Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I have. Girl deliberately hit a police car, got out of her vehicle, came at the cop with fake pistol in two handed grip extended in front of her.Actually there are several important differences besides her skin color.A 17-year-old girl killed by a Fullerton police officer last week appears to have been pointing a replica handgun at the officer when she was shot, according to body camera footage released by the Police Department on Friday.
The graphic 15-minute video, which also features emergency radio transmissions and statements from Fullerton police officials, provides the most complete account yet of the events leading up to the shooting of Hannah Williams along the 91 Freeway in Anaheim.
The on-duty K-9 officer was driving east on the 91 Freeway when he noticed an SUV speeding past him shortly after 7 p.m., according to a videotaped statement by Fullerton Police Lt. Jon Radus introducing the footage.
As the officer attempts to stop the vehicle for a possible speeding violation, it appears to intentionally collide with his patrol car before making an abrupt U-turn into oncoming traffic and coming to a stop facing the wrong way, Radus said.
When the officer approached the driver’s side door, Williams exited and pointed the replica gun at him, Radus said. She can be seen in the video walking toward the officer with her arms outstretched.
The officer opened fire, striking her. The video shows a still-conscious Williams crying out for help as the officer and a responding LAPD officer handcuff her and provide medical aid.
Body camera video appears to show 17-year-old pointing replica gun at officer before she is shot, police say
What we have here is almost an exact replica of a case in my city with a boy named Tamir Rice. In this case, an officer was confronted by a girl with a toy gun which the officer had no way of knowing, and did what he had to do which is protect his life.
There are several differences between the Rice case and this one. First and most importantly, the liberal media has not expressed outrage in this shooting. Two, you had to dig for this story to find it. Three, they were both minors, but this girl was five years older than Tamir.
A USMB member told me that if Tamir had been white, the officer would have been prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law; that the officer should have known it was a toy and waited until he was shot at first before defending his life.
Not to worry though, because this is a white girl, this story will die this evening. It won't be like the year long constant reporting by the MSM like what happened in the Rice case. They likely won't investigate the life history of this officer like in the Rice case, and the city won't give the parents of this mentally challenged girl 5 million dollars because she was white and they need to buy votes.
Mod note: Edited Title and OP to remove call-outs...
She was 17, not 12. There's a significant difference in maturity level between the two.
She advanced in the officer, pointing the fake gun at him. Rice did nothing of the sort.
The police in the Rice shooting were told in advance the gun was probably a toy, and that.the subject was probably a juvenile. There was no such warning in current case.
There's body camera video of her pointing the suppose gun at the officers.
Yes, this is a tragedy, all such shootings are. It's not receiving as much attention because it's a clear cut case of the officer responding to a threat.
I still do not think this was a legal shooting, but I agree this is much closer than most.
I have not seen the video and do not know how reckless the cop was as far as exposing himself.
That's how I was trained however have you been trained as a law enforcement officer?you never point a gun toy or real at anyone unless you intend on using it. and if that toy gun looks real you're dead a legal kill.
So then you are saying that anytime police point a gun at someone who is not an immediate threat, that then you can kill the police?
That is what you are saying, since in a democratic republic, all people have equal authority because inherent rights of individuals are the ONLY source of ANY authority.
Do the police intend to kill someone they are pointing a gun at?
Probably not.
So then where would police get the right to shoot just in case from?
They can't get it from government, because government does not have that authority and can't grant it.
In a democratic republic, police are and MUST be identical to anyone.
So just switch the people around and see if you claim makes sense.
And clearly it does not, so you are wrong.
he's trolling/smoking/drinking all at the same timeyou are a genius!! and very wrongWhat the law says is that you can't shoot someone just for pointing a weapon.
If police can legally shoot a civilian for pointing a weapon, than any civilian could then legal shoot police when they point a weapon.
Police can NOT have superior authority to anyone else, because it is the inherent rights of all individual that is the ONLY source of ANY authority at all in a democratic republic.
The mistake is to believe that since government has authority and hire the police, that then police are a higher authority than average people.
That is not at all true in a democratic republic.
The reality is that since the public create government, then government is below the people.
And then since government hires the police, the police then are 2 steps lower than the population as a whole.
