MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Minneapolis Cop Shoots and Kills Australian Woman Through Door of His Car [UPDATED w/ comments from ACLU]

His and his partner's body cameras were both off.

family photofamily photoThe shooting of Justine Ruszczyk has attracted international attention and outrage for reinforcing the idea that American cops look at citizens as threats rather than employers who hire them to serve and protect them.

A Minneapolis police officer reportedly shot Ruszczyk, who was dressed in pajamas, while she was talking to his partner. The officer shot the woman through the driver's side window of the squad car while in the passenger seat.

The officer who shot her was not identified but was placed on paid leave, according to the police chief, Janee Harteau. Neither officer had his body camera activated despite department policy. Because the cop shot her from inside vehicle, the incident was not caught on dash camera.

The Minnesota Department of Public Safety's Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) is investigating the shooting, and acknowledged in a press release that the officers' body cameras were off and that the dash camera didn't record the shooting. Investigators are looking for whether other video of the incident might exist.

"I am heartsick and deeply disturbed by what occurred last night. My thoughts are now with everyone affected by this tragic incident, especially the deceased woman and her family," Minneapolis Mayor Betsy Hodges said in a Facebook post. "The City will continue to provide updated information on this incident, and the BCA's investigation, as soon as we have it."

Ruszczyk, an Australian, had lived in the U.S. for three years and was set to marry Don Damond, a local businessman, whose surname she sometimes used. She had called 911 herself to report a possible assault in the alleyway outside her home.

"America sucks, these cops need to get trained differently," Ruszcyk's step-son, Zach Damond, said on a video posted online. "I'm just done, fuck the police. I'm just done. This has to stop."

The incident demonstrates the urgent need for higher employment standards at police departments across the country. Specifically, policies requiring the use of body cameras should be coupled with disciplinary measures that include termination for failure to activate body cameras as required.

And this kind of policy needs to be enforced vigorously. In that way, it can be possible to remove officers who have a habit of ignoring their body cameras before they fail to activate it during a violent incident.

Further, a national police offender's registry, if used vigorously, could keep such problematic cops from getting employment in law enforcement elsewhere.

For there to be any hope about improving police standards and reducing incidents of violence, it has to become easier to fire bad cops and harder for such cops to get jobs in other jurisdictions.

Minneapolis police were equipped with body cameras starting in early 2016, and department policy require them to be turned on during suspicious person and traffic stops, chases, and public contact that involves verbal or physical confrontation.

It also calls for disciplinary measures up to and including termination for failing to comply. It won't be known whether any disciplinary measures will be taken against these two officers for their failure to turn on the body cameras in the first place at least until their names are released to the public.

The Minneapolis police body camera policy also calls for officers to obtain consent when possible before turning on their body cameras. It remains to be seen whether this offers enough of a loophole for cops to wriggle out of trouble in police shootings such as this one.

The city apologized last year for not publicizing the department's body camera policy before rolling ou the cameras themselves.

UPDATE: The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Minnesota has called on the two officers to face penalties for violating department body cam policy. "This violation of policy thwarted the public's right to know what happened to Ms. Damond and why the police killed her," said Teresa Nelson, the interim executive director of the Minnesota ACLU, in a statement. "The two officers broke the policy not only when they didn't activate the body cameras before the incident, but also when they failed to do so after the use of force."

"These two officers should face penalties for breaking policy 4-223 and making the truth so much harder to find," she said. "Consequences should be added to the policy to ensure better compliance and accountability.

The ACLU also called for the release of audio of Damond's 911 call and any audio that may have been recorded by the dash camera.

Photo Credit: family photo

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Hugh Akston||

    The officer who shot her was not identified but was placed on paid leave, according to the police chief

    So the cop got the same treatment as any murder suspect.

  • ||

    I'm beyond being flabbergasted at cops shooting people.

    I'm flabbergasted at the people who will see this story and *not* think that *maybe* police unions are too powerful and/or destroying our justice system. To the point where I'm probably going to have to start regarding as willful and malicious ignorance and have to start avoiding people based on it.

    Though, I had the same feeling about Eric Garner's death.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    The thing is, I read cases like this and I agree with you. Then Black Lives Matter latches onto a case and it gradually emerges that the 'victim' was armed, or acted belgerantly, or had a long history of violence (though 'he was turning his life around'), or did something phenominally stupid, and it's on video, or widely witnessed, or the physical evidence strongly supports it. A cynical person might suspect this is done deliberately, to discredit the people who want more controls on the police.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    ALL public sector unions should be illegal. Every goddamn one of them is a blight on this country. From the civilian federal employee's union, the teaxher's union, and the police union. Every one of them needs to go.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    Not totally sure that doesn't apply to all Unions. There was a time when they appear to have done more good than harm, but that was a while ago....

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    Disagree. Collective bargaining is just contracts. As long as the government does not butt in, there is nothing wrong with unions. In fact, they have a vital role in the marketplace.

  • ThomasD||

    "As long as the government does not butt in"

    Agreed, but the problem is that the government effectively is 'butted in' to every collective bargaining agreement.

  • timbo||

    That and the fact that collective bargaining is legal extortion. If the employer meets with other employers in their industry and discusses ways to deal with the union blight, it is called collusion and is highly illegal. When the employees do the same thing, it is benevolently called collective bargaining.

    And of course now more than ever, unions are completely pointless in that workers' protections are built into US law and there is hardly anymore specialized labor that can't soon be performed by robots.
    Unions are the biggest luddite camps of all time. And most of them are total scum.
    Sorry to offend but when you have worked with these people, it is far more than a stereotype.

  • Arcxjo||

    There's still no robot that can commit senseless violence quite as well as a union worker though.

  • The Last American Hero||

    Didn't you read about the Russian shooting robot the other day?

  • I'm Not Sure||

    "And of course now more than ever, unions are completely pointless in that workers' protections are built into US law..."

    If workers are protected by government laws, why do government workers need unions?

  • You're Kidding||

    What's the difference between a union and a gang? A union member and a gang banger?

    What's the difference between a closed shop and a mob protection racket?

    Libertarians are all for individual agency and individual rights. Aren't unions anathema to both of those?

  • The Last American Hero||

    They are also for free association.

    I have the right to get together with my colleagues and collectively bargain, striking if need be.

    My employer should have the right to tell us to fuck off.

  • Galane||

    Teacher's unions should not be allowed to go on strike during the school year. That's hurting the students they claim to care so much about. Let them do contract negotiations during the summer.

  • Merl3noir||

    Except that those contracts generally ought not be legally binding, as they are not signed as an agreement, but with one side using intimidation, and strong arm tactics to get the other side to sign. Also those contracts create significant obstructions to removing bad employees. Unions have become more like a parasite, killing it's host. And with government union thats bad for everyone.

  • Galane||

    Look up Caroline Small, Georgia, 2005. The full dashcam video can be found various places. Be aware that the end is not for the weak of stomach.

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    According to Daily Mail, the cop was a black dude namef Mohammed. So conservatives can breathe a sigh of relief. The narrative is not in danger.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

  • Hank Phillips||

    And gorgeous! No way can the perp pretend he thought he was shooting at someone's dog.

  • Inigo Montoya||

    Well there's the crux of the problem. The victim was gorgeous! The cop, being one fugly S.O.B. felt threatened by her beauty. And when cops feel threatened, they shoot. It's just so they can go home safe!

    See? The real problem isn't police unions, it's body image and self-esteem support for cops. We need a multi-million dollar program to promote positive self-imagery among police officers.

  • MarkLastname||

    A beautiful woman out that late at night? The cop rationally assumed she was a prostitute and therefore extremely dangerous. It's just a pity he didn't manage to force her to give him sexual favors to catch this lawbreaker in the act before blowing her away. Poor guy.

