Brandon Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 Friday...I was eating at Original Joes on Taylor with a group and we noticed a large amount of cop cars circling the area. A few minutes later we see a white vehicle drive onto the field with literally a dozen cop cars chasing and circling trying to contain the guy. It looked straight out of a GTA video game. 95% of the people were smart , pulled over there car and didn't get involve. 5% decided to either try to drive closer to the situation and/or to get out of the car and run closer while video taping with a cell. We were a fair distance away but we did see them box him in and draw weapons on the guy. The 5% of the people .. attempted to go closer to get a better cell phone vid!!!? Police are well trained and rarely will fire in a direction where innocent bystanders are located... but the criminals are not quite as nice. For the love of god why are people this dumb? Somehow (maybe out of karma) I've been in the nearby area of 2 shootings in the year and both times a small amount of people have went towards the danger rather then trying to escape. Are people just this dumb, is it because everyone wants to copycat what they see in the news with police incidents and trying to get youtube hits, do people just want to get hit with stray bullets? Blows my mind.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
basslicker Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 Yes, people are THAT dumb. These 5% are the same to be the first to bash cops, even though they got in the way of the police. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taynted_Fayth Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 most people wanna be social media stars with those caught on cell vids. Rarely do I ever think these people are doing it for $ like selling the vid to a news outlet (like the movie nightcrawler with jake gyllenhaal) and more just wanna be like I was there man! agreed tho, idiocy by all means Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardCoreBlue Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 most people wanna be social media stars with those caught on cell vids. Rarely do I ever think these people are doing it for $ like selling the vid to a news outlet (like the movie nightcrawler with jake gyllenhaal) and more just wanna be like I was there man! agreed tho, idiocy by all means Therein lies the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted November 8, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 I think the one video that went on cbc's website you can hear an annoying girl give a play by play and right at the end of the video you see an angry cop waving her to GTFO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatty Liver Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 Yep, lot of idiots out there but the police have a few of their own and have done a bad job of self-policing their actions in the past, so these videos are a bit of karmic payback for a long history of past infractions. Cameras are everywhere, the police must adjust their behaviour to this new reality. Without a cell phone video that created public awareness of the Robert Dziekanski tazer death in Vancouver Airport, every officer would have gotten off scot-free. Not only do the police often ignore their own procedures but covering up and lying to protect fellow officers who break the law is standard operating procedure in most departments. Fraser 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark F Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 very good movie related to this is Nightcrawler with Jake Gillenhall... plays a guy who tracks police and the like and videos from in close. really suspenseful movie. was on netflix. similar stupid behavior relates to bears. we were camping in Alberta, mother bear and cubs peacefully walked by behind tent (one hundred feet or so away) a guy came up to our campsite with wife, and small children, he was going to cut through, get close and take pictures. then if anything happened, the bear would be shot and killed. I talked him out of it. I think the one video that went on cbc's website Irresponsible by CBC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatty Liver Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 Too many people learn about wild life from watching the mad-cap antics of Yogi and Boo Boo. Mark F and kelownabomberfan 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted November 8, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 Yep, lot of idiots out there but the police have a few of their own and have done a bad job of self-policing their actions in the past, so these videos are a bit of karmic payback for a long history of past infractions. Cameras are everywhere, the police must adjust their behaviour to this new reality. Without a cell phone video that created public awareness of the Robert Dziekanski tazer death in Vancouver Airport, every officer would have gotten off scot-free. Not only do the police often ignore their own procedures but covering up and lying to protect fellow officers who break the law is standard operating procedure in most departments. People don't realize the power of a bullet... even at my long distance I could tell the situation had escalated. Had the guy have a gun (I think he did) and missed firing at the cops... that bullet easily could kill you from where they were standing. While the police screw up once in a blue moon , it's not up to a clueless citizen to walk in on the scene and become the cameraman. So very dangerous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark F Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 Too many people learn about wild life from watching the mad-cap antics of Yogi and Boo Boo. i thought that program was loosely based on an actual story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelownabomberfan Posted November 9, 2015 Report Share Posted November 9, 2015 Too many people learn about wild life from watching the mad-cap antics of Yogi and Boo Boo.i thought that program was loosely based on an actual story. Based on "true events", whatever that