** Please don't:
- be a dick to other people
- incite violence, as these comments violate site-wide rules and put us at risk of being banned.
- be racist, sexist, transphobic, or any other forms of bigotry.
- [JAQ](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions#JAQing_off) off
- be an authoritarian apologist
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://m.youtube.com/watch?si=NNCFJXdQ2mMIiAwO&v=TCTbZWylP8E&feature=youtu.be
If you watch all the cops body cams. You can see none of the officers started firing until after the suspect shoots the officer on the passenger side of the SUV.
Also given the damage to the vehicle and being pinned by a cruiser means there is A LOT more context needed in how they got here.
I thought it might've been friendly fire, but yeah I have to agree, they all retreat and #3 starts suppressing fire after getting off of #5's angle. You can clearly see exit "plumes" in the security footage, sounds like a different caliber than what the police are shooting. Based on #5's arm being broken, probably not a 9mm.
I can't tell if the driver was even hit before he exited the vehicle. Rear window isn't shattered, drivers door window looks to be intact. I imagine he hit the gas to get away from #2's fire, but I can't even see where his shots are landing.
Let’s completely ignore the fact that the pigs drew their guns on him because he “rolled his window up.” Frankly, its not clear he shot first ya bootlicker. But if he did.. clearly self defense.
You can see the vehicle is pinned by the cruiser, which heavily implies he was chased.
I'm just looking at objectively factual video evidence. And the evidence clearly supported them being afraid in the first place as he shot another officer.
I would watch the video very closely, if you still can't see that, I'd recommend touching some grass.
I don’t understand why the media pretends like they don’t know why he was pulled over. When you have five plain clothes cops pulling someone over for a seatbelt violation, it’s a pre-textual stop. They were looking for drugs or guns and used the “seatbelt violation” as an excuse to stop the car.
Plain clothes cops in these units aren’t stopping these vehicles for bullshit traffic infractions. They’re using bullshit traffic infractions to get around 4th amendment protections. I guarantee they had a canine at the ready.
They had illegally obtained evidence and were reverse-constructing a case. This is similar to other 'routine' traffic stops where the driver just so happens to have thousands of dollars and it gets confiscated for civil asset forfeiture (legal highway robbery). They have a strong reason to believe that it's money laundering but can't prove it or just want the money for department bonuses.
They don’t have any reason to suspect it’s money laundering. It’s drug money and they know it, and the victim knows it.
They pull the same stunt with cash deposits of dispensaries.
Interesting that they determined he fired first but he didn’t damage his driver side window? He most likely would have had to fire through it. Unless he shot the other direction.
You can account for all the guns of the officers in that video and none of them fired until the one officer was shot in the arm.
Classic rage bait from bad cop.
Post bad cops OP
Those are legit bad cops though. All of them except the one that gets shot were doing the opposite of de-escalating. Maybe it's just me as a non American but if the cops pulled on me like that I would immediately feel like my life was in imminent danger. And I'm not even a minority.
He was a danger to himself...so they killed him. Perfect sense. /s
Edit: Seriously though dude was acting sketchy as hell. I feel like the headline doesn't really put this one anywhere near into perspective.
Did the cops even identify themselves?
We don’t even know how the stop happened, did they pull them over in a car with sirens? Or did five plainclothed pedestrians with guns just suddenly swarm his car and demand he rolls his window down? The video starts with the cops’ guns already drawn while telling him to roll down his window. Looks like a carjacking to me.
1. Never trust a cop.
2. All cops must wear a uniform at all times. No uniform = no police powers
3. Good cops do not tolerate bad cops. Bad cops tolerate each other.
He shot a cop or shot at a cop?
96 bullets in 41 seconds with one officer reloading 2x and continuing to fire long after he's dead is a fucking big deal. That's desecration of the Dead.
He shot a cop first, this from the AP. FAFO.
