• Executions on our Streets

    October 4, 2013

    Tags: , ,
    Posted in: #99Percent, Democracy




    Outside America’s non-working Capitol Building yesterday, cops killed an unarmed woman with a baby in her car after the car had crashed and was stationary. When the cops had her stopped the first time, she did not fire any shots or give any indication she had a weapon.

    Not that anyone noticed, but cops in the DC area killed another unarmed citizen on Tuesday. No indications this one was mentally ill, just wouldn’t stop running when told to do so by the cops (Did he hear the order? Was his adrenaline rush too much? Was he scared of being hand cuffed and beaten?)

    Typical rules of engagement for soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan require someone to brandish a weapon before he can be blasted away. Not always followed, but cops in America do not even have the paper restriction. I’ve written elsewhere about making life-and-death decisions in ambiguous wartime situations.

    We all know that cops have a dangerous job; they know that too. I know they are scared, dealing with unclear, threatening situations. The dead woman at the Capitol was likely mentally ill (Did she have access to psychological care?)

    But none of that grants them the right to conduct executions on our streets.



    Related Articles:




    Copyright © 2020. All rights reserved. The views expressed here are solely those of the author(s) in their private capacity.

  • Recent Comments

    • grayslady said...

      1

      Thank you for writing this. I think many of us are appalled by this incident. The woman was shot seventeen times, yet the traditional media spins the story as heroic action by the police. When I saw the photos of police in their–what else can we call it?–Nazi-style uniforms, running down the street with huge automatic rifles, I was horrified. This isn’t even close to the country I grew up in.

      Speaking of Nazis: spelling Nazi here. Stationery with an “e”=writing stationery. Stationary with an “a”=fixed in place. Sorry to be a pest, but can’t help noticing.

      10/4/13 3:51 PM | Comment Link

    • Kyzl Orda said...

      2

      If you see the video someone posted on youtube, there’s a point where it is 7 or 8 police aiming their guns straight at the driver. From their vantage point, how could the child in the rear NOT be seen?

      If the police had to shoot, why didnt they do so at the tires? Wasnt there concern as the vehicle turned stray bullets could hit bystanders somewhere?

      The other thing that occurred is it’s quite evident alot of journalists got all their information from the authorities.

      This is part of the problem of downsizing papers and the rise of internet journalist, with a reliance on people who either have no journalist training (because the older and more seasoned true professionals were ‘given the package’) or the young generation of writers believe every single word their sole source, the authorities, feed them. How this story initially unfolded is another embarassment for our media. This story is utterly different than the one we were initially fed this time yesterday

      Bottom line, the police and the journalists clearly need more training. More stories like this and the police cannot expect to rely on whitewash commissions

      10/4/13 6:13 PM | Comment Link

    • John J. said...

      3

      Like the police couldn’t box her in with their vehicles? Perhaps shooting out her tires would not work like it does on TV but don’t law enforcement have such capablity?

      P.S. Off Topic

      I overheard an ex-Marine early this year: “We were dropping more bombs on North Korea than Afgahnistan. Just nobody knows it.”

      Maybe you could look into that?

      10/4/13 6:48 PM | Comment Link

    • teri said...

      4

      Update this morning, per the woman’s mother, is that the woman the cops killed had postpartum depression. The article I read stated that “there was no information on whether or not she was on medication for this condition” – as though having or not having a prescription would have saved her life.

      I can’t get through a day without some piece of news sickening me.

      Oh, and tangentially, since your post is about cops, tear gas and pepper sprays are on the chemical weapons list, i.e., banned from use by the military. They are, however, permitted for use by the police forces in many countries (ours, for example). Egypt’s as well, which is why we felt no compunction about selling a shit-load of those chemicals to Egypt to use on their protesters.

      10/5/13 6:06 AM | Comment Link

    • Kyzl Orda said...

      5

      From today’s Washington Post:

      “The vast majority of big-city police agencies — including in the District — prohibit or strictly limit their officers from shooting at moving vehicles. But it’s unclear whether the Capitol Police or Secret Service violated their policies during the chase or the shootings.

