KoHeartsGPA Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 He's not black....his life doesn't matter. Link to comment
john510 Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 You guys crack me up. Link to comment
Draker Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 Why not shoot to subdue? Why not apprehend a SUSPECT instead of kill them. Please explain. The officers of the law, sworn in to protect the people, and serve justice, accept a high level of risk when they sign on to the force. In a situation such as this, the general population was not at risk. There were bare woods in every direction. The only danger was to himself and officers. They were not acting to protect and serve. They were using lethal force when they could have apprehended him alive. A gun is lethal force, when you make the decision to use it, you have made the decision to kill them. If you want to subdue them, you use rubber bullets, bean bags.. flash bags.. tasers. Its taught that way in every hand gun and personal safety course and every law enforcement arms training. For good reason.. a person that is shot to subdue can still kill you. It was widely known these protesters were armed. Now that I think of it, that does really make them a credible threat. They didn't know if he was armed at the time and he moved swiftly. I don't know if that was a credible source saying the gun was planted or stolen. I have no opinion on that.. could go either way. Eitherway, it was a tough call.. but don't like or hide information. Link to comment
Z-train Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 1)Why not shoot to subdue? 2) Why not apprehend a SUSPECT instead of kill them. Please explain. The officers of the law, sworn in to protect the people, and serve justice, accept a high level of risk when they sign on to the force. In a situation such as this, the general population was not at risk. There were bare woods in every direction. The only danger was to himself and officers. They were not acting to protect and serve. They were using lethal force when they could have apprehended him alive. No such thing as "shoot to subdue"-it doesn't exist on any planet. High level of risk? no kidding-so they minimize it at every corner. Gen-pop not at risk? How do you know this? If a suspect displays behavior that suggests the gen -pop WOULD be at risk if the suspect was allowed to continue, then they ARE at risk even though none of them is present. the rest of your questions are "out of school" Link to comment
Z-train Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 This is just wrong thinking. He was executed. Just like a lot of unarmed felons. I'm so sick of hearing that 'LEO have determined that lethal force was justified'. Sometimes it is, this wasn't. I was taught that even if a fire looks like it's out you empty the fire extinguisher to be sure. Seems like more and more that cops empty their weapons and can't seem to stop. It's like a 5 second rule.... no matter how many fellow officers are firing into a 'felon' if you can get started within 5 seconds of the first shot, you get to empty your gun too. If you start shooting and run out, you can reload if withing that 5 second rule. Mob mentality, pack of dogs. Mike-how many years of LE experience do you have? 1 Link to comment
MikeRL411 Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 "Shoot to subdue?" what do you think the real life on the street scene is? This is not a Lone Ranger radio program! Or an early Hopalong Cassidy TV show. Pistols at 25 or 50 yards are NOT precision instruments even without taking adrenaline into considerstion. One of my favorite quotes from a Dumb S$$$ TV reporter asking a cop just why he had fired 16 rounds at a suspect. "Because that's all I had in my magazine" was his reply. 1 Link to comment
john510 Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 Why not shoot to subdue? Why not apprehend a SUSPECT instead of kill them. Please explain. The officers of the law, sworn in to protect the people, and serve justice, accept a high level of risk when they sign on to the force. In a situation such as this, the general population was not at risk. There were bare woods in every direction. The only danger was to himself and officers. They were not acting to protect and serve. They were using lethal force when they could have apprehended him alive. Didnt they try and apprehend this guy for several weeks or was it longer ? The only danger was to himself and officers ? officerslivesmatter.com.I agree there was a possibility to capture him alive,maybe one of those nets they shoot from a helicopter to capture animals but then they may have been fired at.Look at the bright side,us taxpayers wont be wasting money on a trial.This could have been a lot worse,there were passengers in the vehicle. Link to comment
Draker Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 Mike-how many years of LE experience do you have? Does Ratsun Law count? 3 Link to comment
KoHeartsGPA Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 He's Datzenmike...he doesn't need LE experience to be right....step back, son... 1 Link to comment
thisismatt Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 "Shoot to subdue?" what do you think the real life on the street scene is? This is not a Lone Ranger radio program! Or an early Hopalong Cassidy TV show. Pistols at 25 or 50 yards are NOT precision instruments even without taking adrenaline into considerstion. One of my favorite quotes from a Dumb S$$$ TV reporter asking a cop just why he had fired 16 rounds at a suspect. "Because that's all I had in my magazine" was his reply.Nice, you basically made my point before I even brought it up. Since pistols are so inaccurate, why are cops shooting unarmed people from 10s of yards away when they "think" they're pulling a weapon? Why not take cover and verify, since they're highly unlikely of being shot by these innacurate pistols? 1 Link to comment
