Cop Shows How To Shoot To Stop, Not To Execute. (legal, FBI)
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.
So he is preserving the criminals life so that he can be convicted and we, as taxpayers, can support him in prison with free food, shelter, and medical care? And this is a good thing?
Yeah, cuz its one of those crappy constitution things.
So he is preserving the criminals life so that he can be convicted and we, as taxpayers, can support him in prison with free food, shelter, and medical care? And this is a good thing?
.... or the taxpayers are liable for a lawsuit for "excessive force" that gets settled to avoid riots.
I see it as being similar to when a person gets attacked by a shark and you hear people calling for sharks to be killed and beaches netted when it the events are statistically tiny and not much would really change.
Police officers equal sharks? Police officers are just killing based upon instinct? They don't have the ability to think and reason?
Quote:
I'm not too worried about it due to it being extremely rare and that you're not going to change much in regards to these "rogue" cops that turn up from time to time. As long as humans are used for policing, you're going to have these events regardless.
The Jeffrey Dahmers are rare. Dealing with one will not stop the next but we still deal with it.
I personally would not have fired once and stopped to observed the effect, but having determined that firing was necessary in the first place, I'd have fired twice (missing the first round is more common in gunfights than hitting with the first round).
And there are often as many as 15 rounds between firing twice and "emptying the gun."
So he is preserving the criminals life so that he can be convicted and we, as taxpayers, can support him in prison with free food, shelter, and medical care? And this is a good thing?
We do not hire the police officer to be judge, jury and executioner. That is not how our system works. I'm generalizing here but the arguments that courts should only rule on the merits of the Constitution and beliefs such as yours seem to overlap many times.
The system should work for some but not others it would seem.
Could you point to some post in this thread where someone defended this?
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.