GUILTY MD - Korryn Gaines, 23, fatally shot by Baltimore police, 1 Aug 2016

[CoolJ]

Were the officers that arrested Korryn during the traffic stop the same officers who attempted to arrest her for the bench warrant?

Good question. I do not know. Not even sure if it is possible to find out.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Human posted a link to a CNN article that I find interesting.

There are many ways a new weapon could potentially incapacitate suspects, including electricity, drugs, chemical inhalants, extreme sounds or blunt force.

Tasers might do the job if their range and reliability could be improved. New drugs or inhalants may be able to render people unconscious for handcuffing, and then they could be administered an antidote. The U.S. Navy has funded research on a nonlethal weapon that uses radio frequencies to "interrupt the normal process of human hearing and equilibrium" to cause instant and extreme motion sickness.

Most of the things proposed sound like what I've heard as being "cruel and unusual punishment" and therefore a violation of the 8th Amendment. JMO

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/12/health/police-deadly-force-technology-solutions/

 

[human]

Human posted a link to a CNN article that I find interesting.



Most of the things proposed sound like what I've heard as being "cruel and unusual punishment" and therefore a violation of the 8th Amendment. JMO

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/12/health/police-deadly-force-technology-solutions/

Please identify . Tasers are already used. Rubber bullets are used. Tear gas is used. So what are the ones listed that are cruel and unusual?

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Good question. I do not know. Not even sure if it is possible to find out.

Thanks. I'm not so sure what the officers knew about comments Korryn made earlier. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. JMO

 

[KaaBoom]

Wow, this is damning. One line really stood out to me as it is in line with what I was saying earlier in the thread about revenge and anger:

Force is often used as a retaliatory tactic in instances where officers "did not like what those individuals said."

Sickening really.

We can only hope this does not fall upon deaf ears and that those who tend to ignore the concerns of these citizens will finally do some soul searching and give this some serious thought. Maybe, just maybe, there are some hard truths to be learned here.

Unfortunately, the Ferguson report fell on deaf ears, so I’m sure this one will to. When it comes to reports on deficiencies in law enforcement in the US, they always fall on deaf ears. So we just keep going in circles, and nothing changes.

 

[human]

Unfortunately, the Ferguson report fell on deaf ears, so I’m sure this one will to. When it comes to reports on deficiencies in law enforcement in the US, they always fall on deaf ears. So we just keep going in circles, and nothing changes.

Maybe not because of lawsuits and LE getting killed

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Please identify . Tasers are already used. Rubber bullets are used. Tear gas is used. So what are the ones listed that are cruel and unusual?

I've heard that Tasers and rubber bullets are abused by LE to inflict punishment on innocent people. Using chemical weapons and radio waves to affect peoples brains seems horrifying to me. JMO

 

[human]

I've heard that Tasers and rubber bullets are abused by LE to inflict punishment on innocent people. Using chemical weapons and radio waves to affect peoples brains seems horrifying to me. JMO

Tasers are dangerous in the US. In France they are outlawed and they use a different kind.

Tear gas is already used. Don't know about radio waves.

They all sound horrible, but aren't bullets that kill,worse?

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Tasers are dangerous in the US. In France they are outlawed and they use a different kind.

Tear gas is already used. Don't know about radio waves.

They all sound horrible, but aren't bullets that kill,worse?

If you give LE multiple way's to inflict pain more easily, the more they will use it against innocent people. Cruel and unusual punishment isn't only about death at the hands of the government. JMO.

 

[al66pine]

She said " if you try to kidnap me, I promise, you will have to take me out in a bodybag"
She repeated this many times. Those officers who went to her home knew this. They knew she was going to fight them. I have no doubt in my mind.

I'm trying to figure out how the officers "would know this," that "she was going to fight them."
If the same officers from traffic stop were serving warrant, seems they would anticipate she might be verbally disagreeable, (raise her voice, curse at them, name-call, & repeat 'Sovereign Citizen' litany) but have no clue she would have gun, threaten to shoot them, or that she actually would shoot (at) them.

Several posters have pointed out - at that traffic stop (AFAIK from vid), she did not tell LEOs she had a gun, would shoot to kill them. How would these officers "know" when serving warrant? Esp from any poster who has "no doubt."
JM2cts.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Another question, if officers serving warrant were different from officers at traffic stop:
I'm also trying to figure - if an LEO at the March traffic stop would have included in any LE form her stmts like "...you will have to take me out in a bodybag" and her other threats. If an LEO did record it, and if the report is electronically avail to LEOs serving warrants before they serve warrants, then ----Yes, LEOs would have been able to "know this" that she believed some Sovereign Citizen dogma.

