Shooter at US Capitol.

[The Romulan Republic]

http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/suspect-in- ... -1.2835195

WASHINGTON -- A U.S. Capitol Police officer was shot Monday at the Capitol Visitor Center complex, and the shooter was taken into custody, Capitol officials and police said.
The event unfolded with Congress on recess and lawmakers back in their districts. The White House was briefly put on lockdown, but that was soon lifted.
The shooting occurred in the Visitors Center of the sprawling Capitol Complex. Staffers, reporters and others were told to "shelter in place" and not allowed to leave their offices. The police officer who was shot was not believed to be seriously injured.
PHOTOS
U.S. Capitol
FILE - Tour buses line up in front of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, on March 23, 2009. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
Visitors were being turned away from the Capitol as emergency vehicles flooded the street and the plaza on the building's eastern side. Police, some carrying long guns, cordoned off the streets immediately around the building, which were thick with tourists visiting for spring holidays and the Cherry Blossom Festival.
Traffic was jammed in the vicinity, but despite the obvious emergency the scene was relatively calm. A work crew on the north side of the Supreme Court, across the street, was asked to stop work and move away from the building as a precaution.
Capitol Police did not immediately return calls.

Is it wrong that I'm kind of hoping its not a Muslim because the reactions will likely be way worse if it is?

I mean, it should be just as bad whoever did it, but that's not how politics works these days, is it?

Thankfully, it looks like no one was killed.

[Ziggy Stardust]

According to CNN, the suspect is named Larry Russell Dawson, a 66-year-old man from Tennessee. Apparently last year he was charged with assaulting a police officer after an outburst in the House of Representatives during which he called himself a "prophet of God".

So looking like it was not Islamic terrorism, but the good old fashioned home-grown domestic right-wing extremist terrorist type.

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, technically you could have Muslim terrorist named Larry Russell Dawson from Tennessee, of course. But yeah, I know what this looks to be now. Typical conservative religious nut.

"Prophet of God."

[Channel72]

Look, I think we really need to ban all Evangelical Christians from coming into this country until we can figure out what's going on.

[The Romulan Republic]

A lengthier article:

http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/man-shot-by ... -1.2835195

WASHINGTON -- Police shot a man on Monday after he pulled a weapon at a U.S. Capitol checkpoint as spring tourists thronged Washington, authorities said. The suspect was previously known to police.
The suspect was taken to a local hospital, and a female bystander also sustained non-life-threatening injuries.
Capitol Chief of Police Matthew R. Verderosa declined to confirm reports that the suspect was the same man who was arrested last October for disrupting House proceedings, yelling he was a "Prophet of God."
PHOTOS
Police on Capitol Hill after shooting
An officer stands guard on a street leading to Capitol Hill in Washington that is closed, Monday, March 28, 2018. (AP / Alex Brandon)
A Secret Service Police Officer
A Secret Service Police Officer patrols the North Lawn of the White House in Washington, Monday, March 28, 2016. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
Tourists directed by Capitol Police in Washington
Tourists are directed by Capitol Police away from the Capitol at Constitution Ave. and Delaware Ave. in Washington, Monday, March 28, 2016. (AP / J. Scott Applewhite)
That man, 66-year-old Larry Dawson of Tennessee, was issued a "stay away order" by D.C. Superior Court in October, telling him to keep away from the Capitol grounds, court documents show.
The U.S. Capitol was on lockdown for about an hour Monday and the White House also was briefly locked down. As the capital teemed with spring tourists in town to view the cherry blossoms, staff members and visitors to the Capitol were rushed into offices and told to shelter in place.
"We do believe this is an act of a single person who has frequented the Capitol grounds before and there is no reason to believe that this is anything more than a criminal act," Verderosa told reporters. He said it was unclear how many officers fired their guns. Initial reports had said an officer was injured but that proved wrong.
Verderosa said the suspect's vehicle had been found on Capitol grounds and was being seized.
Monday's event unfolded with Congress on recess and lawmakers back in their districts. House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., issued a statement thanking Capitol Police, as did other congressional leaders. "This evening our thoughts and prayers are with all those who faced danger today," Ryan said.
The sprawling Capitol Visitors Center where the shooting occurred remained closed into the evening as the incident was being investigated, while the Capitol itself and nearby office buildings reopened.
Visitors were turned away from the Capitol in the immediate aftermath of the shooting as emergency vehicles flooded the street and the plaza on the building's eastern side. Police, some carrying long guns, cordoned off the streets immediately around the building.
Cathryn Leff of Temecula, California, in town to lobby with the California Association of Marriage and Family Therapists, said she was going through security at the main entrance to the Capitol Visitors Center when police told people to leave immediately.
Outside, on the plaza just to the east of the Capitol, other officers told those there to "get down behind this wall," she said. "I heard what sounded like two shots off to my left." After a while, police told her and others to keep running. "I felt like I was in a movie. It didn't feel real at all."
From back home in their districts, many lawmakers got in touch with staff to ensure all were safe, and posted thanks on Twitter as it appeared they were.
Earlier in the day, officials conducted an unrelated shelter-in-place drill at the Capitol.
Associated Press writers Mark Sherman, Michael Biesecker, Mary Clare Jalonick and Alan Fram contributed to this report.

