Videos show Chicago police fired nearly 100 shots over 41 seconds during fatal traffic stop
apnews.com
Plainclothes Chicago police officers fired nearly 100 gunshots over 41 seconds during a traffic stop that left one man dead and one officer injured, according to graphic video footage a police oversight agency released Tuesday.
Five officers from a tactical unit who were in an unmarked police vehicle surrounded an SUV last month driven by Dexter Reed, allegedly for failing to wear a seatbelt. Video shows the 26-year-old Black man briefly lowering a window and then raising it and refusing to exit the vehicle as more officers arrived, yelled commands and drew weapons.
You are viewing a single comment
100 shots from five cops is …. Actually fairly reserved.
20 rounds a piece, a Glock 19 9mm, with the 19 round mag… that could easily have been dumped inside of 15-20 seconds, faster if they didn’t care to aim.
Cops are trained, that when they start shooting they don’t stop shooting until either the target hits the pavement or makes it very obvious they’re no longer a threat. (Which, is why you see cops dump full mags into kids.) there is no “wing ‘em and they’ll give up.”
Once a cop decides to use lethal force… its over.
I have no idea of the particulars- and I’m making assumption that the cops murdered another kid. But that headline is not nearly as excessive as they want you to believe. (Though “cops shot kid” should get you angry!)
You're saying that like it's the way they should be trained.
The very fact that they are shooting children over and over again doesn't suggest to you that maybe this is the wrong sort of training?
I ain't defending it.
I completely agree with your assessment that they absolutely need better training- one of the things is spending increased focused on deescalation and soft skills- time-wise,
one unfortunate reality is there are people who would fire out of that car at cops. looking into it it's at least plausible that the guy shot first. Not ... that I trust the narrative. Dirty cops get protection from the others. who knows who shot first.
all I was trying to point out is that, a hundred rounds fired by five cops, isn't actually all that much.
You can see glass blow out from the right hand side of the vehicle before the body cam officer starts shooting, it definitely looks like the vehicle occupant fired first.
Yeah.
nsfw warning, but here’s the COPA release.
They have every body camera involved in it;starting from before they get out of the car (but no audio until they do.)
It’s pretty clear that Reed shot first.
Their pretext for pulling him over doesn’t make sense, though. One, all the windows were tinted, and it’s special tactics cops- there’s a lot of maybes here but you don’t send these guys for routine traffic stops.
Going by the way they approached the vehicle, they knew something was likely to happen.
That does make some sense, once the decision to use lethal force has been made, you use it until it has worked. Police do carry nonlethal weapons as well.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/nnqk4b/theres-no-such-thing-as-a-non-lethal-weapon-1021
What would you prefer, they asked politely, and gave up when people declined?
You're right. There's no middle ground between asking someone politely and giving up when they decline and emptying an entire clip into their chest.
No middle ground at all.
Maybe some type of weapon that, if used correctly, can immobilise or incapacitate someone without doing any lasting harm?
Ah yes, this imaginary weapon that will always be used correctly and never on anyone with a heart condition or anything like that.
I don't know how cops even survived before "non-lethal" weapons were invented. I guess they just shot every criminal every time. Either that, or it was just cop murder constantly. I don't even know how there were any cops.
They hit people with sticks, that's how.
You mean they had to get close to a criminal? They had to actually be brave and take risks?
Police still do carry batons, by the way. It's much easier to do that when the other guy doesn't have a weapon, of course.
I'm honestly not sure what your point is here, police can and do use pepper spray and tasers quite often, but not when the person they're approaching is likely to have a firearm.
Seems to me they use their guns a lot of times when the other guy doesn't have a firearm...
The guy in the video did.
Not when they have no valid cause to fire even once FFs!
Sø you're saying that, at least some of them emptied their mag and then RELOADED to keep shooting for no good reason? That's what you call fucking RESERVED??
First of all, that's horrible. That's murder.
Second of all, it's pretty damn hard to "hit the pavement" when you're seated inside a car trying in vain to not be murdered!
Barricading yourself inside his car unarmed wasn't obvious enough?
It's plenty fucking excessive and even WITH your disclaimers at the end, you're still minimizing absolutely insane behavior and dismissing it as "reserved". That's fucked up and you should probably reevaluate some things..
First of all, you should probably watch the video in the article. Or any of the other videos that came out.
Of special note is the cop at the front passenger window getting shot. those were the first shots fired. You, uh, sure, you want to insist he was "unarmed"? or perhaps you're suggesting the cop buddies just didn't like him?
in the cbs segment on it... the ex-cop-talking head makes an excellent point: the pretext for stopping was total bullshit. For one, those windows are heavy tint. you can't see inside. For another, special tactics teams are not used for "routine traffic stops". unless it's an exceedingly slow day. (and it's chicago. no such thing as a slow day.)
it doesn't pass the bullshit test. but in the videos released of the shooting... cops got shot first. I'm surprised they didn't turn the truck into scrap. And yes. that's fucked up.
You mean the ones carefully curated by the cops to make them come off as well as possible? No thanks. I never watched the campaign videos of Joe Arpaio or Eric Adams and I'm not going to start watching pro-cop propaganda now.
No evidence of where that sho came from. Could easily be a cop with bad aim, yes. I'm not going to give the benefit of the doubt to the murder victim, not the murderers.
"I'm not trying to defend murderers, BUT.." 🙄
So you’re full of shit spouting your own propaganda. Okay.
Have a nice life living in a fairy tail where the only monsters are cops.
Nope. Just not automatically trusting the story of cops because I'm not an idiot.
Have a nice life living in a fairy tale where cops aren't monsters and haven't proven themselves as inherently untrustworthy as the IDF, Newsmax or Russia Today.
I think I’ve been very clear about my skepticism.
I’m not trusting the cops for shit. Watch the video. If you want skip the talking heads, go to twenty-five seconds in the video on this article. That’s just before the first shots start. You see a cop get shot.
Those were the first shots fired.
Is it curated? Probably. Their pretext is full of shit, no question.
But not who fires the shot. Could be another cop. Could be a randomly passing lunatic. Could be Rahm Emanuel or Chicago Bears punter Trenton Gill for all we know.
You're acting like a bullet hitting a cop is in itself incontrovertible evidence that their victim shot first. It's not.
And you’re acting like it’s not evidence at all.
I accept there’s missing information here. Things we don’t know. A lot of this is going to depend heavily on the real reason the cops targeted him. I doubt very much either of us will really know. And I’m very confident they didn’t pick a random black guy.
You seem incapable or unwilling to doubt the narrative you’ve already decided is the Truth™️.
As for who fired the first shot, the cops didn’t go active until after the cop gets shot. The more or less full body cam videos of every cop Are released there. Including the cop that gets shot (arm/wrist. You can see the blood on his left hand.)
Not of anyone in the car shooting, like you keep pretending it is.
Rule number one of everything cops release to the public: if there's anything significant missing, it's extremely likely that it's missing on purpose because it contradicts their narrative.
Does Trenton Gill even have an alibi? 😛
Because they're trigger happy and murdering people makes them feel powerful, probably.
Proving once again that you've learned nothing from previous similar incidents.
Says the one who trusts cops without evidence 🙄
According to cops who have proven no such thing.
And again, I never said I don't believe that the cop got shot. I just won't take a notoriously untruthful and manipulative group of people at their word on WHO shot him.
And unfortunately they seem to be making that decision before they even arrive on the scene.
They were certainly prepared to make it, and considering how short the trip was- like they got in the truck, rolled up and rolled out on the guy.
There’s something else here. It wasn’t a seatbelt beef, and it wasn’t an accident.