Are traffic stops written up on "Incident Report" forms, in addition to the traffix tix? Or does the traffic citation tix form itself serve as documentation of events?
Altho her ~21 min vid did not show LEOs actually removing her from the car, would PD policy require LEO to write an Incident Report, if in fact, they had to physically remove her from car? Is there a separate Use of Force form, in which LEO must report that kind of action?
Or would an LEO record that use-of-force info a separate report - an Arrest Report?
Didn't she ask/demand to be taken to ER/hosp? Would an LEO write an Incident Report written for that, occurring after her removal from her vehicle & booking?

Still does not prove or indicate that she had gun, would shoot at them. JM2cts.Thx in adv.

 

[KaaBoom]

That left out an important part of the case quote, which states that as long as permitting is applied equally to people, local laws can enforce a license requirement.

http://www.snopes.com/supreme-court-rules-drivers-licenses-unnecessary/


ETA: sorry, I guess my page wasn't refreshed and I see this has been addressed! I just don't want people mistakenly thinking they don't need a license!

To the best of my knowledge before the 1940s nobody called driving a privilege. I mean nobody. Many states didn’t even require driver’s licenses, and even fewer required people to take a test or have insurance to drive. People paid their 25¢ and they got their driver’s license, if it was even required. That was a time when Americans still lived in a free country where they could travel freely without being harassed by police, and many court rulings at that time affirmed those rights. Only after decades of people being brainwashed that driving is a privilege, not a right, do we have the situation we have now. If people continue to be harassed by the police for trying to travel freely, then more and more people will join the sovereign citizens movement, and fight it.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

To the best of my knowledge before the 1940s nobody called driving a privilege. I mean nobody. Many states didn’t even require driver’s licenses, and even fewer required people to take a test or have insurance to drive. People paid their 25¢ and they got their driver’s license, if it was even required. That was a time when Americans still lived in a free country where they could travel freely without being harassed by police, and many court rulings at that time affirmed those rights. Only after decades of people being brainwashed that driving is a privilege, not a right, do we have the situation we have now. If people continue to be harassed by the police for trying to travel freely, then more and more people will join the sovereign citizens movement, and fight it.

Before 1913 American citizens were able to keep the money they earned because there was no income tax being taken to fund government programs.

 

[human]

Before 1913 American citizens were able to keep the money they earned because there was no income tax being taken to fund government programs.

People lived on farms. Then we had the depression, dust bowl. Nightmares

 

[katydid23]

To the best of my knowledge before the 1940s nobody called driving a privilege. I mean nobody. Many states didn’t even require driver’s licenses, and even fewer required people to take a test or have insurance to drive. People paid their 25¢ and they got their driver’s license, if it was even required. That was a time when Americans still lived in a free country where they could travel freely without being harassed by police, and many court rulings at that time affirmed those rights. Only after decades of people being brainwashed that driving is a privilege, not a right, do we have the situation we have now. If people continue to be harassed by the police for trying to travel freely, then more and more people will join the sovereign citizens movement, and fight it.

So in your perfect. world, ANYONE who wanted to would be free climb in a car and go out on the roads with all of us? No need for drivers training, passing a test, having valid ID in case of an accident--no need for car insurance? Would that be an improvement?

It sounds like a nightmare to me. :no:

 

[Deleted member 39678]

People lived on farms. Then we had the depression, dust bowl. Nightmares

The real nightmare is the extinction of those family farms caused by oppressive estate tax's that forced the sale of family farms and created giant corporate farms.

 

[KaaBoom]

So in your perfect. world, ANYONE who wanted to would be free climb in a car and go out on the roads with all of us? No need for drivers training, passing a test, having valid ID in case of an accident--no need for car insurance? Would that be an improvement?

It sounds like a nightmare to me. :no:

Thats the way it is anyway. Half the people I have had car accidents with, couldn’t produce a valid driver’s license. You can’t stop people from driving, if they want to.

My personal opinion is that driver training should be mandatory for every one. I would make four years of driver’s education a high school graduation requirement, and then get rid of driver’s licenses entirely.

 

[2Hope4]

Sovereign nation, and groups of the sorts, IMO, prey on the mentally unstable. You have someone that feels wronged by the world, and a group telling them they are WRONGED and do NOT obey the laws, they don't have to, etc., and the mentally unstable pays the ultimate price. SMH. All the while those that head up these groups are making money off of others!

