The times we live in

x5060 · Post by **x5060** » Sat May 21, 2005 12:19 pm

Police Say Crowd Cheered as Gary, Indiana Officer was Attacked

ASSOCIATED PRESS

GARY, Ind. (AP) -- Authorities say about 10 people urged a man on as he attacked a city police officer who had responded to a domestic dispute call.

Patrolman Carl Cochran was investigating the call Wednesday night when he was attacked unprovoked by Kelvin D. Banks, Lt. Roger Smith said.

Both men were on the ground and a group of residents were crowded around urging Banks to keep up the attack, Smith said. Cochran, a five-year veteran and member of the department's SWAT team, said Banks choked him and told him: ''I could kill you right now if I wanted to!''

Eventually, Patrolman Richard Knight arrived and saw his partner struggling with Banks. The two officers were able to subdue Banks.

Banks was charged Thursday in Lake Superior Court with counts of battery, resisting law enforcement, intimidation and disorderly conduct, said Diane Poulton, spokeswoman for the county prosecutor's office.

Cochran was speaking to a woman and Banks, who appeared to be joking and ''engaging in horseplay'' when the woman ran behind Cochran and asked him to protect her. Cochran reported he put his hand out to stop Banks from continuing toward the woman when Banks tackled Cochran's legs and the fight began.

Police Cmdr. Jerome Krebes said Thursday he ordered additional patrols in the neighborhood because of the crowd's response to the incident.

An interesting story you guys might find... well... interesting.

The cop should have shot him.

sam · Post by **sam** » Sat May 21, 2005 1:17 pm

fuck that. cops are here to uphold the law. not obliterate stupidity. we aren't nazis

Original Sin · Post by **Original Sin** » Sat May 21, 2005 3:46 pm

And last time I checked assaulting a police officer was illiegal, not to mention the other list of charges.
If someone was choking me, and said that, I would have shot them. No question about it, whether I was a police officer or not.

People like that aren't going to respect the law if they think they can walk all over it. If they know the police are going to fight back, people will think twice before fucking with them like that.

SoDeepPolaris · Post by **SoDeepPolaris** » Sat May 21, 2005 4:37 pm

Original Sin wrote:And last time I checked assaulting a police officer was illiegal, not to mention the other list of charges.
If someone was choking me, and said that, I would have shot them. No question about it, whether I was a police officer or not.

People like that aren't going to respect the law if they think they can walk all over it. If they know the police are going to fight back, people will think twice before fucking with them like that.

And he can't learn the respect it if he's dead.
What he did was wrong, the redneck piece of trash(UH OH, STEREOTYPE!), but he was unarmed, and it sounded like the cop had enough training to subdue an unarmed man without shooting him.

sam · Post by **sam** » Sat May 21, 2005 4:58 pm

Original Sin wrote:People like that aren't going to respect the law if they think they can walk all over it. If they know the police are going to fight back, people will think twice before fucking with them like that.

So maybe he's a moron. It'll catch up to him, it always does. It's this kind of thinking that drives me up the wall. Do you not see that empowering the police like that ends up horribly? I mean hell look at Ball State. That poor kid was just drunk and confused about which house was his. Stupid armed officer (WAY overpowered too for the call) UNLOADED on the poor guy and he's dead. It's thinking like what you say that ends up with outcomes like this. You fail to realize that a great deal of the police force themselves are bumbling idiots. Hell, the drug task force arrested my roommate back in february for supposudly recieving steroids in the mail. Yet the package wasn't steroids nor was the supposed order for steroids in question. We live in a state of disinformation where the blind lead the blind.

edit: article for those not in the know http://tinyurl.com/auhye

Spazz · Post by **Spazz** » Sat May 21, 2005 5:04 pm

sam wrote:
Original Sin wrote:People like that aren't going to respect the law if they think they can walk all over it. If they know the police are going to fight back, people will think twice before fucking with them like that.
So maybe he's a moron. It'll catch up to him, it always does. It's this kind of thinking that drives me up the wall. Do you not see that empowering the police like that ends up horribly? I mean hell look at Ball State. That poor kid was just drunk and confused about which house was his. Stupid armed officer (WAY overpowered too for the call) UNLOADED on the poor guy and he's dead. It's thinking like what you say that ends up with outcomes like this. You fail to realize that a great deal of the police force themselves are bumbling idiots. Hell, the drug task force arrested my roommate back in february for supposudly recieving steroids in the mail. Yet the package wasn't steroids nor was the supposed order for steroids in question. We live in a state of disinformation where the blind lead the blind.

