Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report • Hacker News Board

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#121

Post by kelnos » Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 8:57 AM UTC

JamesBarney wrote: post #71

newacct583 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Were they not supposed to shoot back when Taylor’s boyfriend shot at them? How about: they should be held responsible for the preventable death of this woman in a situation they directly and deliberately created? Is that not the problem? I don't think anyone is demanding a first degree murder conviction here. They didn't walk in with the intent to kill her. But they sure as shit did kill her, and it's all their fau…

Is the bad guy a couple of cops who we hold to the impossible standard of not returning fire? Or are no-knock warrants the bad guy which routinely cause deaths for the sole purpose of keeping some drugs from being flushed down the toilet? Because one of these is very easy to fix and would 100% mean Taylor would still be alive. The other would be super difficult to fix and who knows if it would have saved her life.

> Is the bad guy a couple of cops who we hold to the impossible standard of not returning fire?

How is that an impossible standard? Holding your fire and retreating is certainly an option. It carries more risk, but if you're going to dress in plain clothes and serve a no-knock warrant, that's a risk you must accept up-front.

The existence of no-knock warrants is also to blame, of course; banning them entirely would likely have prevented this.

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#122

Post by 082349872349872 » Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 9:02 AM UTC

acallaghan wrote: post #117

alkibiades wrote: post #69

and not a single shred of evidence it was racially motivated rather than an accident having to do with the fact that her boyfriend shot a police officer

If you don't like people defending themselves against plain clothed intruders with guns they legally bought, then maybe you need to revoke the 2A. Most cops don't need guns. Almost no normal civilians need guns. The entire developed world that's not the USA gets by just fine without the 'right' to own a semi-automatic machine gun.

The tech debt is so legacy in those amendments that it predates SCCS. See the git blame for "three-fifths", or ponder the fate of the "Equal Rights Amendment".

Note: Where I live, most young men, and some young women, have assault rifles at home. Cops still don't kill people. (might savoir-vivre have something to do with this juxtaposition?)

(speaking of refactoring tech debt, the Duke of Wellington was one of the signatories to an international treaty which may have helped inspire the "Monroe Doctrine". [flagged] discussion at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23359754 )

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#123

Post by gridlockd » Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 9:14 AM UTC

fiblye wrote: post #107

Kiro wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you enter private property forcibly, you should expect to be shot at. For someone outside the US this is such a crazy statement.

If the point of contention guns specifically, or people defending their homes to the point of killing someone? America has more than just a few home invasions and murders. If someone is trying to break into your home, especially at night, there's a high chance that that person is not only willing to maim or kill you, but planning to do so. America has around 1 million home invasions per year and help isn't always nea…

It's a matter of culture. This is how the average European imagines an encounter with a criminal:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woO1Cs6c-oo

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#124

Post by MaxfordAndSons » Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 9:20 AM UTC

Grollicus wrote: post #84

rayiner wrote: post #7

USA Today has the best coverage of this I’ve seen. The NYT coverage of this is awful: https://www.nytimes.com/article/breonna-taylor-police.html A key fact is that the police shot Taylor after her boyfriend shot at the police, thinking they were intruders. While he was fully entitled to do that, the NYT doesn’t believe in gun rights so that’s a messy fact. To make the victim seem more sympathetic, the narrative under…

> Obviously nobody expects the police not to shoot back when fired upon Well, I do. We had a case in Germany a few years back where the police served some kind of no-knock warrant, the guy (a Hells Angel) thought they were from a rival gang, shouted at them and then shot at them. A Policeman died, the guy dropped his gun immediately after police identified themselves. The Case made the news later because the guy got…

That's great that German police are trained to react that way. But American police are not. American police are trained to prioritize their own safety and survival above the safety and survival of suspects or even innocent bystanders. There's no consideration of intention or what information people are acting on - if there's a potentially lethal threat to the policeman, it must be dominated and suppressed.

So yes, with a practical understanding of how American police train and operate, this outcome is completely expected.

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#125

Post by bagels » Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 9:21 AM UTC

leereeves wrote: post #111

baddox wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course news agencies should report that the US Senator has that opinion. There are plenty of news agencies that reported on the fact that the NYT published this opinion piece, for instance, and I don’t think people are too upset about those reports. It’s the publishing of the opinion piece that is the issue.

News agencies shouldn't report that because the Senator didn't say that. He made it very clear he was talking about rioters and looters, not protestors: > Those excuses are built on a revolting moral equivalence of rioters and looters to peaceful, law-abiding protesters. A majority who seek to protest peacefully shouldn’t be confused with bands of miscreants. And nowhere in the op-ed did he call for murdering or kill…

"One thing above all else will restore order to our streets: an overwhelming show of force to disperse, detain and ultimately deter lawbreakers"

Killing is what the military does.

Trump has declared that the protests are lead by terrorist "Antifa".

The police were already gassing, shooting and brutalizing protesters.

I don't know what other conclusion to draw about what "overwhelming force" and "dominating" would mean in this context besides murdering people.