  • Old_Dog||

    ML:
    Do a little reading...she is the one who called the police.
    She was standing next to the Drover's door talking with that policeman when the shooter sitting in the passenger seat shot her.

    Somali shooting a Caucasian? He figures he gets one for Allah for free.

  • Old_Dog||

  • Longtobefree||

    But that would involve restricting donuts!
    The horror!

  • kV||

    Noor is the first Somali-American police officer in the 5th Precinct.

    Uh-oh, this isn't looking good for the libertarian moment.

  • Cy||

    "Uh-oh, this isn't looking good for the libertarian movement."

    Because we like cops?!?!

  • Careless||

    Because most of us like third world immigration, and this is an enormous increase in the immigrant cop murder rate

  • EvilWayz||

    "Because most of us like third world immigration"

    Wait.. what?

    I guess I'm not a libertarian then, unless they have something to offer America they can stay in their shitty country.

  • ||

    Noor is the first Somali-American police officer in the 5th Precinct. He has a degree is business administration and economics from Augsburg College.

    I bet it wasn't Austrian School economics but rather Keynesian economics.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Woman should have not spoken without permission

  • Uncle Jay||

    RIght.
    Plus, she exhaled without written permission which is a capital offense in Minnesota.
    Serves her right.

  • Inigo Montoya||

    ...she exhaled without written permission...

    Thereby contributing to CO2 and global warming! See, this is a cop who truly cares.

  • ThomasD||

    Her eye contact was a direct threat to his masculinity.

  • AZ Gunowner||

    What narrative?

    Anyway, since under Islam a women walking around in her pajamas is pretty much subject to summary execution we can excuse this one on religions liberty grounds.

  • You're Kidding||

    But, not until you've had your way with her first.

    It's in the Koran.

  • Juice||

    As long as we're getting to the bottom of the real story here, the races of everyone involved.

  • junyo||

    I heard she smoked reefer once, didn't report all of her tips as income when she waitressed in college, and is marrying some American dude for a green card. In other words, a career criminal. So... GOOD SHOOT.

  • Crusty Juggler :)||

    Ugh. I forgot about this aspect of police shootings.

  • Gene||

    Oh, so it's a good shoot, move along.

  • 171639||

    Enforcing sharia law perhaps? Woman outside in pajamas probably offended him.

  • ChipToBeSquare||

    Don't worry guys, better training and body cameras will fix the problem eventually. We don't need to rethink the idea of having a class of people for whom there's an entirely different moral standard

  • You're Kidding||

    And legal.

    Do you know of any non-cop who has shot someone who wasn't taken into custody immediately?

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    At least both cops have probably got some pretty fucked up hearing right now. But all that really means is a higher disability pension.

    I can't imagine any circumstances where the passenger thought he was in such mortal peril that he had to shoot someone talking to the driver while standing outside the driver door, yet such imminent threat of death was not reported within minutes to the press and everybody else. What the fucking fuck was going on? Was the passenger cop sleeping and woke up suddenly? Was he having hallucinations? Nightmares?

  • Rhywun||

    Look at her. I would cross the street if I saw that approaching. I mean geez.

  • Hank Phillips||

    When he heard the name Diamond, the asset-forfeiture urge took over and... BLAM! It's common knowledge that dead ladies file no petitions to have their confiscated property returned.

  • John C. Randolph||

    failure to activate body cameras

    Why aren't they just always on?

    -jcr

  • Hugh Akston||

    Batteries and memory are limited.

  • kV||

    Yeah, but those batteries and memory cards are too heavy for our boys in blue to be carrying up trees when they rescue cats, etc.

  • BYODB||

    Neither of those limitations is a good excuse in todays world.

  • Uncle Jay||

    Batteries are never limited in lesbian communities.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    They never run out of clams or scissors either.

  • You're Kidding||

    Plug ins are better. Nothing is worse than having a battery give out just before lift off.

    And, why would one need to be lesbian to appreciate this?

  • ||

    Why aren't they just always on?

    I kinda get it. Reason has long touted the cameras as panaceas a treatment for this sort of misbehavior, and they aren't exactly wrong, but it opens up a whole different can of worms.

    Innocent people will have video collected, by the police, against them. Minor, made up, asshole infractions are going to be empirically documented and we'll get to argue about whether Philando Castille should've put his hands at 10 and 2 and waited for the officer's 'OK' to retrieve his license or not, per unwritten procedure.

    I mean, the woman called 911, the police show up and kill *her* (completely unarmed, right?). If we were talking about having a leak under your sink and the plumber shows up and destroys the sink, there wouldn't be any question about how things should proceed. Instead, we get to wonder why the bodycams weren't on and where things go from here.

  • ThomasD||

    Nothing you do in front of an on duty cop is going to be private. Sure cops can (and no doubt do) stick their noses where they do not legally belong, but I'll accept that risk in exchange for not having to rely on their word if push comes to shove.

    Body cams should always be on. The 'consent' rule is horseshit cover for "we'll film when we want to, and not film when we don't'"

  • ||

    I'll accept that risk in exchange for not having to rely on their word if push comes to shove.

    It's not an exchange. Push come to shove, the video footage doesn't or won't matter. You can watch Eric Garner choke to death. You can watch Yanez shoot Castille. As I said, normally the plumber destroys your sink and you fire the hell out of him on the spot and/or sue him for all he's worth. This officer, both of them, are on paid vacation at the moment. As long as this seems sensible in pretty much *anyone's* mind, video won't matter.

    Further, just like we don't necessarily like stop light cameras because they'll be a magnet for Statist abuse, the same will go for body cams. There's no reason to assume otherwise. I'm not exactly arguing against the body or cams universally (I think the gun discharge cam should absolutely and unequivocally exist). Just imagining the day(s) when dash cam footage is sufficient for ticketing motorists for passing within 3 ft. of a bicyclist or whatever. Officers, even without bodycams are already being exploited for revenue.

  • ThomasD||

    "You can watch Eric Garner choke to death. You can watch Yanez shoot Castille."

    Absent the video they'd both still be dead and you wouldn't even know their names, much less recognize the injustice.

    Again, give me the video.

  • marshaul||

    It's not an exchange. Push come to shove, the video footage doesn't or won't matter.

    Just imagining the day(s) when dash cam footage is sufficient for ticketing motorists for passing within 3 ft. of a bicyclist or whatever.

    Holy Jesus fuck do you want to have your cake and eat it too.

    Bro, if a cops wants to shoot you and still will despite a body cam, then you can bet your nuts that if he wants to bust you for "passing within 3 ft. of a bicyclist or whatever" he still will despite not having a body cam. The cop's word has always been good enough for minor traffic infractions.

    What are you, some kind of police apologist?

  • Arcxjo||

    "Also, I felt threatened by her refusal to consent to being recorded. She clearly had something to hide."

  • flyfishnevada||

    Pretty sure I'd risk some a-hole cop trying to bust me on some minor technicality with his camera in exchange for cops having "always on" cameras. In any case, I can use the same video to defend myself if need be. Dismissing body cameras because they might be abused is a bit short sighted. They can and do cut both ways.

  • Nihil||

    The Minneapolis police body camera policy also calls for officers to obtain consent when possible before turning on their body cameras.

    No mention about when consent isn't possible. You know, in a situation where you have to draw your weapon immediately. Police body cameras should, at a minimum, activate when a weapon is drawn.

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    Yep. That should not be too hard. While we are at it, put another camera on the gun.

  • DJK||

    Damn. I though you had come up with a brilliant market opportunity. It already exists.