[Eternal_Freedom]

Glad to hear no-one died and that it was just one nutter.

Incidentally, I've said it before but I'll say it again, I hate it when articles say something like "xyz did not immediately respond when we asked them to comment" as if it means something. They could just be, y'know, busy dealing with what happened.

[Flagg]

Damned Christians. When will the leaders of all of these Christians who commit robberies, rapes, and murders condemn them and demand they stop?!

[Dominus Atheos]

This story is getting weird. At first it was "gunman opens fire, shoots police officer". Now it's "man shot by police after pulling out what appeared to be a weapon, woman lightly injured by bullet fragment."

I still remember Miriam Carey, who's death went from "crazed woman shot while trying to ram white house security checkpoint" to "woman with a baby takes wrong turn down restricted street, makes u turn, non-uniformed cop try to pull her out of her car to arrest her, she flees, police shoot at fleeing car, kills woman".

[Simon_Jester]

I will note that in the process of fleeing she managed to hit two people with her car, though neither died. I think her sisters were right to claim wrongful death, but I do think it's a borderline case.

Excessive force is bad, but people who won't listen to reason, won't comply with directions from security officers, and have access to potentially deadly force (such as hitting you with a car) are dangerous. Sure, sometimes nobody gets hurt, but that's luck.

I'm going to repurpose a quote from David Drake, adding a few words in square brackets: "When you send out a man with a gun, you create a policymaker. When his ass is on the line, he will do whatever he [believes he] needs to do [to ensure his safety]. And if the implications of that bother you, the time to do something about that is before you decide to send him out."

We "send out" armed guards to maintain security around the White House and Capitol for a reason. One reason we do that is because these places are magnets for crazies, some of whom are not going to respond rationally to the armed security around those buildings. As a side effect, there will be times when the armed guards decide they cannot ensure their own safety without using violence... and, predictably, they will use that violence.

As far as I know, the only alternative is to leave the capitol largely unguarded and hope no actually dangerous crazies attack it.

[Flagg]

This story is getting weird. At first it was "gunman opens fire, shoots police officer". Now it's "man shot by police after pulling out what appeared to be a weapon, woman lightly injured by bullet fragment."

I still remember Miriam Carey, who's death went from "crazed woman shot while trying to ram white house security checkpoint" to "woman with a baby takes wrong turn down restricted street, makes u turn, non-uniformed cop try to pull her out of her car to arrest her, she flees, police shoot at fleeing car, kills woman".

Doesn't it always change to something drastically different?

Luckily it's not every fucking pissant police organization in every state in the union Orange County, Florida where in the entire 90's anyone shot and killed with a criminal record always had a gun and they would show this stack or stacks of paper in folders that was supposed to be the victims "entire criminal record" during the first 3 press conferences. Until the FOIA requests were met. Then the Sheriff was never seen talking about it again but the lawyer for the Sheriffs department would come out, admit there was no gun, knife, or blade of grass to be used, and the record was 90% traffic infractions printed at mega-font and the remaining were all dismissed shit or check bouncing charges ending in guilty pleas with the harshest sentences handed down being community services.

But this being the capital building in DC the versions of truth will be known in a couple days/weeks. So I won't be shocked if he pulled out a small copy of the US Constitution (3/5ths people-negroes redacted) or Christian Bible to wave around and some idiot rookie or ancient who should have been retired 15 years ago, dropped him.

[Grumman]

I still remember Miriam Carey, who's death went from "crazed woman shot while trying to ram white house security checkpoint" to "woman with a baby takes wrong turn down restricted street, makes u turn, non-uniformed cop try to pull her out of her car to arrest her, she flees, police shoot at fleeing car, kills woman".

