be deliberately shooting the guy even at point-blank range (this two-year veteran of the force probably isn't Wyatt Earp), keeping the gun pointed at the ground is the safe thing to do in the vast majority of situations and is probably a habit, and his body language afterward looked a lot more like surprise or shock than anything else to me. It looked to me like he drew it thinking to intimidate the guys sitting there or the noisy crowd and grabbed the trigger in the process. There is nothing at all to suggest racism aside from the cop and the victim being of different races. Stupid and negligent: yes, deliberate and cold-blooded: no.

Spokker

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:37:50 -0800

Yeah man, the solution to problems in the ghetto are to go in with guns blazing. That'll learn 'em! It's sarcasm.

withak

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:35:26 -0800

Definitely smell lines.

Chiot Moite

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:34:24 -0800

A fart?

travin

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:30:49 -0800

I wanna know about the artist's choice to use emphasis marks around the crotch area. Those don't indicate smell, wind or dingleberries, so what's going on there?

SFJoe

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:27:59 -0800

I was thinking that he has clothes pins on his balls. I don't know.

travin

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:27:34 -0800

The video record shows there was no accident. If your description of accident includes overreacting as a result of poor training or mental instability, or both, then I totally agree with you. But there's nothing in the video that suggests the gun discharged by accident. With deliberation he drew a lethal weapon, stood up, stanced with both arms to aim and discharged the weapon into the victims back. There's no accident here. The only question is why he felt compelled to do so.

periqueblend

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:03:39 -0800

Negligent use of a firearm!?! holy shit is that NOT what happened. I think officer's resignation could also be indicative of his own admission that his actions surpassed merely the accidental discharge of a firearm into the back of an unarmed civilian. The poster could mention all sorts of things that should be improved, but it thankfully, and rightfully limits itself to one message. How much uglier can it get than shooting someone on the BART platform? Tarring all BART officers is fairly unsophicated and misses the point, but making a sign that questions their actions is the least of responses.

bluecanary

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 14:59:19 -0800

I think it's a matter of perception. I assume it was an accident (unless the guy is a complete monster). But I don't think you necessarily get that from the videos. I don't think the videos depicting this event show it was "clearly" an accident.

scopa

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 14:57:49 -0800

Also in the interest of equality, since this poster calls for 'the black community to come together in unity to stop police terrorism'... I'd like to see other posters calling for the black community to come together to stop youth violence. It's a vicious cycle, but those cops wouldn't have been there in the first place if there wasn't a fight going on.

billywags

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 14:56:05 -0800

What are the little things coming out of his crotch?

scopa

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 14:51:48 -0800

If you watch all the videos, it's pretty clear he fired his weapon on accident. The question is why did he draw in the first place. The poster is obviously going the inflammatory route, rather than reason. I feel bad for all involved, but this was clearly an accidental homicide. 'Negligent use of a firearm' is how I would describe it.

brittney

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 14:37:37 -0800

The officer has resigned.