      Brian Leary, a Secret Service spokesman, declined to provide a copy of his agency’s use-of-force or chase policies. Lt. Kimberly Schneider, a spokeswoman for the Capitol Police, did the same.”

      Sound familiar?

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/shooting-at-capitol-debate-fatal-shooting/2013/10/04/a2b38a64-2d26-11e3-b139-029811dbb57f_story.html?tid=pm_local_pop

      10/5/13 10:26 AM | Comment Link

    • Clarence Boddeker said...

      6

      More information may come out but remember these guys had seconds to respond while we have forever to look back. The vehicle could have been a VBIED, and shooting out the tires and talking to the suspect would only increase the danger. Based on the information shown, this was a good shoot. It’s unfortunate but that is the training protocol.

      10/6/13 12:10 AM | Comment Link

    • wemeantwell said...

      7

      I will disagree. At no point did the driver do anything to suggest she had a weapon, even after the first volley of shots. Her car was stationary (crashed) when the cops killed her. She had a one year baby in the car, and after the first volley of shots they must have seen it. The two areas where 17 shots were fired were full of people. Why wasn’t she Tasered in the stopped car? Whatever the rules are that might be used to justify this, those are just made-up rules and what happened isn’t right.

      10/6/13 12:19 AM | Comment Link

    • J Kwe said...

      8

      Weak analysis. She was using her vehicle as a weapon.

      10/6/13 3:47 AM | Comment Link

    • Clarence Boddeker said...

      9

      Well, I agree that would definitely have been a good response if they knew she didn’t have an explosive device. But if it was a VBIED, tasering wouldn’t help but could actually trigger the device. Also, multiple cops start firing, most will empty their magazine (this isn’t the movies where you shoot them in the head once and say “happy trails, Hans”). A typical 9mm service weapon will have around 13 rounds so 17 rounds is actually rather conservative. We know at this point that she did not have an explosive device and may not have meant any harm. However, they had a limited picture and based on what they knew at the time, I do see their rationale. Lastly, and most importantly, we don’t know what intel they had at the time. Threats may have been made (given all in the news, that wouldn’t surprise me) which may have had security on a heightened state of alert. Regardless, a tragedy.

      10/6/13 4:05 AM | Comment Link

    • pitchfork said...

      10

      quote:” Based on the information shown, this was a good shoot.”unquote.

      Good shoot.

      right.

      What fucking parallel universe were you spawned in asshole.

      Cops pump 17 rounds into an unarmed woman with a baby in close proximity..and it’s a..ahem..good shoot. Fuck you.

      Why don’t you follow your slime trail back to that cesspool you crawled out of and eat shit.

      10/6/13 6:57 AM | Comment Link

    • Clarence Boddeker said...

      11

      Well, thank you for your insightful comment, you’ve clearly researched the issues and have arrived at a well thought-out conclusion. Furthermore, thank you for contributing to an open environment of discussion and polite discourse. To step back, “good shoot” doesn’t mean that it was desirable only that it wasn’t a negligent decision. It’s a term law enforcement people use when determining if lethal force was justified.

      10/6/13 9:02 AM | Comment Link

    • wemeantwell said...

      12

      My concern is not so much whether the rules of engagement were followed to make this a “good shoot” or not, but the larger question of the cops treating America under those rules as a war zone. Yes, yes, she could have had a VBIED in her car, or anthrax, or an al Qaeda hit squad or whatever, but when ever in recent America has that really happened? It has not. The cops now move from one event to cataclysmic terror threat in a heartbeat and react accordingly. That’s what happens in a war zone. I don’t want to live in a war zone.

      10/6/13 12:36 PM | Comment Link

    • pitchfork said...

      13

      quote”Well, thank you for your insightful comment, you’ve clearly researched the issues and have arrived at a well thought-out conclusion.”unquote
      Well, thank you for providing us with a peek into the mind of SubZero IQ cockroaches who think a badge is a license to murder UNARMED citizens with impunity.

      quote”Furthermore, thank you for contributing to an open environment of discussion and polite discourse.”unquote
      Polite discourse. right. You don’t deserve it and neither do these degenerate bastards.

      quote”To step back, “good shoot” doesn’t mean that it was desirable only that it wasn’t a negligent decision. It’s a term law enforcement people use when determining if lethal force was justified.” unquote

      I know exactly what it means. It’s a “word” the law enforcement PTB use to justify murder. And THAT is exactly what this was.

