Texas police want uvalde bodycam footage suppressed

Post by kube-system » Mon, Jun 13, 2022, 7:15 PM UTC

the_only_law wrote: post #81

kube-system wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just unreasonable. Humans have a natural desire to preserve their own lives. First responders aren't any different. The idea that first responders are superheros is a fallacious trope. The vast majority of police never use their gun over their entire career.

If a soldier goes AWOL because they're "scared" of fighting or consistently straight up neglects to do their job, I'm sure "natural self preservation" will be a stunning and effective defense at the court martial regardless if they're ina combat role or not.

Post by ceejayoz » Mon, Jun 13, 2022, 7:15 PM UTC

kube-system wrote: post #98

ceejayoz wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Putting themselves in harms way is the deal. It’s why they get to retire over a decade earlier than the rest of us with a nice pension. It’s why they get qualified immunity for a whole bunch of actions. They aren’t holding up their side of the deal here.

Yes, it's expected that first responders may do things that are generally dangerous but they're not on kamikaze missions, it's completely normal for them to back out when they believe their own life is in danger. This is not any different for any first responder. Firefighters will run right back out of your house if they think it's required to save their own lives.

Post by nescioquid » Mon, Jun 13, 2022, 7:16 PM UTC

kube-system wrote: post #25

johndevor wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Accountability is the issue. If they can tax you by force, they're not going to put themselves in harms way. They already got paid. (Generalization of course, but true in many life-and-death situations.)

Most people won't willingly die at work for any amount of money or accountability, and I don't blame them. These kinds of situations are outrageous because people want to believe in superheros, but they don't exist.

Post by threatofrain » Mon, Jun 13, 2022, 7:19 PM UTC

ALittleLight wrote: post #99

threatofrain wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The police were doing something. They were threatening the parents with tasers and arrests if they interfered. Does "all bets are off" mean that parents should have enough tactical force to subdue the police? In evaluating potential scenarios, is a shootout with the police on the table of possibilities? The police even threaten parents with obstruction of justice and violating probation for merely talking to the medi…

If I happened to be on the jury for a case assessing the murder of an Uvalde police officer by an Uvalde school parent I would not vote "Guilty" under any circumstance. Realistically, I think what this situation means is that the police, at least in Uvalde, need to be disbanded and reformed and serious steps need to be taken to ensure their failure is not repeated. I think such serious steps include charging the cowa…

Post by calibas » Mon, Jun 13, 2022, 7:20 PM UTC

pigtailgirl wrote: post #100

doodlebugging wrote: post #86

I thought body cam footage was public data, discoverable and releasable under the law. There is no one left to prosecute here since they killed the shooter so there is no reason to delay disclosure. That thin blue line looks more and more like a line for cowards to hide behind while they seek to escape accountability for actions they know would have them arrested if they had no badge. Simply holding their noses while…

-- bottom link in this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31729913 :=) --