Since police also are average citizens, they do then also have the same right of defense as anyone, but no more.
They have no more right or authority to pull the trigger than anyone does.
The risks they face is why they are paid more.
They can't then start shooting people because they no longer want to accept the risk they choose to take money for.
What police SHOULD do is not to shoot, but to take cover.
They should be acting defensively, just like everyone else.
They do not get the right to murder people so that they can just stand there in the open and pretend it was not their fault for getting into a risky situation.
''''if police can legally shoot a civilian for pointing a weapon, than any civilian could then legal shoot police when they point a weapon.'''' ..????!!!!!!!! ahahahhaa
hahahahhahahahahahah
how old are you???!!! 10???
Penal Code 417 is the California law that prohibits “drawing, exhibiting, or using a firearm or deadly weapon”.1 This offense is commonly referred to as "brandishing" a weapon.Penal Code 417 PC - "Brandishing" a Weapon or FirearmThis is just one of California gun laws that regulate how and when people may lawfully use their firearms. A conviction under this section subjects you to a jail or prison sentence.
.....understand???? in most states you can't just brandish/etc weapons---the police usually are not BRANDISHING weapons
.
etc etc
you are way off base--not even in the ballpark
bran·dish
/ˈbrandiSH/
Learn to pronounce
verb
- wave or flourish (something, especially a weapon) as a threat or in anger or excitement.
Brandishing is when you display a weapon of deadly force in a way that intimidates.
That is exactly what police are doing when they point a loaded gun at someone, and since it could easily go off by an accidental trip or tug, that is the felony conduct regardless of life.
Police illegally violate that law constantly.
But brandishing is perfectly legal by any ordinary citizen if they feel their life or property is in danger, and they have no means of safe retreat. Same as police. In fact, it has to be IDENTICAL is this it to remain a democratic republic.
Ummm, what the fuck do you think POINTING a gun at you is? Moron!
Brandishing is when you display a weapon of deadly force in a way that intimidates.
That is exactly what police are doing when they point a loaded gun at someone, and since it could easily go off by an accidental trip or tug, that is the felony conduct regardless of life.
Police illegally violate that law constantly.
But brandishing is perfectly legal by any ordinary citizen if they feel their life or property is in danger, and they have no means of safe retreat. Same as police. In fact, it has to be IDENTICAL is this it to remain a democratic republic.
Ummm, what the fuck do you think POINTING a gun at you is? Moron!
You seemed to have misunderstood.
While she should not have brandished, the police do it all the time, and it is even more illegal when police do it because they have real guns, they are loaded, and the police should have been better trained to know how easily guns can go off accidentally.
It is illegal for police to point loaded guns at people who have not shown any weapon, and yet police illegally do this all the time.
Police are trained (fortunately this is one thing they do train relatively well) to NOT point the weapon at the person until they are going to shoot. They are also trained to keep their fingers off of the trigger. But, I am a real good shooter, and I train waaaay the heck more than cops do, but if anyone points a gun at me, I shoot them.
Period end of story. Your movie physics belief you can dodge a bullet is laughable. Point a gun at a person and you should, and most likely will get shot for doing so.
I have had police point a gun at me, with finger inside the trigger guard, over a dozen times, and have seen it more than a hundred times.
The point is not to try to dodge bullets, but to put a vehicle between you and someone you do not know.
It is not hard to do.
Lots of police have easily survived shootings by doing that.
Police apparently are no longer being properly trained, and instead are using armed forces rules of engagement for a combat zone.
This is simply not believable. How many felony convictions do you have?
What the law says is that you can't shoot someone just for pointing a weapon.
If police can legally shoot a civilian for pointing a weapon, than any civilian could then legal shoot police when they point a weapon.
Police can NOT have superior authority to anyone else, because it is the inherent rights of all individual that is the ONLY source of ANY authority at all in a democratic republic.
The mistake is to believe that since government has authority and hire the police, that then police are a higher authority than average people.
That is not at all true in a democratic republic.
The reality is that since the public create government, then government is below the people.
And then since government hires the police, the police then are 2 steps lower than the population as a whole.
Since police also are average citizens, they do then also have the same right of defense as anyone, but no more.
They have no more right or authority to pull the trigger than anyone does.
The risks they face is why they are paid more.
