Ok, vaatame lähemalt siis.
Police Killing: A case where a person dies as a result of being shot, beaten, restrained, intentionally hit by a police vehicle, pepper sprayed, tasered, or otherwise harmed by police officers, whether on-duty or off-duty.
A person was coded as Unarmed in the database if they were one or more of the following:
not holding any objects or weapons when killed
holding household/personal items that were not used to attack others (cellphone, video game controller, cane, etc.)
holding a toy weapon (BB gun, pellet gun, air rifle, toy sword)
an innocent bystander or hostage killed by a police shooting or other police use of force
a person or motorist killed after being intentionally hit by a police car or as a result of hitting police stop sticks during a pursuit
Siin on ju tohutult halli maad. Näiteks ühe politseiniku vastuargument sarnase konteksti kohta.
In 2017, according to the Washington Post, law enforcement shot and killed 20 African Americans that were considered “unarmed.” It was 18 in 2016 and 38 in 2015. I did what the Washington Post did not list in their data. The actual facts from each incident. Because I have been in law enforcement for two decades, I wasn’t surprised by what I found. Out of the 20 “unarmed” suspects, 11 were committing a violent crime and fighting with a police officer before they were shot. The fights were brutal with some choking the officer.
Üks Unarmed kõik, isegi kui neil on relvalaadne asi käes? Ok, hea tagantjärele tarkus.
This information has been meticulously sourced from the three largest, most comprehensive and impartial crowdsourced databases on police killings in the country: FatalEncounters.org, the U.S. Police Shootings Database and KilledbyPolice.net.
Milline erapooletus! Sealt tuleb kindlasti ainult objektiivset ja kinnitatud infot.
Võtsin U.S Police Shootings Databse'ist, mis tundub kõige objektiivsema nimega, suvalise Unarmed ohvri ja vaatame, mida need sõltumatud allikad ütlevad.
Heenan was drunk (.2 BAC) when he accidentally entered a neighbors home thinking it was his own. The neighbor called the police. When police arrived, Heenan apparently was confrontational. The police officer claims that Heenan went for his gun, resulting in officer Heimsness firing three rounds into Heenan's upper torso. Heimsness was later cleared of any wrongdoing, but the situation wreaks of bullshit.
Heenan entered a neighbor's home while intoxicated, neighbor called police, police responded after everyone realized the mistake, neighbor's attempted to get the officer's to back down, Officer Heimsness felt threatened by Heenan and murdered him.
Ja siin politseiraport selle kohta.
/.../
Mõlemal juhul on "erapooletu" allika kajastus selgelt kallutatud sõnakasutuses -
accidentally, apparently, claims, reeks of bullshit, after everyone realized the mistake, attempted to get the officer to back down, felt threatened, murdered him. Reaalsus on see, et politseinik reageeris parasjagu käimas olevale murdvarguse väljakutsele, kohale jõudes nägi rüselust, kus üks osapool oli helistaja ise, üritas neid eraldada, helistaja allus korraldustele, arvatav murdvaras aga lähenes politseinikule ning asus temaga rüselusse ning üritas tema relva haarata, politseinikul õnnestus väike vahemaa tekitada, mil ta ka sooritas lasud ründaja suunas, mingil hetkel selle käigus hüüdis helistaja, et tegemist on naabriga. Loomulikult on kahetsusväärne, et inimene surma sai, aga selles oli oma osa ka ründaja mitte kõige targemal tegutsemisel.
Aga selliste allikate kallutatus on küll jälestusväärne. Oma agendat aetakse ikka ülima küünilisusega. Täiesti kaheldava väärtusega info pannakse moodsa graafikaga kaardi peale ning juba ongi tegemist tõestuse ja faktiga, mida levitatakse kui evangeeliumit üle maa.
