Diuretic
Permanently confused
It's also hilarious that somebody who knows nothing about being a cop deigns to tell others what cops should or shouldn't do.
They got off. End of story.
Judges do that every day.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's also hilarious that somebody who knows nothing about being a cop deigns to tell others what cops should or shouldn't do.
They got off. End of story.
Not really, considering we are talking about how cops should act, rather than about complicated legal arguments. Its the difference between general knowledge about a profession and extremely specialized knowledge.
Whatever the situation, someone screwed up.
The fact that they shot at all means they felt deadly force was justified. How long the threat was around can depend on your viewpoint.
And this is based on your wealth of experience as a cop? Oh that's right, you're not a cop, never been a cop, probably haven't even watched cop shows on tv. Maybe you should just shut the fuck up? The silence would be pleasant for a change.
It isn't whether or not there was a threat, but whether or not a threat was perceived.
It isn't whether or not there was a threat, but whether or not a threat was perceived.
And if the response was proportional to the threat.
The Judge followed the law. The fact is the man killed had problems and his buddies were thugs and criminals.
True. Unfortunately, the US is a dangerous place - much more than say NZ or Oz, in that regard. So, they can't take chances, and sometimes they over react to a situation. I don't believe for one minute they committed murder. Did they over react? Dunno, wasn't there and don't know the mindset of the officers involved, or how it pannedo out. It's easy for some (not saying you BTW) to sit on the sideline and act like the moral arbitor without having been in that situation. 50 shots sounds bad. But handguns - even in the hands of trained people - are not known for their accuracy. Of the 50 shots fired, how many found their target?
Lotsa Monday morning quarter backing going on here.
The only folks who know exactly what went on are the three victims and the five cops. Cops thought they were being fired on. Wouldn't surprise me, in the confusion, if one cop hearing another cop firing thought it was the suspects and opened up himself.
What I do love, is these folk who criticise the cops, because you know, if it had been them in that situation, they would have handled it perfectly...
Bottom line, I doubt it was racially motivated in any way, shape or form. These guys could have been little green men from Mars and the result would have been the same. It was the situation, not the people, that was the problem.
And you have training and experience in police work? Do you tell your Doctor how to operate? Do you tell your mechanic how to fix your car? Do you tell your broker how to work your stocks?
True. Unfortunately, the US is a dangerous place - much more than say NZ or Oz, in that regard. So, they can't take chances, and sometimes they over react to a situation. I don't believe for one minute they committed murder. Did they over react? Dunno, wasn't there and don't know the mindset of the officers involved, or how it pannedo out. It's easy for some (not saying you BTW) to sit on the sideline and act like the moral arbitor without having been in that situation. 50 shots sounds bad. But handguns - even in the hands of trained people - are not known for their accuracy. Of the 50 shots fired, how many found their target?
I don't think anyone is claiming they'd have handled it perfectly. Being killed for resisting arrest, if that is all he did, is a little extreme.
They didn't resist arrest. The cops never identified themselves as such and were in plainclothes.
They didn't resist arrest. The cops never identified themselves as such and were in plainclothes.
That's not what the trial demonstrated.
The threat of violence by Sharpton shows his -- and the larger black -- lack of respect for the settling power of the law. The blacks didn't get the legal result they wanted, so now they want to riot, loot, burn, etc. That doesn't show you're a part of civilized society, it shows you're outside it.
Never mind the incredible absurdity of this being racial when 2/3 of the cops were BLACK.
And can I point out that a drunk man gunning his car at you is not an "unarmed man"?
So, solution! White cops and command go bye-bye from black neighborhoods. Only black cops, with Rev. Al as the commander, patrol black areas. Then, any police misconduct will come to rest solely upon... themselves. Would that work?
Where in the trial did it say differently?