  • ||

    Yeah, Mythbusters did a special on guns that could shoot around corners.

    Of course, they brilliantly skipped past this idea to spend 10 min. talking about this idiotic monstrosity.

  • Hank Phillips||

    To be fair, after she was shot to death there was no withholding of consent to flip on the cam. Is there footage of the apes handcuffing the body as in Salt Lake City?

  • Chip Woodier||

    Every service weapon should have a camera that comes on automatically every time it's removed from its holster. Have it at the front of the weapon next to the barrel so that they can't "accidentally" obscure the lens.

  • Inigo Montoya||

    Because FYTW.

    Cops don't need a camera tattling on them when they abuse their authority. They may be dumb, but they're bright enough to know that camera has the potential to reveal mistakes and abuses on their part, and that is not acceptable.

    It's not like they feel they have to answer to the public. They only answer to their union rep, who they know will always have their back no matter what they do.

  • You're Kidding||

    Somehow, I'm sure it's not necessarily the individual cops that fear revelation of a mistake due to being videoed as much as the police and city administrators who do. The cop would just be fired. The city would be sued.

  • Dillinger||

    Who oversees the national police-offender registry?

  • Uncle Jay||

    "Who oversees the national police-offender registry?"
    The police.
    Who else?

  • Longtobefree||

    Hillary keeps it on her server.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    "America sucks, these cops need to get trained differently," Ruszcyk's step-son, Zach Damond, said on a video posted online. "I'm just done, fuck the police. I'm just done. This has to stop."

    I'd have used less inarticulate angst and better phrasing, but his way of saying it works too.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    I would definitely be that person on (hopefully) live television telling my fellow citizens to not call the police in any circumstance if you can avoid it. Ideally at a presser with the police chief standing right there to try to rebut the idea.

  • sarcasmic||

    Kinda destroys the whole "cops are racist" narrative.

  • Praveen R.||

    No it doesn't. The problems with many cops is two fold. Bad training and a lack of will to deescalate situations. And in the majority of cases, there is a lower threshold of pulling that trigger in self defense when it is black "suspect"

    '

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    Exactly. It is not an either-or explanation. It is a double problem.

  • MarkLastname||

    I know that's the conventional wisdom, but it's not empirically demonstrated. Black people disproprtionately interact with police in a negative way because they commit a disproportionate share of crimes.

    The racial component is almost entirely anecdotal or failing to account for conformity being variables.

  • No Yards Penalty||

    Jeezus christ, what an asshole. Take it back to the Federalist where the hillbilly crackers are more receptive to Grand Wizardry.

  • No Yards Penalty||

    Jeezus christ, what an asshole. Take it back to the Federalist where the hillbilly crackers are more receptive to Grand Wizardry.

  • Uncle Jay||

    That will never happen.
    If it did, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, et al. would have to move out of their gated communities.

  • cluskillz||

    #australianlivesmatter

  • Brandybuck||

    This is why Lou Solverson got out of Minnesota policing and opened a pancake house. Just saying.

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    What the fuck is it with Minnesota? First Philando Castile, now this, and they are invading Virginia politics as well? What have I missed?

  • brokencycle||

    Plus the dog shooting a week ago was Minneapolis.

  • Uncle Jay||

    Shooting the dog was only a warm up to shooting a human.
    Police training at its finest.

  • You're Kidding||

    If a cop were about to shoot one of my four Chihuahuas and, I took the cop out instead, could I claim that I had used deadly force in defense of the life of another?

  • marshaul||

    No, dogs are property.

    Except for police dogs. They're officers.

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    I want to start a twitter account for the sole purpose of endlessly flaming the Minneapolis PD.

  • Seamus||

    Not all Minnesota cops. That Marge Gunderson treated everyone she met with respect and professionalism.
    You betcha.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "Ruszczyk, an Australian, had lived in the U.S. for three years and was set to marry Don Damond, a local businessman, whose surname she sometimes used. She had called 911 herself to report a possible assault in the alleyway outside her home."

    I know cops are innocent until proven guilty, but the suggestion that this woman presented ant kind of danger to this police office--sitting in his car--is really far-fetched.

    I'd say it's ironic if we come to imagine that video of a police shooting is necessary in order to prosecute police for misbehavior, but "ironic" means unexpected and nothing having to do with protecting the police from prosecution surprises me anymore.

    How can this be okay?

  • BYODB||

    I very much suspect that this was a misfire situation where the officer was careless with their firearm, instead of an 'on purpose' shooting. Even an idiot, who has at least handled firearms in the past, would not be interested in firing their service weapon inside of a vehicle on purpose or otherwise.

    My bet is the officer was doing their little 'lock and load' to barge into the alleyway and light someone up, and got a little too 'gung-ho' about it.

  • brokencycle||

    Well, the cop did hit on the first shot. He couldn't have possibly been trying to shoot her.

  • juris imprudent||

    Hey-oooh!

  • ||

    I very much suspect that this was a misfire situation where the officer was careless with their firearm, instead of an 'on purpose' shooting.

    A source with direct knowledge of the shooting said Monday that the woman was shot multiple times.

    Jesus fucking Christ.

  • Rhywun||

    Mohamed Noor

    Oh boy....

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    Mohamed Noor

    Burn in hell you son of a bitch.

  • Rhywun||

    Wait a minute - he shot across his parter while he was in the driver's seat? WTF?? I was assuming the partner was outside the car.

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    No, it's completely fucked. He had to draw his gun while sitting and while his partner, the driver, wasn't in any kind of danger and was in fact talking to the woman.

    I suppose it's possible the woman had just gotten there and leaned down to talk and the passenger just freaked out, but I can't think of any possible scenario of imminent danger which doesn't also include the cops shouting it out within minutes.

  • junyo||

    Assault titties. She shoved them right through the window. Thankfully his warrior cop training kicked in.

  • Inigo Montoya||

    Guess I'm much more of a masochist than I thought, because I would not mind having a pair of assault titties shoved in my face.

    You'd think most cops would see that a bit of a job perk. But maybe that's why I could never be a cop.

  • junyo||

    True story: Years ago an aging stripper, trying way too hard for a tip, put my head in the motorboat position and then smacked me silly with her giant fake tits. It was like being attacked with a pair of saddlebags.

    So, it really depends on the caliber of the titties.

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    I feel a black putrid rage building in me.

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    You went to Taco Bell again?

  • ebola131||

    Chipotle
    III/0317

  • Robert||

    Maybe the first was unintentional, then the ones after that were to "justify" the error. Or maybe it's like they don't want to leave an animal wounded & angry.

  • AZ Gunowner||

    OMG, if I was his partner in the drivers seat I've probably lost my hearing and will have PSTD after having multiple rounds go right in front of me.

  • retiredfire||

    The article you linked to doesn't say that:
    "The Hennepin County Medical Examiner's autopsy report, released Monday night, indicates Damond died from a single gunshot wound to the abdomen, and that the manner of death was a homicide."

    Reading comprehension issues?

  • tgrondo||

    As far as this story is concerned....Yes, there are quite a few people with "Reading comprehension issues"!

  • You're Kidding||

    I suspected the same thing before I even read the story; accidental shooting.

    None-the-less, that still qualifies as negligent homicide in the real world. I think in the military as well. It's only cops that seem to be immune.

    He'll be let go but not prosecuted. Probably find another job as a cop elsewhere.

    The City will be sued out of existence.

    The taxpayers will foot the bill for his negligence.

  • ThomasD||

    If reports of multiple shots are true then this is beyond accidental. It's either intentional or gross incompetence, and that sort of incompetence is no accident.

  • ThomasD||

    First he had to have his pistol out of it's holster.

    Second he had to have the pistol pointed in an unsafe direction (to both her and his partner.)