means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacklewasher Posted November 9, 2015 Report Share Posted November 9, 2015 While the police screw up once in a blue moon , it's not up to a clueless citizen to walk in on the scene and become the cameraman. So very dangerous. Want the list of cops who would have gotten off scott free without these videos? It isn't once in a blue moon. I'm not advocating rushing into a gun fight with a phone, but don't belittle the issue with the RCMP either. There's a problem and it will only be dealt with because people are videoing them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark F Posted November 9, 2015 Report Share Posted November 9, 2015 bifurcated discussion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Dee Posted November 9, 2015 Report Share Posted November 9, 2015 bifurcated discussion Winner of the word of the day!! I mean who uses the word discussion in a sentence? Mark F 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatty Liver Posted November 9, 2015 Report Share Posted November 9, 2015 bifurcated discussion Is there any other kind??? I blame you for bringing up bears....but then "bears" is a synonym for "cops" or "pigs" and the bear is a member of the boar family which is really just a hairy pig...and I've seen some really hairy pigs in my time...but whether hairy or not best keep to a safe distance as they're nasty beasts....all sorts of tie ins to the original story. Keep on bifurcating! Mark F 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark F Posted November 9, 2015 Report Share Posted November 9, 2015 bifurcated discussion Winner of the word of the day!! I mean who uses the word discussion in a sentence? have to admit, I used "discussion" to impress people! and it worked! I blame you for bringing up bears... and If I had the chance to do it again... I would! Mr Dee 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted November 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 9, 2015 While the police screw up once in a blue moon , it's not up to a clueless citizen to walk in on the scene and become the cameraman. So very dangerous. Want the list of cops who would have gotten off scott free without these videos? It isn't once in a blue moon. I'm not advocating rushing into a gun fight with a phone, but don't belittle the issue with the RCMP either. There's a problem and it will only be dealt with because people are videoing them. Well considering police/RCMP go to 1000s of calls every day and 99.99% of them don't end up with police brutality yes it is once in a blue moon. Just because off incidents happen it doesn't mean it's regular occurrence. Very ignorant and naive to believe otherwise. When a suspect is waving a gun it is absolutely moronic to run in close and video it just to be moral police. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted November 12, 2015 Report Share Posted November 12, 2015 Gave it its own thread as this is a pretty significant story in Winnipeg. Here's an interesting take from The Black Rod: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 Shooting Mark DiCesare: Did he have a gun? Or was it murder? Manitoba's shiny new office to investigate police shootings has failed its first major test. When 24-year-old Mark DiCesare was surrounded by a veritable army of gun-toting police officers and blasted to eternity in an empty field in River Heights, the public wanted an answer to one, and only one, question. One. Count 'em. One. Did he have a gun? That's it. That's what everybody who heard the shocking news wanted to know. Did he have a gun? Once people knew the answer to that simple question, they could debate the need to shoot but at the same time would let the investigation take its course. "A police source" told the Winnipeg Free Press on Friday, Nov. 6, the day DiCesare was killed by Winnipeg police, that he did have a gun. And CJOB reported that "Brendan", who goes by one name like Madonna, also saw DiCesare with a gun, a "large" one. Yet, since the day police unloaded their deadly weapons, they've been strangely reticent when it comes to discussing a gun in the possession of the man they killed. Deputy Chief Danny Smyth held a news conference Saturday where he obliquely said that DiCesare was shot by five Winnipeg police officers. “Five officers have been identified as directly involved officers. What that means is that they were involved in the lethal-force encounter at the standoff in the field,” he said, hiding his meaning behind as much bafflegab as he could. But, according to the Winnipeg Sun, "Although witnesses say they saw Dicesare waving a gun, Smyth could not confirm that either." The Winnipeg Free Press put it more succinctly: "Smyth would not say how many shots were fired in total or whether a gun was seen by officers before or during the confrontation because it is part of the IIU investigation." And Zane Tessler, executive director of the bravely-named Independent Investigation Unit of Manitoba, cautioned the public not to expect quick answers. "There is a fine balance between the desire for expediency and the expectation for thoroughness," he said. In short, I've got nothing to say about a gun. Which is extremely troubling. For, you see, the last time police killed a man, in September, not so long ago, Tessler, a former Crown attorney, tried the same stonewall tactic. But less than 24 hours later, he changed his mind. As reported by CBC: Shooting happened about 10:30 p.m. Sunday near intersection of Highway 59 and KirknessCBC News Posted: Sep 21, 2015 4:56 AM..."