Norolis look, these situations, post mortem, all turn out the same. The police will not answer questions for several weeks while they "investigate." this is their way of getting their story straight, and this is what the New Hanover County Swat Team did after they murdered the teenager, Peyton Strickland. And I don't know what you read into my former, but he didn't point the tv remote at the deputy, as he was going to answer the door he saw the cops and was backing up when the cop shot him through the window in the head, and then in the shoulder. I only read the story about the crazy guy that was shot by six cops. According to the storys I read, he never pointed the gun at him and had actually been tased when they started shooting. Of course he can't defend himself now because he's dead. Talk about depriving someone of their constitutional rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, but most cops don't know the Bill of Rights from their rear ends. The worst of all is they seem to be really bad shots as well. Thats why they're cops and not Seals or Marines, who are against people that are actually shooting back. Like I wrote before, more like punks at a gang meeting.
The taser failed (unclear if it missed or what). There are various accounts as to if he did or did not point the gun at the cops. I was not there, and couldnt say. But a number of the folks saying he did not point it were also not there, yet their opinion is part of all the hoopla. There are a lot of stories over the past couple of weeks on this shooting. It says something that they tried the taser first though, right? They did not barge in guns blazing (as they seemed to in the other unfortunate event). This is just the best info I have from the 10 or so media coverings of this event, for whatever the media is worth in this day and age.
I am all for a neutral, third party investigation. At this point, its about all that makes sense. I am against the "trial in the press" of the officers and politically motivated groups throwing race cards and inflaming the community with unfounded nonsense about profiling, excessive force, and the like.
And thats all I am going to say, I don't want to monopolize the thread, I have already posted too much.
I cannot see how the two cases are vaguely related. One kid had a remote and was in his home, and the officers were clearly in the wrong (although, never, ever point anything at all at an officer, raise your hands or lower them, drop what you are holding, and assume a non-threating posture immediately). In the other case, the kid had a rife, was outside with it, and pointed it at an officer (although this is not confirmed, I take the word of the officers over the word of his parents who were not even there to witness it).
How can you relate the two in any way? How can you say that because one officer is bad, they all are? I totally agree that some of them need to be taken off the street, but many, many officers are doing their job and making the world a better place, and to insult all for the actions of a few is just as wrong as racism, its the same thing really (lumping everyone into a negative category without any real basis for it).
Its just the race industry creating the usual chaos because the criminal who was shot (criminal record is available to the public, and its rather long) while pointing a gun at the police happened to be black.
I keep seeing a reference to how many times this guy was shot. This does not matter, one shot or 1000, he is still just as equally dead. This is a distraction from the real issue -- some sort of undefinable claim that shooting a man once is ok, twice is ok, but there is no defined limit as to when it becomes "brutality". Is it 10 shots? 25? 100? I would be more concerned that he was missed nearly 1/5 times, sounds like they need to go hit the range and work on marksmanship.
I also keep hearing the word child thrown around. This child had a rife, and pointed it at the police. This child had a criminal record. This was no "child", no innocent little 4 year old. The criminal here was 15, old enough to know right from wrong, old enough to get his hands on a gun, and old enough to point that gun at the police. Old enough to commit murder, we have seen this time and again how teens can shoot up a school, or their parents, or whoever else.
As for the race card, its total BS. I can assure you, if I grab one of my rifles and go point it at the police, it will end just as badly for me, and I am white. You want to see racism, its in these community leaders. The same sort of folks who spent a month trying to make a case for racism in the arrest of that thug professor Gates, the assumption was that the cops were racist because the suspect was black. They combed the 911 call looking for racial slurs. They browbeat the cops and insulted them repeatedly. All to find that the police were doing their job and the suspect was doing something questionable (not breaking the law in gate's case, but still questionable).
I fully support the police in this matter, they acted in self defense and very likely removed a threat to the community before he was able to kill someone. An armed, historically unstable threat with a record of law breaking and access to firearms.
