A suspect being chased by a team of Michigan police officers last week was a potentially dangerous 40-year-old white woman wanted in connection with a stabbing. But the person they cuffed at gunpoint and placed into the back seat of a squad car was a terrified 11-year-old black girl named Honestie Hodges. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...fire-cuffing-11-year-old-girl-holding-n829521 Spoiler: :(
Are you really so unathletic you can’t comprehend crawling without using your hands? Your legs are what generate power during a crawl. You don’t need your hands.
I watched your video. Do you think if the police handled it differently he would have still been killed? I'm assuming you don't. That cop is fired btw.
and victim's hand wasn't behind him when the shot was fired as police defense attorney made it seem. I can't even watch that video with sound, it makes me sick. here you go fo fa http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/11/opinions/daniel-shaver-shooting-opinion-gagliano/index.html Those "furtive movements" might very well have given Brailsford, in the jury's eyes, a legal right to shoot Shaver. But the officer's unprofessional conduct, seeming inexperience, and the confusing commands we hear being issued by a SWAT officer, directly and indirectly influenced Shaver's reactions, which resulted in the shooting. Here's how: The SWAT team member issuing the initial commands instigated non-compliant situation. In a quarter-century of participating in and leading tactical resolution operations, I have never heard a law enforcement professional use such offensive -- almost taunting -- rhetoric. The vocal police officer tasked with directing the operation appeared hell-bent on baiting a confused but receptive and compliant subject into making a deadly mistake. Was this related to a dysfunctional team or to this officer's inexperience or lack of emotional maturity and control? What police executive with oversight of tactical operations could have felt this officer possessed the leadership and interpersonal skills necessary to de-escalate potentially combustible situations?
That kid was a complete moron, but christ sakes....he is sobbing. Asking not to be shot. You've got 3 guns on him. Any LEO with a shred of skill gets him detained without killing him.
it's got nothing to do with athleticism, it's the definition of crawling. When a baby crawls, what are they doing? Scooting around on their knees? or on all 4's? Poll 100 people and 98 of them are going to define crawling just like that, hands and knees.
What are you even trying to argue? If you’re asked to crawl without using your hands you understand what the command is, right?
I'm arguing that if you tell someone to crawl, they are going to put both knees and both hands on the ground and crawl. Honestly, I had no clue what crawling without using your hands was until I saw this explanation here. Can you crawl without using your knees also? Are these people crawling?
No they’re not crawling because they’re not in the prone position. That’s a handstand walk. What you’re telling me is you don’t believe humans are able to follow directions? That if explicitly instructed not to use your hand, you’re still going to use your hand? What a hill to die on.
30 seconds after unexpectedly being confronted by 6 men with assault rifles? I'd say it's hard to follow very confusing instructions in that situation, especially when the guy with a gun tells you that you're going to die if you make one wrong move.
What I'm telling you is that the officers seemed to give contradictory commands. In my mind, and in the guy who was murdered mind, and everyone except cops, apparently, you cannot possibly keep your hands raised and crawl. You can't do it, because crawling required both hands on the ground. That's why he did what he did. He was also told to shut the fuck up and not ask questions. Had he been allowed to ask a question, perhaps that could have been clarified. But if the explicit instruction was to crawl, yes, I'd drop my hands and crawl like a baby. If I did not do that, I'd feel like I was not following their instructions to crawl. ? I'm not really dying on a hill here, just having a discussion
It isn’t a contradiction just because you want it to be a contradiction. It’s a supplemental instruction. When you were in college were you unable to write a paper because the teacher gave contradictory instructions when she wanted it typed?
if she had a gun pointed at me and said she'd kill me if I made a mistake, I'd do my best to giver her exactly what she wanted. Do you not see the problem with telling someone to crawl with their hands up, if that's not something they've ever seen or heard of, right after telling them they will die if they make one more mistake? You are really not seeing that? It's crystal clear to you, that guy should have known exactly what crawling with your hands up was, and not assumed the command to crawl was a new command that overwrote the command to keep his hands up? Are there other examples? If tell you to stand up and crawl, what would you do? Remember, if you make a mistake, you are dead. NOW CRAWL!
Skimming this page, but I think it is well established that the police instructions and strategy was piss poor and also established that he should not have reached back. Perfect storm. The shooting gets justified (in trial) and the police change the way they handle situations like that. Doesn't seem to be too much left to even argue about
He is correct if his argument is that the police only added chaos to a situation. Honestly, I'm not happy with the timing of the shot either (his hand was back up), but I understand I wasn't there.
If only that were his argument. Instead he’s trying to argue it’s impossible to crawl without using your hands.
941Gator is 100% on this. He was not shot because he crawled with his hands, and they wanted him to crawl without his hands. If he were he would have been shot about 5-8 seconds faster when he began to crawl. He was shot because he reached back behind him instead of crawling all the way to them. That being said m, the cops could have done a way better job of communication on their desires for how to take these two into custody. That being said, the chick did what was told and didn’t die. Really was a perfect storm.