That is not an honest interpretation of events. You fail to mention that she drove through a security checkpoint and ignored the orders of uniformed Secret Service officers to stop, rammed another Secret Service officer who tried to obstruct her path, drove in an extremely dangerous manner trying to flee the authorities, tried to ram more police when they finally halted and surrounded her vehicle, and then was finally shot and killed.

Quite simply, Carey was too stupid to live. If she started acting like a reasonable person at any point during her five minutes of running amok, she would still be alive. She could have stopped at the checkpoint. She could have stopped when the uniformed Secret Service officers told her to stop. She could have refrained from ramming the off-duty Secret Service officer out of her way. She could have not lead the authorities on a high speed chase, ignoring red lights, speed limits and direction of traffic. She could have given up when the authorities surrounded her vehicle. She could have not tried to ram two officers out of her way. She did not do any of these things, and that is why she is dead.

[Dominus Atheos]

I still remember Miriam Carey, who's death went from "crazed woman shot while trying to ram white house security checkpoint" to "woman with a baby takes wrong turn down restricted street, makes u turn, non-uniformed cop try to pull her out of her car to arrest her, she flees, police shoot at fleeing car, kills woman".

That is not an honest interpretation of events. You fail to mention that she drove through a security checkpoint and ignored the orders of uniformed Secret Service officers to stop, rammed another Secret Service officer who tried to obstruct her path, drove in an extremely dangerous manner trying to flee the authorities, tried to ram more police when they finally halted and surrounded her vehicle, and then was finally shot and killed.

Quite simply, Carey was too stupid to live. If she started acting like a reasonable person at any point during her five minutes of running amok, she would still be alive. She could have stopped at the checkpoint. She could have stopped when the uniformed Secret Service officers told her to stop. She could have refrained from ramming the off-duty Secret Service officer out of her way. She could have not lead the authorities on a high speed chase, ignoring red lights, speed limits and direction of traffic. She could have given up when the authorities surrounded her vehicle. She could have not tried to ram two officers out of her way. She did not do any of these things, and that is why she is dead.

Yes, but when did we learn that version of events? It sure as hell wasn't he day it happened, it wasn't day after it happened, it may not have been the same week it happened. For a long time, the official version was "crazed woman shot while trying to ram white house security checkpoint", and that isn't what happened.

[Flagg]

Quite simply, Carey was too stupid to live.

This truly isn't directed at you, Grumman, and I don't advocate what I'm about to say in this case be done to you, since it just reminded me of something I've been feeling for awhile.

I want to really stress that, as we often disagree. But this honestly doesn't pertain to you or this thread specifically, because while I find your opinions and reasoning to be flawed and of a wrong worldview, I respect them because I can't recall you ever making an argument that wasn't at least thought out and presented in a reasonable manner. This is just something that's been going on for a long time, especially on Internet forums, comment sections, and even articles themselves.

Maybe we should bring back custom titles and anyone who ever uses the term "Too Stupid To Live" in relation to a human being's death (barring Darwin Award shit, but maybe even then...) in seriousness should get "Too Stupid To Live" as their aforementioned custom title.

There's just something so callous and disturbing in an empathy-lacking way about it. I mean this is someone who in all likelihood took a wrong-turn, then panicked. When fight or flight kicks in, you'd be surprised at what some will do, especially when that reptile brain kicks in and you just need "out!", despite how stupid or irrational it is, or seems.

I mean if a couple dumb teenagers shoplift expensive shit at a large store, run to their car and load the stolen goods in, then take off and a cop without a drawn firearm or an unarmed security guard jumps into the parking lot dozens of yards ahead of their car waving their arms trying to block the way with their body alone and end up getting run over and killed, are they "Too Stupid To Live"? And yes, it's happened.

I think if you say "yes" to the question, that's one thing, but if you read the story and say something like "That cop/guard was just too stupid to live" in response... You're deserving "Too Stupid To Live" as a CT.

[Grumman]

I mean if a couple dumb teenagers shoplift expensive shit at a large store, run to their car and load the stolen goods in, then take off and a cop without a drawn firearm or an unarmed security guard jumps into the parking lot dozens of yards ahead of their car waving their arms trying to block the way with their body alone and end up getting run over and killed, are they "Too Stupid To Live"? And yes, it's happened.

I think if you say "yes" to the question, that's one thing, but if you read the story and say something like "That cop/guard was just too stupid to live" in response... You're deserving "Too Stupid To Live" as a CT.