    Third he had to have his finger on the trigger.

    That is a chain of steps that each must be explained.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    I think you nailed it BYODB; a "negligent discharge" that could just as easily have killed his partner. Why the hell can't someone, with even a modicum of training, learn to keep their fucking finger off the fucking trigger?

  • Jerryskids||

    Jesus, Ken, the poor cops were obviously fearing for their lives, trapped inside their car by this formidable creature blocking their egress, clawing at the car door, snarling at them with her vicious fangs exposed, all because they probably accidentally ventured a little too close to her cub. If you've never been in that situation, you have no idea what you're talking about.

    Oh, wait. Aussie. Aussie. I thought you said grizzly.

    Nevermind.

  • Hendu Manchu||

    Interesting that while serving as agents of the state the "cops are innocent until proven guilty" but their victim isn't.

  • Sugarsail||

    White Aussie Women's Lives Matter!!! Let's march in the street!

  • Uncle Jay||

    Where's Lawrence Welk when you need him?

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    A Minneapolis police officer reportedly shot Ruszczyk, who was dressed in pajamas, while she was talking to his partner. The officer shot the woman through the driver's side window of the squad car while in the passenger seat.

    My brain cannot process this information.

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    Maybe the pajamas had a hood?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Because you don't normally hold a loaded weapon, finger on trigger, pointed at something you have no intention of shooting?

  • ebola131||

    Bingo!
    III/0317

  • Uncle Jay||

    I recommend drinking a bottle of twelve year old scotch, then try again.
    It works for me.

  • Cy||

    You forgot...

    Multiple times!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Let's face it, even with definitive video evidence of a colossal, fatal police fuckup, odds are at most 50/50 whether there would be any appreciable repercussions.

  • Galane||

    Yup. Caroline Small. Whole thing end to end documented by dashcam and the cops still got away with killing her.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    he officer shot the woman through the driver's side window of the squad car while in the passenger seat

    I'm betting that mystery cop's partner is not very happy with him right now either.

  • singlestack||

    mwap.... mwaaaap

  • Inigo Montoya||

    I'm sure he isn't, but that's not something that means anything to the police union's defense of this P.O.S.

    The thin blue line dictates that he keep he mouth shut and relax while he waits for his deafness to hopefully clear up. Otherwise he'll probably meet some unfortunate end which can be conveniently pinned on the next cop-killer they come across.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Further, a national police offender's registry, if used vigorously, could keep such problematic cops from getting employment in law enforcement elsewhere.

    The one database the government has no interest in.

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    How about an app that keeps track of problem cops? Wait a second! How about an Uber for law enforcement? Instead of calling 911, your phone alerts concealed carry holders in the area, and whoever wants can come to your aid.

  • Hank Phillips||

    That Uber app is also a good idea. I'd much prefer to have citizens come to my aid than thugs in the pay of looter politicians. There ought to be a way to crowdfund the coding and make this a real thing. Startup? Gust? Microfunding?

  • GMATFF||

    It sort of exists: Cell 411.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Now THAT is a damn good idea. Sen. Millard Tydings of H.L. Mencken's Maryland compiled a book--Before and After Prohibition--naming names in the shooting of human being by dry agents and their abettors. That book is now online and makes interesting reading. Oh... prohibition (and open season an everyone) was soon repealed and government jobs firmly taken out of the hands of the God's Own Prohibitionist party for the next two decades.

  • Fat Stanley||

    Word

  • Curt2004||

    Don't forget the pants-shitting...

  • Uncle Jay||

    RE: Minneapolis Cop Shoots and Kills Australian Woman Through Door of His Car
    His and his partner's body cameras were both off.

    Well of course their cameras were off.
    Nobody in their right mind would want to know what really happened here.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The shooter is Somali-American, so I guess it's the libertarians turn at being the police brutality scapegoats.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Ooooo. We ARE on a roll today...

  • ||

    Is this a 'Muh Immigrantz!' comment or a 'Muh Roadz!' comment?

    I haz a confuse.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    If Somalia is in the mix, I shouldn't have to spell it out for you.

  • ThomasD||

    Why on Earth was he pointing a gun at her?

    Not sure what the law in MN specifies but this sure seems like a reckless, and not merely careless, act.

    When you point a gun AT someone their death is an entirely foreseeable consequence.

  • ThomasD||

    Nevermind.

    Multiple shots would seem to indicate he meant to shoot her.

  • ||

    Multiple rounds on 'target'.

    One-off handgun discharge killing a civilian maybe an accident (still worth immediately losing your job over). Full-auto or burst fire, even on accident, is rather maliciously homicidal. Even if he didn't shoot her, there's no reason to assume he wasn't going to accidentally put three rounds in the next 'target'.

    I can only assume his partner is talking with his union rep about how to sell him down the river without poisoning all his other relationships at work.

  • Jerryskids||

    I'd bet you a sizeable sum of money he wasn't pointing the gun at her, just that it was pointed in her general direction as he was cocking his gun with his finger on the trigger preparatory to going all Charles Bronson on whatever random neighbor's dog happened to be loose in the back alley. His partner knows damn well he got lucky not to have had his head just a little bit forward or it would have been his brains splattered all over this woman's pajamas.

  • ThomasD||

    I get that what you are addressing is intent. But barring a ricochet (or multiple ricochet) the pistol was pointed at her.

    Also kinda doubt he was cocking the pistol, many service type pistols are striker fired, and many of those that are not don't even have an exposed hammer.

  • Dillinger||

    at Mogadishu PD we are trained to shoot any woman who speaks.

  • Uncle Jay||

    Is this a Muslim thing?

  • Dillinger||

    doesn't have to be, the humor is in the general location of his upbringing...

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    It's a pirate thing.

  • You're Kidding||

    Calling Thomas Jefferson and the first Marine strike force to the shores of Tripoli.....(Lake Superior just wouldn't work in there.)

  • Hank Phillips||

    DemoGOP politicians sign the pigs' paychecks, so the understanding is that their job is to initiate the use of force against all and sundry--and their dogs. And blaming the baboons they hire to shoot people and dogs only reinforces the impunity of the slimy bastards the political soft machines put on the government payroll to give the orders to kill. In 1776 Jefferson complained, as translated by Mencken: When the soldiers kill a man, framing it up so that they would get off.
    Here the perp's anonymity is assured by politicians, but here's also hoping next election this is brought up by a for-relegalization libertarian candidate against the politicians who ordered their goons to shoot people.

  • sarcasmic||

    Tell us how you really feel.

  • Praveen R.||

    These cops are such whiny SOBs. They refuse to criticize their brethren and we end up with incidents like this. I hope this black cop gets convicted and sent to the slammer for two reasons
    1) The most obvious one is this australian lady deserves justice and this cop deserves punishment regardless of race.
    2) Maybe the justice system will wake up if a jury finds a black cop killing a white woman guilty and more attention will be paid to other cases involving black victims.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Was it JFK who allowed government parasites to unionize and force the innocent to pay dues?

  • You're Kidding||

    No. Goes back to FDR....and he voiced an opinion against it.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xycy1aNZBzc

  • Juice||

    I hope he does simply because it would cause an "oh the BLACK cop gets convicted for killing a white woman" uproar and maybe they'll start convicting white cops too just to settle the racial score, because that's all that seems to matter lately.

  • ThomasD||

    When is Reason going to start demanding immediate comment from the NPA?

    (National Pajamas Association)

  • juris imprudent||

    Meanwhile the NRA can spin this as proof that gun control does not save Aussie lives

  • AlmightyJB||

    You know how the media will play this is he's convicted after all of those aquitals

  • MarkLastname||

    Yep. They'll blame it on anti male sexism; you can shoot a man and get away with it but not a woman. The media is all over misandry these days.