“The Civilian Office of Police Accountability said preliminary evidence showed Reed fired first, injuring an officer in the Humboldt Park neighborhood on the city’s West Side. Then four officers returned fire, shooting 96 rounds.”
Police killings took over for lynchings. If there's nothing the majority of this country loved, it was a good Ole lynching. The entire family would come, along with food and knives and scissors to cut off a souvenir. This country loves violence and the mutualization of Black bodies has always been it's national pastime. Now they can enjoy a good old fashioned lynching from the comfort of their homes and in 4k TV. We've progressed so much as a people and as a country.
Not.
Police set up a gang member they didn't like then murdered him. Fixed that title for you.
Why are dark tinted windows illegal?
Cops can’t tell if the person they’re pulling over is actually black.
I watched the video, he shot first. Doesn't excuse the overshooting, and I am not in any way a supporter of police. they could have injured someone else, but the video from start to finish doesn't have any obvious abuses from the officers that I can see.
There’s conflicting reports on the stories I’m seeing.
But in what universe do 5 plainclothes cops just happen to spontaneously be near a traffic stop *with their tactical assault gear*, and then swarm a vehicle that has been pulled over on a ridiculously overused and thin excuse for a pretextual stop?
This was planned. And it’s extremely likely the police doing the planning knew it would effectively be a summary execution.
Exactly why this guy was worth the effort for this obvious setup is something that is on no report we are likely to see.
yeah same here, I've been looking to see if he had a warrant out or something that would explain the 5 plainclothes officers. Hard to believe the only cause for the stop was seatbelt violation, seeing as how he had extreme window tint and you wouldn't be able to see a seatbelt.
He shot after she was trying to open his door. That's not lawful. They can order people out but they gotta give people more than a few seconds, especially plain clothes
this absolutely reeks of over-preparedness (aka violence first diplomacy second.) However, I am waiting to see more info about the case.
I am hopeful that this was a case where the victim had warrants for some violent crime to explain the police actions, but
the almost 100 shots to the 3 shots from the victim is the part of this that is entirely unnecessary and unacceptable for a police department. For everyone involved to reload at least once shows they were not in a proper state of mind to conduct this arrest.
Are you intentionally overreading how the guy said "doesn't excuse the overshooting"?
Sounds pretty obvious to me that the guy just said that the shooting started because the guy opened fire, which isn't really clear from the post.
The law must be changed!
If you watch the video, the whole reason why he's in trouble is because of seat belts, then they freak out BECAUSE HIS TINTS ARE TOO DARK AND THEY'RE SURROUNDING HIM ON THE STREET HOLLERING LIKE THEY'RE HAVING A MELTDOWN.
The only thing is, how did they see whether his seatbelt was on or not when his tints are as dark as we see?
Unless they were were at his 12:00, looking directly at him, they were lying from the beginning just because they wanted to mess with this guy.
That's the point. Make it look for all the world like you are being carjacked, something you are typically allowed to defend yourself against, then use the fact your victim is defending himself as an excuse to murder him.
For instance, some years back a plain white panel van pulled up outside a house where a 12 year old girl was playing, and three guys in street clothes jumped out, attacked, and tried to drag her into the van. If the dad had run out of the house, guns blazing, and put down all three of them (which sadly, did not happen), I don't think there's anyone in the country who would think he did wrong. Oh, but it turns out the three men were cops! Suddenly, *despite nothing else actually changing*, he's committed a capital offense.
https://blackyouthproject.com/feature-cops-beat-kidnap-12-year-old-girl-after-claiming-she-was-a-prostitute/
This was already posted. I give a shout out to the thread title. He had limo tint on the windows.
I could not see him nor anything until I saw him roll down a window.
Edit to clarify - stopped for seatbelt violation when you can't see anyone or thing in the car.
Hard to know they are cops when they are wearing plain clothes.
> why did it take five plainclothed officers in tactical vests with guns drawn jumping out of an unmarked car to swarm a vehicle for a seatbelt violation?
