An Unwinnable Situation?

[Deanimator]

Either way "falling on your sword" is a mischaracterization of the choice.

No in the context of that particular incident it's a perfect characterization, and MINE. I attribute it to nobody else.

1. Police handling of this incident was characterized by non, mis or malfeasance, every step of the way. That doesn't bode well for your coming out of an intervention legally unscathed.

2. Abbate stomped a woman into the ground for refusing to serve him. Because of how this was handled by the police, we don't know if he was armed or not. Intervening is betting your life that he wasn't armed and that he wouldn't use his firearm.

3. I never said you SHOULDN'T intervene. I said that intervening was 100% downsides and other than "doing the right thing" there were NO upsides. What I DID say is that you shouldn't badmouth somebody with a family who chose not to get shot, arrested, and or pauperized by intervening.

I'd probably have intervened, and quite violently. But then I have a pretty unquenchable hatred for 250+lb. men who stomp 117lb. women. I also don't have a family to support. If I go to jail on trumped up charges or get shot, I'm the only one who gets hurt. But I still get hurt. That's falling on your sword, albeit willingly.

Doing the "right thing" in this case amounts to walking into the abyss with no assurance that you'll ever walk out. I respect somebody who'll do that. I can't fault somebody who doesn't want to take his family with him on the trip.

 

[LightningJoe]

You could conceivably incapacitate the offending officer* and then disappear before reinforcements arrived. That's vigilantism, I suppose, but when the cops are criminals, you have a different set of choices.


*A 12" piece of half-inch rebar should work on an angry drunk, particularly if he doesn't see you sneaking up on him. Bear in mind, direct cranial injuries have unpredicable effects, anything from nothing to mortal. A solid whack to the point of the right shoulder (above the deltoid) is preferred.

 

[Deanimator]

You could conceivably incapacitate the offending officer* and then disappear before reinforcements arrived. That's vigilantism, I suppose, but when the cops are criminals, you have a different set of choices.


*A 12" piece of half-inch rebar should work on an angry drunk, particularly if he doesn't see you sneaking up on him. Bear in mind, direct cranial injuries have unpredicable effects, anything from nothing to mortal. A solid whack to the point of the right shoulder (above the deltoid) is preferred.

Unless you're going to be more successful at destroying the video than Abbate was, you're going to be on that video "assaulting a police officer".

Are you planning not just to flee Chicago, but the country, in the name of protecting the barmaid? I could do it. But I don't have a family.

I can guarantee you without one iota of doubt, that if you were to do what you suggest, and save the barmaid's life in the process, the Chicago Police Department would pursue you to the ends of the earth. And your "flight" would be used as "evidence" of your "criminal" act.

Fleeing the country as a wanted man is something that would give pause to a lot of married men with families. It'd give pause to a lot of single men... and ought to.

 

[DHJenkins]

This goes to show how important it is to know your local laws AND politics.

I hate to be a stereotypical Texan, but as a former bouncer, had this happened down here, he more than likely would have been "subdued" with much gusto and speed by other patrons.

Granted - this is ONE situation, and generalizations made about the use of force to defend another in a different situation is beyond the scope of this thread and my post.

 

[Ed4032]

Nobody shot this SOB? Oh yeah it was in Illinois.

 

[bababooey32]

in the context of that particular incident it's a perfect characterization

I said that intervening was 100% downsides

I respectfully disagree. Your argument that intervening was 100% downside is factually inaccurate for two reasons: 1) it is unknowable what the outcome would be of various levels of intervention and 2) there are many plausible (if not probable) outcomes that are positive, a few of which were mentioned by me above. You cannot summarily dismiss them because they inconvenience your argument. You CAN, if you wish, argue that they are unlikely outcomes (I would disagree), but you cannot (logically) argue that they are impossible.

That doesn't bode well for your coming out of an intervention legally unscathed.

You keep bringing up this notion of "unscathed"! Nowhere in my arguments did I suggest that intervening would be a free lunch. In fact, I pointed out to you and Lee earlier that any situation discussed here necessarily has the potential for bad outcomes. But we all still carry and believe there are tactics and training we can undertake to give ourselves a decent chance.

Intervening is betting your life that he wasn't armed and that he wouldn't use his firearm.

Again, this is the notion of coming out of this "unscathed'. Intervening isn't betting your life, it's attempting to save someone else's. Yes, you may get hurt. To quote you: 'Life isn't fair"! But that doesn't change the moral imperative to act.

I can't fault somebody who doesn't want to...

I can. Like I said, I think it is a moral question about how you hold your fellow citizens. This Incident last year is another example of the "bystander syndrome" that results in a decline in our society's overall morality. The unwillingness to help others who are in grave danger and cannot help themselves is not an attractive trait for an individual, or a community.

 

[bababooey32]

By the way...I think this discussion is incredibly valuable. Giving members the opportunity to discuss and think about the ramifications of acting and not acting in various situations is a great exercise. Even though we may disagree on the right answer, the effort to understand all of the factors is very helpful!

 

[Deanimator]

You keep bringing up this notion of "unscathed"! Nowhere in my arguments did I suggest that intervening would be a free lunch.