      As to.. “it wasn’t a negligent decision.” Maybe in your parallel universe. “Negligent” is a bullshit euphumism. This was out and out murder. These cops aimed to KILL..ON PURPOSE. The militarized police of America are out of fucking control and this crap happens all over America daily. Here is just a few examples of the insanity of current “law enforcement”, Waco/Ruby Ridge notwithstanding.

      http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2011/05/i-wonder-what-truth-of-this-is-71-to-0.html

      71 rounds in 7 seconds. These sub-human pond scum redefine psychopaths.

      http://www.policestateusa.com/2013/distraught-family-members-pepper-sprayed-handcuffed-bench-while-daughter-dying-self-inflicted-gunshot-wound/

      http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/fla-family-claims-police-cover-up-in-squad-car-death/?stay=1

      There are hundreds of videos on youtube of “law enforcement” gone fucking mad. Policestate is a massive understatement.

      Like I said…fuck you.

      10/6/13 1:37 PM | Comment Link

    • Kyzl Orda said...

      14

      “It’s unfortunate but that is the training protocol.”

      Dear Clarence, That seems to be part of the problem. It is alot about the training and clearly the training is off here. Even if the suspect was using her car as a weapon — and by the way its the police who put that out into the news first so caution there — there’s steps they could have taken after seeing the kid in the car.

      Also, if the car was being used as a weapon, its amazing humans could outrun it and not more cops were hurt. That woman could have mowed down far more people if she really was using the car as a weapon. It seems more like she panicked and survival mode, with having baby on board, kicked in

      It seems like military training tactics were applied here — not civilian policing. Of course, doesnt help when the law enforcement agencies suddenly decide to hide their policies and operations guides from the very public that funds them

      10/6/13 3:27 PM | Comment Link

    • pitchfork said...

      15

      Kyle…look at any news source on this story and you’ll see the entire world is calling this an execution…except for the Congress, who gave these scumbag cops a standing ovation, notwithstanding the cops themself. Whudda thunk. One criminal gang congratulating another for murdering an innocent woman. Only in ‘murica.

      And now excuse me while I..well, you know.

      10/6/13 6:54 PM | Comment Link

    • Clarence Boddeker said...

      16

      Pitchfork, you may have some good points but it’s hard to discern them from your contempt and hostility towards people presenting alternate opinion. I had assumed this was a forum of expression and communication, not an echo chamber. Apologies.

      10/7/13 6:21 AM | Comment Link

    • pitchfork said...

      17

      quote:”Pitchfork, you may have some good points but it’s hard to discern them from your contempt and hostility towards people presenting alternate opinion.”unquote

      I’m sorry, but this “alternate opinion” you speak of is worthy of contempt. But hostility? That’s rich. Considering the hostile attack on this woman, I’d submit you placed the shoe on the wrong foot.
      Regardless, given the exponential expansion of the Surveillance and Police State in America, exhibiting contempt for those who cheerlead, acquiesce and apologize for it’s existence is the LEAST thing I could do. As to “alternate views” from my own regarding acts committed by these vile murderers…well, if you’re gonna sugar coat this murder under the color of law as “justified”, Houston..we have a problem. But hostility on my part? I suggest you visit the morgue to see the results of REAL hostility perpetrated by these psychopaths. And then get back to me.

      10/7/13 12:42 PM | Comment Link

    • pitchfork said...

      18

      Ahem…

      http://www.policestateusa.com/2013/gang-atlantic-city-officers-brutally-beat-man-release-an-attack-dog-to-gnaw-on-his-neck/

      If these scumbag cops aren’t sent to prison, I submit, this country has lost it’s soul and we are doomed.

      10/8/13 1:43 AM | Comment Link

    • pitchfork said...

      19

      10/8/13 1:56 AM | Comment Link

    Leave A Comment

    Mail (will not be published) (required)