I would not call that cop/guard "too stupid to live". They made a split-second assumption that a shoplifter is not a murderer, and would sooner stop than run you down trying to escape. I wouldn't compare that to the assumption that barging through a security checkpoint will get you better results than just stopping and admitting you made a mistake, or the failure to realise after five minutes that your split-second decision to evade capture wasn't actually working and that surrender might be a better choice.

[Edi]

Flagg, when you have a high security target like the White House and the US Capitol Hill and you ignore instructions from uniformed security and act consistently with the profile of a violent attacker, as described in Grumman's post, that is more or less Darwin Award material and qualifies for the Too Stupid To Live designation.

It doesn't even need to be used maliciously, though it often is, but in instances like Miriam Carey, more like frustration and disgust at the waste of it all. It isn't that she deserved to die, but she actively brought her own death about by her chosen course of action. It was also entirely predictable, because the police response to attackers in general and around high security targets in particular is well established and highly public common knowledge.

So I wouldn't fault Grumman too much about using that phrase here. One just needs to be careful about when, where and how to use it and usually only after all the facts have come to light.

[Joun_Lord]

Maybe we should bring back custom titles and anyone who ever uses the term "Too Stupid To Live" in relation to a human being's death (barring Darwin Award shit, but maybe even then...) in seriousness should get "Too Stupid To Live" as their aforementioned custom title

I think that is unreasonable.

There are times when someone is too dumb to live, when they seem to go out of their way to try to kill themselves in the dumbest manner possible. It goes beyond just panic or making a stupid mistake.

The woman at the Capitol might have just been panicking even for 5 minutes. Time gets distorted during stressful events, especially if the stress is compounded by a pre-existing condition (which apparently she had, calling herself the Prophet of Stamford and saying she had personal contact with Obama). Still a bit of a stretch but maybe it was just an unfortunate event, she didn't willfully act like a dummy.

But there are certainly other cases where someone can be considered too dumb to live. Certainly LaVoy Finicum after broadcasting his desire to go down swinging then trying to run down a cop then refusing to keep his damn hands away from his waist could be considered too dumb to live. He died because of his own bonehead actions while in a clear state of mind.

The guy who recently shot a lawnmower full of a stupidly huge amount of tannerite (a legal explosive used by shooters to make a boom, it is recommended to have 100 yards for every pound you use, he had 3 pounds and was standing less then 25 yards away) might have survived his encounter with only a leg missing but certainly could qualify as too dumb too live. He nearly killed himself willfully doing something incredibly, incredibly stupid.

Other really stupid incidents like the guy riding in a helmet law protest rally dying by dashing his brains on the pavement or the guy who tried to rob a gun store with a marked police car out front he would have had to walk by to enter. Those guys sound like they were too dumb too live, again while of sound mind doing something completely and utterly moronic on purpose.

These cases are of people who more or less committed suicide by their actions, who literally were too dumb too live. Few if any of thats the result of panic (maybe in LaVoys case just the police chase but certainly not the stupid shit proceeding it or the reaching for the handgun while surrounded by cops) but them doing that shit on purpose.

And I ain't even saying they deserved to die, lord knows I whined enough here about the poor wittle fucktards at Malheur being total shitbags deserving of zombie Roosevelt rising from the grave to kick them in the nuts until they stop being so fucking stupid but not deserving of death for their stupid action, but by their purposeful actions they did die. And to risk sounding like an internet tough guy, its not like their deaths are tragedies. They died because they choose to undertake radically retarded actions.

[Dominus Atheos]

Flagg, when you have a high security target like the White House and the US Capitol Hill and you ignore instructions from uniformed security and act consistently with the profile of a violent attacker, as described in Grumman's post, that is more or less Darwin Award material and qualifies for the Too Stupid To Live designation.

Grummans description was wrong. I ignored it since that wasn't the point I was trying to make, but its a terrible description of what happened that day. Here is the Washington posts article on the 1 year anniversary.

Carey arrives at the Secret Service kiosk at E and 15th. She drives past the kiosk into a restricted area that used to be E Street NW before it was closed after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Now only authorized vehicles are permitted.

The White House is not even visible from this outermost perimeter. Someone trying to reach it would have to pass through at least three more. Obama is inside, after a visit to a Rockville construction company.

In the first of three still images the U.S. attorney released from security videos of this encounter, at precisely 2:13:13 p.m., a uniformed Secret Service officer seems to be trying to rap the Infiniti to get Carey’s attention. He and another uniformed officer direct her to stop, according to the U.S. attorney’s report. Carey doesn’t. She makes a U-turn and drives past the kiosk again on her way out.