  • Jack W||

    This happening to a good looking blonde woman is the best political development in a long time. If we ever want to live without the legally sanctioned, taxpayer funded, street gangs.
    It happens to white people all the god damned time. I dont see why lower income whites and blacks cant work together on this one. The last three people executed by the thin blue line in my town were white. Nobody cares.

  • CLM1227||

    It was BLM that chose to make this about race and nothing else, refusing to make common cause with white people.

  • CLM1227||

    Completely agree with you.

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    On the other hand, many white people refuse to acknowledge that the race issue is real.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Because it's not.

    More unarmed white people are shot by cops than unarmed black people. But more black people have run ins with cops than white people.

  • Tony||

    Black Americans are 2.5 times as likely as white Americans to be shot and killed by police officers.

    And what organized effort has done more to draw attention to police shootings (in general) than BLM? When did you get off your ass and do something about it?

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Oh fuck off, you bore.

  • Mongo||

    I've razzed some members of the local BLM : "Kind of late in the game, doncha think? - Tha cops have been shootin' you down in the streets for years and you don't do shit about it."

  • Tony||

    Excuse the fuck out of me for addressing the issue with facts and clarity.

  • ChipToBeSquare||

    Ahh, the good ol' "What are YOU doing?" comment

    Never change, you angry aspie loser

  • MarkLastname||

    They're also at least 4x as likely to commit murder, rape, and other violent crimes as non-black Americans, which probably explains why they are more likely to have confrontations with the police

    The attention BLM has generated is negative and at the expense of their cause; that tends to happen when you riot indiscriminately even when the person who got shot by a cop was an armed violent felon. That belligerent racist movement is a liability, not an asset.

  • No Yards Penalty||

    Grand Wizard Mark,
    Go back to the Federalist you cross-burning cunt.

  • Seamus||

    Yeah, he pointed out hate facts. That is unacceptable.

  • Longtobefree||

    Please cite your source.

    WaPo; The Washington Post studied shooting deaths by law enforcement officials in 2015. 494 white suspects were killed. That number is almost double the number of black suspects killed: 258.

    Harvard; Roland G. Fryer Jr. is an economics professor at Harvard. Distressed by what he was seeing in the treatment of black men like Michael Brown and Freddie Gray, Fryer commissioned a study on how the role race play in the use of lethal force by police. The study examined more than 1,000 police shootings from 10 large police departments in California, Florida and Texas.The study found no indication of racial bias associated with incidents in which cops fired their guns. The study concluded that police officers who had not been attacked were more likely to shoot white suspects.

  • EdFinnerty||

    And how much more likely are they to be convicted of a crime than their white neighbor?

  • Azathoth!!||

    Add in 'unarmed' and get back to us.

  • Juice||

    refusing to make common cause with white people

    I don't know if that's necessarily the case. It seemed they wanted to work with white people who also believed it was primarily a matter of police racism and not really about the root cause of police unaccountability and immunity.

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    As stated above, both are a problem.

  • Juice||

    Well, you would hold racist cops accountable for their actions too, so one is the broader, more encompassing problem.

  • Inigo Montoya||

    The problem is their utter lack of accountability or any personal responsibility!

    Sure, racist cops will shoot black people for no reason. And ageist cops also shoot elderly people (mostly white ones) for not complying fast enough to demands or hearing them clearly.

    Cops with prejudices against mental illness shoot people with suicidal thoughts when their family members call the cops for help saving the suicidal person. Cops who don't like pets shoot cats and dogs without a second thought, and drug-warrior cops burn toddlers. I could go on and on...

    Racism IS a problem, but to say it's the only problem is a joke.

  • EdFinnerty||

    Not only is it a joke, I believe it is the sole hurdle preventing police reform.

    I refuse to hop on this retarded bandwagon of "white police love shooting black people" when it is demonstrably, by any metric, false.

    It's tragic at this point.

  • ||

    I dont see why lower income whites and blacks cant work together on this one.

    She was (educated as) a Veterinary Surgeon. I don't know what your definitions of lower income are or why it matters.

  • Zeb||

    This case it doesn't apply. But I suspect that you will find that most people killed by the police would fall in the low income category.

  • ||

    But I suspect that you will find that most people killed by the police would fall in the low income category.

    Sure, because you will find that most people [insert verb] by the police would fall in the low income category.

    It's not like police are checking these people's bank accounts before they open fire. So the notion of an explicit policy or systemic income bias seems about as askance as a/the racial one, IMO.

  • The Last American Hero||

    Poor neighborhoods = higher crime rates = more police likely to pull guns.

    The math ain't hard.

  • RabbitHead||

    One of the nicest parts of town too.

  • EdFinnerty||

    Yah. Household median income is $150,000 in Fulton, the neighborhood this happened in. This was not the hood. She did not have the police called *on* her, as is the case in many of the recent high profile incidents.

    She called the police as she was trying to help her community.

  • Seamus||

    Well, she won't make that mistake again.

  • RabbitHead||

    Oh no. When the cops get nailed to the door for this BLM will go berserk.

  • CLM1227||

    They picked unsympathetic victims to boost a narrative. With the outstanding exception of Philando Castile (which was more clearly gross incompetence and pant-wetting cowardice than racism or brutality), they have themselves to blame.

  • junyo||

    Anyone not actively in the commision of a violent crime and/or directly threatening an officer's life who gets killed by one of the King's men is a sympathetic victim. When agents of the state have convinced a large chunk of the populace that non-compliance and/or previous convictions are valid justifications for summary execution in the street then the Blue Lives Matter PR people deserve a raise.

  • No Yards Penalty||

    CLM,
    Nice of you to represent the viewpoint of the Contards over at Brietbard and the Federalist.
    Keep it real, Grand Wizard.

  • EdFinnerty||

    But he's not wrong.

  • Seamus||

    But he *is* a racist, because he draws attention to facts that run counter to the narrative.

  • No Yards Penalty||

    CLM,
    Nice of you to represent the viewpoint of the Contards over at Brietbard and the Federalist.
    Keep it real, Grand Wizard.

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    If this cop had any fucking decency or honor he'd tie a short noose, stand on top of his toilet, and swing his way straight to hell.

  • sarcasmic||

    If he had any decency he wouldn't be a cop.

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    The never ending cycle of MN news being the worst thing on Reason.

    My soul is crushed.

  • Mongo||

    Minnesota Public Radio's roundtable of pundits and experts re the Phil Castile shooting: "Everyone knows that the police are the only ones who run towards trouble while everyone else runs away from it."

    LOL

  • You're Kidding||

    They stole that from the Marine Corps.

  • The Last American Hero||

    Fire fighters disagree. So do lifeguards.

    So do the large numbers of real "first responders" that respond to a situation 15 minutes before the paid "first responders" do.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Man, details thin on the ground. So she had pajamas on, we know that. Seems like a good shoot.

  • ||

    Were the pajamas black? Perhaps the officer thought she was a dangerous ninja warrior...

  • Seamus||

    Or a Viet Cong.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Outside in pajamas is thankfully not a capital offense in MA.

    I'm betting that her last words were something along the lines of "No! I'm not going to suck either of your dicks!"

  • Ron||

    my thought as well

  • OM Nullum gratuitum prandium||

    A woman named Hannah, who came to the scene with Zach Damond and is a close family friend, said Justine was a "spiritual healer." Hannah, 21, did not want her last name used for safety reasons.


    I would ve hesitant ad well, now that open season has been declared by the State against ordinary people.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    I find it highly suspicious that his partner's gut didn't extend right to the steering wheel and thus block the bullet's path.

