On Thursday night, Oct. 22, a San Bernardino police officer responding to calls of man armed with a gun jumping on cars at a convenience store parking lot was involved in a physical altercation with the suspect that was followed by an officer-involved shooting resulting in the death of Mark Matthew Bender Jr., 35, of San Bernardino.

According to a San Bernardino Police Department press release, the department’s dispatch center received a call for service at 11:16 p.m. on Thursday in reference to a man with a gun jumping on cars in the parking lot at 279 E. Base Line, San Bernardino.

A solo officer was close by and responded within minutes to assist the citizen’s call for help. The uniformed officer contacted the suspect in the parking lot and immediately gave verbal commands to the suspect. The suspect refused to follow commands and attempted to walk into a convenience store that was occupied by several employees and citizens.

The officer attempted to physically restrain the suspect, placing himself between the suspect and the entrance to the store. A physical altercation occurred between the officer and the suspect.

The suspect was able to physically repel the officer and retrieved a weapon from his pocket, and was turning to face the officer.

At this time, an officer-involved shooting occurred. The officer discharged his duty weapon four times and the suspect was struck multiple times.

Responding officers provided medical aid on scene. The suspect was transported to a local hospital where he was pronounced deceased.

A 9mm semi-automatic handgun was located at the scene. The firearm was determined to be functional and was photographed, processed and collected as evidence. The firearm was loaded with no record of ownership on file with Department of Justice.

Department homicide detectives are investigating the shooting with the assistance of San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office.

According to the release, a criminal history of Bender revealed a lengthy violent criminal past dating back 17 years. The suspect had several arrests for domestic violence, grand theft, possession of narcotics, possession of narcotics for sale, possession of a firearm, felon in possession of a firearm and receiving stolen property. He had additional arrests for false imprisonment, criminal threats and attempted murder.

The suspect was an ex-felon with several probation violation and parole violation arrests. An ex-felon is not permitted to possess a firearm in the state of California.

This investigation is ongoing, and anyone with further information is urged to contact Detective A. Reyna at (909) 384-5628 / reyna_ar@sbcity.org or Sergeant A. Tello at (909) 384-4955 / tello_al@sbcity.org.

(17) comments

growthisgood

I may be incorrect but I doubt anyone will miss him. Certainly not society.

Barstow Cowboy

Wow. Just wow. Great reporting HN.N, just great. Is SBPD paying for you to do their PR work now? You listed every single negative thing you could about Mr. Bender and nothing else. Did he have children? What did he do for a living? Had he ever done anything else in his life? Could you please provide some kind of context about the circumstances leading up to his slaying at the hands of SBPD? Did it even occur to anyone there to investigate why he was (allegedly) jumping up and down on cars? Does HN.N just assume that that kind of thing is normal for “those people”? Maybe there was a reason he was acting out, but I guess we’ll ever know now. Maybe if a non-violent approach was taken to investigating incidents like this people in crisis like Mr. Bender could be helped to deescalate instead of just being murdered by men in costumes with too much testosterone. And while we’re on that topic, since you saw fit to prejudice your readers against Mr. Bender by printing every single mistake he’s ever alleged to have made did you bother asking for the offender/officer’s personnel file to see what complaints have been made against him? Highland News dot net do you have something etter to do than perform actual journalism?

idaknow

Do you think the officer just showed up and jumped on the dude? Probably not, I'm sure the officer showed up, gave this gentleman commands to come talk to him, but refused;, situation escalated and this is what happened. Maybe the officer should have just let him be and told him "No, no, we don't jump on cars. Please stop." I'm sure this gentleman would have stopped and gone home. Right?

Barstow Cowboy

The articles I’ve read say the officer initiated the physical struggle in an effort to force Mr. Bender into a contact that he obviously didn’t want to have, so whether or not the cop just just “showed up and jumped on the dude” (which is entirely possible) in the end the cop started the fight. You false dichotomy of either doing nothing or killing the guy for jumping up and down on cars just illustrates the exact reason why we need to start sending violence interrupters or deescalaters to these situations where someone is having an emotional crisis instead of sending heavily armed former high school athletes who only know one or two methods for dealing with problems; either ignore, arrest or kill.

