Police Shooting Declared Justifiable - Protestors Act Stupid

you people are so full of shit
you talk like you are watching a movie/tv
you talk as if you would do it DIFFERENTLY !!!!
you are James Bond/Bruce Lee/Chuck Norris
you would not wear a pistol on patrol/on a call for robbery/etc
..you would side step someone attacking you [ like MBrown ] and give him a James Bond karate chop
...you would take down someone much bigger than you with a Chuck Norris punch to the chest
what bullshit---
I guess you would let some jackass like MBrown beat the shit out of you before you would use your pistol............??????
..this is REAL---not the movies/tv

Really? You know what I would do in your fantasy? In Iraq we were running a checkpoint. We were searching cars. I disarmed and searched the people, and then searched the cars. They were scavengers. Bedouin’s who were trying to find materials to use or sell. They were allowed to have the military items but not weapons or components. I found several AK magazines and a few grenades. I separated the weapons from the rest.

I had rearmed. That is to say I had the M9 Beretta I used in searching bunkers. I signaled to the family that they could have the stuff in the large pile but not the stuff in the small pile. I stood by the small pile. I turned to ask a question of a friend and saw motion. One of the males was reaching for the military weapons pile. I pulled the pistol, there were grenades there. I aimed at his head. He froze. He stopped moving. I told him no in English and he backed off.

I didn’t shoot. I didn’t have to. A possible threat. But not certain. Later there was a mix up with the prisoners and I was holding forty or so at gunpoint. A M-16A2 rifle. Again a series of motions and again I held fire. It was not necessary to shoot.

I did shoot in Panama when we were engaged. I would have shot earlier if I had seen him with a weapon. I was trained to think and remain calm. Defusing booby traps while amped up on adrenaline is not a recipe for a long life. I shot in Iraq when I had a target that qualified. An enemy with a weapon.

So how is it my real life experience doesn’t match your fantasy? In both those cases I probably could have gotten away with shooting them. But it was not necessary. I know I will shoot. I’ve done it. I know I will not shoot. I have refrained.

I carry a pistol. I have a CCW. I go to bad sections of town from time to time. I don’t pull it. I am not afraid of black guys. Unlike you hero’s.

I grew up among other places in a rough neighborhood in California. We had gang bangers. I wasn’t afraid of them either. The first time I was shot at was in Cerritos California. I ducked.

It is why I have said many times. Guns don’t scare me. The fellow behind it may have my undivided attention. But the gun doesn’t scare me. I am more than 50 years old. But I had more sense thirty years ago when I thought I was ten feet tall and bulletproof than these idiots today wearing badges.

Let me ask you this. How many unarmed civilians are the equal to saving one cop? Is it ten? Can the cops kill ten unarmed people? Is it a hundred? How many must die every year because of cops who are terrified pussies at the drop of a hat? How many are too many? I bet you won’t answer.

Lol....well we are all real proud of ya s0n!!:113::113:

But most Americans think the working class hero shit is ghey....too, most Americans think a guy running around with a gun and shooting in the air around cops is a fucked up savage beyond anybody's help. When hes put in his box, lives are being saved.... that is how the voting public looks at it. Maybe doesn't fit your makey uppey world but that's the way it is

Of course you think it is made up. It doesn’t fit your world view. Because in your wild world view, if you don’t shoot the instant there is a possible threat, you are a dead person, and that is the worst possible outcome. So anything is acceptable to avoid that. The fear of your own death is enough motivation to shoot lots of unarmed civilians in your very odd view.

Yet, you have made a statement about what I would do, and I said I wouldn’t. I told you a story, I say it is true, you say it was a lie. But when I was in the 82nd Airborne, we were taught that killing an unarmed person was unacceptable. Of course, when I was a boy growing up, I was taught that and many other lessons you probably did not get. Things like all races deserve to be treated equally. That I would refer to adults no matter their color as Mr. or Mrs. or Miss. I’d call them all Sir or Ma’am.

