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.
Oh good grief. She was a drunk woman who could have been easily disarmed by the two cops. If this had been an unarmed civilian, they would have just whacked her and taken the scissors away. Cops (and other shooters) need to be held to a reasonableness standard when declaring that they shot because they feared for their lives.
There is a reasonable standard: whether the officer reasonably believed his life was being threatened. There will be an investigation, and he will be judged on that objective basis. He will not be judged on whether you or I or anyone else think he could have done better. That is not a reasonableness standard.
This is where you lose me. You are STILL making excuses for MB but making the police officer out to be the guy that made a bad judgment call. MB is solely responsible for making a bad decision. I will not make excuses for thug behavior.
The judgement call on the taking of a life is largely determined by the value and worth of the life that was taken as seen by the one doing the judging. I fully EXPECT that regardless of whether MB punched the cop....you see his life as having little value and worth....hence, the taking of his life will never be a bad judgement call. You probably see it as a tax savings.
Unfortunately, shooting to wound does not necessarily stop a potential threat. Shooting to stop a threat does exactly that.
In some shooting incidents there is no apparent threat. That needs to be remedied quickly.
When I was in my criminal law class in college. My professor was a police chief also. I asked him why not shoot them in the leg. He said the same thing. You are trained to shoot in the chest to neutralize the target as fast as possible.
That is correct. In order for a PO to pull their weapon at all, he must be able to demonstrate that deadly physical force is warranted, i.e., that he is reasonable fear for his life. Shooting to wound is never justified, not only is it much harder to do, it is much less likely to stop an attack. Even shooting to kill sometimes fails to stop an attack.
Frankly, suggesting that cops should "shoot to wound, " or the related suggestion "shoot the weapon out of his hand" tells me that the person suggesting it has no knowledge of firearms, does not know how to shoot, and has never had to face down deadly physical force on the street. This is not a criticism of the person, its a recognition that they just don't have the facts to judge the situation.
Going from shooting to wound....then throwing in the package deal "Shooting the gun out of the persons hand"....sounds like pork barrel politics. Who the hell is suggesting that they shoot the gun or scissors out of someones hand....lol? That is ridiculous. I posted a video with 6 cops, who were standing at least 50 ft away, shoot a person at least 30 times and all he has was a little pocket knife. All of the seemed to open up at the same time. That was totally uncalled for.
You can shoot to wound.....use a taser, wait for backup.....OR JUST DON"T BECOME A DAMN COP!!!!
You know....a lot of the violence in the black community is based off of fear too. How often do people think, when they hear a shooting in the black community, that the person who did it was in fear for their life? If someone out to kill you and so you kill them to preempt them killing you....why is that considered savagery. If the police cannot stop a person from killing me, who says he is going to kill me, then why does not my fear justify me killing that person first in a drive by?
If Mike Brown did everything that he did that day....to me......and I shot and killed him in a drive by.....you would consider me just as much of a thug as him.....IF NOT MORE.
The judgement call on the taking of a life is largely determined by the value and worth of the life that was taken as seen by the one doing the judging. I fully EXPECT that regardless of whether MB punched the cop....you see his life as having little value and worth....hence, the taking of his life will never be a bad judgement call. You probably see it as a tax savings.
I see MB as contributing absolutely NOTHING to society. If he was doing something productive to better his life I would feel differently. Why don't you ask the store clerk he assaulted if he was a contributor to society or just a thug. Do I see it as a tax payer savings? HELL YES!!! If you want to pick somebody to feel sorry for pick somebody who is more of a role model, not a thug.
I see MB as contributing absolutely NOTHING to society. If he was doing something productive to better his life I would feel differently. Why don't you ask the store clerk he assaulted if he was a contributor to society or just a thug. Do I see it as a tax payer savings? HELL YES!!! If you want to pick somebody to feel sorry for pick somebody who is more of a role model, not a thug.
Judge Mathis
Judge Greg Mathis was a member of the notorious Detroit street gang, the Errol Flynns. At age 17, he was incarcerated after being arrested several times. After his release, Mathis went to college where he became a campus activist; and he was later elected a superior court judge for Michigan’s 36th District.
Today, Mathis hosts his own television show.
Actor Christian Slater suffered some setbacks when he served 59 days in jail after assault on his girlfriendand a police officer. He had been arrested prior to that for drunk driving, boarding a plane with a gun and another episode of assault. After jail and rehab, he was able to successfully turn his career around and enjoy a comeback.
The judgement call on the taking of a life is largely determined by the value and worth of the life that was taken as seen by the one doing the judging. I fully EXPECT that regardless of whether MB punched the cop....you see his life as having little value and worth....hence, the taking of his life will never be a bad judgement call. You probably see it as a tax savings.
You forfeit your rights when you violate the non-aggression principle.
How is that so hard to understand?
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.