She is crossing back into public space, at 2:13:30 p.m., when a man not in uniform, wearing a dark short-sleeve shirt, is seen pushing a section of portable fencing against the front of Carey’s Infiniti. At the same time, he’s trying to hang onto what looks like a cooler and a plastic shopping bag.

The man is an off-duty Secret Service officer, according to the report. The U.S. attorney, the Secret Service and the Capitol Police have declined to name any officer involved.

The off-duty officer is not trying to block Carey from entering the restricted area; he is trying to keep her from exiting back onto 15th Street.

According to a tourist bystander quoted at the time, Carey tries to steer around the fence section, but the officer repositions it in front of her. This is the only security barrier Carey ever rams.

The third image (2:13:32 p.m.) shows the off-duty officer tumbling away from the left front of Carey’s car. Officials said at the time that a Secret Service officer was slightly injured but not taken to a hospital. (Later, a Capitol Police officer would be taken to a hospital after his cruiser rammed a pop-up barrier suddenly erected across Constitution Avenue by his colleagues as he was pursuing Carey.)

In recent cases of motorists entering restricted areas, drivers have faced misdemeanor charges. Last May, Mathew Goldstein mistakenly followed the Obama daughters’ motorcade into the pedestrian section of Pennsylvania Avenue. A misdemeanor charge of unlawful entry was dropped.

In September, the day after Omar Gonzalez sprinted into the White House, another man, Kevin Carr, allegedly drove into the same restricted area as Carey did and parked. He, too, was charged with misdemeanor unlawful entry. His case is pending.

Eric Sanders, a civil rights lawyer and retired New York City police officer who is representing the Carey family in the wrongful-death claim, cites D.C. code to argue that an element of the crime of unlawful entry is the refusal to leave, making the act intentional. Carey did not refuse to leave. She refused to stop leaving.

Why didn’t Carey halt at the officers’ direction? Valarie Carey thinks her sister was scared.

“What I see is a plainclothes person, not in uniform, not easily identifiable as law enforcement, who’s in front of her car, leaning against her car in an aggressive way,” she says. “ ‘Who is this crazy man? Let me get away from him.’ ”

“If you’re an officer, I don’t believe that’s in the protocol of how you stop someone,” she adds, referring to her NYPD training. The Secret Service wouldn’t comment. “I don’t think you were trained that way. To take a barrier and place it against somebody’s car while you’re holding a cooler? ‘I’m confused. Who are you?’ ”



How fast was Miriam Carey driving?

Carey goes straight across 15th Street onto Pennsylvania Avenue. You could say this route is the most obvious open road from the White House checkpoint, rather than making a hard left or right onto 15th Street. Or you could say this is a straight shot to another high-security piece of architecture: the Capitol.

She arrives at the next scene of action, Garfield Circle, at the foot of the Capitol’s West Lawn, by the Reflecting Pool and the U.S. Botanic Garden.

The U.S. attorney reported that she drove “at speeds estimated [by officers on the scene] at 40-80 mph, while weaving through traffic, and ignoring red lights.”

Garfield Circle is 1.3 miles from the White House checkpoint. The U.S. attorney’s investigation determined that Carey covered the distance in four minutes. If Carey arrived in four minutes, her average speed was 19.5 mph in a 25-mph zone.

What do ubiquitous traffic and security cameras show us?

At 2:17 p.m., news videographer Danny Farkas is on the West Lawn covering a demonstration against the government shutdown. He works for Alhurra TV, funded by the U.S. government to provide news in Arabic.

Suddenly, Farkas hears sirens and, through the viewfinder, sees the black Infiniti pull onto the sidewalk at the foot of the Lawn and stop, its bumper close to the bollards. He zooms in. “I expected to hear someone to come out and yell, ‘Cut!’ ” he recalls.

At least four Secret Service vehicles pull up seconds behind the car. Four uniformed officers leap out and surround the Infiniti, aiming pistols with urgent two-handed grips at the interior. A fifth officer, also taking aim, is wearing plain clothes, with a dark short-sleeve shirt. (The officer with the cooler?)

“Get out of the car!” officers can be heard shouting. Two of them peer through the passenger and driver windows, their faces close to the glass.

“Then she did something you only see in the movies,” Farkas says, referring to the way Carey backed into a cruiser, seemingly to get room to maneuver. “Is that a trained stunt driver in there?”

Carey pulls forward on the sidewalk, forcing an officer to sprint out of the way, and continues between the wall of the Lawn and the tree boxes.

