After BART Shooting: "We'll Reform Procedures"

By -
You gotta love it. Remember when the Abu Ghraib horror pics came out, and the military said the guards should have undergone better training? ("OK guys, it's a common misconception that civilians have, to think that it's a good idea to put detainees in sexually compromising positions and then taking pictures. But believe it or not, that's not how we do things in the US military.")

Well a similar spectacle unfolded today, when the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) board listened to complaints about the fatal shooting of a passenger on New Year's Eve: "The public asked the BART directors, and they agreed, to set up a committee to review procedures. They also discussed the possibility of creating a civilian review board."

I have to ask: Is there an actual procedure on the books right now, that says when you and other officers have an unarmed guy face down on the floor, that it's acceptable to stand up, draw your weapon, and kill him?

Now I'm a pacifist, so of course I don't condone the riots. Two wrongs don't make a right, and you're not going to convince Whitey to rein in the police by rioting. But if you haven't seen the video of what happened, you should check it out. The policeman is not your friend.

Comments

  1. TokyoTom1:16 AM

    Man, that's terrible.

    Another casualty of the war on drugs and the excessive force that is given to police as a result.

    It doesn't seem from the video that any use of a weapon is justified, but it also looks that the officer who did the shooting was shocked that he had actually fired his gun. Did he think he had a taser in his hand instead?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bob Murphy2:53 PM

    I don't know Tom. I couldn't really make out his expression, but the newscaster agrees with you that the officers were surprised by what happened.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more