ThrowawayAccount

Did you not watch the video or listen to the 911 call? He was reported to have been waving a gun around at people and jumping on cars. The officers arrived, gave him legal commands and he refused so they tried to use force to detain him. He then pulled the gun out that was reported and was shot for doing so. Pretty clear cut what happened. A social worker would have been killed if they went to this call (Especially considering he was convicted of attempted murder before)

Barstow Cowboy

Okay @throwawayaccount, let’s examine this...a guy is reportedly jumping up and down on cars and waving a gun, so the best response we can think of is to send ANOTHER GUY WITH A GUN DOWN THERE TO CONFRONT HIM? And we’re supposed to be surprised that this approach ends in a shootout? Hardly. Remember, there may have been some minor property damage and a man holding g a gun, but no one was shooting until the cop showed up and started physically assaulting folks, amirite? I guess we’re supposed to be all alarmed about there being a man supposedly waving a gun around, but what’s the difference between what Mr. Bender did and what white supremacists have been doing at mask protests and anti-BLM riots all summer long? Hint: the difference is Mr. Bender was an African DOS and that makes it scary, right? And all of this back and forth we’ve been having doesn’t even ask the obvious questions, like why the cop shot Mr. Bender in the back? Kinda hard to shoot a cop when he’s behind you, right? Did the cop even see that gun that Mr. Bender had, or was he going to shoot him whether he had a gun or not? Lastly, why couldn’t he have aimed a little lower and shot Mr. Bender in the leg?

idaknow

'Maybe if we asked him nicely over and over and over and over and over, maybe he'll put the gun away and get off the cars. Let's be more lenient on criminals, we don't know what kind of life they've had.' Boo-Hoo, everybody has had trauma and hardships in their lives, learn to heal and get over it. I'm tired of people telling others to be kind to criminals, and they shouldn't be held responsible for their actions. He's a criminal, he's an adult, he know what he's doing and needs to be held to the same standards as you and me, no less, no more. If these criminals don't like being hassled by law enforcement, stop doing bad things, problem solved.

ThrowawayAccount

Your ignorance is showing. " guy is reportedly jumping up and down on cars and waving a gun, so the best response we can think of is to send ANOTHER GUY WITH A GUN DOWN THERE TO CONFRONT HIM?" YES. WTF ELSE WOULD YOU DO? Thats like saying there is an actice shooter but sending a cop might result in more shots so lets send an unarmed social worker to stop them. Jesus Christ. "Remember, there may have been some minor property damage and a man holding g a gun, but no one was shooting until the cop showed up and started physically assaulting folks, amirite?" #1 I realize that this may be hard to grasp, but cops go to scenes like this to take a suspect into custody. If the cops got a call exactly like this one and said "Dont worry about him, hes just vibin" and sent no one and he ended up going on a spree, wtf would people say about the police then? They would scream and cry about how their loved ones would be alive if the police had got off their lazy butts and responded. "I guess we’re supposed to be all alarmed about there being a man supposedly waving a gun around, but what’s the difference between what Mr. Bender did and what white supremacists have been doing at mask protests and anti-BLM riots all summer long?" They arent jumping on cars or actually pointing their guns at random people. They are also carrying their guns legally because they aren't felons with prior violent convictions such as say attempted murder. "And all of this back and forth we’ve been having doesn’t even ask the obvious questions, like why the cop shot Mr. Bender in the back? Kinda hard to shoot a cop when he’s behind you, right?" Its really not. You just take the gun put it behind your back aimed at the general direction of the officer and start firing wildly. Hes so close you have a large chance to hit. You can even see the gun pointing directly at the officer when he fired. "Did the cop even see that gun that Mr. Bender had, or was he going to shoot him whether he had a gun or not? " Yeah he saw it, you can clearly see him pull it from his waistband and slam it on the pavement next to the cops face. It makes a very distinctive metallic smack. Right when that smack happens you can see the cop trying to get off and draw his gun. "Lastly, why couldn’t he have aimed a little lower and shot Mr. Bender in the leg?" No. This is completely illegal to do. The only time they are allowed to use their firearm is as lethal force. if they shoot for the leg, its the same as trying to use a gun as a Taser. Plus, shooting someone in the leg is just as deadly as the chest. Its also a much smaller target so you have a higher chance of missing and hitting someone in the background.