Farkas has to shift position. The camera briefly swings away just as the shots ring out. No shooting can be seen on camera, but the posture of the officers when the camera catches up makes it apparent the shots are fired as the car is departing.

Eight rounds are fired by two Secret Service officers and one Capitol Police officer, according to the U.S. attorney. Investigators “do not believe” any rounds fired at this encounter hit Carey, the U.S. attorney reported, without stating the basis for that belief.

Alhurra’s footage is the only video evidence the public has seen. Capitol Police says it can’t release video of what will be the fatal finale for security reasons. The Secret Service declines to release video of the checkpoint encounter, without explanation.



Why did officers open fire?

Police standards prohibit officers from firing at moving vehicles except in rare circumstances.

“To successfully fire at a vehicle, let alone a moving one, is something that only seems to work well in the movies,” observed a D.C. police training manual from the late 1990s.

Police tacticians frown on shooting at moving vehicles because the practice often results in stray bullets spraying public space, speeding cars being turned into unguided missiles if their drivers are incapacitated, or unarmed drivers being killed before questions can be asked.

The “model policy” propounded by the International Association of Chiefs of Police says “firearms shall not be discharged at a moving vehicle unless a person in the vehicle is immediately threatening the officer or another person with deadly force.” The vehicle itself cannot automatically be considered the threat, according to the policy. “An officer threatened by an oncoming vehicle shall move out of its path instead of discharging a firearm at it.”

The D.C. police policy echoes the model: “A moving vehicle is not considered deadly force.”

The Secret Service and the Capitol Police will not disclose their current policies, but past policies give a clue.

A Capitol Police order dated 1989 barred shooting at moving vehicles except to defend against an attack that could cause death or serious injury; or to prevent the escape of a person whom the officer has witnessed commit a felony. A former Capitol Police officer says those principles were still in effect as of several years ago. A 2004 Department of Homeland Security memo to the Secret Service and other enforcement agencies within DHS said “deadly force may not be used solely to prevent the escape of a fleeing suspect.”

Early last month, Capitol Police Chief Dine sent a department-wide bulletin highlighting a recent Supreme Court decision in a case involving local police from Arkansas who fatally shot a driver and passenger just over the border in Tennessee. The driver exceeded 100 mph and posed a deadly threat to motorists, hence officers were justified in firing 15 rounds to stop the driver, the court ruled.

“When the totality of the circumstances indicates that there is a grave risk to public safety … it is advised that it remains reasonable to use deadly force to end that risk,”Dine’s bulletin said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/style/ ... her-death/

[Ziggy Stardust]

I fail to see how that disproves Grumman's description. Though perhaps his is a bit hyperbolic, it still gets the basic sequence of events correct.

I'm not even sure what you are trying to prove with this case. She acted stupidly and recklessly. It's a shame that she died, because stupidity doesn't deserve death, but it's hard to also make the argument that she didn't bring it on herself with her actions. I mean, have you ever been to that part of D.C.? I lived in D.C. for three years and was in that area frequently; there is virtually no way to innocently confuse any of those streets or checkpoints for anything but what they are. They are all clearly marked, and there's no way to be in that neighborhood and not know you are next to the White House, or at least another government building (like the executive offices in the Eisenhower Building or the nearby Treasury). Trying to pass it off as if she was just confused and didn't realize what the barriers in front of her were just won't fly.

[Simon_Jester]

Quite simply, Carey was too stupid to live.

This truly isn't directed at you, Grumman, and I don't advocate what I'm about to say in this case be done to you, since it just reminded me of something I've been feeling for awhile...

Maybe we should bring back custom titles and anyone who ever uses the term "Too Stupid To Live" in relation to a human being's death (barring Darwin Award shit, but maybe even then...) in seriousness should get "Too Stupid To Live" as their aforementioned custom title.

There's just something so callous and disturbing in an empathy-lacking way about it. I mean this is someone who in all likelihood took a wrong-turn, then panicked. When fight or flight kicks in, you'd be surprised at what some will do, especially when that reptile brain kicks in and you just need "out!", despite how stupid or irrational it is, or seems.

I mean if a couple dumb teenagers shoplift expensive shit at a large store, run to their car and load the stolen goods in, then take off and a cop without a drawn firearm or an unarmed security guard jumps into the parking lot dozens of yards ahead of their car waving their arms trying to block the way with their body alone and end up getting run over and killed, are they "Too Stupid To Live"? And yes, it's happened.

