Police Shoot, Kill Fleeing Suspect on Lodge

[Detroitnerd]

I find it interesting that when somebody robs a liquor store, we are going to talk about the facts and justify police doing ANYTHING to the suspect. They shot him in the back? He was fleeing/fighting/lunging/complaining/resisting, etc.

But when police commit a crime, suddenly we are discussing how police are caught between unrealistic expectations, unfair biases, lack of compensation, etc.

If you're going to judge somebody's actions, and complain about streetcorner sociologists, do it across the board and evaluate the actions of the police when they break the law.

[Hermod]

I find it interesting that when somebody robs a liquor store, we are going to talk about the facts and justify police doing ANYTHING to the suspect. They shot him in the back? He was fleeing/fighting/lunging/complaining/resisting, etc.

Just think of it as a post-partum abortion of an obviously defective fetus.

[Detroitnerd]

Just think of it as a post-partum abortion of an obviously defective fetus.

Tell that joke to his mother. I'm sure she'll get a laugh out of it.

[TKshreve]

Generally speaking, a certain segment of the population does not like the idea of police shooting people in the back as they're fleeing. It just seems unsportsmanlike.

Tell that joke to his mother. I'm sure she'll get a laugh out of it.

Wasn't it his mothers job to teach him not to run from the cops and also not to commit armed robbery? Sounds like the mother [[parents) are the real joke here.

[Detroitnerd]

Wasn't it his mothers job to teach him not to run from the cops and also not to commit armed robbery? Sounds like the mother [[parents) are the real joke here.

Why don't you shoot her too? Who needs juries and judges?

Love how so many people who winge on about "breaking the law" really have no respect for the law when you get down to it.

[TKshreve]

Why don't you shoot her too? Who needs juries and judges?

Love how so many people who winge on about "breaking the law" really have no respect for the law when you get down to it.

Easy Dnerd. The fact that I am not in jail, nor do I conduct my "day job" with a sawed-off shotgun should be proof enough <to you> that I RESPECT THE LAW.

"Why don't you shoot her too?"
- Uh, don't remember shooting anyone lately. Nice bait though. Fact is that no one took on the role to raise this individual in the proper manner. And what you have is a very typical outcome. Don't you think that it was someones responsibility to educate this guy for society? Or were they shot too?

[Detroitnerd]

Easy Dnerd. The fact that I am not in jail, nor do I conduct my "day job" with a sawed-off shotgun should be proof enough <to you> that I RESPECT THE LAW.

So then it's perfectly OK to shoot a fleeing suspect? There's no way that's legal. And if you don't hold police to the law, you're going to end up with just another gang wearing colors.

"Why don't you shoot her too?"
- Uh, don't remember shooting anyone lately. Nice bait though.

It's a rhetorical device. If killing people who break the law without a trial is OK, it's just a small step to extrajudicial killings of people who enable breaking the law in some fashion.

Fact is that no one took on the role to raise this individual in the proper manner. And what you have is a very typical outcome. Don't you think that it was someones responsibility to educate this guy for society? Or were they shot too?

I believe it's our collective responsibility to ensure people are properly educated, don't live in ghettos, get substance abuse counseling, have real opportunities, and some modicum of security so they don't rob liquor stores. It's so freakin' easy to blame people's parents, and so much harder to work to create a more just society.

[Johnlodge]

We should probably wait until an investigation is carried out and all the facts are in. Oh, what's that you say, it's DY? Carry on, then.

[Detroitnerd]

We should probably wait until an investigation is carried out and all the facts are in. Oh, what's that you say, it's DY? Carry on, then.

Haha. Well, you're right, of course, as usual. But this discussion is already on the free range. And there are some fundamental ideas there that can be discussed as the investigation moves forward. Thanks for the levity, though, JL.

[Danny]

That prep did the crime, now he's doing time.

[TKshreve]

I believe it's our collective responsibility to ensure people are properly educated, don't live in ghettos, get substance abuse counseling, have real opportunities, and some modicum of security so they don't rob liquor stores. It's so freakin' easy to blame people's parents, and so much harder to work to create a more just society.

Those are very fair things to expect of society. In Detroit, the money is simply not there for each and every one of those.

At one point though, I truly believe that you have to ask people kick in to the pot. Right?

I think we have been here before DNerd. I am not rying to wag my finger, but at one point the people have to apply themselves to the community alongside of the local gov't assistance programs. Frankly, the social services can't be the only answer.

Take all those wishlist items you mentioned and apply community involvement to them individually. Do you see where volunteer involvement might be able to improve the benefits of those programs?