They can't then start shooting people because they no longer want to accept the risk they choose to take money for.
What police SHOULD do is not to shoot, but to take cover.
They should be acting defensively, just like everyone else.
They do not get the right to murder people so that they can just stand there in the open and pretend it was not their fault for getting into a risky situation.
I see....now that makes sense. Your source is a personal opinion andWhere did you get your information from, Rigby? I am very curious to read your source.What the law says is that you can't shoot someone just for pointing a weapon.
If police can legally shoot a civilian for pointing a weapon, than any civilian could then legal shoot police when they point a weapon.
Police can NOT have superior authority to anyone else, because it is the inherent rights of all individual that is the ONLY source of ANY authority at all in a democratic republic.
The mistake is to believe that since government has authority and hire the police, that then police are a higher authority than average people.
That is not at all true in a democratic republic.
The reality is that since the public create government, then government is below the people.
And then since government hires the police, the police then are 2 steps lower than the population as a whole.
Since police also are average citizens, they do then also have the same right of defense as anyone, but no more.
They have no more right or authority to pull the trigger than anyone does.
The risks they face is why they are paid more.
They can't then start shooting people because they no longer want to accept the risk they choose to take money for.
What police SHOULD do is not to shoot, but to take cover.
They should be acting defensively, just like everyone else.
They do not get the right to murder people so that they can just stand there in the open and pretend it was not their fault for getting into a risky situation.
The reason why I say that is a person who has an avatar of the Twilight Zone
posts something that is totally out of this world.
It is obvious that in a democratic republic, we create government by hiring it to do things for us.
Those you hire, can not possibly ever have superior authority to you yourself.
And police do not exist according to government.
They are not mentioned in any constitution.
They were not created until a over a century later.
Therefore they can not possibly have any additional legal authority at all.
And if they think they do, that is the line in the sand, where they have crossed over and become more of a problem then help, and it is time to get rid of them.
you are a genius!! and very wrongWhat the law says is that you can't shoot someone just for pointing a weapon.
If police can legally shoot a civilian for pointing a weapon, than any civilian could then legal shoot police when they point a weapon.
Police can NOT have superior authority to anyone else, because it is the inherent rights of all individual that is the ONLY source of ANY authority at all in a democratic republic.
The mistake is to believe that since government has authority and hire the police, that then police are a higher authority than average people.
That is not at all true in a democratic republic.
The reality is that since the public create government, then government is below the people.
And then since government hires the police, the police then are 2 steps lower than the population as a whole.
Since police also are average citizens, they do then also have the same right of defense as anyone, but no more.
They have no more right or authority to pull the trigger than anyone does.
The risks they face is why they are paid more.
They can't then start shooting people because they no longer want to accept the risk they choose to take money for.
What police SHOULD do is not to shoot, but to take cover.
They should be acting defensively, just like everyone else.
They do not get the right to murder people so that they can just stand there in the open and pretend it was not their fault for getting into a risky situation.
''''if police can legally shoot a civilian for pointing a weapon, than any civilian could then legal shoot police when they point a weapon.'''' ..????!!!!!!!! ahahahhaa
hahahahhahahahahahah
how old are you???!!! 10???
Penal Code 417 is the California law that prohibits “drawing, exhibiting, or using a firearm or deadly weapon”.1 This offense is commonly referred to as "brandishing" a weapon.Penal Code 417 PC - "Brandishing" a Weapon or FirearmThis is just one of California gun laws that regulate how and when people may lawfully use their firearms. A conviction under this section subjects you to a jail or prison sentence.
.....understand???? in most states you can't just brandish/etc weapons---the police usually are not BRANDISHING weapons
.
etc etc
you are way off base--not even in the ballpark
bran·dish
/ˈbrandiSH/
Learn to pronounce
verb
- wave or flourish (something, especially a weapon) as a threat or in anger or excitement.
Brandishing is when you display a weapon of deadly force in a way that intimidates.
That is exactly what police are doing when they point a loaded gun at someone, and since it could easily go off by an accidental trip or tug, that is the felony conduct regardless of life.
Police illegally violate that law constantly.
But brandishing is perfectly legal by any ordinary citizen if they feel their life or property is in danger, and they have no means of safe retreat. Same as police. In fact, it has to be IDENTICAL is this it to remain a democratic republic.