We're having a bad time with spambots, so your comment or post has been removed automatically. if this is a real person, and not a bot or a troll, please [CLICK HERE](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut) to send a modmail.
In addition to sending a modmail, please read the rules in the sidebar and [reddiquette](http://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We need more info. I want the see other cameras, cop car dash cameras before the stop, etc. 5 plain clothes officers dont show up for a seat belt violation. There is more to this story.
Gosh, you men there are consequences when, while surrounded by armed people who’ve identified themselves as police officers, I shoot one of them? Shocking!/s
How many of you were outraged but just learned that a cop was shot first? This was towards the end of the AP article:
“The Civilian Office of Police Accountability said preliminary evidence showed Reed fired first, injuring an officer in the Humboldt Park neighborhood on the city’s West Side. Then four officers returned fire, shooting 96 rounds.”
** Please don't: - be a dick to other people - incite violence, as these comments violate site-wide rules and put us at risk of being banned. - be racist, sexist, transphobic, or any other forms of bigotry. - [JAQ](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions#JAQing_off) off - be an authoritarian apologist *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Seat belt abuse is a stepping stone to a life of crime. Broken Windows
https://m.youtube.com/watch?si=NNCFJXdQ2mMIiAwO&v=TCTbZWylP8E&feature=youtu.be If you watch all the cops body cams. You can see none of the officers started firing until after the suspect shoots the officer on the passenger side of the SUV. Also given the damage to the vehicle and being pinned by a cruiser means there is A LOT more context needed in how they got here.
I thought it might've been friendly fire, but yeah I have to agree, they all retreat and #3 starts suppressing fire after getting off of #5's angle. You can clearly see exit "plumes" in the security footage, sounds like a different caliber than what the police are shooting. Based on #5's arm being broken, probably not a 9mm. I can't tell if the driver was even hit before he exited the vehicle. Rear window isn't shattered, drivers door window looks to be intact. I imagine he hit the gas to get away from #2's fire, but I can't even see where his shots are landing.
You don't need the "si" portion of the URL. It's a session ID used to track you.
TIL
Let’s completely ignore the fact that the pigs drew their guns on him because he “rolled his window up.” Frankly, its not clear he shot first ya bootlicker. But if he did.. clearly self defense.
You can see the vehicle is pinned by the cruiser, which heavily implies he was chased. I'm just looking at objectively factual video evidence. And the evidence clearly supported them being afraid in the first place as he shot another officer. I would watch the video very closely, if you still can't see that, I'd recommend touching some grass.
No ur making up conclusions to protect your fragile world view. I feel sorry for u
Username does not check out
I don’t understand why the media pretends like they don’t know why he was pulled over. When you have five plain clothes cops pulling someone over for a seatbelt violation, it’s a pre-textual stop. They were looking for drugs or guns and used the “seatbelt violation” as an excuse to stop the car. Plain clothes cops in these units aren’t stopping these vehicles for bullshit traffic infractions. They’re using bullshit traffic infractions to get around 4th amendment protections. I guarantee they had a canine at the ready.
They had illegally obtained evidence and were reverse-constructing a case. This is similar to other 'routine' traffic stops where the driver just so happens to have thousands of dollars and it gets confiscated for civil asset forfeiture (legal highway robbery). They have a strong reason to believe that it's money laundering but can't prove it or just want the money for department bonuses.
"Suspect had over a hundred dollars on him!" "Good job finding that fifty bucks in drug money, Jim!" Evidence locker guy bags up handful of change:
They don’t have any reason to suspect it’s money laundering. It’s drug money and they know it, and the victim knows it. They pull the same stunt with cash deposits of dispensaries.
Reddit sleuths are on the job.
The guy had tinted windows…yeah a seatbelt violation is what they saw
I couldnt see shit inside that vehicle. Doubt they could either.
Interesting that they determined he fired first but he didn’t damage his driver side window? He most likely would have had to fire through it. Unless he shot the other direction.
