A twelve-year-old video has surfaced showing Kern County Sheriff Donny Youngblood saying that it is better to kill suspects than wound them because it is a cheaper for the county to just pay off the families for a death. Since Kern County had one of the highest (if not the highest) per capita shooting rates in the country for police departments, the words were particularly chilling.
In the one-minute clip released Monday by the Kern County Detention Officers Association, shows Youngblood saying “There’s a good reason for that: millions and millions of dollars.” In addressing inmate costs, Youngblood asks the audience: “Which way do you think is better financially? To cripple them or kill them, for the county?” An audience member says”Kill them” and Youngblood says “Absolutely, because if we cripple them we get to take care of them for life, and that cost goes way up.”
The video is from a 2006 meeting with Youngblood during his successful first campaign and Youngblood insists that he was merely explaining (after the beating death of an inmate in 2005) about the relative costs of bad deputies. He insisted that he never suggested that deputies should shoot to kill. While he regrets the way he said it, he said that he was making a comment on the costs of police abuse not endorsing such abuse.
I have watched the video and he does start the exchange by highlight the costs of “a bad shooting.” However, it is bizarre that he would then turn to a discussion of the relative costs of killing or crippling and noting that “if they’re crippled, we get to take care of them for life. And that cost goes way up.”
Notably, Youngblood may have become precisely one of those litigation costs that he was bewailing. Even if he was not encouraging the use of lethal force, his words will likely be introduced at every future police shooting trial. City officials would well ask “Which way do you think is better financially? To cripple him politically or kill him politically, for the county?”
On most roads in Kern County one holds one’s nose while driving through as quickly as may be.
Back in the day, they’d have called this a-hole a “Good German.” Nowadays, he just another typical thug cop, of which their are far too many in this country.
Reblogged this on The Inquiring Mind and commented:
Frightening
Most of the people the Sheriff is talking about are meth and heroine heads who are going to die form their addictions. They are soul-less ghouls who leave a wake of damage and destruction in their paths. If 1:20 could turn around their sorry lives, you could say that the Sheriff is being callous in writing off that 1:20 as irredeemable. However, the odds are not good….there is such as thing as human trash…those who’ve long since given up on themselves, and are just waiting for the inevitable downward spiral to end.
The Sheriff’s job is to protect the good people of Kern County. Before you go judging the Sheriff, do a little research on Kern and the human detritus that gathers and festers there.
The cop cars in that county have a bumper sticker which says: Shoot To Kill.
It’s sad that police work seems to attract such a high ratio of the type of people that are least suited to that line of work, as exemplified by this human POS Sheriff Bloodthirsty.
Few people deserve to be water boarded till they “accidentally” drown or cardiac freeze more so than our dear little Sheriff Bloodthirsty.
Sadly, this is like someone noticing that having a sick aged parent, who has Alzheimers, who does #1 and #2 in their diapers, has no idea what planet they are on, never has a moment of lucidity, and must be watched 24/7 – – – it is like them noticing that it would be cheaper if the senior just died. And probably better for the parent, too.
That is not a warm and fuzzy thought, and no one wants to admit to having thoughts like that, but it is REALITY. And people do think it. Because the REALITY is, somebody has to pay the bills.
Which, is why a really good Greater Financial Depression would be great for getting Americans to face reality again. We have been throwing money at problems for years, without fixing them.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Your analogy is about as relevant as Sheriff Bloodthirsty’s justification for his teaching moment.
In your case, someone is dying a natural death. In Sheriff Bloodthirsty’s case, a person whom taxpayers arm with a gun and bullets and a badge and training willfully assassinates a human being to save money.
Debate skills lacking, much?
Squeeky lives in Her Own Private Mississippi.
He may have been saying that if a deputy makes a bad decision and engages in an unjustified shooting, it is financially better for the county for the victim to die rather than be injured. That is the talk of lawyers, for example, in discussing the cold numbers of how much various personal injuries are actually worth in relation to the cost of litigating.
However, this is going to be one of those clips that haunt you. Clearly, if they have an unusually high number of police shootings, then it needs to be investigated. Why is the number high? Is there gang activity? High criminal activity? Or unjustified shootings? Is the review process fair? My husband is friends with a retired cop who also had a high number of officer involved shootings. However, he worked in gang territory, and had been shot at when he returned fire. Once he chased a running suspect, and when he rounded a corner, the suspect had whirled around, pulled a gun, and fired at him. Once you discharge your weapon once, you become more likely to discharge it a second time, if I recall correctly. It might be that you are more prepared to act when need be.
It is critical that each and every police involved shooting be investigated fairly. The community needs to know it can trust its police officers, and that any bad apples are removed and face justice. Everyone also needs to know that an officer-involved shooting may be entirely justified, and not to jump to conclusions.
I haven’t watched the video, so I don’t know if the sheriff in question was engaging in the same dry data analysis as any personal injury attorney, or was actually encouraging executing suspects. Clearly, that question needs to be answered.
“He may have been saying…”
Yes, you are correct. And monkey’s “may” fly out my _utt. (Props to Madonna.)
The only thing unusual about this is that it was recorded. Still, he tries to spin what he said and tries to explain away his clear lack of value for human life. Sheriff’s don’t do data analysis or budgets for paying off police shooting victims. Their employers do. This is unfortunately the attitude of too many police officers.
Elected sheriffs are nobody’s subordinate employee. Yes, they do budgeting and yes they do data analysis or one of their subordinates does. Depending on how the county is structured, it is probable that they have some say in settlement talks as well.
In the movie “Nuremberg”, Alex Baldwin’s character interviews top Nazi prisoners after World War Two. He tries to understand the mindset of the most evil humans in world history, specifically how they “dehumanized” the minority population of Jewish people in order to get citizen-support of the Nazi regime.
One of the first tactics was to compare their murder victims to animals or inanimate objects. Another tactic was to rationalize the “cost” in dollars, if you you have no religion or morality, finances may be a winning propaganda tool.
Not implying this sheriff’s supporters are evil Nazis, but whether we dehumanize non-convicted suspects or African-Americans or immigrants – this is dangerous territory for the United States to embrace.
I’m guessing the sheriff and his supporters may perceive themselves as Christians and follow the Bible’s teachings.
After a while … say 20 plus years…. it gets one a bit calloused. But then we remember. Not serving the countnry nor the people our oath is to the Constitution.
Very true. Corpses can’t testify for one thing. In the short… three years … time I spent in law enforcement wounding or warning shots were strictly forbidden and a firing offense. If it didn’t merit shoot to kill don’t and always two shots.
My father, who is former military, always taught us that you never, ever point a gun at anyone unless you intend to use it, and you only do so if your life or someone else’s is in danger. If you do shoot, you don’t waste your minuscule opportunity at survival by trying to shoot a moving small target like their arms or their legs. It’s easier to miss, and there went your chance at making it out alive. There went your family’s chance at getting you home safe. Your goal is to survive or save someone else’s life, which means your target has to go down and no longer be a threat. We were always taught to take the body shot. He explained that it takes a shockingly short amount of time for someone to tackle you, shoot you, stab you. You might get one opportunity to survive, so don’t waste it trying to preserve the person who is there to kill you. Don’t give them the opportunity to take you out, and don’t point a gun at someone unless you are ready and prepared to use it.
Amen to all that! But, the gun is Plan B. Always carry a good attack knife in case the sucker gets to you and you are unable to plug him. That is Plan C!
Plan A is, be situationally aware at all times and do not let yourself get into a scenario where you need Plan B or Plan C. Which, isn’t possible if you are a cop.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Good point. I like my Spyderco folding knife. It’s handy and light, and I use it frequently at the barn. Plus it’s amusing to flick it open with the thumb hole when someone needs to open a package. Being prepared is not just for Boy Scouts.
My father served in the First Cavalry as a front line, combat trooper and NCO during WWII. He fought the Japanese on Los Negros in the Admiralty Islands and on Leyte and Luzon in the Philippines. He said exactly the same. In fact, the more “modern” rules of engagement imposed on US troops in the Middle East drove him to distraction. He insisted that he would never have survived the Battle of Manila under such rules. In his day, only 3 rules governed: Kill, kill and kill.
Turley is such a phony. He pretends to be “chilled” by Police State tactics. But the truth is he LOVES them.
Police state? That’s common sense and street smarts. Nothing to do with ‘police state.’ You been reading Mao and Lenin too much and not paying attention to the other side of their coin.
Not to be overlooked, he is talking about suspects not people guilty of any crime.
Why would anyone shoot a suspect unless they were presenting ye olde clear and present danger? And if they were doing that they were committing a crime.
If the public knows your too scared of ACLU and 9th Circuit to shoot they must also know your are not going to jeopardize yourself for people who don’t give a damn about their own selves.
The Democrats who run CA have had many years to fix this problem, but have done nothing. Apparently those being killed are politically unimportant.
By some of the comments here, you have shown yourselves to be what you really are.
When it comes to enemies domestic ….you got that right.
If one of my friends got killed then I would put up a bounty on the shooter and the Chief. The bounty would be for the shooter who shot them in the balls. Don’t kill em. Ruin em.
Do it openly you would be in jail for 20 to life.
Actually, it is better in a war to wound your enemy than kill him. If you wound him, then there are all the attendant costs of care and rehabilitation. You can actually bankrupt your enemy with care costs.
Sadly, this man is telling the truth.
Yes- in history, the well-being of the soldiers of one’s enemies is always top priority, as example, the Russians and Japanese in WWII.
Oh, sorry, you were being sarcastic.
Linda – I was being realistic. You wouldn’t know sarcasm if it jumped up and bit you on the nose.
Exactly but then women being second class citizens are not subject to the draft. Why? Because men are considered by the left to be cannon fodder and women as ‘baby factories.’ Which is really strange when you consider their stand on abortion.
No he wasn’t he was being practical as was I. In a country with a ‘draft’ system still in force what else can you do? Answer…. Never go to soldier when the left is looking for another war.
The puzzle solved- Military men tend to vote Republican (the party that cuts their benefits and keeps grunts’ wages low) because GOP politicians support substantial military employment. The soldiers aren’t intended for a war effort (it’s the Dem’s that want war according to Michael). So, the GOP employ soldiers for ceremonial functions like Trump’s military parade.
Actually, it is better in a war to wound your enemy than kill him.
****************************
Right you are, Paul. It takes 7 people to care for a wounded soldier; 2 to bury him.
Different type of war and it’ svery true. Wound one takes two to extract the patient from the battle area and there is a chance you can wound another one. but when in doubt let God by whatever name you use … sort them out. To cut down on deaths and wounded in military action the only fail safe methods are don’t join up when the war monger party is in power or corollary don’t vote for the left. Their ration from 1909 when the Progressive Socialists took overe is 608,000 US Dead versus 7,000 or so with the GOP in the oval office. (World Almanac any annual issue you choose to use. )
Reblogged this on .
No surprise, the sheriff is Republican. Speaking of…Ohio’s GOP Speaker of the House resigned (under investigation).
The Koch political party, it’s what they do.
What’s that got to do with anything. and a crappy job of diverting or redefining . Old George Yoda Lykoff gonna make you buy a new book
So how does your point fit in with the fact that most of the big city mayors who sent their thug cops in beat up and arrest unarmed, harmless Occupy protesters were Democrats? Wake up, both parties are equally authoritarian. If you don’t believe that, try and have a reasoned discussion with a Democrat about Russia. They’ll call you a traitor for even insinuating we should try and get along with the Russians and completely shut you down.
Like so much of the truth, harsh but accurate.