Ummm, what the fuck do you think POINTING a gun at you is? Moron!
You seemed to have misunderstood.
While she should not have brandished, the police do it all the time, and it is even more illegal when police do it because they have real guns, they are loaded, and the police should have been better trained to know how easily guns can go off accidentally.
It is illegal for police to point loaded guns at people who have not shown any weapon, and yet police illegally do this all the time.
Police are trained (fortunately this is one thing they do train relatively well) to NOT point the weapon at the person until they are going to shoot. They are also trained to keep their fingers off of the trigger. But, I am a real good shooter, and I train waaaay the heck more than cops do, but if anyone points a gun at me, I shoot them.
Period end of story. Your movie physics belief you can dodge a bullet is laughable. Point a gun at a person and you should, and most likely will get shot for doing so.
Suicide by Cop. The problem is that the Cop has to live with it for the rest of his life.
What the law says is that you can't shoot someone just for pointing a weapon.
If police can legally shoot a civilian for pointing a weapon, than any civilian could then legal shoot police when they point a weapon.
Police can NOT have superior authority to anyone else, because it is the inherent rights of all individual that is the ONLY source of ANY authority at all in a democratic republic.
The mistake is to believe that since government has authority and hire the police, that then police are a higher authority than average people.
That is not at all true in a democratic republic.
The reality is that since the public create government, then government is below the people.
And then since government hires the police, the police then are 2 steps lower than the population as a whole.
Since police also are average citizens, they do then also have the same right of defense as anyone, but no more.
They have no more right or authority to pull the trigger than anyone does.
The risks they face is why they are paid more.
They can't then start shooting people because they no longer want to accept the risk they choose to take money for.
What police SHOULD do is not to shoot, but to take cover.
They should be acting defensively, just like everyone else.
They do not get the right to murder people so that they can just stand there in the open and pretend it was not their fault for getting into a risky situation.
What the law says is that you can't shoot someone just for pointing a weapon.
If police can legally shoot a civilian for pointing a weapon, than any civilian could then legal shoot police when they point a weapon.
Police can NOT have superior authority to anyone else, because it is the inherent rights of all individual that is the ONLY source of ANY authority at all in a democratic republic.
The mistake is to believe that since government has authority and hire the police, that then police are a higher authority than average people.
That is not at all true in a democratic republic.
The reality is that since the public create government, then government is below the people.
And then since government hires the police, the police then are 2 steps lower than the population as a whole.
Since police also are average citizens, they do then also have the same right of defense as anyone, but no more.
They have no more right or authority to pull the trigger than anyone does.
The risks they face is why they are paid more.
They can't then start shooting people because they no longer want to accept the risk they choose to take money for.
What police SHOULD do is not to shoot, but to take cover.
They should be acting defensively, just like everyone else.
They do not get the right to murder people so that they can just stand there in the open and pretend it was not their fault for getting into a risky situation.
Let's meet you bring your toy gun I'll bring my real one. But I don't know yours is a toy. You can rest assured you will get shot if you even start to point it at me. Police are not required to get shot first then react. Citizens do not have the "right" to disobey the law, ( which includes pointing deadly weapons at LE)no matter how ignorant you are about it. Ignorance is no defense! So I guess you are just ignorant and defenseless! Where we meeting?
Brandishing is when you display a weapon of deadly force in a way that intimidates.
That is exactly what police are doing when they point a loaded gun at someone, and since it could easily go off by an accidental trip or tug, that is the felony conduct regardless of life.
Police illegally violate that law constantly.
But brandishing is perfectly legal by any ordinary citizen if they feel their life or property is in danger, and they have no means of safe retreat. Same as police. In fact, it has to be IDENTICAL is this it to remain a democratic republic.
Ummm, what the fuck do you think POINTING a gun at you is? Moron!
You seemed to have misunderstood.
While she should not have brandished, the police do it all the time, and it is even more illegal when police do it because they have real guns, they are loaded, and the police should have been better trained to know how easily guns can go off accidentally.
It is illegal for police to point loaded guns at people who have not shown any weapon, and yet police illegally do this all the time.