I imagine you have a lot of trouble with that idea. I could be wrong, because here, unlike my story we are talking about my opinion, not my history. It all happened. I was mugged by a moron with a knife outside Chicago when I drove OTR trucks. I drove for Swift, and then US Xpress about twenty years ago. In fact, I was driving for US Xpress when the Y2K bug was supposed to hit. I was literally driving a load for FedEx, contract job obviously, from Memphis to Dallas when the only thing on my truck broke because it wasn’t Y2K compliant. Oddly enough, it was the mounting bracket for my Alternator. It literally broke just after midnight. I limped into a truck stop just after that and shut the truck down. The Mechanic fixed it with an obviously wicked hangover and I was back on the road.

I carry concealed. I do so because I have a right to do it under law, and I am willing to accept the responsibility for my safety and the safety of my family. To a lesser extent of those around me. But that also means I have the responsibility to use the weapon in a manner which meets certain standards. Not only hitting the target when I shoot, which isn’t a problem.

You remind me of an idiot I ran into at the range last time. According to him I wasn’t doing anything right. My weapon, a Five Shot Magnum revolver, was not serious. The way I carried it was old fashioned. And I was using the wrong targets. I was shooting bullseye instead of silhouette. He snorted and told me that the bad guy would not be wearing a bullseye if I was attacked. I had spent nine years in the Army shooting at silhouettes. I ran the target out further, more than double what he was shooting at. I reloaded my revolver, and aimed and fired. all five in the black, only one in the ten ring, the other four in the nine. I told him the bad guy might as well be wearing a target if I’m shooting at him.

By comparison he was all over the damned place, several even missing the target entirely. I told him the most awesome gun with the baddest ammunition won’t do you a bit of good if you miss the target entirely.

Yeah, I am old fashioned. I believe that you don’t shoot someone who is unarmed. An old fashioned idea that literally goes to the old west. I believe that marksmanship means I hit the target. Today it means you fire all your rounds in the general direction of the target in under two seconds. I believe that courage means facing your fear, instead of using that fear as an excuse to kill someone. I believe in a lot of old fashioned ideals.

If you had been in charge of the Marines in the 1980’s, the motto would have been dishonor before death, instead of the more commonly accepted form.

Well s0n, I must admit I cant compete with a legend in his own mind. In terms of that, you have no peer in here. Find one other USMB member who can write 35 paragraphs about themselves in one post! :2up:If you can, I'll give you a fine cigar!:113:

So again, you have nothing but insults. Not surprising for a Dishonor before Death type. A coward that can cheer the deaths of others.

To a gutter scum like you, that story may have sounded heroic. But it wasn’t in those days. That was the standard. That was simply the expected behavior. I guess we had higher standards in those days. Before scum like you got involved in the process. I never thought it was heroic, and I don’t expect your adulation. I told the story so you could see it was the norm, not the exception, in those days.

As for blaming Liberals for that mentality? It was 1989-1991. After eight years of Ronald Reagan, and in Iraq, after more than two of George H. W. Bush. The Ultra Conservatives that you lionize. Those were the standards. We were not going to have any more massacres of civilians like they had in Viet Nam. We were not going to shoot first and ask questions never like happened in that God Forsaken war. We had learned. We had learned that you must act with honor. It is why we had so many of the enemy surrender. They knew we would not kill them just because. They knew we would treat them properly.

It is a lesson this generation has lost. Honor is not about how others treat you, but about how you treat others. I can see you would have trouble qualifying for even a sliver.
so you would let an unarmed, big ''man'' like Mike Brown beat the shit out of you??
you would not shoot him???
you would get into a fist fight??? etc??? instead of using your weapon?
 
Last edited:
It's getting entirely too common. An armed, black felon, well within hearing range of police officers, and ignoring their commands. In this case, in Minneapolis, Minnesota. the suspect Thurman Blevins was firing a gun into the ground and into the air, and when confronted by police, Blevins bolted and started running away.

2 cops ordered him to stop and show his hands. Blevins ignored that and kept running away, Then Blevins made an idiotic mistake, and started turning around toward the officers, WITH THE GUN STILL IN HIS HAND. He was shot 4 times, and died from his wounds.

The whole event was caught on video by the cop's body cam, showing the shooting to be an obvious justifiable use of force. Incredibly, protestors showed up at a news conference and shouted down the County Attorney announcing the decision of no criminal charges against the officers. They also took over the room and started holding their own press conference, moronically claiming the shooting to be "murder".