  • MarkLastname||

    His seat was all the way back as he was napping.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    UPDATE: The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Minnesota has called on the two officers to face penalties for violating department body cam policy.

    Oh, and also for killing someone.

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    Walk them naked through the streets.

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    [Pulls out shame bell]

  • CE||

    The incident demonstrates the urgent need for higher employment standards at police departments across the country. Specifically, policies requiring the use of body cameras should be coupled with disciplinary measures that include termination for failure to activate body cameras as required.

    Or, I don't know, maybe prosecuting officers for murdering unarmed civilians?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Internal policy enforcement is really the only thing you can reliably expect law enforcement to come close to caring about.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    Maybe, but they don't have a nice view of internal affairs. Or snitches, which is funny, because cops are not just snitches, they are professional snitches.

  • You're Kidding||

    I don't know. Anyone involved in a shooting, even when apparently in self defense, is routinely detained by the PD and any evidence turned over to the DA's office for possible prosecution. In this case, the normal charge would be negligent homicide.

    Applying that same, external standard to prosecuting criminal cops would not be impossible. You know, the will of the people and all of that.

  • AZ Gunowner||

    Can't wait to see the blame the victim excuses by the "law and order" types on this one.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    That probably won't be necessary. This one seems like an actual misfire situation. Negligence is an outlier that we will all agree to dismiss.

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    A misfire that resulted in her being shot multiple times?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Yeah, that part I'm waiting for verification. Obviously, if true, it wipes out my assumption.

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    Even if just one shot, what was he doing playing with his gun when there was no danger?

  • retiredfire||

    "The Hennepin County Medical Examiner's autopsy report, released Monday night, indicates Damond died from a single gunshot wound to the abdomen, and that the manner of death was a homicide."

  • Ron||

    Miss fire why would he even remove his gun from his holster in the first place?

  • AZ Gunowner||

    "misfire"?

    Well, I agree I've been surprised that the "blame the victim" types have been nearly absent here - it will be pretty hard to find any way to really do that, I was just being facetious.

    But, "misfire".

    He evidently pulled the trigger several times.

    You may not be blaming the victim, but it sure sounds like you're trying find a reason to excuse the cop, or at least make it "accidental".

  • You're Kidding||

    What's the difference between misfire and negligence? Either one resulting in injury or death is prosecutable.

  • Karl Hungus||

    What's the difference between misfire and negligence? Either one resulting in injury or death is prosecutable.

    Very much so. Let's say for the sake of argument that the gun did "misfire"; why wasn't Mr. Noor obeying one of the primary rules of safe gun handling - never point your weapon at anything you're not willing to destroy?

  • EdFinnerty||

    There is no such thing as a misfire. He may have fired the gun accidentally. It's not like the gun just went off because it's settings were not properly calibrated.

    He broke many rules of firearm safety here, including failing to maintain trigger discipline and pointing his gun at things he supposedly didn't want to destroy, his partner being one of those things too.

  • juris imprudent||

    I bet that cop sucking site turns on the immigrants taking our jobs theme, because after all - no white cop would improperly kill an unarmed white woman.

  • Calidissident||

    Yeah, a lot has been said about how the left will react to this case, but I also think that a lot of the usual "law and order" crowd that defends cops no matter what will acknowledge this injustice. But I fear that many of them will avoid any question about the police generally and any systemic issues, and instead blame it on the cop being a black Muslim. I've already seen comments to that effect on one of the local papers (in Minnesota) reporting on this.

  • Robert||

    A Muslim killing someone with a Jewish name.

  • Robert||

    Oh, wait...Damond, not Diamond. Well, he must've misheard it.

  • LynchPin1477||

    For there to be any hope about improving police standards and reducing incidents of violence, it has to become easier to fire bad cops and harder for such cops to get jobs in other jurisdictions.

    Maybe, you know, also hold cops to the same legal standards as everyone else when trying them for manslaughter, murder, and the like.

  • AZ Gunowner||

    But even when they do, as in the Castile shooting, stupid juries let them off.

    If our own idiot "peers" won't hold the police accountable what can be done except disarm the police - not that that will happen.

  • juris imprudent||

    That's crazy talk you know.

  • AZ Gunowner||

    Yeah, crazy is the new sane.

  • Seamus||

    That's crazy talk.

    The police put their lives on the line for you every day, and they just want to be able to go home in one piece at the end of their shifts. The only reason you civilians sleep peacefully in your beds is that rough men are willing to commit murder and manslaughter on your behalf.

  • AZ Gunowner||

    I hope you are being facetious.

  • Tony||

    She was probably wielding a spatula in a threatening manner or something.

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    How will this work out from Team Blue politicians?

    The shooter is a cop (and therefore racist -- BAD) but a muslim Somali-America -- GOOD.

    The victim is white -- BAD, but also a female immigrant -- GOOD.

    I'm looking forward to an interesting game of Victimhood Boggle while the left sorts this out.

  • Tony||

    Maybe you shouldn't play games you don't understand.

  • You're Kidding||

    Hmmm...so Tony, you must be the pro?

    Please, do tell. Provide your professional opinion on the matter at hand.

  • Cy||

    "while the left sorts this out."

    It who shrieks loudest wins!

  • You're Kidding||

    Always has been. One upmanship at it's finest.

  • EdFinnerty||

    This is the silver lining to the tragedy. Watching the mental gymnastics of Partisan victim-boggle.

  • Dan S.||

    Well, this does prove that white people get shot needlessly by police too. It's not just black people. But the stepson is right when he says "These cops need to get trained differently." Training cops to prioritize their own safety over everything else just isn't acceptable. When you sign on to be a police officer, you sign on to accept a certain degree of risk, a certain degree of danger. Certainly, you protect yourself as well as you can. But not by just shooting strangers dead because there may be a 1% chance they have a gun they could use against you.

  • Zeb||

    I'd go a little further. The police should be held to a higher standard for when it is acceptable to use deadly force in self defense than anyone else. There should have to be a clear an immanent threat (like someone pointing a gun at you, not furtive movements that might indicate someone is reaching for a gun.

    If cops have to take a few bullets from bad guys so that they can avoid shooting innocent people, I'll take it. If there is any doubt, teh cop needs to take the risk, not the person they are dealing with.

  • Crusty Juggler :)||

    If cops have to take a few bullets from bad guys so that they can avoid shooting innocent people, I'll take it. If there is any doubt, teh cop needs to take the risk, not the person they are dealing with.

    It is, in theory, what they get paid for. Deal with the scum. Take the risks to protect the innocent. You know, the tasks that we, in theory, would and should be grateful for. Not, "fiddle around with a gun and shoot a pretty lady and get paid handsomely and retire after twenty years with a generous pension."

  • AZ Gunowner||

    I'd settle for them being held to the same standard as the non-badge wearing "civilian".

    But, nooo, they seem to have convince American people that even though they are the "highly-trained professional" that anything they do is ok, up to an including murder, because they're cops.

  • You're Kidding||

    I'm with you on that.

    If I shoot someone because I fear for my life - a trespasser reaches for his waste band as if he's going for a gun - I'll get prosecuted for having used deadly force when it wasn't necessary.

    What's fair for me, should be fair for a cop.

    Or, we can turn it around and my fearing for my life allows me to shoot the creep that just broke down my front door without having to prove my need to do so.

    I live in CA. The state and local authorities have been telling us for years that we have no right to self defense and a duty to back down.

  • MarkLastname||

    Yes. This needs to be said in public more. People are born civilians and they don't get paid to be civilians. Cops choose to become cops and get paid to be cops. Protecting civilian lives is more important than protecting cop lives. Any cop who disagrees should resign immediately.