Barstow Cowboy

Comparing Mr. Bender (PBUH) to an active shooter is preposterous. Mr. Bender (PBUH) never shot anyone; he never even fired a round. There are MANY concealed carry licensees in San Bernardino now, and it’s not at all unusual for a person to be doing the exact same thing Mr. Bender (PBUH) was doing, which was carrying a concealed weapon on his person, and when he felt threatened he produced it from concealment in a show of force. Let’s not forget the fact that the entire nation watched a WHITE POLICE OFFICER CRUSH A BLACK MAN TO DEATH ON TV JUST RECENTLY, so it’s obviously going to make Black men feel rightfully in fear for their lives when humongous white police officers jump on their backs, and to ask them to just lie there and be crushed to death for no reason is a show of YOUR ignorance. Police shoot people in the legs all the time, so I don’t know of any of these laws you claim make it a crime for them to do so, can you cite a statute? You seem to know quite a bit about it so I’m sure you can also cite some case law in which the courts have punished police officers for not shooting to kill. People don’t die from being shot in their legs, at least not as much as they do from being shot in their chests, otherwise people would be wearing body armor on their legs instead of their torsos. I posted a different reply to another poster but Highland News didn’t see fit to approve it for posting, hopefully they’ll see fit to post this reply as a way of balancing out all the posters who seem eager to see another Black man killed by a white cop.

ThrowawayAccount

"There are MANY concealed carry licensees in San Bernardino now, and it’s not at all unusual for a person to be doing the exact same thing Mr. Bender (PBUH) was doing" No. CCW holders do not pull their gun out, point it at random bystanders and jump on cars. Mr. Bender was also prohibited from possessing a firearm due to MULTIPLE felony convictions and arrests one of which was attempted murder, so no comparing him to an active shooter is not far off. A man who has attempted murder in the past is now waving a gun around at random people. "Let’s not forget the fact that the entire nation watched a WHITE POLICE OFFICER CRUSH A BLACK MAN TO DEATH ON TV JUST RECENTLY, so it’s obviously going to make Black men feel rightfully in fear for their lives when humongous white police officers jump on their backs, and to ask them to just lie there and be crushed to death for no reason is a show of YOUR ignorance." Except the cop only jumped on him when he #1 Refused to obey a lawful command, #2 begun to put his hands towards his waistband presumably to grab the gun he was illegally possessing. "Police shoot people in the legs all the time, so I don’t know of any of these laws you claim make it a crime for them to do so, can you cite a statute?" The only time they shoot the leg is on accident. I can only think of a single case where it was intentional and in that case the courts found him unjustified for his use of lethal force because he shot them in the leg intentionally. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9-bvUb0Aaw&ab_channel=FOX13NewsUtah There you go. "People don’t die from being shot in their legs, at least not as much as they do from being shot in their chests, otherwise people would be wearing body armor on their legs instead of their torsos." Once again, another fallacy. You have many many arteries in your legs that if hit will kill you within seconds because of the blood loss. It is just as dangerous. "You seem to know quite a bit about it so I’m sure you can also cite some case law in which the courts have punished police officers for not shooting to kill." The case above shows the officer was found unjustified to shoot without the intent to kill. Almost like lethal force is called lethal for a reason. Why are you defending someone who literally tried to murder someone in the past and then began waving a gun in peoples faces? Race had nothing to do with this.

ThrowawayAccount

This is honestly EXACTLY how you think. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yG8p10dMwA&ab_channel=LongBeachGriffy

Barstow Cowboy

Alright there @Throwawayaccount, apparently there's a limit here on how much two people can reply to one another and I guess we've reached that limit because I don't have the option of replying to your comment anymore, so I'll just reply to my own comment with a reply to your...comment. First, I don't know what video footage you saw, but the footage I saw began with SuperCop just grabbing Mr. Bender (PBUH) and throwing him to the ground. I have an even better video that shows a cop attempting to get Mr. Bender (PBUH) to answer questions and talk to him when it's very clear Mr. Bender (PBUH) doesn't want to talk to him, and then from out of nowhere the cop starts the fight by attacking Mr. Bender (PBUH) as he's trying to peacefully leave the area of the King Tut Liquor store, precipitating the WHOLE FIGHT. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6LYTfkMB6k There was no gun waving, NO jumping on cars and no apparent reason for the officer to put his hands on Mr. Bender (PHUB). If you have footage of the police observing Mr. Bender (PBUH) waving a gun at people I'd like to see it and then based on what I see maybe I'll modify my position. Just so you know it's not unheard of for reporting parties to exaggerate the circumstances of the incident they're reporting in order to get a higher priority response, and in my opinion (until I see video proving otherwise) Mr. Bender couldn't have possibly been waving a gun around when the police were there because his gun was concealed. Secondly, you bring up Mr. Bender's (PBUH) prior involvement with the justice system AS IF it's relevant to the officer's actions, but it's not; there's NO WAY the cop who pulled up to the scene had any knowledge of Mr. Bender's (PBUH) prior involvement with the justice system, so as far as the officer knew Mr. Bender (PBUH) has just as much right to possess a firearm as anyone else. In a previous post you condescendingly told me that police are dispatched to incidents like this in order to arrest people, but that's WAY oversimplified; police are dispatched to incidents to INVESTIGATE what's taking place, and if they decide a crime has been committed and that there is someone present who was more than likely responsible for the crime they then make a plan to arrest that individual. Hopefully their plan involves de-escalating that person and taking them into custody peacefully, but in the case of Mr. Bender (PBUH) I didn't see a whole lot of careful planning or de-escalation taking place, I saw a hostile city employee accosting a man who was clearly afraid of him and wanted nothing to do with him, and then I saw that city employee throw a peaceful man to the ground and try to crush him with his body.