I'm trying to figure out what's going on here. Do these protestors think that labeling obviously justifiable shootings, "murder", will somehow cause cops to water down their use of force or something ? Or do they just have a knee jerk reaction to any cop shooting of a black person to call that murder, whether the shooting was self-defense justifiable or not ? Or maybe they're just stupid beyond belief.

In any case, I'd say those protesters (thugs might be a better word) are lucky they weren't arrested, for their very disorderly conduct, that went way beyond the bounds of free speech.

police shooting-Minneapolis, Minnesota - Bing video


Only blacks would have the gall to angrily protest one of their own getting shot for antagonizing, threatening and disregarding police WITH A FIREARM IN HIS HAND. Is it any wonder why a lot of people just DON'T LIKE THESE PEOPLE? Had those been whites protesting like that, I'd bet they would have been arrested on the spot no questions asked. I'm sick and tired of seeing bad behavior excused on account of race.
 
Do you think I'm lying? Here's some proof for you.

Fatal Force: 2018 police shootings database

237 whites have been shot by police this year. Have you heard any of these stories on the news? Ask yourself why.

Blacks 112

Yet every day we seem to have someone standing ready with a camera to show us the blacks getting shot.

Sort of reminds me of Trumps fake ass news story where Assad poisoned his people and Trump got to come in and be the savior/tough guy. But a day or two before Trump told Putin to get his boys out of there. I tell you this is all theater and it's working. They have us divided on race.

I don't think your stats show what you think they do.

There are 6 times more whites in this country than blacks. Yet only twice as many whites are shot as blacks. That would mean statistically blacks are shot far more often than whites, per capita.
 
Do you think I'm lying? Here's some proof for you.

Fatal Force: 2018 police shootings database

237 whites have been shot by police this year. Have you heard any of these stories on the news? Ask yourself why.

Blacks 112

Yet every day we seem to have someone standing ready with a camera to show us the blacks getting shot.

Sort of reminds me of Trumps fake ass news story where Assad poisoned his people and Trump got to come in and be the savior/tough guy. But a day or two before Trump told Putin to get his boys out of there. I tell you this is all theater and it's working. They have us divided on race.

I don't think your stats show what you think they do.

There are 6 times more whites in this country than blacks. Yet only twice as many whites are shot as blacks. That would mean statistically blacks are shot far more often than whites, per capita.
Ah so now you people understand statistics?

You guys also commit way more crime than your share.
 
Yet the momentum is in exactly the opposite direction. California will in the next couple years change the laws governing use of force. From reasonable to necessary. That small change will be the catalyst. If they shoot someone who isn’t armed then the burden of proof will be on the cops, where it belongs.

And it isn’t just California. The truth about improperly trained police is getting out.

How Police Training Contributes to Avoidable Deaths

In another decade the use of force will be tighter on the cops. Shooting an unarmed man will go from a regrettable tragedy to a criminal occurrence.
Shooting a suspect whose hands disappear from view IS NECESSARY. If it wasn't, the shootings would not happen. And the police are not improperly trained. It is the public who is improperly trained, by hollowhead schoolteacher liberals, who don't understand cop relationships.

You are actually saying that cops should gamble with their lives, when a suspect fails to follow directions about keeping his hands visible ? And then in some significant %, LOSE their lives because of following a crazy policy like that ?

That IS what the author of the idiotic Atlantic article you linked to, says. This incredibly stupid article says >> "But what about the consequences of a mistake? After all, that dark object in the suspect’s hands could be a wallet, not a gun." Sure, it could be. And in one recent case, it was just that. But the burden of not making that mistake (of having something in the hand) is on the suspect, not the cop. The dopey, backwards article also mentions hands disappearing behind the back. Again, same as in a recent case where the suspect got shot dead. Suspect screwed up by allowing his hands to go out of view of the cop. If he had a gun behind him, and instantly brought it out and shot the cop, the cop would have had zero time to react, to defend himself. The ONLY way the cop can defend himself, is to shoot as soon as that hand disappears from view.