  • You're Kidding||

    But, us non-cops are not allowed to do this.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    The shooting of Justine Ruszczyk has attracted international attention and outrage for reinforcing the idea that American cops look at citizens as threats rather than employers who hire them to serve and protect them.

    Where would anyone get that idea? /sarc

  • simplybe||

    Well you can write about this all day but fact is these two cops will get less jail time than it took to write the article. Chances are even if this were to make it to trial there would be some dumbass Badge Bunny sitting on the jury that would never convict a cop no matter what they did. Cops have always been out of control but thanks to social media at least you can no longer pretend not to know about it. Half of the cops in America were your school bullies or dumb jocks. The other half are ex military that wanted to go overseas and kill somebody. When they found out that those people were allowed to shoot back they came crawling home to take it out on some unarmed American. Before you start with the hate mail take a look around and ask just one question. Why would anyone want a job in America paying less than Walmart if they were right in the head.

  • Zeb||

    "Less than Walmart"?

    Maybe they have it worse in some places, but the cops where I live have nothing to complain about financially.

  • simplybe||

    Chief of Police Alexander AR about 30,000 a yr. Expected to put in 12 hr days. You can't live in a place like LA or San Fran on cops salary. Or any other major city for that matter.

  • Gene||

    The median annual Police Patrol Officer salary is $53,229, as of June 28, 2017, with a range usually between $44,323-$62,817, however this can vary widely depending on a variety of factors.
    Police Patrol Officer Salaries by education, experience, location and ...
    www1.salary.com/Police-Officer-Salary.html

    Cashier
    580 profiles
    $9.81
    Sales Associate
    466 profiles
    $10.20
    Pharmacy Technician
    304 profiles
    $13.16
    Certified Pharmacy Technician (CPHT)
    263 profiles
    $13.60
    Department Manager, Retail Store
    222 profiles
    $12.94
    Overnight Stocker
    219 profiles
    $10.33

  • Tony||

    Gotta throw in all the free food restaurants shove down their fat throats.

  • ||

    Gotta throw in all the free food restaurants shove down their fat throats.

    There are other perks as well. I know there have been gentrification efforts aimed at offering officers mortgage perks to live in 'high crime' areas. I say 'high crime' as street crime doesn't intrinsically tend to follow district lines specifically and it ends up with lots of officers getting mortgage assistance to live in some pretty posh neighborhoods.

  • Trainer||

    And don't forget the nice side jobs. Here in Houston cops are employed by private companies for really good hourly pay (I think it's 2-3 times an hour what they make from the city) that it seems as though the job of police officer is just the certification needed to get the real jobs.

  • MarkLastname||

    So, you'd agree we should cut their salaries, gut their pensions, neuter their unions, and lay off a bunch of them for good measure?

  • Tony||

    Paying people less tends not to make them better at their jobs. I want to recruit serious, professional adults more than dumbass kids with a stick up their ass and a gun fetish.

  • Trainer||

    About that gun fetish...

    When my son went through the police academy, most of the others had never shot a gun until the day they started training. (This was in Texas so you can imagine how much worse it is in other parts of the country.) However he has a lot of experience with firearms, did some sharp shooting competitions and worked at a range while in college where the sheriff's office had the annual re-qualifying. Some of those officers only shot their guns then and barely passed.

    I don't think it's the gun fetish cops who are shooting people. Those are the people who respect firearms if not the people they're dealing with. They know how to keep calm and use their weapon properly. The ones who are shooting from panic and fear (which seems to be a lot of what is happening) are the ones who aren't familiar with their weapons and perhaps even afraid of them. If you're scared as crap because you felt you had to pull your gun, your going to go all Barney Fife and shoot someone.

  • Galane||

    So many hours of range time and instruction and no less than 1,000 rounds fired in practice before they even go to police academy.

    Make them really learn to shoot and what to shoot and especially what and when NOT to shoot.

  • No Yards Penalty||

    Better idea: Take away their fucking guns.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Did you get kicked off of Slate?

  • Seamus||

    Barney never actually shot anyone, because Andy wouldn't let him load his weapon. You're thinking of Fearless Fosdick.

  • Trainer||

    We need to put this misconception to rest right now! Barney lost his bullet privilege because he kept shooting up things.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barney_Fife

    "One major comedic source is Barney's lack of ability with a firearm. After numerous misfires (usually a Colt .38 caliber revolver), Andy restricts Barney to carrying only one bullet in his shirt pocket, "in case of an emergency." However, the bullet always seems to find its way back into the gun, where Barney accidentally shoots it, usually into the floor, the ceiling, or his own gun holster. The accidental discharge of Barney's gun becomes a running gag."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQBhUzEsO-Y

  • You're Kidding||

    Well, here in the Golden State we are above average in so many ways. Cops in any major metro area are easily north of six figures. One imbecile - Stanley Eng - on our local police department managed to snag $200,000 worth of OT in one year!

    https://goo.gl/eTJcLs

    https://goo.gl/1g7eRM

    https://goo.gl/MhDAS9

  • King's Ransom||

    I'm not sure the number one career goal for most vets was the desire to kill someone over seas. The general assertion that most vets that leave the service do so out of cowardice or the desire for an easier stateside kill is fucking ridiculous....someone is projecting. All that said these cops need to fucking get in the game this shit is ugly. Shooting an unarmed civvie should be an automatic DQ

  • Crusty Juggler :)||

    I propose "Justine Ruszczyk's Law," whereby the criminal justice system treats every police officer who murders an innocent citizen as though if they are a poor black teenager.

  • XM||

    There was a show on FOX called APB. The main character is a millionaire (Gideon Reeves) who takes over a police force and upgrades it with the tech from his own company. His "APB app" allows the poor ass citizens report crime more easily.

    Anyways, his approach is becoming a success but the shareholders and his aide are becoming concerned that he's taking his eye off the profit game. Under pressure, Gideon proposes the radical idea of selling the APB service to wealthy consumers - basically private police. The predictable response from his coworker - "Yeah sure, if you want us to be like North Korea"

    But let's the cops are willing to outsource mundane "checking up on female cat fights and dope heads" duties to a third party. The company who wins the contract must enforce body cams and their non union officers have to adhere to tougher standards.

    Sounds like a good idea to me. I think some ED-209s and Fuchikomas on the street will cut down on human error.

  • You're Kidding||

    A group is organizing in my neighborhood to look into hiring private security. We've had a rash of burglaries, mail thefts, auto break ins, vandalism and kids racing cars around the streets since 2009 when Vallejo went bankrupt. These neighbors are of the opinion that the cops are ignoring us because they see these property crimes as uninteresting and minor.

    I've already told them the police union will shut this down in it's infancy. They want to preserve their monopoly. Even if it costs us individual homeowners in higher levels of property crimes.

  • Ron||

    If cops don't get their act together we may have to take away their guns. I laugh that will never happen

  • Ron||

    well maybe now that a pretty white woman was shot people will do something. I laugh at that.

    All I can figure is the cops propositioned and maybe even threatened her and when she declined their "offer" and threatened to report them they shot her.

  • ||

    Cops have to face stiffer consequences for such actions.

  • Liberty =><= Equality||

    On the contrary, if they prosecute a black cop for shooting a white woman after letting white cops off for shooting black men, that will be portrayed as racism.

  • Seamus||

    Yep. This shooting should be regarded as affirmative action to try to eliminate the racial disparity among victims of cop shootings.

  • Gene||

    Cops draw their weapons far too frequently.

  • You're Kidding||

    I attended an EOC training class last week. Class was full of fire and police as one might expect. The cops were bragging about how often they deploy their SWAT units now compared to twenty years ago and receiving high fives all around.

