trag3dy Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 No, it isn't. Reaching for a cops gun should result in a serious attempt to stop you, obviously, but that attempt doesn't have to only be shooting you. It is a serious shame that so many in our nation subscribe to the notion that our rights are secondary to that of state actors. So much so, that these persons don't agree with the Constitution's mandate for due process. The job of policing will result in cops killing people, but, as I said earlier, they should be made as rare as possible with proper training and equipment. Every loss of life at the hands of police should be vigorously scrutinized to ensure the officer(s) involved did the best they could do to apprehend the innocent party and abide by our Constitution. If the death could have been prevented the officer(s) should be given the additional training and/or equipment needed to help them in this regard. This is the minimum standard our Constitution requires; although I understand that no one really cares about that document anymore until "gun rights"... You're making an awful lot of assumptions. It's really amazing how you can gather all of that from someone saying "don't resist arrest and don't get shot", though. Play stupid games win stupid prizes.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisj1968 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 We're getting waay off topic here, there are religions older than Christianity, not to mention attrocities god fearing Christians have committed historically, ok they don't even compare to isis, I'll give you that. The debate on this thread is something that has stirred controversy, some think (I am one of them) the actions were unprofessional, and in my case, question training methods, some would argue, don't question, or protest police actions, akin to communism, 'we're in charge, do as you're told' Staying within the guidelines layed out by law, a citizen of any society would have nothing to worry about. But I was concerned as if we used a different scenario, a car chase, police will at some point be given permission to contain the chase using their vehicles, in the UK, any police vehicle damaged by such a chase, the officer driving the vehicle, the has to submit to a breath test, even if the officer didn't cause the damage. And protocol is followed, that's not to say they're perfect, they're people, just like we are. But this is how they're trained. Even the officers who shot Lee Rigby's murderer faced questioning about the fact that their weapon was discharged. I don't know about the intricate details of US police training, but was curious about it, or if there's even a protocol and inquest regarding the level of professionalism they've displayed. (I have to go, dinner's ready) I wasn't intentionally trying to get off topic. I appreciate you seeing that. That's why I inserted the comment of not getting into a faith based debate but to just put a point in there. I never meant to offend you in anyway. Just from my bible studies, that came to mind in relation to the video is all. But thanks for being kind in your reply. The Evil Overlord 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11448767/LA-homeless-man-shot-dead-by-police-had-stolen-Frenchmans-identity-to-follow-Hollywood-dream.html A homeless man shot dead by police in Los Angeles was a convicted bank robber Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted March 4, 2015 Subscriber² Share Posted March 4, 2015 For anyone who replied to my comment about fists, take it as hands instead. I'm not talking about beating the crap out of someone, but manhandling with force that is proportional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krome Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 I would love to not be on the police side, but this guy is clearly attacking the officer in the beginning. He was throwing a punch. He sealed his fate when he throw that punch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T3X4S Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Just thinning out the herd. Justifiable homicide. Buh Bye..... NEXT !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisj1968 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I would love to not be on the police side, but this guy is clearly attacking the officer in the beginning. He was throwing a punch. He sealed his fate when he throw that punch. ok, you admitted throwing punches which clearly isn't in line with deadly use of force. what about other non lethal methods? Just thinning out the herd. Justifiable homicide. Buh Bye..... NEXT !! good point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dashel Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 "This waste of life made his choices, and chose poorly" Given his history of mental illness that's a hard line of reasoning to follow. I've seen unarmed, small women in social services handle much more explosive situations with individuals much larger than themselves. Its an issue of approach, and as you cheerleaders tend to reinforce, 'retreat and de-escalation' are not in most cops vocabulary. soniqstylz 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soniqstylz Posted March 16, 2015 Author Share Posted March 16, 2015 Just putting this here, someone who knows more about holsters can explain more or just call ###### on this video http://thefreethoughtproject.com/video-dispels-reached-gun-myth-lapd-cops-killing-homeless-man/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisj1968 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Just putting this here, someone who knows more about holsters can explain more or just call ###### on this video http://thefreethoughtproject.com/video-dispels-reached-gun-myth-lapd-cops-killing-homeless-man/ that is compelling evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan R. Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 I don't understand what that video is suppose to prove. They're merely feeding you a perspective. You don't know if the person handling the gun in the video is avoiding movements that would unholster the gun. The "test case" isn't even done with the weapon holstered to the side of the body, secured on a belt, as it would be in the field. Further, are we now assuming that someone going for an officer's weapon doesn't know how to unholster it? Or couldn't possibly? This video is nothing but an example of how ignorance is accepted and spreads. Nogib 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts