Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not a police chief, and hardly a "ripping." This is an Executive Director of the Fraternal Order of Police, the same national organization that is providing legal counsel to the as-yet-unnamed shooter.
The representative engages in an ad hominem attack, builds a strawman position for the President, uses false equivalency and vagueness, admits that he lacks information about what is happening, and refuses to comment about whether the officer should be identified, stating instead, "I would leave any statements on that to his defense."
I hardly think it is controversial to suggest that people have a right to peaceably assemble, express themselves, petition the government, and that the press has a right to engage in reporting. Apparently the Fraternal Order of Police has a different view.
Civilian homicide suspects are typically arrested when they are located, if there is probable cause to believe they committed a crime. The eyewitness testimony establishes probable cause to believe that this officer committed a crime. His identity is known to police, and it appears that his whereabouts are known, as well. Why is he not arrested?
The police will arrest and detain two reporters who are taking too long to pack up their stuff at McDonalds, and then won't even detain the police officer who shot a young unarmed man to death. It is truly unbelievable.
The same people who would shoot a trespasser in the head, with the bullet as judge and jury, want a 'fair process' and 'withhold judgement' on a cop where all eye witnesses give the same version of events.
Ok, you make a great point. If the justice system needs to work; we should let it. The several eyewitnesses have given their story so why haven't the police. If the officer was justified in this shooting....then where is the explanation. It seems that most times something like this happens, the police are right there with their side of the story. The silence is disturbing at best
the police cannot come out and condemn the officer, particularly if he is going to be on trial.
The police sometimes will be "right there with their side of the story" when a case is pretty cut and dried. This thing went off the rails from the get go so there wouldn't and shouldn't have been a "side" given by the police.
Sad but true we will always be seen as animals/savages until we change our way of thinking, change our attitude change our behavior.
BS. People with common sense will not judge a whole race of people on account of a few. And I don't know who you're fooling using this "we" bull just so you can refer to others as animals and savages.
Why? Because the police ordered it. You obey a LEO's instructions. They were clearing the restaurant and the area.
with the circumstances in particular, you obey the LEO's instructions. If they want you to move, you move.
The officer was patient. He asked nicely, repeatedly. At some point they will cuff and stuff you.
Now, if they would have CHARGED the reporters with a crime, then yes. I'm with you. They simply detained them and later released. The same that they would do to anyone that didn't comply with their instructions.
This wasn't a normal, business as usual day. The reporters were out of line and the police acted correctly in handling them. Like I said, if they would have actually charged them, then I would have disagreed with that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xander_Crews
You do not obey a LEO's instructions if they are violating your rights, or rights are absolutely useless.
Exactly what rights were violated? I'll answer that for you. NONE.
And, AGAIN, this had become a riot zone. this is not the time for being polite. Again, they were patient for some time but the reporters obviously continued to resist. They made it about THEMSELVES instead of the situation. It's shameful.
Just like so many on here and in the media, they are stoking the flames. Pushing the LEO's and trying to get them to react. Welp, these 2 clowns got what they were asking for.
I have zero sympathy for them in that case.
Do I agree with the LEO's trying to stop recording video? Nope. But if you are asked to move, you move.
If this event had taken place at night, in more isolation, without such clear eye-witnesses---there would have been nothing but a grieving family. There would have been a cursory investigation, and a complete police cover-up and sanctioning of the teen's shooting.
Stop. You are just fanning the flames. It's pathetic
The same people who would shoot a trespasser in the head, with the bullet as judge and jury, want a 'fair process' and 'withhold judgement' on a cop where all eye witnesses give the same version of events.
I swear there are some posters on here who wouldn't even accept the veracity of a full video of the shooting --they'd find a way to claim the video was doctored, or was a conspiracy video shot in a studio etc...
BS. People with common sense will not judge a whole race of people on account of a few. And I don't know who you're fooling using this "we" bull just so you can refer to others as animals and savages.
Yet "they" are judging all cops the same. In "their" world, all cops are crooked, hate minorities, can't be trusted to find out the truth, and want to kill young black men.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
