If police use there new drones to kill bad guys will you cheer?

[g5000]

ok try to keep up.

What part of "public danger" do you not understand? I'm here to help.

LOL PUBLIC DANGER. The guy was in ******* YEMEN. How is that a public danger to Americans?

The same way some dude named Osama bin Laden living in Afghanistan in 2001 a public danger to Americans.

 

[LibertyLemming]

What part of "public danger" do you not understand? I'm here to help.

LOL PUBLIC DANGER. The guy was in ******* YEMEN. How is that a public danger to Americans?

The same way some dude named Osama bin Laden living in Afghanistan in 2001 a public danger to Americans.

And he deserved to get punished after he committed a crime.

Why do you think terrorists hate us? You think us ******* around in Brown Town and killing their family members for decades might have something to do with it?

 

[slackjawed]

You cop haters are hilarious. Especially with the pictures of SWAT teams and calling it "militarized". Lets analyze:

OH GOD NO THEY ARE......

- Wearing body armor? Yep. They may get shot at, and dont wanna die.
- Wearing helmets? Yep, dont wanna get shot in the head, or hit with a blunt object and get hurt/killed.
- Carrying AR15's? Yes. They are FAR more accurate, and thus, create less chance of missing (and hitting someone innocent).
- Riding in armored vehicles? YES. They are cheap from military surplus, and, they too dont wanna get shot while arriving at a dangerous call.
- Wearing OD green BDU's!!! Yeah...why not? What, you want them in pink or orange spandex?


You people are ridiculous.

And most of them these days are well educated professionals. Since they perform a public service, I believe we can assume most are patriotic and care for their community as well.

Barney Fife and Festus Hagen just wouldn't fit in anymore, Andy probably couldn't even get on the force.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If a drone took out a new Timothy McVeigh in a truck full of explosives on his way to a federal building,

should I not cheer?

Ah and when it blows up a truck of innocent people?

The thread title says blowing up bad guys.

So again, should I not cheer if the above occurs?

 

[LibertyLemming]

If a drone took out a new Timothy McVeigh in a truck full of explosives on his way to a federal building,

should I not cheer?

Ah and when it blows up a truck of innocent people?

The thread title says blowing up bad guys.

So again, should I not cheer if the above occurs?

No you shouldn't cheer at killing people without proving them guilty of a crime.

 

[g5000]

LOL PUBLIC DANGER. The guy was in ******* YEMEN. How is that a public danger to Americans?

The same way some dude named Osama bin Laden living in Afghanistan in 2001 a public danger to Americans.

And he deserved to get punished after he committed a crime.

Why do you think terrorists hate us? You think us ******* around in Brown Town and killing their family members for decades might have something to do with it?

Blaming the victims now, eh?

And I prefer we kill a terrorist BEFORE he kills innocent people. Not after.

 

[LibertyLemming]

The same way some dude named Osama bin Laden living in Afghanistan in 2001 a public danger to Americans.

And he deserved to get punished after he committed a crime.

Why do you think terrorists hate us? You think us ******* around in Brown Town and killing their family members for decades might have something to do with it?

Blaming the victims now, eh?

And I prefer we kill a terrorist BEFORE he kills innocent people. Not after.

The victims lol. I guess they're not victims when we kill their people, but when they kills our (likely in retaliation) we are the only victims.

I prefer innocent until proven guilty and the sanctity of human life. I prefer not creating "collateral damage" in the form of the mangled corpses of children and women.

 

[Dante]

If police use there....their....there....there.,...their.....there....

 

[LibertyLemming]

yeah i already addressed that dante

 

[thanatos144]

The paulbots have lost their ******* mind again.....Must be using cheap foil for their hats and it is baking their brains. First off who is going to pay for these drones????? Cause they are millions of dollars each.....I dont know about you guys but I am pretty sure most municipalities cant afford them. Second...Cops do not willy nilly go shoot people up.... Normally they shoot when threatened by idiots like Pot growers using threatening actions to keep them off land cause they dont want to go to jail....Or meth heads to waked out to even care what he is doing....That is called using logic and evidence.... instead we get Jessy Ventura conspiracy retards saying the cops are evil government jackbooted thugs come to take you pot and drink your beer.....

More proof Paulbots are ******* insane liberals that just hate taxes.

 

[LibertyLemming]

The paulbots have lost their ******* mind again.....Must be using cheap foil for their hats and it is baking their brains. First off who is going to pay for these drones????? Cause they are millions of dollars each.....I dont know about you guys but I am pretty sure most municipalities cant afford them. Second...Cops do not willy nilly go shoot people up.... Normally they shoot when threatened by idiots like Pot growers using threatening actions to keep them off land cause they dont want to go to jail....Or meth heads to waked out to even care what he is doing....That is called using logic and evidence.... instead we get Jessy Ventura conspiracy retards saying the cops are evil government jackbooted thugs come to take you pot and drink your beer.....

More proof Paulbots are ******* insane liberals that just hate taxes.

lol you're really angry kid. cops don't shoot innocent people ever good call. government hasn't put people in cages for no crime before. good call.

 

[Connery]

I mean we will probably see that day sooner or later.

edit: their* gotta quit using my iphone

Under what circumstances would these drones be used, in an area populated by innocent civilians, for example?