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#126

Post by vkou » Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 9:30 AM UTC

leereeves wrote: post #111

baddox wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course news agencies should report that the US Senator has that opinion. There are plenty of news agencies that reported on the fact that the NYT published this opinion piece, for instance, and I don’t think people are too upset about those reports. It’s the publishing of the opinion piece that is the issue.

News agencies shouldn't report that because the Senator didn't say that. He made it very clear he was talking about rioters and looters, not protestors: > Those excuses are built on a revolting moral equivalence of rioters and looters to peaceful, law-abiding protesters. A majority who seek to protest peacefully shouldn’t be confused with bands of miscreants. And nowhere in the op-ed did he call for murdering or kill…

> News agencies shouldn't report that because the Senator didn't say that. He made it very clear he was talking about rioters and looters, not protestors:

Here in Seattle, it wasn't the rioters and looters who were attacked by police, it was mostly peaceful, non-violent protesters.

One might even imagine that the two are deliberately conflated.

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#127

Post by leereeves » Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 9:31 AM UTC

bagels wrote: post #125

leereeves wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

News agencies shouldn't report that because the Senator didn't say that. He made it very clear he was talking about rioters and looters, not protestors: > Those excuses are built on a revolting moral equivalence of rioters and looters to peaceful, law-abiding protesters. A majority who seek to protest peacefully shouldn’t be confused with bands of miscreants. And nowhere in the op-ed did he call for murdering or kill…

"One thing above all else will restore order to our streets: an overwhelming show of force to disperse, detain and ultimately deter lawbreakers" Killing is what the military does. Trump has declared that the protests are lead by terrorist "Antifa". The police were already gassing, shooting and brutalizing protesters. I don't know what other conclusion to draw about what "overwhelming force" and "dominating" would mea…

You're trying to imply something that's contrary to his statement, literally right there in the bit you quoted:

> disperse, detain and ultimately deter lawbreakers

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#128

Post by nl » Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 9:42 AM UTC

hkai wrote: post #47

lukifer wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US leads the world in prison population, compared to other democracies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_United_States_in... Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that I don't live in China. But it's pretty embarrassing for the richest and most powerful country in the world (allegedly bearing the mantle of freedom and democracy and Enlightenment values), to have to compare ourselves to totalitarian dictatorship…

As for your second point, I've seen an article on CNN the other day that says US kills twice as many people (per 1M arrests) than Australia. It seems like a lot, but then consider that only 5% of people killed by police in the US were unarmed. The other 95% were armed, and most of those cases seem to be actual criminals rather than ordinary people like Breonna Taylor's boyfriend. I'm with you on the American police b…

> I've seen an article on CNN the other day that says US kills twice as many people (per 1M arrests) than Australia.

Do you have the link?

I don't know how to find the number of arrests, but in Australia there were 4 people killed by law enforcement in 2016/17 and in the US there were 1,536 killed (2019). Australia has a population of 24M, the US 329M, (so 13 times the population). At the same per-population rate as Australia, the US would kill 52 people, and at double the per-population rate it would be 104.

It would seem astonishing that the arrest rates somehow converts to the US only killing twice as many people!

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#129

Post by lm28469 » Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 9:46 AM UTC

alkibiades wrote: post #69

and not a single shred of evidence it was racially motivated rather than an accident having to do with the fact that her boyfriend shot a police officer

Does it matter though ?

The job of the justice system, and the police, is to keep non criminal people safe, all of them, even if it means not being able to catch a few criminals here and there. It's obviously not the case in the US though, just looking at wrongly convicted people gives you a good idea of what the US system is about [0]. This kind of shit should never ever happen, it's the very basis of any serious justice system.

Also, this is exactly why countries like France have laws preventing police interventions between 9pm and 6am (it obviously has exceptions, but even then they need a special authorisation). You don't storm people houses in the middle of the night and start shooting when the confused people you just woke up start panicking... seems like common sense to me

As far as I can tell you're legally allowed to own a gun and use it to defend yourself against intruders, you can't use this as a valid argument in that case. The only shocking thing here are the police tactics, not the fact that this dude defended himself.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_miscarriage_of_justice...

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#130

Post by pjc50 » Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 9:47 AM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #7

USA Today has the best coverage of this I’ve seen. The NYT coverage of this is awful: https://www.nytimes.com/article/breonna-taylor-police.html A key fact is that the police shot Taylor after her boyfriend shot at the police, thinking they were intruders. While he was fully entitled to do that, the NYT doesn’t believe in gun rights so that’s a messy fact. To make the victim seem more sympathetic, the narrative under…

> nobody expects the police not to shoot back when fired upon

This is often part of the "rules of engagement" that military personnel are expected to follow; not only because they're expected not to shoot civilians, but also peacekeeping situations where firing on the wrong forces could cause WW3, as well as the very basic check that the target isn't wearing the same uniform as you and shooting in your direction by mistake.

It's not clear whether the police were firing at the gun-holder here and missed, or whether they were firing blindly through a door, wall, or into a dark area; that is also criminally irresponsible.