Barstow Cowboy

@Throwawayaccount, you were WAY off on you attempt to produce real life manifestations of you delusional legal thinking, if you can call it thinking since really it was just you making up stuff and hoping that no one would question it. Did you just throw that link to that report about the cop shooting someone in the leg up there hoping that no one would click on it and see that the BEST example you could find of a cop being charged for shooting a suspect in the leg instead of the torso had NO COPS BEING CHARGED WITH A CRIME FOR SHOOTING A SUSPECT IN THE LEG INSTEAD OF THE TORSO? The following summation is from the story you linked to when asked to produce an example of a cop being charged with a crime: While Dunn's actions have been found not justified, the letter states he will not be charged criminally.

"Even though the shooting was not legally justified, the State would not be able to prove the requisite criminal intent for a criminal charge," the letter states. SO, no charge, and it's also worth noting that the officer's decision to shoot the suspect in the leg resulted in the suspect NOT DYING, which I'm sure many people are happy about. No civil unrest in the aftermath, no mention of a civil suit...yeah, what a disaster! Boy, I bet that cop wished he'd shot her in the chest a couple dozen times. Great example. Boy, you really schooled me. I'm thunderstruck. Do you have any other examples that actually involve a cop being charged for violating this make pretend imaginary legal requirement you just invented that allegedly requires cops to shoot to kill or else be charged with a crime?

ThrowawayAccount

So you asked me to provide a link showing how an officer is not legally justified to shoot someone in the leg as a less lethal alternative, I provided and you scream its not what you wanted? There aren't many cases for me to provide since... ya know... its illegal.... https://www.deseret.com/2015/1/15/20556511/why-police-don-t-aim-for-the-legs https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/26/us/why-police-shoot-so-many-rounds-trnd/index.html https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/its-myth-police-criticize-bidens-advice-cops-should-shoot-suspects-leg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5S7tFrQI2Bw&ab_channel=DonutOperator https://www.foxnews.com/politics/police-rip-bidens-advice-to-shoot-suspects-in-the-leg https://www.nola.com/news/crime_police/article_ae82835c-0212-5e50-a175-85601a1ed8bb.html https://www.ajc.com/news/national/here-why-police-don-shoot-wound-the-case-deadly-force/IV4ohtIm6r8FaEMj78u1bO/ https://reason.com/2020/10/15/joe-biden-townhall-cops-shoot-in-the-leg/ https://www.police1.com/patrol-issues/articles/why-shooting-to-wound-doesnt-make-sense-scientifically-legally-or-tactically-6bOdYvNUEECtIWRI/ Is this enough for you? I realize google is hard to use, so ill help you. "SO, no charge, and it's also worth noting that the officer's decision to shoot the suspect in the leg resulted in the suspect NOT DYING, which I'm sure many people are happy about. No civil unrest in the aftermath, no mention of a civil suit...yeah, what a disaster!" They got lucky they didn't die. You have a large amount of arteries in your legs that will kill you nearly instantly if they are hit. Not only that, this suspect was very close to the officer and not moving at all as well as there was not a single person in the backdrop for the officer to hit if he missed. This was an extremely rare scenario where the officer could shoot without the risk of hitting someone else. Oh BTW, the cop was suspended from police work for 4 years because of this. https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/archive/2019/10/02/cgb-officer-receives-4-year-suspension-after-judge-finds-shooting-in-parowan-not-justified/#.X6CMf4hKiUk