 

[LibertyLemming]

I mean we will probably see that day sooner or later.

edit: their* gotta quit using my iphone

Under what circumstances would these drones be used, in an area populated by innocent civilians, for example?

keep reading this was covered, who knows, all we can do it guess

 

[Connery]

I mean we will probably see that day sooner or later.

edit: their* gotta quit using my iphone

Under what circumstances would these drones be used, in an area populated by innocent civilians, for example?

keep reading this was covered, who knows, all we can do it guess

It depends upon the actual circumstances. Nevertheless, I would not cheer, I would be satisfied if the use prevented unnecessary deaths of innocents or law enforcement.

 

[Bill Angel]

And, of course, law enforcement is dying to use drones.

I don't think drones would be particularly cost effective in urban environments. The money might be better spent beefing up patrolling by police on the ground. For instance, by putting more police on Segways to give them greater mobility.

Um...no. Police on Segways is a horrible idea. The reasons why are too many to list on here. Foot patrol? Yes. THey've done that for centuries. Horseback? Once upon a time, but no more. Bicycles? Yes, they're silent, fast and cheap, and many cities use them. Patrol cars are never going away.

People outside of LE wouldnt realize just how much shit a cop needs....or is required...to keep with them, and a car is almost mandatory to transport all that shit. Lawyers are to blame for that, since laws require all that nonsense to be in a car with the cop, and when foot/bike cops do make arrests or go to a call, 99% of the time a patrol car must show up to have that paperwork or equipment on-scene.

Segways were tried, and failed. Malls use them. Thats about it.

First, a word (images really) in defense of police on horseback

Police on horseback
The above images were taken in Baltimore on January 6th, 2012

Here is a video on Police Use of Segways:​

[ame=http://youtu.be/Yfk5ef81UcU]Police Using Segways For Downtown Patrol - YouTube[/ame]

But there was something disturbing about what the policeman said at the beginning of this video.
Here is what he said:​

“We are getting some issues about dope smoking. I’m not saying that it’s you guys. But if they are in the crowd with you, then you are going to be just as guilty as them.”

Talk about guilt by association!
Suppose that the police were equipped with drones that could fire missiles at terrorists.
Imagine the following hypothetical assertion by the police
“We are getting some issues about terrorism. I’m not saying that it’s you guys. But if they are in the crowd with you, then you are going to be just as guilty as them."
Meaning that the terrorists and those that they are hiding among, are all to be considered equally guilty and a threat???

 

[JakeStarkey]

That is stretch, a difference of kind not degree. Don't make connections that don't exist.

 

[P@triot]

I mean we will probably see that day sooner or later.

edit: their* gotta quit using my iphone

Absolutely ******* NOT. Do you people not understand that U.S. citizens are entitled to due process? That a "bad" guy is entitled to a trial through due process, and is not to be executed on the whim of someone driving a drone?!?!

You idiot, you have no clue what you're talking about.

If a guy is shooting up a mall or sports event, does he get a trial? No, the cops will kill him right there.

Second...you have no clue about what a drone could do. Here are some fine examples:

1- Limit car chases. Yep. A drone, like a helicopter, can keep a visual on a fleeing car. You know how many people get hurt by cop car chases? A lot. They wouldnt need to now. Just follow the guy, keep cars in the general area, and when he stops, move in. Less collisions = GOOD.

2- Help search for missing people and kids, or victims in a disaster. Cover a lot of ground, quickly, and send high-res visuals. Far superior to a helicopter, which is why the military is using them.

3- Uses less fuel than a helicopter. Means saving money, means less budget eaten up. You like less spending, right?


You right wing alarmists are funny sometimes. I bet people like you protested in the early 1900's when cops moved from horseback to Model-T cars also.

You're such a ******* idiot. With each post, you expose an IQ that borders on mentally retarded.

The examples given were "militia in the woods". At no point did the OP give an example of an active shooter, you ****'n moron.

Since you have ZERO capability to read and understand, would you please just go away? This site requires reading and writing skills - something you have clearly NEITHER of....

From post #4 you ****'n moron:

This is far too vague, you need to provide an example or examples. And are we to assume this within the United States?

Well it hasn't happened yet so examples are hard to come by, but yes, within the USA.

Say there is a well armed anti-government militia holed up in the woods?
Say there is a murder suspect in what they believe is an empty house?
Say a car is about to cross the border and the occupants are wanted terrorists?

Everything listed in the example requires due process - not active shooter elimination! Jesus Christ Almighty, you're absolutely incapable of following the conversation....

 

[JakeStarkey]

A "militia in the woods" that is revolting against lawful control would and should be a drone target.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Ah and when it blows up a truck of innocent people?

The thread title says blowing up bad guys.

So again, should I not cheer if the above occurs?

No you shouldn't cheer at killing people without proving them guilty of a crime.

You should not talk about subjects you know nothing about:



The Model Penal Code follows the more modern view and allows the use of deadly force only in situations where the crime that the suspect is arrested for involved the use or threatened use of deadly force or if there is a substantial risk that the suspect would seriously harm or kill someone else if the arrest were delayed.

Someone is on their way to a government building, driving a truck filled with explosives, and the police have a reasonable belief that his intent is to blow up the building.

They kill him with a drone. Why can't they do that?

Use of Force to Effectuate Arrest and to Prevent Crime

 

[skye]

If police use their new drones to kill bad guys will you cheer?



It's not like I'd cheer..... but it would be perfectly fine with me.

We are talking about killing bad guys here. It's all good.