I think if you say "yes" to the question, that's one thing, but if you read the story and say something like "That cop/guard was just too stupid to live" in response... You're deserving "Too Stupid To Live" as a CT.

My feeling is that there are two categories of "too stupid to live" callousness that don't turn my stomach at least a little, and I"d like to talk about them, but I want you to know that I empathize with the feeling and that there are certainly plenty of places where having "too stupid to live" brought up does turn my stomach a little.

One of the two exceptions is, of course, when people make suicidally foolish premeditated decisions. Like disabling the safeties on heavy machinery and then using it as a toy. Or like having your dog play 'fetch' with lit sticks of dynamite (this was in an actual Darwin Awards book).

The other exception is when someone makes a persistent, consistent, chain of bad decisions. Not a single instance of unwise judgment (e.g. jumping in the path of a moving vehicle in the expectation that the driver will stop rather than running over you, or conversely driving straight at a person on foot in the expectation that they'll get out of the way). But consistent bad judgment, of doing exactly the wrong thing, making the wrong move over and over and over. Ignoring basic rules of 'how to behave in this situation, and displaying a total inability to control one's emotions or use one's reason in a crisis.

Do that enough times in a row, and the sentiment "too dumb to live" sometimes flashes irresistibly through my brain.

Now, I recognize that there exist people who have issues with mental illness or who may be having an adverse drug reaction or something. The problem is that, and this is something I alluded to in my last post, the rest of us have to live in the same world as that. At street level, people have to somehow have a right to physical safety, in the face of people who behave erratically.

In particular, the guards who have to deal with erratic people have a right to try to not die, while at the same time having a very important duty to protect others. One of those responsibilities is everyone's ground rule #1 and deserves some respect; the other responsibility is a sacred obligation. Having armed people around who are caught between those two imperatives is a big deal and we should take it seriously- as noted in my last post.

Ideally, everybody lives. The only way to make that happen in situations where violent force is involved, though, is if we all keep a grip on ourselves. If everyone takes a little time to be... not-reckless. If we all show enough respect for the lives and welfare of others, we don't create situations where anyone feels forced to hurt or kill people in order to survive. Yes, that may mean ignoring an impulse from your reptile-brain... but part of the human condition is knowing when to do that, of being capable of participating in human society and not acting on this pure "nature red in tooth and claw" level.

But sometimes you get people who cannot or will not show that level of respect for safety and public order. Maybe they can't help it. Maybe they could, but are too reckless or lacking in empathy to care about the consequences of their actions for others. During an incident, it is hard to tell.

And at that point, well... you are in the presence of people who have deadly force at their disposal, whom we have told "protect this area, protect these people, maintain public order." And they are going to begin to see your death as "what they have to do" in order to both do their duty and live to tell about it.

The consequences are predictable.

So from my point of view, your right to wave your arms ends when you start hitting people. Even if you're in the middle of a nervous breakdown. Even if you're freaking out or have unreliably regulated bipolar disorder. If you're erratic enough to be using genuinely threatening violence against others (e.g. hitting them with a car) and acting in a way that makes you an imminent threat (e.g. running red lights and smashing into people and things with your car to knock them out of your way), then yes. If you're being that reckless, not once but over and over, with no evidence that you are capable of stopping and getting enough control of yourself to NOT be dangerous to those around you...

Basically, at that point, you are running amok, and as in Indonesia there is a strong likelihood that you will be killed... and if such actions aren't "too dumb to live," they are definitely too something to live.

[Flagg]

Flagg, when you have a high security target like the White House and the US Capitol Hill and you ignore instructions from uniformed security and act consistently with the profile of a violent attacker, as described in Grumman's post, that is more or less Darwin Award material and qualifies for the Too Stupid To Live designation.

It doesn't even need to be used maliciously, though it often is, but in instances like Miriam Carey, more like frustration and disgust at the waste of it all. It isn't that she deserved to die, but she actively brought her own death about by her chosen course of action. It was also entirely predictable, because the police response to attackers in general and around high security targets in particular is well established and highly public common knowledge.

So I wouldn't fault Grumman too much about using that phrase here. One just needs to be careful about when, where and how to use it and usually only after all the facts have come to light.

To be fair, I specifically did not fault him, and I feel like it could or couldn't apply here. The problem is, I've seen it used (not here, but less savory places, like Facebook or YouTube comments) in cases of drug mules where a woman has the balloons rupture and kill her, when she was almost certainly forced into it. I just feel like there are cases where the callousness is over the top.