No different than the KKK, BLM, extreme militia groups, cults, etc. The ones in power use the weakness of the population to enforce their agenda.....never caring if it cost someone their life.

I don't know the answer obviously, but they are all wrong for preying on the vulnerable!!!!

As for serving the warrants when she didn't have the kids, when she wasn't armed, etc, etc, etc, etc.... think about for a moment. We're talking about ONE person getting served a warrant in this case, however, think of how many thousands of warrants are served daily. Should police just call them to come to the station and pick up their warrant?? I mean seriously! Police can't hand you a piece of paper without worrying about getting shot?? Have we lowered the expectations of the population that much? Of all the warrants served in America on the day Korryn was served, how many others were shot? How many others pulled a gun on the officers?

The needs of ONE does NOT trump the needs of many. Babysitting isn't in the job description of a LE. Why should all kinds of special treatment be amended for one person out of all the population? IMO, it shouldn't! The laws are for ALL. Respect them, or face the consequences. You live in America, you go by American laws. You live in OZ or Russia, you obey their laws. Simple.

 

[2Hope4]

So in your perfect. world, ANYONE who wanted to would be free climb in a car and go out on the roads with all of us? No need for drivers training, passing a test, having valid ID in case of an accident--no need for car insurance? Would that be an improvement?

It sounds like a nightmare to me. :no:

Having lived through this...NO!

A young man got gas at a country store near me. Filled up the motorcycle. Went for a ride. Meanwhile, my husband lives our home to go pick up parts for the tractor. He admired a nice motorcycle in the opposite lane coming from the opposite direction. The young man lost control of the cycle and it went under my husband's truck. The young man was killed instantly, severed his leg, and major head trauma. That day is forever ingrained in our minds. My husband lost the innocence of enjoying a motorcycle. Has never rode one since. Still gets clammy and grabs the steering wheel tight when one is around. Still has nightmares because he looked in the rearview mirror of the truck, and saw the young man's leg, but not the rest of his body. The young man had a child. Fatherless now. That bothers my husband as well. The truck was totalled. Completely ruined the frame underneath.

The young man had just sold that motorcycle at the same store he purchased gas and wanted to take it for a final spin before delivering to the lady that bought it. Unfortunately, he wasn't the owner of the motorcycle, his father was. His father was in another state, working, driving a tractor trailer. There was no insurance on the bike, nor tags. The young man wasn't suppose to be even driving it as he didn't have a liscense nor permission to ride or sell the bike.

OUR insurance had to pay for the hospital bills for my husband, for the loss of the truck, for the loss of work, etc. Thus OUR insurance premiums went up!

People yelling all lives matter, however, if it's between my life, and someone else's, I'm fighting to live. To my family, my life matters! No doubt every person feels the same.

 

[2Hope4]

Thats the way it is anyway. Half the people I have had car accidents with, couldn’t produce a valid driver’s license. You can’t stop people from driving, if they want to.

My personal opinion is that driver training should be mandatory for every one. I would make four years of driver’s education a high school graduation requirement, and then get rid of driver’s licenses entirely.

Interesting, so because people don't obey the laws, we should just get rid of them. I mean, those that want to kill are going to anyway, so why have a law that murder is wrong? Those that want to molest kids are going to anyway, so just let them. Hey, just forget property lines as well, if you neighbor wants to use your pool, well no reason they can't. Doesn't matter. Free for all. Do what you want.

I don't think society would work well that way.

 

[2Hope4]

To the best of my knowledge before the 1940s nobody called driving a privilege. I mean nobody. Many states didn’t even require driver’s licenses, and even fewer required people to take a test or have insurance to drive. People paid their 25¢ and they got their driver’s license, if it was even required. That was a time when Americans still lived in a free country where they could travel freely without being harassed by police, and many court rulings at that time affirmed those rights. Only after decades of people being brainwashed that driving is a privilege, not a right, do we have the situation we have now. If people continue to be harassed by the police for trying to travel freely, then more and more people will join the sovereign citizens movement, and fight it.

I don't know about other areas, but here in my county, most people had horses and buggies. Very few owned an auto back then. Only the really rich. But there was still laws on the books about the horses and buggies. Still today, if you encounter a tractor on the road, it has all the rights of any other automobile, and you can't just fly past it because it moves slower than you want. Owning a vehicle was a luxury! It wasn't a right. It still isn't a right.