Police are trained (fortunately this is one thing they do train relatively well) to NOT point the weapon at the person until they are going to shoot. They are also trained to keep their fingers off of the trigger. But, I am a real good shooter, and I train waaaay the heck more than cops do, but if anyone points a gun at me, I shoot them.
Period end of story. Your movie physics belief you can dodge a bullet is laughable. Point a gun at a person and you should, and most likely will get shot for doing so.
I have had police point a gun at me, with finger inside the trigger guard, over a dozen times, and have seen it more than a hundred times.
The point is not to try to dodge bullets, but to put a vehicle between you and someone you do not know.
It is not hard to do.
Lots of police have easily survived shootings by doing that.
Police apparently are no longer being properly trained, and instead are using armed forces rules of engagement for a combat zone.
This is simply not believable. How many felony convictions do you have?
You pull a screwdriver on a cop and he'll shoot your dumb ass.Mouth shut. Hands visible. Ears open. No problem, in general.She pointed a gun replica at a cop? What an idiot.
surely you troll---hahahahhahahahahahahhayou are a genius!! and very wrongWhat the law says is that you can't shoot someone just for pointing a weapon.
If police can legally shoot a civilian for pointing a weapon, than any civilian could then legal shoot police when they point a weapon.
Police can NOT have superior authority to anyone else, because it is the inherent rights of all individual that is the ONLY source of ANY authority at all in a democratic republic.
The mistake is to believe that since government has authority and hire the police, that then police are a higher authority than average people.
That is not at all true in a democratic republic.
The reality is that since the public create government, then government is below the people.
And then since government hires the police, the police then are 2 steps lower than the population as a whole.
Since police also are average citizens, they do then also have the same right of defense as anyone, but no more.
They have no more right or authority to pull the trigger than anyone does.
The risks they face is why they are paid more.
They can't then start shooting people because they no longer want to accept the risk they choose to take money for.
What police SHOULD do is not to shoot, but to take cover.
They should be acting defensively, just like everyone else.
They do not get the right to murder people so that they can just stand there in the open and pretend it was not their fault for getting into a risky situation.
''''if police can legally shoot a civilian for pointing a weapon, than any civilian could then legal shoot police when they point a weapon.'''' ..????!!!!!!!! ahahahhaa
hahahahhahahahahahah
how old are you???!!! 10???
Penal Code 417 is the California law that prohibits “drawing, exhibiting, or using a firearm or deadly weapon”.1 This offense is commonly referred to as "brandishing" a weapon.Penal Code 417 PC - "Brandishing" a Weapon or FirearmThis is just one of California gun laws that regulate how and when people may lawfully use their firearms. A conviction under this section subjects you to a jail or prison sentence.
.....understand???? in most states you can't just brandish/etc weapons---the police usually are not BRANDISHING weapons
.
etc etc
you are way off base--not even in the ballpark
bran·dish
/ˈbrandiSH/
Learn to pronounce
verb
- wave or flourish (something, especially a weapon) as a threat or in anger or excitement.
Brandishing is when you display a weapon of deadly force in a way that intimidates.
That is exactly what police are doing when they point a loaded gun at someone, and since it could easily go off by an accidental trip or tug, that is the felony conduct regardless of life.
Police illegally violate that law constantly.
But brandishing is perfectly legal by any ordinary citizen if they feel their life or property is in danger, and they have no means of safe retreat. Same as police. In fact, it has to be IDENTICAL is this it to remain a democratic republic.
.....you don't brandish when your life is in danger or the cops are trying to capture/etc a jackass criminal--it's NOT brandishing then --hahahahahahhahahaha
..you must be drinking/smoking dope
What the law says is that you can't shoot someone just for pointing a weapon.
If police can legally shoot a civilian for pointing a weapon, than any civilian could then legal shoot police when they point a weapon.
Police can NOT have superior authority to anyone else, because it is the inherent rights of all individual that is the ONLY source of ANY authority at all in a democratic republic.
The mistake is to believe that since government has authority and hire the police, that then police are a higher authority than average people.
That is not at all true in a democratic republic.
The reality is that since the public create government, then government is below the people.
And then since government hires the police, the police then are 2 steps lower than the population as a whole.
Since police also are average citizens, they do then also have the same right of defense as anyone, but no more.