The guy at fault in this is the cop giving direction, more than the shooter. And no. I don’t agree that many people should eat a bullet.
Agree the guy giving instructions was the root of the problem but keep in mind that six officers had guns on this guy and only one of them pulled a trigger.
I've been 100% consistent here. He stated the guy giving the instructions was more at fault than the shooter. While I agree, it should not be forgotten that 5 other officers refrained from pulling their trigger. The shooter holds a lot of blame. Even with the cop giving instructions doing a horrible job, 5 out of 6 officers were able to refrain from shooting the guy.
Nah, I put most of the blame on the guy that squeezed off 5 rounds from his "You're Fucked" hardo AR-15.
The sobbing guy was reaching for his pants, he could have had an assault rifle stuffed down there. The only way to handle the situation was to end his life, duh!
Talk about birds of a feather, the nut job screaming directions isn’t even the trigger happy guy that got fired. I’m ready to start arguing semantics about his hand location and exactly when the shot was fired, when you are ready.
It depends on your definition of crawling. If you are going by what most people consider crawling, then yea, it's impossible to crawl without using your hands. I'm not sure why this is difficult to grasp. if I asked you to crawl 2 weeks ago, you'd be on your hands and knees like a baby, crawling. But now that this video comes out, if I asked you to crawl you'd get on your knees and scoot towards me? GTFO. Crawling is not a mysterious, hard to define action. What they were asking the guy to do can only very loosely be considered crawling, if at all. But if we can call anything crawling by simply describing what you have to do, we can say - stand up, move your legs quickly back and forth, and crawl towards me. uhhh you mean run? no, CRAWL!
“It depends on your definition of crawling.” Lol no it doesn’t. You don’t get to just make up a false reality and make your own definition of what is crawling. If you tell me to crawl without using my hands I am smart enough to understand not to use my hands. I’m sorry you aren’t smart enough to understand the difference between crawling and crawling without using your hands.
By definition, you literally can't crawl without being on your hands and knees. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/crawl Definition of crawl intransitive verb 1a : to move on one's hands and knees The baby crawled toward her mother. b : to move slowly in a prone position without or as if without the use of limbs The snakecrawled into its hole. The soldiers crawled forward on their bellies. 2: to move or progress slowly or laboriously traffic crawling along at 10 miles an hour 3: to advance by guile or servility crawling into favor by toadying to his boss 4: to spread by extending stems or tendrils a crawling vine 5a : to be alive or swarming with or as if with creeping things a kitchen crawling with ants b : to have the sensation of insects creeping over one the story made her flesh crawl 6: to fail to stay evenly spread —used of paint, varnish, or glaze transitive verb 1: to move upon in or as if in a creeping manner all the creatures that crawl the earth 2: to reprove harshly they got no good right to crawl me for what I wrote —Marjorie K. Rawlings NEW! Time Traveler
Surely you read the rest of the definitions before posting that right? It just amazes me you’re so willing to be wrong with the evidence right in front of you.
Yes! Yes! Exactly! You don't get to just make up definitions Dictionary crawl krôl/ verb gerund or present participle: crawling 1. (of a person) move forward on the hands and knees or by dragging the body close to the ground. If you are not moving forward on the hands AND knees or by dragging the body close to the ground.....you ain't crawling, chief. Throughout the exchange, the cops tell the guy to do one thing, then their next command overwrites that previous command. For example: Lie down with your face flat on the ground, and interlock your hands behind your head and DON'T MOVE! Now put your hands out flat on the ground in front of you and push yourself up to a kneeling position but officer, how can I do that with my hands interlocked behind my head??? And how can I do that without moving, as you previously told me "DON'T MOVE"?? Oh, that's because this is a NEW command. Forget what I told you before, and do what I'm telling you now. So when they say - put your hand up and leave them there. Now crawl towards me. Those are two (2) commands that are not necessarily meant to be followed simultaneously, just as the above example.
I read them all. I missed one that said "scoot around on your knees with your hands above your head."
941Gator see what I mean about about him making a retarded argument? I’d hate to see him at the Paralympics arguing the amputees aren’t really running because they got no legs.
show me where in either of those definitions crawling would be considered scooting on your knees with your hands and body straight up. It's not there. It's not crawling. ? I'm not sure why you are even debating this.
So now you’re changing the argument? Just save us the time and acknowledge you can crawl without using your hands.
How is this changing the argument? the cops confused the guy by giving him strange commands that seemed to conflict with eachother. The reason the commands conflicted is precisely because you can't crawl and keep your hands up. This has been my argument the entire time. I can scoot on my knees with my hands up, but that's not crawling, soooo
I see Missouri fired the incompetent turd who caused the death of a friend of mines son. https://www.desmoinesregister.com/s...case-drowning-handcuffed-man-fired/958310001/