One officer is seen standing at her door and repeatedly telling her to “get out of the car”.
    “For what?” she responds twice, adding: “I’m not going to do that.”
    One officer seen in front of the car has his left hand on the hood, his gun drawn in the other hand.
    “Are you going to shoot me?” she says moments before a single shot is fired and the officer quickly moves out of the car’s path.

    The cop who killed her was in no danger, and has time to casually stroll out of the way of the vehicle.

    What he doesn’t have is a name or a face — as often happens, the police haven’t been named, and their faces have been blurred in the video.

    Why?

If they weren’t cops — if they were just a pair of random dudes killing a black pregnant woman, and there was video footage — would their names remain secret, their faces blurred?

  • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s really not, but doom scrolling sure makes it feel that way. The human mind simply does not understand mass statistics as applied to individual risk.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      While true (over four decades without seeing a gun used against a living target in the US here), the statistics are still pretty bad here per capita.

      Someone in my school growing up killed their sibling (accidental shooting). A guy that did some work for my family couldn’t finish the job because he shot his wife’s boyfriend and went to jail. There was a spree shooter within half a mile of my home once. I’ve never seen anything personally, but have more “close calls” than people in a lot of countries wouldn’t believe.

      Of course, I’ve known more fatalities from cars or cancer or heart attacks. But still our statistics on gun violence is not great, just not to the point of it being quite as ubiquitous as reported on the media.