Likewise, the article mentions a person sticking a hand into a vehicle, as in the case of Terrence Crutcher, who was shot dead by officer Betty Shelby. Shelby was cleared of any wrongdoing, because she HAD to fire at Crutcher, who put her in a position of lethal threat, when he stupidly put his hand inside the window of his SUV. Crutcher created that shooting, not Shelby.

Thank goodness the police academies teach exactly what the author said they teach, and they will continue to teach it because it is basic common sense, not the liberal mushy-brain thinking of that dumbass author.

These are the kinds of mindsets that make people say that liberalism is a mental disorder. We will continue to have more of these needless killings as long as our MISeducational system is run by liberals, who are clueless when it comes to guns and law enforcement. Kids are graduating from high schools with zero training in how to handle police confrontations, and zero schooling about criminal law.

th
 
Last edited:
Yet the momentum is in exactly the opposite direction. California will in the next couple years change the laws governing use of force. From reasonable to necessary. That small change will be the catalyst. If they shoot someone who isn’t armed then the burden of proof will be on the cops, where it belongs.

And it isn’t just California. The truth about improperly trained police is getting out.

How Police Training Contributes to Avoidable Deaths

In another decade the use of force will be tighter on the cops. Shooting an unarmed man will go from a regrettable tragedy to a criminal occurrence.
Shooting a suspect whose hands disappear from view IS NECESSARY. if it wasn't, the shootings would not happen. And the police are not improperly trained. It is the public who is improperly trained, by hollowhead liberals who don't understand cop relationships.

You are actually saying that cops should gamble with their lives when a suspect fails to follow directions about keeping his hands visible ? And then in some significant %, LOSE their lives because of following a crazy policy like that ?

That IS what the author of the idiotic Atlantic article you linked to says. Thank goodness the police academies teach exactly what he said they teach, and they will continue to teach it because it is basic common sense, not the liberal mushy-brain thinking of that dumbass author.

These are the kinds of mindsets that make people say that liberalism is a mental disorder.

th

I asked before. How many innocents should die to protect one cop? You didn’t answer. Apparently you think there is no number that is too high.
 
Yet the momentum is in exactly the opposite direction. California will in the next couple years change the laws governing use of force. From reasonable to necessary. That small change will be the catalyst. If they shoot someone who isn’t armed then the burden of proof will be on the cops, where it belongs.

And it isn’t just California. The truth about improperly trained police is getting out.

How Police Training Contributes to Avoidable Deaths

In another decade the use of force will be tighter on the cops. Shooting an unarmed man will go from a regrettable tragedy to a criminal occurrence.
Shooting a suspect whose hands disappear from view IS NECESSARY. if it wasn't, the shootings would not happen. And the police are not improperly trained. It is the public who is improperly trained, by hollowhead liberals who don't understand cop relationships.

You are actually saying that cops should gamble with their lives when a suspect fails to follow directions about keeping his hands visible ? And then in some significant %, LOSE their lives because of following a crazy policy like that ?

That IS what the author of the idiotic Atlantic article you linked to says. Thank goodness the police academies teach exactly what he said they teach, and they will continue to teach it because it is basic common sense, not the liberal mushy-brain thinking of that dumbass author.

These are the kinds of mindsets that make people say that liberalism is a mental disorder.

th
You watch the video, the shooter is running away fumbling to get into a position where he can get away. That may mean having to shoot the cops chasing him, not sure if he has made up his mind at that point in the video where he says DON'T SHOOT.

Don't shoot? Excuse me? How about you obey one fucking command that you've been given. Stop. Hands up! He gave them every reason to shoot but tried to be slick.
 
I asked before. How many innocents should die to protect one cop? You didn’t answer. Apparently you think there is no number that is too high.
I was still posting while you were replying, and only finished it just this minute. You may now go back and read the ENTIRE Post # 45.

The answer to your question is another question >> How many cops should die, to protect how many insufficiently schooled people, who don't know how to act in confrontation with police ?

And I actually already answered your question yesterday, in Post # 38, when I said >> "If the suspect's hand then disappears, the cop must shoot. If this rule didn't exist, 100 cops would die every day in America. Maybe more."
 