Sam, as is mostly the case, I agree with you. Everyone going, OMFG the cop should have shot him!... well, guess what. This guy is a member of the SWAT team. Had he seriously wanted to fuck the guy up/kill him, he could have. But like Blaze pointed out, the police, especially SWAT, are trained to subdue and to PROTECT HUMAN LIFE. Yes, the guy was attacking the police officer. Yes, he was a redneck and probably deserved to get shot a few times, if only for the hell of it... but the officer was doing the right thing by not blowing him away. Saying that the police should shoot anyone that poses a threat is a bit like saying that everyone who speeds, cut people off, don't use their turn signals and whatnot should have their license revoked and should never be able to drive again. Yes, this would be nice, you're thinking. But all of us have done at least one of those things at one time in our lives.

I don't really know where I'm going anymore, and this particular session of Windows Update is done. So I leave you with, "The cop did the right thing by NOT blowing him away."

Original Sin · Post by **Original Sin** » Sat May 21, 2005 6:13 pm

I'm not saying the police should shoot and kill anyone who crosses them, don't misunderstand me. Yeah, theres been plenty of times that police have wrongfully shot and/or killed people, as Sam pointed out. However, there are just as many, if not more times when a police officer HAS been justified in shooting, and they usually do not.
In this particular case, I believe they should have. If not killed, subdued (taser, riot baton, whatever works.) If it were me, I would not have just sat there and let the guy choke me until someone else came along and pulled him off, especially if there's a crowd of morons around me urging this guy to take my life.

I'm not empowering the police, I'm not saying they should kill anyone that looks at them wrong. I'm just saying that in this particular situation, I would not have taken that chance. I would have shot him, because he was a danger to MY life.

Blaze · Post by **Blaze** » Sat May 21, 2005 8:12 pm

Spazz wrote:..But like Blaze pointed out....

You flatter me, no that was SoDeepPolaris who deserves the credit for such a true statement.

The case is definately an interesting one, but I really don't see the point. The cop did his job, the man is being charged, and everything is coming to a close. Or did I read it wrong?

x5060 · Post by **x5060** » Sat May 21, 2005 10:03 pm

SoDeepPolaris wrote: And he can't learn the respect it if he's dead.
What he did was wrong, the redneck piece of trash(UH OH, STEREOTYPE!), but he was unarmed, and it sounded like the cop had enough training to subdue an unarmed man without shooting him.

Yeah, subdue the man choking you to death...

At that point you arent really in too much of a position to "Subdue" anyone. If that other cop hadent of showed up this story could have all to easily read "Local Gary cop strangled to death". When im being attack, I will do what ever possible to stop the attack, including the use of deadly force in a situation where my life is in jepordy.

PROTECT HUMAN LIFE.

So whos human life is worth more? The cop or the attacker?

And i never said anythign about empowering cops to be able to shoot anyone they please. But this was a case of justifible use of extreme force.

P.S. As a point of interest, only 30% of people shot by the police actually die from the resulting gun shot wound. Id take the odds of him surviving (70%) over the odds of my living.

P.S.S. Im not too sure why the term "Blown away" is used. from my experiance, gun shot wounds are hardly "Getting blown away".

sam · Post by **sam** » Sat May 21, 2005 10:08 pm

in lieu of this discussion, i must say something.

i am pissed off.

so tonight i watch my favorite 8:00 block of the week: primetime cops. After this show, since I'm an american I watch America's Most Wanted (actually nothing else is on a 9 and i couldn't find the remot BA-ZING!) and mostly it's the same old same old. I started to notice something very peculier though, because usually they have some sort of kidnapping, a killing and then rape. This episode every single one had to deal with kiddy sex or pedos or something about kids. Then, the very last one is a guy that went on a spree of molesting children and what not. Right after this, they cut to the head (name slips me right now sorry) of the GPS pedo bill that's being worked on. Now I'm all about expressing ideas, but god damnit that is one cheap move. I wonder if AMW came up with it or if the "Taylor Machine" came up with this bull shit.

x5060 · Post by **x5060** » Sat May 21, 2005 10:12 pm

sam wrote:Right after this, they cut to the head (name slips me right now sorry) of the GPS pedo bill that's being worked on. Now I'm all about expressing ideas, but god damnit that is one cheap move. I wonder if AMW came up with it or if the "Taylor Machine" came up with this bull shit.

