Current Affairs The " another shooting in America " thread

[d34noj]

Being a "known felon with a history of violence and gun crime" is irrelevant to whether or not the cops should be allowed to kill you.

A. He's not dead.
B. Of course it's relevant if the police officer feels he is acting in self defence. They will have known of his record, and would have rightly been apprehensive.

Known criminal or not he does not deserve to get shot in the back. He was unarmed and his history should have nothing to do with it.

Also the knife was found after the fact. So they did not know it was in the car.

Also some of those commenting are not "muricans" you dope.

He does if he's a danger to others, he's reaching into his car, it could have been an automatic weapon he pulled out instead of a knife - then it's game over for everyone. He had all the opportunity to not fight armed police, instead he chose to and those is what happens.

And don't call me a dope.

 

[Nymzee]

A. He's not dead.
B. Of course it's relevant if the police officer feels he is acting in self defence. They will have known of his record, and would have rightly been apprehensive.



He does if he's a danger to others, he's reaching into his car, it could have been an automatic weapon he pulled out instead of a knife - then it's game over for everyone. He had all the opportunity to not fight armed police, instead he chose to and those is what happens.

And don't call me a dope.

Pretty sure you can disable a threat without 7 bullets to the back.

 

[SteveSC]

A. He's not dead.
B. Of course it's relevant if the police officer feels he is acting in self defence. They will have known of his record, and would have rightly been apprehensive.



He does if he's a danger to others, he's reaching into his car, it could have been an automatic weapon he pulled out instead of a knife - then it's game over for everyone. He had all the opportunity to not fight armed police, instead he chose to and those is what happens.

And don't call me a dope.

They shot him in the back. They had him covered if he was to pull out an imaginary gun.

Also before he reached into said car they could have disabled him many other ways.

No matter how you try to frame it the cops look bad. Highly trained yet they work in what ifs according to you

Don't call people muricans and you won't get dope.

 

[mezzrow]

Muricans going wild in here.

Crying and shaking because a known felon with a history of violence and gun crime is shot whilst reaching for a knife. Amazing times.

Mate, you know how problematical it is to make those kinds of statements. That's not going to get you much love on this forum.

It's unclear whether he was reaching for the knife or whether he dropped it when he got shot.

 

[d34noj]

Pretty sure you can disable a threat without 7 bullets to the back.

One thats just been tasered and fought off 2 blokes? I'd be shooting until he wasn't moving if he was reaching into his car for a weapon, NEA.

 

[Ruairi77]

No I think shooting a guy in the back seven times when he's ignored a taser, refused to comply and is reaching into his car whilst one foot away from an officer is justified.

You know, context.

even that context, I cant believe you think it's justified

 

[Connor]

Shooting someone seven times – in the back – while they're fleeing and they are front of three kids does not constitute as self-defence, I'm sorry, it doesn't

 

[SteveSC]

One thats just been tasered and fought off 2 blokes? I'd be shooting until he wasn't moving if he was reaching into his car for a weapon, NEA.

Middle finger because I embarrassed you huh. Just like your posts how juvenile off you.

They could have reloaded the taser and used pepper spray and fought him again but sure unload a gun into him while he is unarmed.

See you miss the point. They cannot shoot unarmed people. Only if they fear for their life or see a weapon. They could have not seen a weapon nor felt threatened.

 

[Ruairi77]

But nobody is talking about gun laws being the issue here, when they are the absolute root of it. That cop would have rightly killed that guy regardless of skin colour.

everybody's talking about gun laws
and there's little or no chance the cop would have shot an unarmed white guy in the back like that.
Gun laws are exacerbating the problem but generations of ingrained racism is the root.

 

[Tubey]

Oh so because he had his gun drawn that gives him the right to shoot someone. Do you hear yourself? He could have holstered the weapon.

Why do you keep saying these are facts like its pertinent?

The biggest "Fact" to play your game is that an unarmed man was shot by a cop and they have thus far failed to justify it other than to give lame excuses much like you have defending them.

He could have holstered his weapon... And then been stabbed or shot in the face by an uncooperative suspect reaching into a concealed area.

Sorry, but that's ridiculous and shows a complete lack of ability to put yourself in the shoes of the people in that situation.

The idiot with the concealed knife ignoring police orders is to blame.

 

[Tubey]

Shooting someone seven times – in the back – while they're fleeing and they are front of three kids does not constitute as self-defence, I'm sorry, it doesn't

Kids are irrelevant. The idiot decided to ignore being tasered and ignore the police entirely in front of them, that's his call, not the problem of the police.

Amount of bullets used is irrelevant. The decision to shoot is taken to nullify the threat, whether one bullet or ten.

 

[Tubey]

everybody's talking about gun laws
and there's little or no chance the cop would have shot an unarmed white guy in the back like that.
Gun laws are exacerbating the problem but generations of ingrained racism is the root.

Yes he would.

 

[Tubey]

One thats just been tasered and fought off 2 blokes? I'd be shooting until he wasn't moving if he was reaching into his car for a weapon, NEA.

Common sense ain't it? Everyone pretending this isn't the reality is making out like the "victim" was completely innocent and just randomly shot in the back.

 

[Nymzee]

One thats just been tasered and fought off 2 blokes? I'd be shooting until he wasn't moving if he was reaching into his car for a weapon, NEA.

Wow.

 

[SteveSC]

He could have holstered his weapon... And then been stabbed or shot in the face by an uncooperative suspect reaching into a concealed area.

Sorry, but that's ridiculous and shows a complete lack of ability to put yourself in the shoes of the people in that situation.

The idiot with the concealed knife ignoring police orders is to blame.

Hahahaha

You go to great lengths to justify attempted murder. No your posts are the ridiculous ones.

The Facts

He did not have a weapon no knife and no gun.
He was shot in the back while unarmed
They could have reused the taser.
They could have used the methods they are trained in to take him down
They wear stab vests and as others have pointed out they are trained how to disable suspect much like many other police forces.

They had no idea if he had a weapon in the car and thus cannot presume he does and shoot him for simple leaning into his car. Say he found the knife. They were a good foot to two feet behind him and had the jump on him if he had pulled it.

The sad part is many of us that live here see this stuff everyday and know people who get treated as if they did something wrong when pulled over.

The cops went to the extreme and are rightly being called out. Time and time again they overstep and make excuses.

When people like you makes excuses for them it slows the process of having something change.

Their broken process needs to be fixed
They pull guns are are jumpy. Despite the training they get they are more willing to shoot than think about it.