[Officers] conducted a stop of that vehicle and then dealt with the occupant," said Tessler. "Moments later officers were required to use their service weapons and discharge their firearms … can't confirm whether or not the driver of the van did have a weapon on his person."Tessler later clarified a weapon that didn't belong to police was found at the scene, but he could not confirm if it had been fired. So, in September, Tessler quickly confirmed that the man killed by police had a gun in his possession, regardless of how convolutedly he tried to phrase it. He flip-flopped probably because news photos showed the gun on the highway near the scene of the shooting. Now, four days after the fact, Tessler tries to dampen discussion about a gun. That's not good. In fact, that's very, very bad. Because that's starting to look like there was no gun. And if Mark DiCesare had no gun, then five Winnipeg police officers should now be under investigation for second degree murder. Tessler is not a Crown attorney any longer. If he has evidence that five Winnipeg police officer shot an unarmed man to death in an empty field he has to turn the matter over to the provincial prosecutions branch. The five must then be treated like murder suspects and read their rights, not given a group hug by police and IIU officials. Everything about this case reeks. 39 police cars involved in a car chase? When was the last time you heard of 39 police cars chasing a suspect in Winnipeg. Start with NEVER. And why were they chasing him? The story has mutated almost daily. * Friday night CTV reported the chase started as the result of a tip.* Then it became a female driver who saw a man in a car waving a gun. * Then the female driver became a female police officer whose attention was drawn to erratic driving.* Then it was a man sticking his head out of the sun roof on his car and brandishing a large gun. (If he had his head out the sunroof, does that mean his was driving standing up, steering with his knees, maybe?)* Then it became a female police officer who noticed unexplained "erratic behaviour." There's no question that there was a police chase. Two, actually, given that the driver of the Audi lost police the first time they tried to stop him. The car wound up in an empty field. It would take one second to see whether the car actually drove over a spike belt. News photos show the car was boxed in tight. The driver couldn't go forward or backward, and couldn't get out the driver's side door as police vehicles blocked him everywhere. His only egress was out the right passenger door, into the killing zone, a small box of empty space zeroed in by armed police. Then there was a lengthy lull, estimated at 20 to 30 minutes by witnesses, more than enough time to bring in a police dog. "It ended when Mr. DiCesare took action and officers responded with lethal force." said Deputy Chief Danny Smyth, whateve that means. We don't know what DiCesare did. We know what police did. At least five officers fired a volley of shots. You can count 12 in DiCesare's car. Two shots blew out the window of a police car.One shot went through DiCesare's car windows and wound up who knows where. How many 40-calibre bullets hit DiCesare we don't know. This wasn't in an alley in the dark of night. It wasn't in a scary dark rooming house. The shooting took place in broad daylight in the early afternoon. It happened at least 20 minutes after the end of a wild police chase straight out of the Blues Brothers movie. The suspect wasn't threatening anybody; he was in an empty field. He wasn't going anywhere; he was surrounded by more than a dozen police cars and at least 25 armed police officers, one step in any direction and he would have been tackled by a dozen uniformed men, and maybe women. Even if he pulled a gun, he would have been instantly shot be police behind and to his side. If he had a gun. If he didn't, we're looking at potentially the worst police scandal since the murder of Paul Clear in 1981 by two active-duty policemen. The public demands an answer to a simple question, not systemic stonewalling by the police department and their alleged watchdog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted November 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2015 I already have a thread about this incident I was there when it happened. No idea if he had a gun but he definitely was a psycho driving around and had tonnes of chances to safely surrender. I've heard a lot of behind the scenes rumours which I can't share but I can definitely confirm he was not a good guy as his friends said in the paper. The public and his ex are very lucky that they did not get hurt by him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigg jay Posted November 13, 2015 Report Share Posted November 13, 2015 I've heard a lot of behind the scenes rumours which I can't share but I can definitely confirm he was not a good guy as his friends said in the paper. I've heard/read the same thing. Friends of his on Facebook were talking about some of the **** they used to do together. One guy was like "seemed like yesterday we were jacking cars together, now he's gone". Definitely didn't get the impression he was the model citizen he's being made out to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuranBoldenRules Posted November 13, 2015 Report Share Posted November 13, 2015 So they should be conducting the investigation with a Free Press, Sun, Global, CBC, CTV reporter embedded to update the public at every turn? I don't quite get the entitlement. There's a process being followed as there is with any investigation. Way too early to call anyone out. Rich 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted November 13, 2015 Report Share Posted November 13, 2015 Sorry Brandon. Maybe mod can merge. Yeah it not as black and white as "no gun = murder". But the media has a tendency to make news rather than report news nowadays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bustamente Posted November 13, 2015 Report Share Posted November 13, 2015 Generally in Canada 5 cops don't shoot a your car when stopped for erratic driving Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted November 13, 2015 Report Share Posted November 13, 2015 Generally in Canada 5 cops don't shoot a your car when stopped for erratic driving They might if the car drove at them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bustamente Posted November 13, 2015 Report Share Posted November 13, 2015 Generally in Canada 5 cops don't shoot a your car when stopped for erratic driving They might if the car drove at them. I might have missed something but was the car moving when they riddled it up with bullets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now