Hacker News Reader

Comment by dudul | Hacker News Reader

"“A male came to the front door,” Livingston said. “As he came to the front door, one of our officers discharged his weapon.”"

US cops have to stop this BS. This is just frightening. He opened his f-ing door and got shot, just like that.

I know it's a very unpopular opinion in America but preemptive shooting by the police should be judged as murder. A cop should only shoot when he's 100% sure the other guy is hostile and armed, that is, only after at least one gun shot has been fired by the suspect, period. And yeah, some cops will die, but they signed up for it. This guy didn't. Better to see 10 cops dead than 1 single innocent killed by the police in my book.

View on HN

>Better to see 10 cops dead than 1 single innocent killed by the police in my book.

Those 10 cops were also innocent, and are still people with families and people who love them. I'm not saying the way things are right now is the way they should be forever and that it's all rainbows and butterflies, but it seems callous to say one innocent life is worth more than another.

To me, it’s not really about innocence, or value of life, but something more like consent and agency. A cop, like a soldier, signs up for a job that they know is mortally risky. So it’s not that an innocent cop’s life is worth less than an innocent civilian’s life, but that a cop’s life is willingly offered for (what is supposed to be) the greater good.

The idea that protecting the innocent is more important than punishing the guilty is the basis of the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard of evidence used in criminal trial, and in an ideal world, we would be able to hold cops to the same standard. If they had any doubt that pulling the trigger was the right thing to do, they would not. Unfortunately, in these situations there’s really no time for deliberation.

Did you miss the part where I pointed out that cops knew what they were signing for? I know it sucks, don't pretend I would be happy to see 10 dead cops, this is insulting. But between 10 persons, employed to protect and serve, and 1 completely random person who just walked out of their front door there is real difference to me.

Suggesting that signing up to "protect and serve" reduces the value of your life to 1/10 of someone who didn't is...insane. Generally speaking, the suggestion that a person's profession influences the value of their life is abhorrent to me.

Richer people have not fought in wars, since forever. Why? They can pay someone else to go die for them.

In modern days, look at the socioeconomic status of people that sign up for the U.S. Military. They come from poorer and less educated than average families. That is basically what military pay does... you start at some level, and slowly raise it until you have enough people willing to risk their life to earn it. Everyone has a price.

I support your unpopular proposal. The idea that a cop can ever (yes, ever) get away with shooting an unarmed person is beyond comprehension. The very notion of pulling a gun on an unarmed person should be considered repulsive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com