I wish we had the motivation and means to harness the energy of the hundreds of thousands of out of work people [[or those who choose not to work) towards the betterment of society. What I think it boils down to is there are those who need assistance and expect it, and those who get off their ass and put personal fate into their own hands. Yes Dnerd - I am referring to bootstraps. Is it completely wrong to assume that many people have stopped trying?

Instead, many of these people consider easier ways to "make it" in a tough economy, in a tougher city.

[Detroitnerd]

Those are very fair things to expect of society. In Detroit, the money is simply not there for each and every one of those.

At one point though, I truly believe that you have to ask people kick in to the pot. Right?

I think we have been here before DNerd. I am not rying to wag my finger, but at one point the people have to apply themselves to the community alongside of the local gov't assistance programs. Frankly, the social services can't be the only answer.

Take all those wishlist items you mentioned and apply community involvement to them individually. Do you see where volunteer involvement might be able to improve the benefits of those programs?

I wish we had the motivation and means to harness the energy of the hundreds of thousands of out of work people [[or those who choose not to work) towards the betterment of society. What I think it boils down to is there are those who need assistance and expect it, and those who get off their ass and put personal fate into their own hands. Yes Dnerd - I am referring to bootstraps. Is it completely wrong to assume that many people have stopped trying?

Instead, many of these people consider easier ways to "make it" in a tough economy, in a tougher city.

This is a pretty wide-ranging debate, but when it comes down to bootstraps, that's not enough. Unless you want to return to 19th century ideas and life patterns, where people grow their own food, raise their own animals, hunt and fish, ride horses on dirt roads, burn their own wood, have no televisions and telephones, and pay no bills for anything. In that sort of environment, you have no excuse but to work and do the best you can. No social safety net to catch you.

Basically, the way the social safety net is in this country, you can't abuse it. It's really a pittance, just there to ameliorate the worst of the suffering. I don't know of any way you can just get a check every month and never do anything. Heck, even unemployed people won't get their checks past 26 weeks this year.

But look how it is for the people up at the top! They run a bank into the ground? No problem. Here's a trillion bucks. Want to start a war that kills thousands of our boys and girls? No problem. Here's a trillion bucks. Want us to change the laws so that you're not breaking the law anymore? No problem. Send us the legislation you want passed.

I find it irritating that we're mortgaging the future so we can blow it on war, graft and the super-wealthy. And then all we can talk about is shiftless people who won't work.

And, if the bankers have to go bankrupt and get up off their asses and do real work, and if generals can't charge off into wars on our dime and have to do real, productive work, then, yeah, maybe I'd be interested in this personal responsibility thing.

[TKshreve]

So if the people at the top are not doing the real work, then society should be held to the same standard. OK.

No wonder this country is circling the bowl as we speak.

Ya know, the city of Detroit was EXTREMELY lucky to get Kwame out of office. After all they voted him into office and he robbed them blind. Sad, but true. The fact that an obscure law allowed Kim Worthy and friends to blow this thing wide open is incredibly fortunate for the city. He would otherwise still be in reign.

Every year the majority votes into office the people we expect will uphold our ideas, beliefs and vision. Often special interests and $$ can sway them away from those priciples. It is again, sad but true. So how do we prevent this legal raping of our country. I propose two paths.

1- Educate the voters. This is why Detroit has Dave Bing and not Monica Conyers at the helm.

2- Wait for the Federal Government to fix things. It probably won't happen until the population revolts, but hey it could fix things.

Yes our government can be more efficient, but again so can society and its people. Ask your self what you can do to help either one of those separate, but intertwined beings.

[Bearinabox]

1- Educate the voters. This is why Detroit has Dave Bing and not Monica Conyers at the helm.

What, because we're so well-educated?

[Detroitnerd]

So if the people at the top are not doing the real work, then society should be held to the same standard. OK.

No wonder this country is circling the bowl as we speak.

Haha. That's a little sneaky, to say that we should follow their lead and do the same thing. I think it's pretty clear that I'm saying the people at the top are behaving like criminals, which they shouldn't. And neither should the average person. But, to a certain extent, it's true: The people at the top set the tone.

1- Educate the voters. This is why Detroit has Dave Bing and not Monica Conyers at the helm.

God, don't get me started on Bing. [[Senile? Where is he?)

2- Wait for the Federal Government to fix things. It probably won't happen until the population revolts, but hey it could fix things.

We should probably be like the French. When the government is doing something horrible, they go in the streets and stop the country from functioning. Taking a page from them would probably be a good thing.

Yes our government can be more efficient, but again so can society and its people. Ask your self what you can do to help either one of those separate, but intertwined beings.