Burabuda Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 anybody else paying attention to the email debacle? just calling it that lessens the huge degree of malfeasance. sickening she's walking free let alone running for prez 1 Link to comment
KoHeartsGPA Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 anybody else paying attention to the email debacle? just calling it that lessens the huge degree of malfeasance. sickening she's walking free let alone running for prez Doesn't matter...Idiocracy in effect. Link to comment
datzenmike Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 Mike-how many years of LE experience do you have? You know the answer and that why you are asking it. Irrelevant. I have about 3 generations of Life Experience and it tells me that it's wrong to execute people that are unarmed. Police are paid to stand in harm's way and risk their lives, that's their job. If they can't do their jobs without shooting first they should try something else. Seems like in the last while, maybe through a failure of society to care or bad training or the failed judicial system, they resort to killing first and rarely have to answer for it. Hey if this was a known murderer, rapist, child molester recidivist felon piece of shit armed and shooting at them after killing a grocery store owner he just robbed, fine it's clear cut. This was someone standing up for what he believed (right or wrong) against a crushing oppressive government and couldn't possibly have gotten away. Was no harm to anyone. Wasn't on a shooting rampage, was identified and had no where to go. Didn't he have kids in the car or something? wtf???? Where's the common sense restraint??? Worst thing they could do was to make a martyr. That shit never goes away. They fucked up yet again. 3 Link to comment
KoHeartsGPA Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 Step back son!!!! 1 Link to comment
thisismatt Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 BTW, cops aren't even in the top 10 of likely to be killed doing their job. Link to comment
VFR800 Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 If you own/use a firearm be 100% prepared to use it and accept you may kill someone. Whatever the circumstances surround your use of said firearm are for you to own also 100%. Obviously the gun is a latent non sentient object,you the human being using it are responsible for it's usage. 1 Link to comment
RatVonDude Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 I jus wanna know what the guy did to began with? Also, why do Harley Davidson guys always assum the upper hand even though they are on one of the biggest loosing machines of all time. Maybe cops never shoot guys on Harleys cuz it might be a friend of theres? 1 Link to comment
KoHeartsGPA Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 You know what RVD......I wanna know where the damn pyramids got their rocks from.... 1 Link to comment
tr8er Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 You know what RVD......I wanna know where the damn pyramids got their rocks from.... The Ghetto. Same corner as you. 1 Link to comment
tr8er Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 The issue seems to stem from the removal of local governance. Police forces are too large, distanced from their "beat" and just jaded from years of putting up with illustrations of fear and division. When "COMMUNITIES" we're around, (remember those? Me neither.) and everyone knew everyone, the police were the peacekeepers. They were accountable to the people. Their boss was the people. They served. Now it's more of a crossing over into the "enforcers". Here's the law book, go out and catch someone breaking them. Mike elaborated well on what I was trying to say. If a fucking brigade of cops couldn't apprehend that guy alive, they should be ashamed, as well as shamed. I pay for the peacekeepers. I don't pay for a local army. It's a risky job. But they are paid for that risk. Civilians are NOT paid to take the risk. Those LE's shot (and killed cause apparently shooting a guy in the stomach and telling him to trade his gun for an ambulance is apparently dumber than Trump) a CIVILIAN. And I know you all believe in the constitution giving us the right to due process and a fair trial. That man was not awarded his constitutional rights. King? Cause he wasn't Black!?? Turn off Fox 1 Link to comment
RatVonDude Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 You know what RVD......I wanna know where the damn pyramids got their rocks from.... All I can say is NEVER bring up pyramids around sling blade looking mofo's from San Leandro CA. Instant problems. I feel this page is leaning towards upper white, networking soooo I just wanted to start fresh 1 Link to comment
tr8er Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 I've always hated Corona. 1 Link to comment
KoHeartsGPA Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 If you knew Spanish....that pyramid makes a whole lot of sense.... 1 Link to comment
Mattndew76 Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 See all the little sheep controlled by the crap at the top.. Link to comment
Recommended Posts