Only blacks would have the gall to angrily protest one of their own getting shot for antagonizing, threatening and disregarding police WITH A FIREARM IN HIS HAND. Is it any wonder why a lot of people just DON'T LIKE THESE PEOPLE? Had those been whites protesting like that, I'd bet they would have been arrested on the spot no questions asked. I'm sick and tired of seeing bad behavior excused on account of race.
These screwballs usually have enough inside information regarding the political situation of the city they're in to know if it's safe for them to criminally disrupt an official County or city news conference, without getting themselves arrested.

Typically in cities with Democrat mayors, these creeps can do just about anything (disrupt meetings, block traffic, attack Trump supporters, etc) and get away with it. They can also do it in places with RINO Mayors, who are too wimp to do their jobs.
 
I don't think your stats show what you think they do.

There are 6 times more whites in this country than blacks. Yet only twice as many whites are shot as blacks. That would mean statistically blacks are shot far more often than whites, per capita.
They are shot by OTHER BLACKS, you don't know ?
 
I asked before. How many innocents should die to protect one cop? You didn’t answer. Apparently you think there is no number that is too high.
I was still posting while you were replying, and only finished it just this minute. You may now go back and read the ENTIRE Post # 45.

The answer to your question is another question >> How many cops should die, to protect how many insufficiently schooled people, who don't know how to act in confrontation with police ?

And I actually already answered your question yesterday, in Post # 38, when I said >> "If the suspect's hand then disappears, the cop must shoot. If this rule didn't exist, 100 cops would die every day in America. Maybe more."

So the cost that is not high enough in your world view is 500 a year. Because half of the people shot by police are unarmed. Half. With hostages being shot by police. Homeowners who are trying to protect their families. The cops can’t wait. They can’t risk saying police drop the gun from a position of cover in the situations. No. They have to draw first. They have to shoot first in an insane perversion of the classic Hollywood old west shootout.

If you wonder why there is a push for more accountability and changes to the laws. Then you are as dumb as I feared.
 
I don't think your stats show what you think they do.

There are 6 times more whites in this country than blacks. Yet only twice as many whites are shot as blacks. That would mean statistically blacks are shot far more often than whites, per capita.
They are shot by OTHER BLACKS, you don't know ?

You do realize we are discussing blacks shot by COPS, not just blacks killed with guns, right?
 
I asked before. How many innocents should die to protect one cop? You didn’t answer. Apparently you think there is no number that is too high.
I was still posting while you were replying, and only finished it just this minute. You may now go back and read the ENTIRE Post # 45.

The answer to your question is another question >> How many cops should die, to protect how many insufficiently schooled people, who don't know how to act in confrontation with police ?

And I actually already answered your question yesterday, in Post # 38, when I said >> "If the suspect's hand then disappears, the cop must shoot. If this rule didn't exist, 100 cops would die every day in America. Maybe more."

So the cost that is not high enough in your world view is 500 a year. Because half of the people shot by police are unarmed. Half. With hostages being shot by police. Homeowners who are trying to protect their families. The cops can’t wait. They can’t risk saying police drop the gun from a position of cover in the situations. No. They have to draw first. They have to shoot first in an insane perversion of the classic Hollywood old west shootout.

If you wonder why there is a push for more accountability and changes to the laws. Then you are as dumb as I feared.

YOU are the "dumb" one. I see police confronting suspects from a position of cover" all the time. This however is not always possible (ex. when cops stop a car and walk over to talk to the driver, they are fully exposed - like Betty Shelby with Terrence Crutcher)

You attempt here to villainize the cops is ridiculous, and does nothing more than show you are a dupe of the Obama/Sharpton/Jackson race hustlers campaign to arouse hate toward cops, to gin up black votes for Hillary in 2016. This goofball mentality still persists, among the lower intellects, like with the idiot kneelers during the national anthem. How dumb.

What is needed is more conservative management of educational programs to get kids familiarized with guns and law enforcement. As it is, clueless liberals in our schools are not even teaching basic criminal law. They're graduating kids from high schools who don't even know that attacking someone physically is a crime.
 
Last edited:
I asked before. How many innocents should die to protect one cop? You didn’t answer. Apparently you think there is no number that is too high.
I was still posting while you were replying, and only finished it just this minute. You may now go back and read the ENTIRE Post # 45.