Well, if the government weren't stealing money for war and graft, we could probably have enough money to fund a society that was well educated, secure and safe, and didn't run around robbing liquor stores.

But we don't have the money, right? Well, ever notice how they say, "Social Security will go broke in [[insert frightening and, ultimately, untrue number here) years." Notice how they never say the Pentagon will go broke? That's how they do us like that.

[EASTSIDE CAT 67-83]

"All of a sudden, this gentleman started running up the side of the expressway and bullets [[began) to [[ring) out"

That man was no gentleman.....

[BagAJellyDonuts]

"I'm sorry if it goes against PC "thinking" but for the pittance that cops make for the crap they have to put up with, if they have to make a decision that leaves no doubt that they will go home that night, so be it."

Are you a real police officer or just pretending to be one on here? Most departments have strict policies about when officers can shoot. When officers start taking a "shoot first" approach, you end up with dead innocent civilians and huge lawsuits.

"pretending to be a cop"? No way but I respect the cops. They put up with a lot of nonsense from those that second guess.

Sure there are strict policies. There are also laws against sticking a gun in somebody's face to rob them. If you do stick a gun in somebody's face and then run from cops, you invited the results.

Worthy could have surrendered. He didn't. He chose to place the rest of us at risk. Good riddance.

Haven't heard of any relative crawling out from under a rock trying to suck a buck yet. They don't deserve a cent.

[RickBeall]

I'll agree with this comment:

Generally speaking, a certain segment of the population does not like the idea of people robbing legitimate businesses with threats of armed violence. It just seems criminal.

[Detroitej72]

"All of a sudden, this gentleman started running up the side of the expressway and bullets [[began) to [[ring) out"

That man was no gentleman.....

I shook my head at that one too.

This criminal made a series of bad choices that resulted in his death, and he alone is responsible for his demise.

If he didn't rob a store at gunpoint, flee police and finally had he surrendered instead of running, this thug would still be alive. I have no sympathy for what caused him to become the animal he was, and do not wish to analyze his upbringing.

[Detroitej72]

I think it's pretty clear that I'm saying the people at the top are behaving like criminals, which they shouldn't. And neither should the average person. But, to a certain extent, it's true: The people at the top set the tone.

Its pretty pathetic if people take a cue from those at the top on how to behave. I don't look to those folks for guidance, and neither dose most people I know. We have a set of morals and that is what guides us in daily life.

Well, if the government weren't stealing money for war and graft, we could probably have enough money to fund a society that was well educated, secure and safe, and didn't run around robbing liquor stores.

Although I agree we should spend more on social programs and less on phony wars and graft, I don't think that would stop criminally inclined people from acting on their tendencies and urges. Crime has and always will happen as long as their is civilizations.

[Pam]

I don't care if this guy was the biggest scumbag on earth, I think they should have tried to capture him by some other means. "Bullets flying everywhere" near a freeway was putting bystanders at risk.

[Novine]

"If he didn't rob a store at gunpoint, flee police and finally had he surrendered instead of running, this thug would still be alive."

Would he?

[gnome]

The thing that seems hinkey is that it was the southfield popo who pulled their weapons and killed Mr. goofball. Not the Novi guys. This tells me that the Southfield guys were operating under a different set of facts. They were informed of the chase by their dispatcher and must have been told that Mr. Goofball was armed and dangerous.

We know that Mr. Goofball had rammed a Novi police Cruiser and that he was a suspect in an armed robbery. We know there was more than enough cause to assume he was still armed. Not just because he had robbed that party store twice, [[once with a knife and once with a pistol) but because of his violent criminal history.

So the full story is not known. Why did Southfield cops shoot to kill and the Novi cops didn't? Did the Novi Dispatcher relay incorrect, or misleading, information to the Southfield Dispatcher who inturn relayed it to the street cops? Did the Southfield Dispatcher conflate the information? Or are the Southfield cops trained to kill at a drop of a hat?

Personally, I'm wired to think the Southfield police aren't bloodthirsty thugs who can't wait kill. I think they are well-trained and sober in how they conduct business otherwise the media would have carried other stories of thoughtless brutal behavior. That does not seem to be the case; hence, what informed their choices?

[Meddle]

Did the Novi Dispatcher relay incorrect, or misleading, information

Having worked at Novi Dispatch and seeing some of the things that go on there, I can say anything is possible.....

[Novine]

If you watch the chase video, it looks like the Novi car hits Worthy's car after it goes out of control and crashes. Then it sounds like multiple shots. I don't know the mindset of the Southfield PD. But this is the second police shooting of a suspect following a pursuit in less than a month.

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/dpp/news...ge-20100702-mr

http://www.theoaklandpress.com/artic...8025367304.txt