I wonder, will people care about this cop as much as they care to view police brutality? I hope the answer is yes, because otherwise society can rot for all I will care.

In any other western country this video would be taken as an indicator that civilians should not be allowed to have assault rifles or any guns or at the very least regular and thorough gun safety- and psychological exams.

Only in America the discussion would be about the cop being too cautious to point a loaded firearm at a human being.

[edit, you cannot see the nsfw tag when the video ended, my fault]
But @DerHasisttot what about all the country's where the possession of weapons is banned or put under very strict rules? Have you been to Europe lately, it's like a deathhole, everybody's going insane and shooting children with illegal guns they can get anywhere!!
Was buying milk at the corner store the other day and BAM got shot in the head - just like that.

>> ^DerHasisttot:
In any other western country this video would be taken as an indicator that civilians should not be allowed to have assault rifles or any guns or at the very least regular and thorough gun safety- and psychological exams.
Only in America the discussion would be about the cop being too cautious to point a loaded firearm at a human being.


And I agree about the assualt rifle part DerHasisttot, 100%. We should not have them. They are used to hunt, but they are not used to hunt animals.

But that doesn't change the fact that it happened and he's dead. This video is to point out that others in this country promote a culture that is less than sane--not necessarily that the cop was murdered. IMO, culture murdered this cop, along with this psycho, along with his assualt rifle (Which our culture promotes as a freedom.)

And the funny part? If this was an police brutality video, it would already be in the top 10...

>> ^Lawdeedaw:


And the funny part? If this was an police brutality video, it would already be in the top 10...


You think? Please show me a police brutality vid out of the Top10 where the citizen got shot in the head several times, you hear his (last) screams and then the cop drives off without caring, after shouting insane-sounding things.

I think/ hope this video isn't in the top ten because it is snuff. And I hope it stays where it is.

*discuss *snuff

This video is being sent to Sift Talk for discussion - discuss requested by kulpims.

>> ^kulpims:
discuss snuff


Perhaps it is snuff, and perhaps the descriptive text I placed in here is not a "documentary" of the mindset behind our culture, but I tried as best I could to make it exactly that. The video itself is informative, and is about the politics of a culture.

>> ^luxury_pie:
>> ^Lawdeedaw:
And the funny part? If this was an police brutality video, it would already be in the top 10...

You think? Please show me a police brutality vid out of the Top10 where the citizen got shot in the head several times, you hear his (last) screams and then the cop drives off without caring, after shouting insane-sounding things.
I think/ hope this video isn't in the top ten because it is snuff. And I hope it stays where it is.


I would disagree that it's snuff. You can disagree with whatever it is, but you cannot change the reason I used and the logic I used. In my heart, it is a documentary of our society. Just because it doesn't state "Documentary" doesn't mean anything. Just because it doesn't use a documentary format doesn't mean anything.

What does it objectively present without inserting fictonal crap? Americans love our guns, no matter the cost. We don't care what happens because others signed up for it (This is referring to a different discussion on another sift dicussion, by someone who apparently doesn't care when human beings die.) We don't value life as much as controversy. We do a lot of messed up things.

So you say it's snuff, I say it's not. Go figure.

*Edit later
And to answer your question, cops lined up and stormed a house. The man inside had a gulf club, and they shot him dead. There was a big stink about it, but I would not say that it was snuff.

Also, this one http://videosift.com/video/Seattle-cop-kills-nonthreatining-pedestrian

But you'll say these don't count because the actual videos don't have screaming and insanity. Whatever floats your boat. But I would say a cop murdering a defenseless woodcutter in broad daylight, in front of others who will probably never get over the psychological mind fuck probably balances things out.

I can't bring myself to watch this. I know a man is about to die.

I think it is snuff. Someone dies. On camera.

Can you find a news report about this and let me upvote that?

@bareboards2 him getting shot is not on camera, only the shooter. you hear his screams however and that is nothing I want to hear, honestly.

@Lawdeedaw I agree with your descriptive text in general. You are addressing a problem I would like to discuss or see discussed on the sift. But that is not the matter I have with the nature of those videos.

I mean if you are used to people getting shot and screaming their last breath (literally) out of their lungs, fine ("whatever floats your boat"). But I do not.

Watching or hearing somebody die is snuff IMO. The other videos don't show it directly nor do you hear anything. You rarely see blood or an open wound. It's a difference.

To the edit-part: It's horrible. We don't have to argue about that. But the difference is the same as the difference between me telling you "Somebody shot Timmy in the woods" and me driving to the woods with you and showing you the actual body.
The one thing is a report and you get what has happened and the other thing is actual sight (and hearing), something that will be in your memory for a pretty while. I don't want to have that memory, I want to know where Timmy is!!!

For the record - As gruesome as it is, the person/officer is not shot on camera, only the shooter can be seen.
This is entirely taken from a dash mounted camera within the police car. You can however hear the screams of the officer as he is being killed. I didn't watch the whole thing, I jumped forward through it all though.

Although he is not killed "on screen," it is a video of a person loosing their life. I think @dag should decide if this is something we want here.

It absolutely is important for people to experience to understand why some officers can be as strict as they are on routine pull-overs, especially those people who criticize without understanding.
However, maybe a Sift Talk with an external link should have been used here. My opinion is it is snuff and doesn't belong on this site as general fodder for the masses. What say ye?

"Our definition of "snuff" does include but is not exclusive to any short clip in which a human fatality occurs whether or not any victims are actually visible on camera."

Clear-cut snuff. *discard

Discarding this post - discard requested by member lucky760.