The answer to your question is another question >> How many cops should die, to protect how many insufficiently schooled people, who don't know how to act in confrontation with police ?

And I actually already answered your question yesterday, in Post # 38, when I said >> "If the suspect's hand then disappears, the cop must shoot. If this rule didn't exist, 100 cops would die every day in America. Maybe more."

So the cost that is not high enough in your world view is 500 a year. Because half of the people shot by police are unarmed. Half. With hostages being shot by police. Homeowners who are trying to protect their families. The cops can’t wait. They can’t risk saying police drop the gun from a position of cover in the situations. No. They have to draw first. They have to shoot first in an insane perversion of the classic Hollywood old west shootout.

If you wonder why there is a push for more accountability and changes to the laws. Then you are as dumb as I feared.

YOU are the "dumb" one. I see police confronting suspects from a position of cover" all the time. This however is not always possible (ex. when cops stop a car and walk over to talk to the driver, they are fully exposed - like Betty Shelby with Terrence Crutcher)

You attempt here to villainize the cops is ridiculous, and does nothing more than show you are a dupe of the Obama/Sharpton/Jackson race hustlers campaign to arouse hate toward cops, to gin up black votes for Hillary in 2016. This goofball mentality still persists, among the lower intellects, like with the idiot kneelers during the national anthem. How dumb.

What is needed is more conservative management of educational programs to get kids familiarized with guns and law enforcement. As it is, clueless liberals in our schools are not even teaching basic criminal law. They're graduating kids from high schools who don't even know that attacking someone physically is a crime.

That is where you are wrong. I have been objecting to the actions of police and excessive force since the 1980’s. Once I was old enough to see it. Sharpton wasn’t a thing then, Jackson was a thing, in New York but not like a decade later. We didn’t need Sharpton to tell us it was wrong. We knew it. We still know it. Dolt.

In another thread the people who stand shoulder to shoulder with you here are taking issue with the cops for shooting an armed man. The big difference in that. He was white. I notice you aren’t there now howling at the top of your lungs that the cops had to shoot the armed man because they had to. No. You are here. Why have you taken issue with me here? Because I said I didn’t have an issue with this shooting because the baddie was armed.

One of us is full of shit. It ain’t me. So take a minute, get back on your meds, and take a flying fuck at a rolling donut.
 
That is where you are wrong. I have been objecting to the actions of police and excessive force since the 1980’s. Once I was old enough to see it. Sharpton wasn’t a thing then, Jackson was a thing, in New York but not like a decade later. We didn’t need Sharpton to tell us it was wrong. We knew it. We still know it. Dolt.

In another thread the people who stand shoulder to shoulder with you here are taking issue with the cops for shooting an armed man. The big difference in that. He was white. I notice you aren’t there now howling at the top of your lungs that the cops had to shoot the armed man because they had to. No. You are here. Why have you taken issue with me here? Because I said I didn’t have an issue with this shooting because the baddie was armed.

One of us is full of shit. It ain’t me. So take a minute, get back on your meds, and take a flying fuck at a rolling donut.
I don't know what you're talking about. What other thread ? It doesn't matter.

Simple fact is, the stuff the author of your link said about police training is correct. And what they teach the cops is correct. And if you are a cop, are you going to gamble with your LIFE, when a suspect allows his hands to disappear, or doesn't keep them empty ?

If you are, then you are awfully stupid, and it will not be long before you wind up dead. Simply, shooting suspects who allow themselves to become a lethal threat, by allowing their hands to go out of view, is not "excessive force". It is self-defense. I blame inadequate schooling, for not getting people educated about this.

As a result of the liberal OMISSION of law enforcement schooling, people are walking around incredibly ignorant about the law. Here's a quote from Britany Jacobs, the girlfriend of the guy (Markeis McGlockton) who got shot at the convenience store in Clearwater FL. She said >> "He was a good man, and all he was trying to do was protect his family".

FALSE! He was a violent criminal, who had just committed a violent crime, upon a guy who was not moving, just talking and standing still, and didn't even see McGlockton, when he got knocked to the ground.
In another quote (which I can no longer find), she actually defends the shove/knockdown, as being what a man should do for his woman. NO! It's a CRIME. Good grief, how deficient our schools are.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top