- Mar 11, 2015
- 80,701
- 44,584
- 2,645
There is no such thing as an "unarmed man"Many conservative radicals have armed themselves to not only fight with cops if necessary they are prepared to fight federal troops too. Does your advice extend to fellow exremists?
On a more personal note,there are some cops who are so obssessed with their power they can and do provoke people into confrontations. Usually the cop has the advantage and comes out on top, but , sometimes that kind of cop doesn't survive.
Some people are just not going to be harrassed and fucked with for no damn good reason whether armed or not.
But it is quite telling that a common theme among you well armed conservative is the notion that an unarmed person who fights with an overbearing asshole hiding behind a badge, or a person who runs from cops deserves to be shot. If you believe that you're a fucking NAZI. Thousands of people have fought with cops, run away and even exchanged gunfire with cops yet were arrested without being murdered. Most cops are not shooting unarmed people with such disdain and impunity as those who shot Stephon Clark, even under similar circumstances.
Lastly, I gave you a link to review pertaining to .a pedestrian being shot after being targeted by an asshole in blue and falsely charged for jaywalking . The pedestrian, knowing he had done nothing amiss, simply asked the officer why he stopped him. Having no viable explanation, the cop escalated the confrontation : that being his intent from the onset for reasons known only to himself. This time the weapon of choice was a taser. But tasers can be deadly too. Scores of people are killed by tasers each year.
ANYONE with an adversarial tone, who is moving toward you, and is already within the standard 21 foot danger zone, is a lethal threat to you. If they continue coming at you after being warned to stay back, they should be self-defense shot.
No Such Thing As An “UNARMED MAN”
Anyone who would call this being a "NAZI", is an obvious casualty of the liberal mind-propaganda, that stems from the typical ignorance of cops and guns.
As for felons who are running away, they can be shot (in the back of course), and police actually violate their protocol, if they don't shoot (and allow suspect to escape)
Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia
Actually the fleeing felon rule does not apply in his case.
Under U.S. law the fleeing felon rule was limited in 1985 to non-lethal force in most cases by Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1. The justices held that deadly force "may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others."
No such threat existed in his case.
Your OP does not set any legal precedent for what an unarmed man is either. If a cop is scared of an unarmed man talking in an angry tone from 7 yards away that officer needs to find another job.
You guys need to teach your children to obey the goddamn law if they don't wanna get shot.
No, that's not the problem. Believe it or not we do have rights and the police do violate our rights on damn near every stop.