Barstow Cowboy

irst link OPINION PIECE, doesn't address legalities at all. Second link, irrelevant CNN story about why cops fire so many rounds. Third link, ironically the main theme of the article is in stark contrast with the reality of what you showed in your video of the cop shooting the suspect in the leg. This article in this third link is a bunch of cops hypothesizing that shooting someone in the leg wouldn't end the threat, yet in the video you sent me a link to that's exactly what it did; when the lady holding the screwdriver was shot in the leg she dropped to the ground and immediately complied with the officer's very next command to drop her screwdriver. She was then taken into custody and no one died. You’re reading these articles you’re linking to, right?Fourth link is a cop telling me that cops are doing the right thing. Surprise there. He says that it's not safe to shoot someone in the leg because it might kill them. So shoot them in the chest, that's...safer? He says that when someone is moving it's hard to hit a leg and that it might ricochet or overpenetrate, all of which are true, but in lots of situations, particularly situations involving someone attempting suicide by cop it'd be easy to hit them because they're not moving or they're not moving very fast, again, just like in the video you sent me. I’m not suggesting that cops be REQUIRED to try to shoot people in the leg, but in a situation like the one that led to Mr. Bender’s (PBUH) death it would seem highly achievable. Video five is basically a rehash of video three saying police don't agree with Biden, still no mention of legalities. Video six and I'm STILL looking for ANYTHING that supports you claim that an officer shooting someone in the leg is explicitly illegal but not finding anything, however I did find this quote from an expert, "If the situation allows, calling for backup, taking hard cover and summoning a SWAT team are better alternatives to pitting oneself against a subject, one-on-one, Scharf said. He added that most SWAT standoffs tend to result in no injuries and peaceful surrenders." This would seem to be a great answer to your question about what other possible course of action the officer who escalated a situation that eventually led to the slaying of Mr. Bender (PBUH) could have taken, thanks for bringing it to my attention so I could...uh, bring it to YOUR attention I guess. You are reading all this stuff, aren't you? Because I am. MOVING FORWARD, video seven finally gets to some substance, “As a policy, [shoot to wound] is a really bad idea because it would give the police permission to take that gun out of the holster under any circumstance,” she said." No mention of any statutes that say shooting to wound is illegal though, so I press on in search of some mention of this law that you say exists. Video eight is another rehash of videos three and five saying that Joe Biden is a stupid dummyhead for suggesting cops shoot people in the leg. No mention of any laws that make it a crime for them to do so though. Ninth link looked promising because it had the word 'legally' in the URL, but alas no mention of this law you said exists. Remember, this whole discussion centers on your assertion that a cop shooting someone in the leg instead of center mass is illegal. When I asked the question, "Lastly, why couldn’t he have aimed a little lower and shot Mr. Bender in the leg?”, you answered, “No. This is completely illegal to do. The only time they are allowed to use their firearm is as lethal force. if they shoot for the leg, (sic) its the same as trying to use a gun as a Taser." I asked you to cite the statute or any reference to the law. So far the only thing you've posted is a link of a video where a cop was determined to have used lethal force without adequate cause, not because he chose to shoot someone in the leg, but rather because his use wasn't justified at all, regardless of where he placed his shot. The Iron County Attorney who evaluated the use of force opined thusly: "From the video and Sergeant Berg's testimony, it appears that the situation was manageable at the time Corporal Dunn arrived and it would have seemed reasonable for officers to continue de-escalation tactics until the situation could be more fully contained. Corporal Dunn was only on scene for three minutes before firing shots." "The attorney notes things may have been different had Casimiro been advancing toward officers or had she been armed with a gun, but they say in this case Dunn's use of force was not justified." Again, Dunn’s use of force was found to be out of policy because Casimiro wasn’t advancing and she wasn’t armed with gun. It had nothing to do with shot placement. @Throwawayaccount, can you PLEASE just admit you were wrong when you said that shooting someone in the leg was illegal so we can stop now?