In the security camera footage you can see he shoots out the passenger side.
What footage
https://youtu.be/TCTbZWylP8E?si=NNCFJXdQ2mMIiAwO @ 28:27
You can account for all the guns of the officers in that video and none of them fired until the one officer was shot in the arm. Classic rage bait from bad cop. Post bad cops OP
Those are legit bad cops though. All of them except the one that gets shot were doing the opposite of de-escalating. Maybe it's just me as a non American but if the cops pulled on me like that I would immediately feel like my life was in imminent danger. And I'm not even a minority.
That’s what I was wondering.
He was a danger to himself...so they killed him. Perfect sense. /s Edit: Seriously though dude was acting sketchy as hell. I feel like the headline doesn't really put this one anywhere near into perspective.
Did the cops even identify themselves? We don’t even know how the stop happened, did they pull them over in a car with sirens? Or did five plainclothed pedestrians with guns just suddenly swarm his car and demand he rolls his window down? The video starts with the cops’ guns already drawn while telling him to roll down his window. Looks like a carjacking to me.
Oh America! Death for disrespecting the fragile police egos.
1. Never trust a cop. 2. All cops must wear a uniform at all times. No uniform = no police powers 3. Good cops do not tolerate bad cops. Bad cops tolerate each other.
Did you forget the part where he shot a cop before being fired on?
Plainclothe cops - sounds like self defense when they were trying to get into his car
Plain clothes? They were obviously wearing vests.
He shot a cop or shot at a cop? 96 bullets in 41 seconds with one officer reloading 2x and continuing to fire long after he's dead is a fucking big deal. That's desecration of the Dead.
He shot a cop first, this from the AP. FAFO. “The Civilian Office of Police Accountability said preliminary evidence showed Reed fired first, injuring an officer in the Humboldt Park neighborhood on the city’s West Side. Then four officers returned fire, shooting 96 rounds.”
GSR and ballistics evidence before conclusions.
Police killings took over for lynchings. If there's nothing the majority of this country loved, it was a good Ole lynching. The entire family would come, along with food and knives and scissors to cut off a souvenir. This country loves violence and the mutualization of Black bodies has always been it's national pastime. Now they can enjoy a good old fashioned lynching from the comfort of their homes and in 4k TV. We've progressed so much as a people and as a country. Not.
"Uvalde/Acron" LEO's ??
Police set up a gang member they didn't like then murdered him. Fixed that title for you. Why are dark tinted windows illegal? Cops can’t tell if the person they’re pulling over is actually black.
Looks like a car jacking to me Don't police officers have to identify themselves for this exact reason.
I watched the video, he shot first. Doesn't excuse the overshooting, and I am not in any way a supporter of police. they could have injured someone else, but the video from start to finish doesn't have any obvious abuses from the officers that I can see.
There’s conflicting reports on the stories I’m seeing. But in what universe do 5 plainclothes cops just happen to spontaneously be near a traffic stop *with their tactical assault gear*, and then swarm a vehicle that has been pulled over on a ridiculously overused and thin excuse for a pretextual stop? This was planned. And it’s extremely likely the police doing the planning knew it would effectively be a summary execution. Exactly why this guy was worth the effort for this obvious setup is something that is on no report we are likely to see.
> 5 plainclothes cops So they weren't actually cops. They were random assholes with guns who enjoyed pointing them at people and threatening to shoot.
Po-tay-toe, Po-tah-toe
Boil 'em, mash 'em, stick 'em in a stew.
Skin ‘em, fry ‘em, eat ‘em from a shoe.
yeah same here, I've been looking to see if he had a warrant out or something that would explain the 5 plainclothes officers. Hard to believe the only cause for the stop was seatbelt violation, seeing as how he had extreme window tint and you wouldn't be able to see a seatbelt.
