Oh, well there's your problem. You can't believe anything from the Huffington post. That's like quoting Rush Limbaugh.
Yes, he had a knife. Yes the cops knew it. He had his hand in his jacket and wouldn't remove it which is why they drew their guns. Then he drew a knife from that pocket. The cops AND bystanders were yelling for him to drop the knife. He then came at the cops yelling "shoot me" and they didn't shoot. He looked at the bystanders and went off to the side which many believe he was avoiding getting a bystander shot. He then went at the police.
I don't care what color you are, that will get you shot. i just watched a video where they shot a white man with a hammer for coming at them.
You and I completely agree that there is bias and unequal justice. I just think people pick the wrong cases as examples. Wilson was defending himself. these cops were defending themselves. The Walmart and park shootings they were not.
I honestly don't care how many people the cops kill in actual self-defense. Dying isn't part of their job description.
I just watched the video as well. 23 seconds was NOT enough time to truly ascertain the situation. And I'm really bothered that immediately upon arriving at the scene, they are there, guns drawn. If the guy was that much a threat, why are there people milling about around him who could easily have been stabbed. That should have been a clue to the officers that the people weren't scared of him. Pull up a bit away and walk up.
TRY TALKING. Try anything other than pulling right up to him and expecting a troubled person to give instant compliance. Well, guess what. Irrespective of color, troubled people don't instantly comply. I've certainly seen enough of THAT at the VA. I've seen plenty of brother vets have issues and the VA police have to walk a line, especially with all the vets watching them. What's missing from these incidents lately are the attempts to de-escalate. From the initial position, to the initial approach to the initial stance, it's always aggressive with zero room for anything other than total capitulation. Short of that? Death. And that's if the guy gets a chance to capitulate.
And that's not how it's done in white neighborhoods. That procedure isn't the same. You look at the guy in Walmart. He wasn't even given a chance to surrender. NO "get on the ground". NO chance to follow any instructions. Nothing. Just...sight him and drop him.
While we may agree on the larger picture, we disagree on the pixels, apparently. The question I raise is WHEN do the police use non-lethal force? When are they held accountable? Because apparently, they can choke a guy to death for selling cigarettes on the street illegally, the pettiest of crimes. And by getting away with it with no consequences, do you think they won't resort to using chokes in the future rather than NON-lethal means? I sure don't have much faith in that.
Folks are far too quick to put the onus on citizens to never resist officers.
Since when? And what's the definition of resist? There are COUNTLESS videos online of an officer's definition of resist essentially being "anything other than the total and complete capitulation of the citizenry to the officers demands" when that's not legal or moral. But, we're supposed to do that ANYWAY? I agree that folks who push, shove or go farther are resisting. However, to speak? to ask questions? to clarify the charges? To deny unlawful requests? To properly and respectfully assert rights? THAT'S not resisting.
Just saw a video this week of a guy who got pulled over. Is standing outside his vehicle. Locks it. Cop asks to search it, guy says no, not without a warrant. Cop says stop wasting time, just open it. Guys stands his ground without being rude. Explains he has rights. If he wants to get a warrant, that's fine, but he won't do it without a warrant. Cop goes ballistic. Slaps the guy so hard he hits the deck. Fearing for his safety at this point, the guy opens his car and allows the search under duress.
Now, this is bad for a number of reasons. Firstly, the cop has committed assault on camera and violated his Fourth Amendment rights. I don't recall seeing any updates posted in the comments about the disposition of the person or the officer. Secondly, if the officer DID find contraband or anything illegal, it would have been inadmissible in court expressly due to the Fourth Amendment violation.
It's important for police to do things properly for their safety and the safety of others. Even if that cop were the best cop in the world having his worst day and he caught two serial killers in the midst of a multi-state killing spree... he'd have likely ruined ANY evidence in that car. So all of this "just do what the cop says" misses the point. The cop needs to follow the law at all times because his JOB is to protect the public and enforce the law. If he's not following the law, he's not doing his job... and in this age, he does not have the latitude to go "off script". The law is complicated enough. Officers don't have the ability to wing it like they're on some sitcom or in some buddy cop movie.