ThrowawayAccount

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6LYTfkMB6k&ab_channel=CBSLosAngeles This is the video I watched. Right at 0:42 Bender has a legal obligation to stop walking and obey the officer. He is being legally detained based upon the officers knowledge of the scene and information he has received from dispatch. The officer gives Bender commands for nearly 10 seconds straight before going hands on with him. Should he have just kept saying "Let me see your hands, come here" for the next couple of hours until they got tired? You refuse a legal command, you get hands put on you. Simple as that. "Mr. Bender (PBUH) doesn't want to talk to him, and then from out of nowhere the cop starts the fight by attacking Mr. Bender (PBUH) as he's trying to peacefully leave the area of the King Tut Liquor store, precipitating the WHOLE FIGHT." Thats kinda what cops have to do. They are in control of the situation so when someone disobeys a legal command, they go hands on to ensure compliance is achieved. No fight would have happened if #1 Bender had not been waving a gun around #2 Obeyed the multiple legal commands he was given #3 Stopped resisting arrest and attempting to evade a police officer. "There was no gun waving, NO jumping on cars and no apparent reason for the officer to put his hands on Mr. Bender" Almost as if someone's attitude can change in the 10+ minutes it takes for an officer to drive there and arrive. You claim there was no reason for the officer to put his hands on him, that is false. Ask, tell, make. This is what officers go by when attempting to detain someone for further investigation. He asked Bender, he told Bender, then he made Bender. "Just so you know it's not unheard of for reporting parties to exaggerate the circumstances of the incident they're reporting in order to get a higher priority response, and in my opinion (until I see video proving otherwise) Mr. Bender couldn't have possibly been waving a gun around when the police were there because his gun was concealed" So you think that because the gun was in his pocket he couldnt have been waving it around? What if he just... put it back into his pocket? How would the RPs have even known he was armed unless they saw the gun? That would have been an impressive guess from multiple different people. "Hopefully their plan involves de-escalating that person and taking them into custody peacefully, but in the case of Mr. Bender (PBUH) I didn't see a whole lot of careful planning or de-escalation taking place, I saw a hostile city employee accosting a man who was clearly afraid of him and wanted nothing to do with him, and then I saw that city employee throw a peaceful man to the ground and try to crush him with his body." 1st of all, their job is law enforcement. Enforcing the law is their #1 Priority. De-Escalation will take place if it is possible, but you cannot attempt de-escalation with a possible armed suspect who is refusing commands. They are a danger and need to be detained as fast as possible. 2nd of all, passive resistance is still resistance. He obviously was NOT a peaceful man as he tried to kill this officer (and has tried to kill someone in the past).

Barstow Cowboy

If I was Mr. Bender (PBUH) I would've probably refused to stop for that cop too. The first thing he did was point a gun at him and threaten him, no commands given, no notice that he was being detained, just a death threat. Nice de-escalation there, officer! According to police experts the officer could've waited for additional resources to arrive instead of going one on one. This quote was taken from one of the links you sent me in your other reply and it's a police expert's opinion about what a cop can do rather than just diving right in and tackling people: "If the situation allows, calling for backup, taking hard cover and summoning a SWAT team are better alternatives to pitting oneself against a subject, one-on-one, Scharf said. He added that most SWAT standoffs tend to result in no injuries and peaceful surrenders." The officer who slew Mr. Bender (PBUH) could've easily stayed with Mr. Bender (PBUH) and waited for additional officers with less lethal capabilities. You say Mr. Bender (PBUH) was more responsible for his own death than the cop because of what he was ALLEGED to have done, but I still haven't seen any evidence that he was doing the things he was alleged to have done. No offense intended towards the deceased, but honestly, look at that man's physique. Do you REALLY think he was jumping onto and off of and all over cars? Really? As far as trying to evade the cop he told him he was going to the store. If he was trying to evade them would he have told the cop where he was headed? Ask, tell make huh? Sure. If he was a white suburbanite I'm SURE the cop would've just started in with the wrestlemania right after having only asked and then told, right? Shall I go to youtube and post endless links to cops spending hours and hours repeating themselves when attempting to gain compliance from sovereign citizens and white ladies on powertrips? Do I really need to do that? Let me know if you really need me to do that and if so I will, but we both KNOW that the whole supercop routine "ASK, TELL, MAKE" only takes place when the subject is black or poor. And I don't agree that enforcing laws is the cop's first and only job, otherwise they wouldn't be able to exercise discretion. Public safety is (or at least ought to be) their number one priority, and in this case they failed miserably. Even if after they investigated they found probable cause to arrest Mr. Bender (PBUH) it could've and should've been done without killing him and endangering others.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.