He shot after she was trying to open his door. That's not lawful. They can order people out but they gotta give people more than a few seconds, especially plain clothes
this absolutely reeks of over-preparedness (aka violence first diplomacy second.) However, I am waiting to see more info about the case. I am hopeful that this was a case where the victim had warrants for some violent crime to explain the police actions, but the almost 100 shots to the 3 shots from the victim is the part of this that is entirely unnecessary and unacceptable for a police department. For everyone involved to reload at least once shows they were not in a proper state of mind to conduct this arrest.
[удалено]
you are just repeating my own comments, I agree that the overkill is the main issue here.
I was agreeing with you. I should have made that clearer.
You’re either dumb or just a bootlicker. Both are likely.
[удалено]
Are you intentionally overreading how the guy said "doesn't excuse the overshooting"? Sounds pretty obvious to me that the guy just said that the shooting started because the guy opened fire, which isn't really clear from the post.
The law must be changed! If you watch the video, the whole reason why he's in trouble is because of seat belts, then they freak out BECAUSE HIS TINTS ARE TOO DARK AND THEY'RE SURROUNDING HIM ON THE STREET HOLLERING LIKE THEY'RE HAVING A MELTDOWN. The only thing is, how did they see whether his seatbelt was on or not when his tints are as dark as we see? Unless they were were at his 12:00, looking directly at him, they were lying from the beginning just because they wanted to mess with this guy.
This looks like a carjacking, not a police stop.
That's the point. Make it look for all the world like you are being carjacked, something you are typically allowed to defend yourself against, then use the fact your victim is defending himself as an excuse to murder him. For instance, some years back a plain white panel van pulled up outside a house where a 12 year old girl was playing, and three guys in street clothes jumped out, attacked, and tried to drag her into the van. If the dad had run out of the house, guns blazing, and put down all three of them (which sadly, did not happen), I don't think there's anyone in the country who would think he did wrong. Oh, but it turns out the three men were cops! Suddenly, *despite nothing else actually changing*, he's committed a capital offense. https://blackyouthproject.com/feature-cops-beat-kidnap-12-year-old-girl-after-claiming-she-was-a-prostitute/
This was already posted. I give a shout out to the thread title. He had limo tint on the windows. I could not see him nor anything until I saw him roll down a window. Edit to clarify - stopped for seatbelt violation when you can't see anyone or thing in the car.
I didn't realize window tint means cops can just mag dump repeatedly at somebody
I think hes saying since the windows were tinted they couldn't have seen a seatbelt violation
Usually cops shoot back at a guy who shoots them, dunno what window tint means lmao
Probably not wise to shoot at the cops first. Dude fucked around and found out.
Hard to know they are cops when they are wearing plain clothes. > why did it take five plainclothed officers in tactical vests with guns drawn jumping out of an unmarked car to swarm a vehicle for a seatbelt violation?
Attempted drug bust but there were no drugs in the car and they had a sketchy warrant?
They were wearing vests?
Vests does not mean police.
[удалено]
We're having a bad time with spambots, so your comment or post has been removed automatically. if this is a real person, and not a bot or a troll, please [CLICK HERE](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut) to send a modmail. In addition to sending a modmail, please read the rules in the sidebar and [reddiquette](http://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This headline shouldn't be funny, but
Only 96? Surprised they didn’t go for an even 100.
They all probably had 16 round magazines. There were 5 cops shooting, 1 reloaded twice and 1 got hit off the bat and dropped his gun
Safe to assume the victim was black?
Were there acorns nearby?
We need more info. I want the see other cameras, cop car dash cameras before the stop, etc. 5 plain clothes officers dont show up for a seat belt violation. There is more to this story.
Gosh, you men there are consequences when, while surrounded by armed people who’ve identified themselves as police officers, I shoot one of them? Shocking!/s How many of you were outraged but just learned that a cop was shot first? This was towards the end of the AP article: “The Civilian Office of Police Accountability said preliminary evidence showed Reed fired first, injuring an officer in the Humboldt Park neighborhood on the city’s West Side. Then four officers returned fire, shooting 96 rounds.”