Hrmmm, AMW shouldent be pushing a political agenda....

Crotis Jivefunk · Post by **Crotis Jivefunk** » Sat May 21, 2005 10:59 pm

gary's a shithole town, but i have to say that that's stupid. my grandpa was a gary cop. you have to be a brave guy to do that.

Original Sin · Post by **Original Sin** » Sun May 22, 2005 1:04 am

sam wrote:in lieu of this discussion, i must say something.

i am pissed off.

so tonight i watch my favorite 8:00 block of the week: primetime cops. After this show, since I'm an american I watch America's Most Wanted (actually nothing else is on a 9 and i couldn't find the remot BA-ZING!) and mostly it's the same old same old. I started to notice something very peculier though, because usually they have some sort of kidnapping, a killing and then rape. This episode every single one had to deal with kiddy sex or pedos or something about kids. Then, the very last one is a guy that went on a spree of molesting children and what not. Right after this, they cut to the head (name slips me right now sorry) of the GPS pedo bill that's being worked on. Now I'm all about expressing ideas, but god damnit that is one cheap move. I wonder if AMW came up with it or if the "Taylor Machine" came up with this bull shit.

What's involved in this new bill? This is the first I've heard of it, but I'll admit I've been slacking on my current events recently.
It's a pretty standard media move, though...Play with the emotions of the viewer so they'll vote in favor of your cause. Same thing they did with the Terri Shiavo case, except this time they're using America's Most Wanted, instead of the news in general.
Hooray for political propoganda.

Disclaimer: I'm in no way trying to put down this bill. I don't even know what it is involved with it, who stands for it/behind it/in the closet with it.
In short, I am not protecting child molesters.
Have a nice day.

sam · Post by **sam** » Sun May 22, 2005 9:14 am

it's a bill they're proposing that would require all sex offenders that have 2 or more strikes to wear a gps tracker at all times. i mean yeah, they're pretty evil people and did an evil thing but doing this is wrong in my opinion. Where's the line drawn? When are we no longer human being? Isn't the idea of the Department of Corrections to be punishment for doing a crime and being able to leave once you've been rightfully punished?

Well, if they're needing to be watched after being punished then we're not doing our job. Rather than making sex criminals demonize themselves, being forced to be half a human I feel that maybe we need to look at our correctional facilities and change how we deal with these criminals. People are fucked in the head but still, you can learn to control it, take medication or something. Turning people into the lost pet registry is not a fix to the problem only a new means of control. I mean, what's to say after you get busted smoking illegal substances, doing some stupid prank on a friend, speeding that they won't slap a gps tag in you? It's bills like these that give the government power enough to put their foot in a very big door and kick it open.

Mosh_Mosh_Revolution · Post by **Mosh_Mosh_Revolution** » Sun May 22, 2005 10:11 am

I see your point, Sam, which is why I hesitate to share mine.

My problem with all of this is that it can be looked at in so many different lights, and each of the lights has its positive points and its negative points.

I think tagging sex offenders is fine. I support it. If they took it upon themselves to take away the rights of somebody else, they deserve to have their rights taken away from them. This is also why I support giving the public access to information about known sex offenders in their areas. I haven't been up on the news lately, so I'm possibly wrong, but I think that Fort Wayne at least is looking into, or already has, this information available.

I don't know about you, but I would certainly like to know if I have a registered sex offender living next door to me. Of if I had children and I was moving into an apartment complex, I would really like to know if one of those people was going to be living across the hall from me.

Once again, I'm going to say that all of these things can be looked at from different perspectives and have different things drawn from them. This is just what I see and how I feel about that.