[Simon_Jester]

Agreed.

Part of this is failure to read between the lines (childish people often don't grasp what coercion means, or don't infer that a drug mule is probably coerced). Or general breakdown of empathy, probably tying into that "failure to read between the lines."

Personally I'd restrict it to cases where someone makes a voluntary, premeditated decision to do something that anyone with basic judgment and common knowledge would have avoided. Such as going outside to adjust your TV antenna in a lightning storm.

...

OR where someone makes consistent, repeated bad judgments under pressure to such an extent that they wind up dying in a way that could easily have been avoided with a modicum of self-control. Such as flying into a rage and taunting an armed man for several minutes, while the armed man remains calm, then screaming and stepping closer while waving one's arms. At that point, you've invited a violent response that you could easily have prevented by getting a grip on yourself at any time in the past several minutes.

But some people have trouble with that. Some because they are suffering from an actual mental illness, tragically.

Others... frankly, others have trouble with this because they're just plain stupid, or because they don't understand how their temper tantrums are perceived by others, due to lack of empathy and inability to admit they are in the wrong.

[Flagg]

I mean if a couple dumb teenagers shoplift expensive shit at a large store, run to their car and load the stolen goods in, then take off and a cop without a drawn firearm or an unarmed security guard jumps into the parking lot dozens of yards ahead of their car waving their arms trying to block the way with their body alone and end up getting run over and killed, are they "Too Stupid To Live"? And yes, it's happened.

I think if you say "yes" to the question, that's one thing, but if you read the story and say something like "That cop/guard was just too stupid to live" in response... You're deserving "Too Stupid To Live" as a CT.

I would not call that cop/guard "too stupid to live". They made a split-second assumption that a shoplifter is not a murderer, and would sooner stop than run you down trying to escape. I wouldn't compare that to the assumption that barging through a security checkpoint will get you better results than just stopping and admitting you made a mistake, or the failure to realise after five minutes that your split-second decision to evade capture wasn't actually working and that surrender might be a better choice.

I used that instance because it happened to a security guard working at a retail outlet at the Merrit Island Mall in Merrit Island, Florida. It was used by the instructor in our deep and detailed 6 hours a day for 4 days as an example of doing something that made him "too dumb to live". The teenaged girls (one 13, the other 15 IIRC) who ran down the 35 year old security guard, got charged with first degree murder.

But I dunno, I'm on a ton of meds for this godawful ear infection, and probably off base.

[Lord Revan]

Agreed.

Part of this is failure to read between the lines (childish people often don't grasp what coercion means, or don't infer that a drug mule is probably coerced). Or general breakdown of empathy, probably tying into that "failure to read between the lines."

Personally I'd restrict it to cases where someone makes a voluntary, premeditated decision to do something that anyone with basic judgment and common knowledge would have avoided. Such as going outside to adjust your TV antenna in a lightning storm.

...

OR where someone makes consistent, repeated bad judgments under pressure to such an extent that they wind up dying in a way that could easily have been avoided with a modicum of self-control. Such as flying into a rage and taunting an armed man for several minutes, while the armed man remains calm, then screaming and stepping closer while waving one's arms. At that point, you've invited a violent response that you could easily have prevented by getting a grip on yourself at any time in the past several minutes.

But some people have trouble with that. Some because they are suffering from an actual mental illness, tragically.

Others... frankly, others have trouble with this because they're just plain stupid, or because they don't understand how their temper tantrums are perceived by others, due to lack of empathy and inability to admit they are in the wrong.

That's my take on it really for someone to be "too dumb to live" their willfull actions must be so irrational as be danger to themselves and others around them be it one specific action or a chain of really bad judgements.

If someone is forced to such a situation it's a whole another thing, after all if coerced a person is not in control of their actions and could do actions they know to be stupid because they have no other choice.

[Grumman]

I used that instance because it happened to a security guard working at a retail outlet at the Merrit Island Mall in Merrit Island, Florida. It was used by the instructor in our deep and detailed 6 hours a day for 4 days as an example of doing something that made him "too dumb to live". The teenaged girls (one 13, the other 15 IIRC) who ran down the 35 year old security guard, got charged with first degree murder.

But I dunno, I'm on a ton of meds for this godawful ear infection, and probably off base.

I don't think that that is unreasonable. Whether or not I agree that doing that actually makes someone "too dumb to live," I think it's fair for an instructor to use such language to make sure the lesson hits home.

[Simon_Jester]

Well, I'll still agree the instructor is a callous son of a gun.