>> ^burdturgler:
"Our definition of "snuff" does include but is not exclusive to any short clip in which a human fatality occurs whether or not any victims are actually visible on camera."


Of course--that's why I brought up the hundreds of other snuff videos out there that reverse the situation. I wouldn't mind this video being discarded at all--if the sift applied this fairly.

I don't think there is much of a difference between whether or not the person screams or just plain dies. It is the same net result. One man's backside or brains splattered on the concrete off camera is, imo, just as bad as this.

I can respect your line of reasoning far more than others; thank you. I personally, as a visual man, find more in the mind's eye than in the verbal. I envison far more than I listen. When I see the woodcutter, even though he is off camera, in my mind, it's like he get's shot, rocks back in agony, and dies with his face smashing into the ground. That, to me, is no more an acceptable video than this.

But here is a question--if this had been the other way around, and the cop shot someone else, do you honestly believe that it would have been classified as snuff? I can almost guarentee that it would not have been--even with the shouting...

Another thing, if they can play this in my class (Which is how I learned about it,) then that shows the maturity of both my class and our teacher.

>> ^luxury_pie:
@<A rel="nofollow" class=profilelink title="member since July 3rd, 2009" href="http://videosift.com/member/bareboards2"><STRONG style="COLOR: #008800">bareboards2 him getting shot is not on camera, only the shooter. you hear his screams however and that is nothing I want to hear, honestly.
@<A rel="nofollow" class=profilelink title="member since May 3rd, 2010" href="http://videosift.com/member/Lawdeedaw">Lawdeedaw I agree with your descriptive text in general. You are addressing a problem I would like to discuss or see discussed on the sift. But that is not the matter I have with the nature of those videos.
I mean if you are used to people getting shot and screaming their last breath (literally) out of their lungs, fine ("whatever floats your boat"). But I do not.
Watching or hearing somebody die is snuff IMO. The other videos don't show it directly nor do you hear anything. You rarely see blood or an open wound. It's a difference.
To the edit-part: It's horrible. We don't have to argue about that. But the difference is the same as the difference between me telling you "Somebody shot Timmy in the woods" and me driving to the woods with you and showing you the actual body.
The one thing is a report and you get what has happened and the other thing is actual sight (and hearing), something that will be in your memory for a pretty while. I don't want to have that memory, I want to know where Timmy is!!!

>> ^lucky760:
Clear-cut snuff. discard


And, so this doesn't happen again on my end, what is the difference between this video and other videos where cops murder people on and off camera that has a sole intent of gaining votes on the sift? (I.e., the majority of cop-killing videos here.)

Those videos are not informative. The only difference noted by other sifters (Which I can respect) seems to be the verbal portion of this video, which, in the end, doesn't really matter much to the one with his brains outside of his head.

I mean, the majority are not videos that I would say are more, "limited portion of a lengthy educational, informative news report or documentary," than mine. Yes, it was horrendous. But equality notes that so are the others. But then again, I am a visual person who sees far more than they hear. (I noted such in comments above if you would like an explanation.)

In general, videos that depict a person being killed just for the horror factor are not exempt from our snuff guidelines. Furthermore, there is no discussion or debate to be had; the video just says "watch this guy murder this cop!"

If this exact video was the reverse, where the cop in the firefight survived by killing the driver of the truck, it would still be considered snuff. This would just be no more than "watch this cop defend himself and kill this guy to death!" However, if it was a case of an officer abusing his power to the point that a life is lost, it has greater potential to elevate the video's significance beyond the sole act of killing.

It is typically easier for a video to fall outside our snuff guidelines when an officer is unlawfully inflicting rather than unlawfully receiving the fatality because such events are by nature more likely to be worthy of discussion/debate. (Criminals are supposed to commit crimes; cops are not.) Think "dog bites man" versus "man bites dog."

I thought it had to be a human being that died for a video to meet the definition of snuff.

This is one point against the 2nd amendment.

Just stating my own opinion, but to me this video did bring discussion to the front; especially since other sifters and I had already discussed some of these debating points. A-Assault rifles are killing Americans, B-Psychological instability, C-The violence of our culture, D-The culture we are creating in law enforcement that makes them timid and fearful to pull a gun, least not certain sifters be there with a camera, E-The fact that nobody cares when a cop does the right thing.

Yes, the clip itself does not talk about these things, but then neither does any of the other videos--at all. They talk about useless crap like "law enforcement sucks" or "I'd sue the shit out of the office." That isn't discussion, that's a diatribe.

I won't gainsay what you have done because I am a man who follows rules and laws--but I will be like Socrates and defend my position while the hemlock is placed into this video. I just find it ghastly that this video being implied as "just for the horror factor" when it's far from it.

Perhaps I will take Sagemind's advice and use the Sift Talk as an outlet for these points.

>> ^lucky760:
In general, videos that depict a person being killed just for the horror factor are not exempt from our snuff guidelines. Furthermore, there is no discussion or debate to be had; the video just says "watch this guy murder this cop!"
If this exact video was the reverse, where the cop in the firefight survived by killing the driver of the truck, it would still be considered snuff. This would just be no more than "watch this cop defend himself and kill this guy to death!" However, if it was a case of an officer abusing his power to the point that a life is lost, it has greater potential to elevate the video's significance beyond the sole act of killing.
It is typically easier for a video to fall outside our snuff guidelines when an officer is unlawfully inflicting rather than unlawfully receiving the fatality because such events are by nature more likely to be worthy of discussion/debate. (Criminals are supposed to commit crimes; cops are not.) Think "dog bites man" versus "man bites dog."

^ It's not "just for the horror factor" but whatever it may has to express, it could have been done in a discussion with an outside link and other videos.