Sean Bell had just as left a raunchy and notorious strip club at 4:00 A.M. in Jamaica Queens (a "bad" neighborhood, if there ever was one) the morning of his WEDDING DAY when he was shot by police. He ignored warnings of a police officer to stop and eye-witness accounts have the "victim" knocking the cop to the ground twice with his vehicle. Sean Bell and his "buddies" were not "choir boys." They learned a valuable lesson regarding the importance of carefully following the instructions of a police officer.
I am tired of families telling us what good boys their sons are when they have arrest records (I could imagine how many times they were never caught) and are doing wrong when a cop takes them down.
Eye-witness accounts certainly seem to be supporting the police version of events. The "phantom" 4th man has now been identified and he has called his lawyer (what a shocker).
The Black community needs to stop blaming the police and start doing some soul searching.
2006-12-02 15:55:27 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Political Correctness has ALWAYS taken precedent over common sense.
2006-12-02 15:59:58 · answer #1 · answered by Tony T 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
The problem here, as I see it, is the media basically lied and created a controversy where there was none.
The parts they left out. This was a BAD neighborhood where people are murdered all the time. The club they were at is a focal point for this type of criminal activity.
Everyone in the vehicle had been arrested previously on illegal weapons charges. The cops knew who they were and had good reason to think that they were both armed and a deadly threat. Not that it mattered though because:
The criminals attacked them and attempted to murder an officer by running him over, not once, but twice. They did this for no more reason than the cops tried to see if they were armed with illegal weapons again, and/or engaged in other crimes. Repeated calls to stop, were ignored. Those calls to stop continued during the entire incident. The cops kept firing because the criminals continued to try and kill them.
This is nothing more than a bunch of murdering scumbags that tried to take on the cops....and lost. The survivors are headed to jail for a long, long time.
2006-12-05 19:08:31 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
My initial response to this event is that if the same incident had happened with a group of white men, the outcome would have been drastically different.
There are also a couple assumptions in your comments that I cannot allow to go unchallenged. First, I have yet to read an account that suggests these men knew they were dealing with police officers. None of the reports by the three surviving men nor that of witnesses that I've seen suggest that the officer identified himself as such. If someone were trying to start trouble with you and second man who may or may not be with the first man tells you to stop, would you think, "Hey, perhaps this is an undercover officer. I think I'd better stop and see what he wants?” From his perspective, Sean Bell was not ignoring the instructions of an officer, that evening; He was trying to save his own life from a street attack.
While Bell did have an arrest record, it doesn't seem as though he were in any regular trouble. I don’t believe that having some minor violations in the past makes you fair game for target practice. Finally, arrest ratios of non-whites in our society only show a bias in the system, not a stronger likelihood of guilt or wrongdoing.
With those comments out of the way, the use of 50 bullets was excessive to say the least. One officer even reloaded during the one-sided shooting spree. Additionally, the officers did not follow departmental procedure when they started firing.
In Commissioner Kelly’s own statement,
"Policy is not to shoot at a vehicle," admitted Kelly at City Hall on Monday while standing at the Mayor's side, "if the only deadly force being used against you is the vehicle itself."
Further more, a witness at the scene has stated that the only person who was armed got away. I think it is definitely a case of excessive force.
I've listed the linke to one of the articles I've read.
2006-12-03 00:32:35 · answer #3 · answered by SDTerp 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It really has nothing to do with political correctness, unless you want to look at it like that. The point is three unarmed young men were shot at by six or seven police officers 51 times. Did you see the Larry King Show last Monday in which Bell's fiancee and Al Sharpton were interviewed. They said the cop never identified himself before he started shooting and the three young men thought they were being carjacked.
It's not a black and white issue; it's a police over-reaction and citizens getting shot issue.
You're obviously unsympathetic to the Black community and have absolutely no understanding of the issues of police racial profileing and brutality against Black people. Maybe you should research a bit before you sprout off.
2006-12-09 23:59:00 · answer #4 · answered by Shelley 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Ok, let me try to be quick here.
1. Doesn't matter if he had an arrest record.
2. A moving car is considered a deadly weapon, just as a tire iron, rock and a lot of other things that too many people can't seem to get their heads wrapped around until it's their live on the line.
3. He DID try to kill or seriously injure the officer, obviously intended to and definitely had the means (see car as deadly weapon.)
4. There were 4-6 officers. Cops are trained to fire until the threat stops that means if it takes 1 round or several magazines you stop shooting when the threat stops. THAT'S defensive firearms doctrine - not an opinion. (See how easy it is to get to 50 rounds?)
5. The NYPD carries a 9mm hardball round. This means it doesn't expand so it does minimal damage and doesn't expend the bullet's energy in the target. That requires additional rounds to get the same effect so it takes more "shooting until the threat stops" to get the threat to stop. If the public wants "nice & gentle" police bullets then that means a lot more of them to save a life. Can't be avoided.
2006-12-10 11:43:39 · answer #5 · answered by deus ex machina 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
SPEED - I am not sure about political correctness but two things stood out to me.
One, these were undercover police officers. That has to mean they were there for a reason and its a reason we are not going to know because these operations are kept under raps. For this reason, we may never know what the real story is.
Conversely, I do not understand the need for 50 gunshots from the police. Something was going on...we may never know the whole story. I am not sure it was about Sean Bell.
Last, I do not think this is a BLACK issue. The officers represented several cultural groups. Its being made a black issue...and THAT may be the political aspect.
Peace
2006-12-03 00:20:12 · answer #6 · answered by Dust in the Wind 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Sean Bell did not have an arrest record. There is nothing criminal about leaving a strip bar at 4AM (unless you're underage). You are a total bigot if you think this man deserved to be murdered by drunken police whose guidelines say they absolutely CANNOT at moving vehicles, even when the vehicles are coming in their direction.
How would you feel if at 4AM a bunch of men surrounded your car? Would you try to move it?
Whites and others need to stop blindly supporting bad police actions against blacks and do some soul searching to learn why they are so comfortable with such a horrifying atrocity as 51 bullets flying into the car of innocent partygoers.
Right now, the police are rounding up young men who had nothing to do with anything-- to save face. The media is helping them by painting untruths about these men just for ignorant people like you.
Pretend this dead man is your family member and feel shame.
2006-12-03 00:03:50 · answer #7 · answered by HawkEye 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Sorry Speedfreak, I see nothing politically correct about an average of one UNARMED suspect a week being gunned down for not following instructions (Portland Oregon and outlying areas). This phenomenon is now presenting its self all over the country, and grand juries are walking these offending cops as "following procedure". Raunchy? Notorious? No prejudice there ?
2006-12-03 00:56:39 · answer #8 · answered by Gunny T 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sean Bell DID have an arrest record! Read the paper! I agree with Speedfrea--Every time a black man is shot by police, there is an uprising! Only two of those cops were white. Bad neighborhood, strip club, drug dealing, you figure it out! Those cops weren't on a stake-out for nothing. The race card is a favorite "outcry" for blacks looking to stir things up.
2006-12-03 00:22:42 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
A vehicle can be considered a deadly weapon. The fact that he struck a cop with a deadly weapon can be consider grounds for self defense if the cop shoots. I really don't know all the details and I would like to read the depositions of every one involved.
Good Luck and Take Care
2006-12-03 00:07:18 · answer #10 · answered by escapingmars 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