They have no more right or authority to pull the trigger than anyone does.
The risks they face is why they are paid more.
They can't then start shooting people because they no longer want to accept the risk they choose to take money for.
What police SHOULD do is not to shoot, but to take cover.
They should be acting defensively, just like everyone else.
They do not get the right to murder people so that they can just stand there in the open and pretend it was not their fault for getting into a risky situation.
Let's meet you bring your toy gun I'll bring my real one. But I don't know yours is a toy. You can rest assured you will get shot if you even start to point it at me. Police are not required to get shot first then react. Citizens do not have the "right" to disobey the law, ( which includes pointing deadly weapons at LE)no matter how ignorant you are about it. Ignorance is no defense! So I guess you are just ignorant and defenseless! Where we meeting?
You pull a screwdriver on a cop and he'll shoot your dumb ass.Mouth shut. Hands visible. Ears open. No problem, in general.She pointed a gun replica at a cop? What an idiot.
What the law says is that you can't shoot someone just for pointing a weapon.
If police can legally shoot a civilian for pointing a weapon, than any civilian could then legal shoot police when they point a weapon.
Police can NOT have superior authority to anyone else, because it is the inherent rights of all individual that is the ONLY source of ANY authority at all in a democratic republic.
The mistake is to believe that since government has authority and hire the police, that then police are a higher authority than average people.
That is not at all true in a democratic republic.
The reality is that since the public create government, then government is below the people.
And then since government hires the police, the police then are 2 steps lower than the population as a whole.
Since police also are average citizens, they do then also have the same right of defense as anyone, but no more.
They have no more right or authority to pull the trigger than anyone does.
The risks they face is why they are paid more.
They can't then start shooting people because they no longer want to accept the risk they choose to take money for.
What police SHOULD do is not to shoot, but to take cover.
They should be acting defensively, just like everyone else.
They do not get the right to murder people so that they can just stand there in the open and pretend it was not their fault for getting into a risky situation.
Let's meet you bring your toy gun I'll bring my real one. But I don't know yours is a toy. You can rest assured you will get shot if you even start to point it at me. Police are not required to get shot first then react. Citizens do not have the "right" to disobey the law, ( which includes pointing deadly weapons at LE)no matter how ignorant you are about it. Ignorance is no defense! So I guess you are just ignorant and defenseless! Where we meeting?
Perhaps you should watch the body cam video.
This was a straight up murder.
Fullerton Police Release Body-Camera Footage of Hannah Williams Shooting | OC Weekly
You pull a screwdriver on a cop and he'll shoot your dumb ass.Mouth shut. Hands visible. Ears open. No problem, in general.She pointed a gun replica at a cop? What an idiot.
How is it murder?What the law says is that you can't shoot someone just for pointing a weapon.
If police can legally shoot a civilian for pointing a weapon, than any civilian could then legal shoot police when they point a weapon.
Police can NOT have superior authority to anyone else, because it is the inherent rights of all individual that is the ONLY source of ANY authority at all in a democratic republic.
The mistake is to believe that since government has authority and hire the police, that then police are a higher authority than average people.
That is not at all true in a democratic republic.
The reality is that since the public create government, then government is below the people.
And then since government hires the police, the police then are 2 steps lower than the population as a whole.
Since police also are average citizens, they do then also have the same right of defense as anyone, but no more.
They have no more right or authority to pull the trigger than anyone does.
The risks they face is why they are paid more.
They can't then start shooting people because they no longer want to accept the risk they choose to take money for.
What police SHOULD do is not to shoot, but to take cover.
They should be acting defensively, just like everyone else.
They do not get the right to murder people so that they can just stand there in the open and pretend it was not their fault for getting into a risky situation.
Let's meet you bring your toy gun I'll bring my real one. But I don't know yours is a toy. You can rest assured you will get shot if you even start to point it at me. Police are not required to get shot first then react. Citizens do not have the "right" to disobey the law, ( which includes pointing deadly weapons at LE)no matter how ignorant you are about it. Ignorance is no defense! So I guess you are just ignorant and defenseless! Where we meeting?
Perhaps you should watch the body cam video.
This was a straight up murder.
Fullerton Police Release Body-Camera Footage of Hannah Williams Shooting | OC Weekly
