Police: "OMGZ! This Man is Holding A Water Hose!! SHOOT HIM!!"

They find out, but this progression isn't the point, the whole point is about the norms which comes first and precedes the chain of events. Which in that it's acceptable by modern society to be drunk publicly, but ridiculed if done so in private.
It is definitely a minor phenomenon that can be refuted using sociological examples, and links to the emphasis of societal functionalism topics from social sciences.

Ok. either this is a pointless debate that I am not sure of what is to prove or I have no idea where we are trying to go.. are we trying to debate about the concept of functionalism?
 
This is why it's a bad thing that any doofus halfwit can become a cop. Surely a little more fortitude and diligence would have determined that the guy was not holding an actual gun and, rather, was just being an idiot. But noooo, cops have to be all gung ho and shoot him to pieces.

You're just as dumb as they are if you think this sort of behavior among our police force is acceptable.
 
Reba said:
Getting drunk alone at home wouldn't have the same immediate consequences as this event did but it still carries consequences.
Click to expand...

Getting drunk at home doesn't have any implications other than people wouldn't want to do it because of peer pressure and network related factors, which precedes the purpose - just as some people want to get high to have a good time, while others may high for a specific cause. As far as I'm aware from all the reports about him (locally and on the web), the guy aligns more with the social type, he was having fun as he usually did, his personality.

Individuals who adhere to stratification follow modernization, which links the whole hierarchical concept between norms and societal regulations involved.
Functionalism examines this as individuals impacted by decision makers influenced within society where they have expectations to be met or they get considered as deviants.

It is not about an individual case by case basis - it is more about how this death contradicts with how popular society operates - after others (as in the community) heard this, does the norm change?
Do people realize they shouldn't be drunk outside unless they can account for their behavior? Or does it still continue and is not impacted? Will codes and enforcement be raised on the community to reinforce the act of being drunk and how does this affect modern society?

This example can be applied in other means:
In regards to autistic individuals shot by police mistaking them, there have been many cases about these incidents. Does it reinforce the notion that children with disorders be closely monitored and kept indoors to harbor them from the outside world that they will never likely be accepted for, should they be held accountable and completely responsible for their own actions once they are outside the door?

Don't want to go on a ramble, it is just the essence of sociology that speaks. The specific case has less relevancy, the upkeeping of popular society to beliefs are the bigger fish.
 
Banjo said:
8 shots is excessive.
Click to expand...

Yeah, there is speculation in the community that the police acted solely on the testimony/account of the witness call and operator's testimony that there was actually a gangster of some sort snooping around on someone's porch.. to account for all the shots fired and probably part of why the vic's family are pursuing legal action.
 
warpedpink said:
I agree that it's too much, but to shoot at his legs is a tad unrealistic. It's difficult to aim at something that's probably skinny and moving.
Plus, IF the person "attacking" the police will probably continue to do so after their legs have been shot.
I say the police need to use their electric gun more.
Click to expand...

Not only that, if he really is holding a gun, a shot elsewhere on the body could cause a contraction that would fire the gun as a reaction. Chances of hurting or killing a bystander.
 
Back
Top