Anger, accusations fly at NAACP meeting
Norolis look, these situations, post mortem, all turn out the same. The police will not answer questions for several weeks while they "investigate." this is their way of getting their story straight, and this is what the New Hanover County Swat Team did after they murdered the teenager, Peyton Strickland. And I don't know what you read into my former, but he didn't point the tv remote at the deputy, as he was going to answer the door he saw the cops and was backing up when the cop shot him through the window in the head, and then in the shoulder. I only read the story about the crazy guy that was shot by six cops. According to the storys I read, he never pointed the gun at him and had actually been tased when they started shooting. Of course he can't defend himself now because he's dead. Talk about depriving someone of their constitutional rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, but most cops don't know the Bill of Rights from their rear ends. The worst of all is they seem to be really bad shots as well. Thats why they're cops and not Seals or Marines, who are against people that are actually shooting back. Like I wrote before, more like punks at a gang meeting.
The taser failed (unclear if it missed or what). There are various accounts as to if he did or did not point the gun at the cops. I was not there, and couldnt say. But a number of the folks saying he did not point it were also not there, yet their opinion is part of all the hoopla. There are a lot of stories over the past couple of weeks on this shooting. It says something that they tried the taser first though, right? They did not barge in guns blazing (as they seemed to in the other unfortunate event). This is just the best info I have from the 10 or so media coverings of this event, for whatever the media is worth in this day and age.
I am all for a neutral, third party investigation. At this point, its about all that makes sense. I am against the "trial in the press" of the officers and politically motivated groups throwing race cards and inflaming the community with unfounded nonsense about profiling, excessive force, and the like.
And thats all I am going to say, I don't want to monopolize the thread, I have already posted too much.
Anger, accusations fly at NAACP meeting
I cannot see how the two cases are vaguely related. One kid had a remote and was in his home, and the officers were clearly in the wrong (although, never, ever point anything at all at an officer, raise your hands or lower them, drop what you are holding, and assume a non-threating posture immediately). In the other case, the kid had a rife, was outside with it, and pointed it at an officer (although this is not confirmed, I take the word of the officers over the word of his parents who were not even there to witness it).
How can you relate the two in any way? How can you say that because one officer is bad, they all are? I totally agree that some of them need to be taken off the street, but many, many officers are doing their job and making the world a better place, and to insult all for the actions of a few is just as wrong as racism, its the same thing really (lumping everyone into a negative category without any real basis for it).
Anger, accusations fly at NAACP meeting
Its just the race industry creating the usual chaos because the criminal who was shot (criminal record is available to the public, and its rather long) while pointing a gun at the police happened to be black.
I keep seeing a reference to how many times this guy was shot. This does not matter, one shot or 1000, he is still just as equally dead. This is a distraction from the real issue -- some sort of undefinable claim that shooting a man once is ok, twice is ok, but there is no defined limit as to when it becomes "brutality". Is it 10 shots? 25? 100? I would be more concerned that he was missed nearly 1/5 times, sounds like they need to go hit the range and work on marksmanship.
I also keep hearing the word child thrown around. This child had a rife, and pointed it at the police. This child had a criminal record. This was no "child", no innocent little 4 year old. The criminal here was 15, old enough to know right from wrong, old enough to get his hands on a gun, and old enough to point that gun at the police. Old enough to commit murder, we have seen this time and again how teens can shoot up a school, or their parents, or whoever else.
As for the race card, its total BS. I can assure you, if I grab one of my rifles and go point it at the police, it will end just as badly for me, and I am white. You want to see racism, its in these community leaders. The same sort of folks who spent a month trying to make a case for racism in the arrest of that thug professor Gates, the assumption was that the cops were racist because the suspect was black. They combed the 911 call looking for racial slurs. They browbeat the cops and insulted them repeatedly. All to find that the police were doing their job and the suspect was doing something questionable (not breaking the law in gate's case, but still questionable).
I fully support the police in this matter, they acted in self defense and very likely removed a threat to the community before he was able to kill someone. An armed, historically unstable threat with a record of law breaking and access to firearms.