In most other situations in other places, the system would at worst be neutral toward you.

In this situation, it's virtually guaranteed to pursue you relentlessly and with a vengeance. Look at how the barmaid herself has been and continues to be treated. And she didn't even fight back. What would have happened to her if she'd actually harmed him in some way? It doesn't take much imagination to figure out what would have happened to somebody who intervened with force against the assailant.

The possible downsides so overwhelmingly outweigh the upsides that this is a "Wake Island" scenario. At BEST, you're going to survive, but permanently damaged without any possibility that you're ever going to be made whole. You're a better person for it, but if you're in jail and your family's homeless, that might ring somewhat hollow. I guarantee that the perpetrator's friends and supporters will portray you as a wouldbe cop killer for the rest of your life, even if you are cleared. You probably AREN'T going to be the "hero" and a lot of people will be working VERY hard to make sure.

The defenders of Wake Island did the right thing. It cost them too. It's good to do the "right thing". Just make sure you do it with your eyes wide open.

 

[ilbob]

I respectfully disagree. Your argument that intervening was 100% downside is factually inaccurate for two reasons: 1) it is unknowable what the outcome would be of various levels of intervention and 2) there are many plausible (if not probable) outcomes that are positive, a few of which were mentioned by me above. You cannot summarily dismiss them because they inconvenience your argument. You CAN, if you wish, argue that they are unlikely outcomes (I would disagree), but you cannot (logically) argue that they are impossible.

The poster actually lived in Chicago and has a good understanding of just how the CPD operates. I think he is in a better position to judge than you are.

I have not lived in Chicago for a long while, but nothing I have learned since I left almost 30 years ago leads me to believe the situation has improved any.

It may not be quite as hopeless as Deanimator thinks it is, but if you were to intervene in such a situation in Chicago, and the criminal turns out to be a Chicago cop, the chances are very high (but not to an absolute certainty) that you would pay dearly for your intervention.

 

[bababooey32]

You probably AREN'T going to be the "hero"

This presupposes that the goal of intervening is to become a hero. I believe the goal of intervening is for the greater good of society and mankind in general. Ask any real hero if they did their good deed for the recognition or if "it was just the right thing to do". How many time have we heard the hero quoted as saying "anyone else would have done the same thing".

This thread and the video demonstartes that, unfortunately, they are wrong.

 

[bababooey32]

I think he is in a better position to judge than you are.

Based on what? Do you know how long I lived in Chicago?

 

[Deanimator]

This presupposes that the goal of intervening is to become a hero.

I doubt that the goal is to be labeled a criminal and to be treated like one by the police for the rest of your life.

It's one thing to take a beating, get arrested, go to jail or be shot yourself.

To have other kids following your child around on the playground saying, "Your dad tried to kill a cop!" is another.

If you've got a family, you're not just making that decision for yourself. A good samurai wife would just clinch her fists and meet things head on. I've been looking for one of them for a long time. Haven't found one yet...

 

[bababooey32]

RE: kids on the playground and ninja wives

Going quite far afield here, yes? I've never encountered a thread here in S&T that attempted to account for the disposition of my family due to the corrupt politics of a second-tier city.

But alas, there is a first time for everything!

I doubt that the goal is to be labeled a criminal and to be treated like one by the police for the rest of your life.

Correct. I clearly stated the goal in my post. YOU clearly stated the goial in the original post:

what SHOULD they have done?

I keep answering and you keep taking the discussion out to left field talking about kids and wives. Sometimes what SHOULD be done isn't easy and doesn't have the desired outcome. That doesn't change the fact that it SHOULD BE DONE!

 

[MisterMike]

This thread has gotten pretty weird, but I just wanted to note that the cop was found guilty of aggravated battery this afternoon.

As for those of you who fear coming to Chicago, I'd urge you to reconsider. Yes, our Illinois gun laws suck, but it's one of the most beautiful cities in the world. Great museums, outstanding food, incredible parks, and the best music and theatre scene in the U.S. Truthfully, I've seldom felt even the slightest twinge of apprehensiveness in my time in Chicago--obviously bad things happen here, as they do in any American city, but most of the casualties are related to gang rivalries, drug dealing, and the like. A visitor would have to make some pretty poor choices to get caught up in that scene. It all boils down to one age-old principle: "live by the sword, die by the sword." If you have even an ounce of common sense, the odds of becoming a victim of violence are not that great.

As far as the question of whether you would intervene in a trying to stop a violent crime being committed by a police officer, I would hope that most would respond in the affirmative. Having said that, whether it were to occur in Chicago, Kansas City, or Kalamazoo, you'd be fighting an uphill battle against the presumption that a police officer can do no wrong.

 

[Jeff White]

The entire premise of this thread is just bait for starting a cop bashing rant! It's freaking over NOW! If you intervene in any situation you run a chance of running into someone who is armed. If you believe 1/10 of what';s posted on this forum you'd know that there is a big chance that anyone you encounter may be armed with firearm, it's just that freaking simple!

This is done, over and finished!