    I didn't dare say this was overreach and reflective of the militarization of police forces. They'd have beat my face in. And the firefighters, who tend not to be completely in sync with cops, would have stood by and let them.

  • ||

    This is just sickening. And it's not like they can cry 'self-defence' bull shit like they do with dogs.

    It's not normal for cops to shoot down people like this.

  • spec24||

    Yeah... I think it is.

  • Enemy of the State||

    Hey, just change the law to a presumption of police misconduct and guilt when they fail to turn those cameras on. Cops will make damn sure they work and are on then..

  • King's Ransom||

    Exactly

  • MarkLastname||

    That's actually not a bad idea, and has some legal justification: if the object of police force is innocent until proven guilty, then the cop has to prove the force was warranted.

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    All they have to do currently is indicate to a judge and/or jury that the steely-eyed, tough as nails, urban warrior/domestic hero they claim to be was afraid, and so their panic fire was fully justified.

  • You're Kidding||

    A body camera would not have prevented this.

    The lack of criminal complaint is astounding. This is negligent manslaughter at best.

    I love the call for higher educational standards for police officers.

    I piss off all my cop buddies by poking fun of their union. When they claim to be professionals, I tell them professionals don't have unions and usually have college degrees.

    I never do this while they are on duty or off duty and carrying for obvious reasons.

  • spec24||

    Didn't these sons of bitches just shoot an innocent dog a few days ago?

  • jonnysage||

    You all seem very eager to convict someone based on nearly no facts.

  • You're Kidding||

    jonnysage:

    Normally, I'd agree that there would be something here that could mitigate the circumstances. But, there isn't anything in this case that could. If she had pulled a knife or gun that is the first thing that PD would have reported when releasing information to the press.

    What facts beyond we have a dead, female civilian shot by a cop inside his patrol car do you need? There is simply no way one could justify this. Even though it is likely accidental, it's still criminal!

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    There is simply no way one could justify this.

    Cop: "I was afraid."

    Jury: "Not Guilty!"

    Judge: "Case dismissed!"

  • jonnysage||

    We need an investigation, forensics, witness testimony, and a fair trial by a jury of peers. You know, justice.

  • retiredfire||

    Maybe hearing what the cop has to say about it would be informative.
    No! REASONHEADS don't need no information.
    All cops are wanton killers. It is just a matter of serendipity that everyone hasn't yet been shot.

  • Hendu Manchu||

    He's law enforcement. There should be a presumption of guilt with a burden on him to prove otherwise.

  • No Yards Penalty||

    jonnysage,
    You seem very eager to have a cop's chocolate salty balls lolling around in your mouth.

  • jonnysage||

    He'll have to wait till Im done with your mom's milky breasts.

  • Seamus||

    You're right. For all we know, we'll learn at trial that Noor saw something metallic which he believed he saw Damond pull from the waistband of her pajama bottom, and he reasonably feared for his life. Did all you cop-haters every think of that? Huh? Did you?

  • jonnysage||

    Or we may learn he just got dumped by a white woman who looked like her and smapped. Point being, lets wait on some actual facts.

  • Zoe Brain||

    A prediction:

    She was probably carrying a mobile phone. Or might have been, difficult to tell in the dark.
    That might have looked like a gun - again, difficult to tell in the dark.

    The shooter thought his life was in danger, so shot multiple times as he was trained to do.

    Shooting justified. At least under US law.

    Not having the body cam on - that's a serious offence though.

  • Karl Hungus||

    Shooting at a vague shape in the dark is about as reckless as it gets. If I did that in my house, thinking I was shooting at an intruder, and wound up shooting a loved one, I'd likely be prosecuted. And that's in my own home; if I shot at a vague shape in the dark while in public and wound up killing an innocent person, they'd throw the book at me, and rightly so. Mr. Noor should face similar treatment.

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    Something other than a book should be thrown at him...

  • EdFinnerty||

    A wood chipper?

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    Rule #1 - never call 911. Simple as that.

  • Longtobefree||

    Call 911. Just never go outside when the cops eventually respond.

  • Hoofddorp Haarlemmermeer||

    Call 911 when you need someone killed. It's faster and easier than renting a woodchipper.

  • Longtobefree||

    Is anyone looking into the possibility he was trying to kill his partner and missed?
    Cause he sure wasn't following any kind of department policy I have ever heard of concerning officer safety, and wasn't following any firearm safety protocol at all.

  • tommhan||

    Not much info at all on this shooting. I think the public at least deserves to know the reason he thought it a good idea to shoot this woman.

  • Trainer||

    We'll find out as soon as he meets with the union attorneys and they can come up with a story. It usually takes about 2-3 days.

  • Heddin_South||

    Body cameras need to be on 100% of the time, otherwise we have this and cops only using them to their advantage. Any embarrassing footage couldn't be any worse than exposing your private parts to a hidden TSA agent.

  • No Yards Penalty||

    Disarm the pigs.

  • geo||

    "Further, a national police offender's registry, if used vigorously, could keep such problematic cops from getting employment in law enforcement elsewhere."

    No, we don't need that. There is this thing called a background check. It most often involves checking references and contacting previous employers. It even involves criminal background checks and finds things like unpaid parking tickets and even charges for manslaughter. It is already part of the job application system. Sometimes they even use Google! WE DO NOT NEED ANOTHER FUCKING DATABASE MAINTAINED BY THE GOVERNMENT THAT WILL UNDOUBTEDLY BE USURPED FOR SOME SINISTER POLITICAL PURPOSE. I thought this was a Libertarian publication.

  • Azathoth!!||

    The officer in question has not been a cop for very long and already (prior to committing this murder) had a lawsuit and several serious complaints levied against him. At least one other involved the serious mistreatment of a woman calling in a possible crime.

    The officer in question is an immigrant/refugee showpiece and favorite of the mayor as well.

  • Fooseven||

    The rationale against having private police (corruption, extra judiciary killings, poor service for the poor, etc) now actually describes the modern public police force

  • JuanQPublic||

    "...reinforcing the idea that American cops look at citizens as threats rather than employers who hire them to serve and protect them."

    Which is largely true, and will continue until a sweeping change is made to not only how crime is handled at the enforcement level, but at the legislative level. Garbage in, garbage out. Based on our attorney general's positions and his interactions with law enforcement, it looks like this will keep happening.

  • TPL||

    The body camera issue is a side show, at best. The fact that a police officer fired his pistol multiple times, in a car, across his partner, and killed an innocent woman in PJs who'd called for help? That is the point.

    Anyone who responds that way, under any circumstances, has no business being a police officer.

  • tgrondo||

    According to the coroners' report, She died from A (one) gun shot to the abdomen....not multiple gun shots...

    My understanding is, the police don't turn on their body cams until they get out of the squad car....not sure the dash cam would of shown anything either....dash cam faces forward....she stood at the side of the cruiser.

    None of the posters here seem to be participating in any practical speculation of how this terrible thing happen...

  • Cy||

    A police officer pulled and fired on an un-armed civilian. Killing her. There's really not much else to talk about, the rest is just distraction.

  • Stanllow||

    This is sickening.

  • SEO Consultant||

    This is a very sad case. It should never have happened.

  • Jim Walsh||

    The thing that stood out to me was the fact that both cops are rookies; under three years job experience between them. Maybe it's just TV, but I always assumed it was SOP to pair up a rookie with an older, seasoned officer...?

  • tgrondo||

    I found that fact odd too....maybe there aren't enough experienced officers to pair with rookies...?

    Wonder what the turnover rate is...I'm pretty sure LO guys can retire at a fairly young age. (being a cop is not a popular occupation anymore)

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online