• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Police shootings and justice

Jon Bonavia

Banned
Joined
Dec 9, 2010
Messages
29
Location
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
Should any community judge itself, gun control or law enforcement?By Dan Bell, JS Community Columnist

Dec. 9, 2010 |(2) Comments

I do a lot of driving on our expressways and have seen a lot of billboards. They all try to sell me something. But I came across one recently that was different. This billboard asked: "When police kill, should they judge themselves?" The picture of the business end of a very intimidating gun accompanied the message. Yeah, it got my attention.

On Nov. 9, 2004, the Bell family (no relation) suffered the ultimate deprivation: the loss of their son and brother, 21-year-old Michael. It was on a "routine" traffic stop in front of his house that Michael E. Bell died, shot at point-blank range by one of several police officers. The incident was witnessed by his mother and sister.

Excerpt ... read more at http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/111631614.html
 

GLOCK21GB

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
4,347
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
Another reason why alot of people GREATLY dislike, distrust & FEAR Law Enforcement.....They can do anything they want...with out any fear of prosecution & They for the most part ARE above the law.
 

oak1971

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
1,937
Location
Wisconsin, USA
The Bell shooting was justified, he was grabbing an officers weapon. He had been fighting off several officers before he went for the gun, he also had a long criminal history.
 

Crassus

Banned
Joined
Dec 7, 2010
Messages
57
Location
why?
Another reason why alot of people GREATLY dislike, distrust & FEAR Law Enforcement.....They can do anything they want...with out any fear of prosecution & They for the most part ARE above the law.


I have to agree with you on this one. It seems like the police are becoming more militarized and act with no repercussions. What happened to the good ole Barney Fife days. I miss Mayberry!
 

oak1971

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
1,937
Location
Wisconsin, USA
Thank you Mr. Huckleberry. You avoided the point of the article, for not reading it to learn that neither DNA nor fingerprints were found on the victim's gun.

Many Wisconsin users on OCDO have significant rap sheets at http://wcca.wicourts.gov/simpleCaseSearch.xsl that should preclude their possession of weapons.

"Anti-gun" is hateful speech. I prefer pro gun-control.

Go away.
 
Last edited:

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
Thank you Mr. Huckleberry. You avoided the point of the article, for not reading it to learn that neither DNA nor fingerprints were found on the victim's gun.

Many Wisconsin users on OCDO have significant rap sheets at http://wcca.wicourts.gov/simpleCaseSearch.xsl that should preclude their possession of weapons.

"Anti-gun" is hateful speech. I prefer pro gun-control.

I have yet to find a single person I know on there. Perhaps you should do some research before you make false accusations (which you can be sued for, for defamation of character).
 

BROKENSPROKET

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
2,199
Location
Trempealeau County
The OP is anti gun. You should all keep that in mind.

Anti-gun? I read the article as it is posted here, and from what I can tell is that it calls for ACCOUNTABILITY in the Internal Affairs of Law Enforcement Agencies when deadly force is used, or am I missing something?
 

MontanaFLHT

New member
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Messages
5
Location
Darby Montana
Regardless of who started this thread, it is always a good idea to have civilian oversight of police involved shooting reviews. We have an independent judge and jury to determine if we have broken the law. Police officers should have no less.
 

Carcharodon

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
189
Location
Neenah, Wisconsin, USA
Regardless of who started this thread, it is always a good idea to have civilian oversight of police involved shooting reviews. We have an independent judge and jury to determine if we have broken the law. Police officers should have no less.

+100 I cringe every time I hear "Internal Review". We do audits on ourselves at work and I can tell you they're a joke. Why would the police be any different.
 

Beretta-m9

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
110
Location
usa
Thank you Mr. Huckleberry. You avoided the point of the article, for not reading it to learn that neither DNA nor fingerprints were found on the victim's gun.

Many Wisconsin users on OCDO have significant rap sheets at http://wcca.wicourts.gov/simpleCaseSearch.xsl that should preclude their possession of weapons.

"Anti-gun" is hateful speech. I prefer pro gun-control.

you can't control criminals having guns, they do not follow laws hence they are criminals. Making "pro gun control" laws only effect the law abiding citizen, but you would not care about that because you have a simple hatred towards guns because you can't comprehend that guns don't kill, people kill. The gun is just a tool of selection like a knife or a bat. Apparently you would prefer the only people to have a gun is a criminal because making more laws does just that, takes from law abiding not from law breakers. get a clue.
As for your post, yes police should have to answer to someone other then themselves.
Btw Lmfao @ Anti-gun is hateful speech.
 
Last edited:

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
I have yet to find a single person I know on there.

Ooh, ooh - I'm on there!
I had to sue the guy I bought my house from 'cause he didn't hold up his end of our contract.
(And even though the court says it was 'paid in full', it wasn't. He got away with only paying maybe half of what he owed.)

A small claims suit is, however, a far cry from Jeri's / Doug's claim of "significant rap sheets that should preclude their posession of weapons". (Should by whose lights?)

Heck, I've had at least 2 background investigations by various parts of "Homeland Security" (cue ominous music). No idea how often they're updated. If they can't find something on me to prevent me from entering a military base, I must be squeaky-clean.
 
Last edited:

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
I knew who the female dog was

Even though anti-gun people are 'legal targets' so to say, your post is WAAAY beyond what's acceptable.

Attack her ideas, not her person, and do not rejoice that the logical outcome of her way of life is that she will be a victim. Her suffering will be justice enough, and is not for us to mete out.

Many a hoplophobe has seen the error of her ways after being attacked by the very criminals she would not work to disarm. We can only hope that they don't kill her, so that she can tell everyone that her previous ideas (laws somehow disarming criminals) were in fact quite wrong.

Or this could be yet another persona that will eventually be banned. Judge for yourself.


As for the original article, I think that an impartial, non-involved, non-LEO board of review for police misconduct of all kinds is a Very Good Idea. I also find it amazing that WAVE would be so virulently anti-gun as to point out that the Only Ones aren't "all that".
 
Last edited:

GlockRDH

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
626
Location
north of the Peoples Republic of Madison
Its been my understanding that when lethal force is used that a department CANNOT investigate the situation. Happened both times in the past year with the 2 shootings in Columbia county...the state came in the investigate both. Seems that IF a department investigated itself, was found to be in the wrong, that would allow for future litigation in which the past WRONG was brought in as evidence of the ability to make errors...hence, i dont think any department would take that chance. Does this make sense? LOL
 
Top