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.
I agree. I just get very alarmed by the sentiment that the dead guy deserved it. It may turn out that he did (not really, nobody deserves to die like that, even a bad person), but if that happens to be the case, that he was guilty of a crime worthy of the death sentence, it will only be after the fact. At the time he was shot, it was not justifiable. That much is a fact.
Wait a minute. I'm having trouble following the thread, as there was discussion about the semantics of presumed innocence in the courtroom versus real life, but... Are you saying there's no way the officer could have been justified in shooting the man without a trial? Are you saying the officer should have allowed himself to be killed to allow the suspect to be taken to trial?
If I'm misunderstanding what you meant, please clarify.
Wait a minute. I'm having trouble following the thread, as there was discussion about the semantics of presumed innocence in the courtroom versus real life, but... Are you saying there's no way the officer could have been justified in shooting the man without a trial? Are you saying the officer should have allowed himself to be killed to allow the suspect to be taken to trial?
If I'm misunderstanding what you meant, please clarify.
No, and thank you for asking (because i can see from MY words how one might come to that conclusion).
What I am saying is that the justification that "he was gangster", "he was a thug", "we saved society the cost of housing another inmate" and other such things can IN NO WAY be justified. If the guy was shot because he pointed a gun at an officer, or somehow otherwise posted a legitimate threat, then THAT is justification, but the guy's history, skin color, prior record, or anything else of that nature offers no further justifications.
(There is a lot of confusion, because we are responding to responses of responses to responses of quotes. Go back to the first page or two. I can't recall who all said stuff, but I think I remember SVTLightning being one who suggested such things.) I'll go back and check, and edit if I'm wrong about SVT.
OK, thank you for the clarification. I agree with those points, as well. His past may help paint a picture of his character for discussion purposes, but you're right: only the actions that took place that day (and at that moment) determine whether the officer was justified in shooting.
These are just some of the quotes that seem to IMPLY that it is justified to kill the guy based on his past, his affiliation, or something else. Some imply it more than others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordHelmit
The guy has 6 arrests and is armed, being chased for a warrant by a cop, what does he expect? Sorry, but no sympathy. One less criminal off the streets.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVTLightning
I find it hard to have sympathy for anyone of any color that live their lives on the wrong side of the law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVTLightning
Exactly!!!!!! Now there is no burden on the taxpayer to pay for his food shelter and clothing while in prison.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVTLightning
Still no sympathy.
Why did he run? Just stop and face the consequences. Simple solution.
I don't understand why people care so much about other people they don't know, when those people decide they don't want to follow the rules of society. If he had simply stopped he would not have been chased and shot. Not too difficult to grasp that concept.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVTLightning
Well we all know what it means when you assume.
The constitution doesn't apply to everyone equally. Convicted felons lose some of their rights don't they ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by John EdwardsII
IF IF IF. Maybe he should have chosen a different path away from the gangs and he would not have been in the situation of running from the cops. Anything positive from gang membership we're missing?
"The guy has 6 arrests and is armed, being chased for a warrant by a cop, what does he expect? Sorry, but no sympathy. One less criminal off the streets."
That looks like a lot of facts to me. He was a dangerous person who did not heed the law. I am so tired of people looking for reasons to find fault with police officers risking their lives to protect ungrateful people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HouseBuilder328
Yes, just saw the updated news. A gun was found next to him, and he was a verified gang member.
I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand by many people in the country. If you don't want to get shot by the police, then follow the rules and try to better your life somehow. There is plenty of help in this town. Maybe not in other places in the country, but plenty of help in Raleigh
On the other hand, I'd like to thank St. Android as one person (of many) who has had a level head in this discussion, and is trying to deal with facts, and who seems to have respect for the laws of our land, which are based on the BoR, Constitution, and two-plus centuries of SCOTUS rulings...
MyGhost you speak of people respecting the laws of our land. If the dead guy had done that we wouldn't be talking about him now would we ? Kind of makes my point.
This goes to show there was a lot of lying by "witnesses", and the media should be ashamed of repeating the account of these anonymous "witnesses" so many times.
According to the report, Twiddy, who is white, first observed Denkins, who is black, on Bragg Street, near Mangum Street. Twiddy, who was in uniform, parked his patrol car and approached Denkins, who turned and begun to walk away.
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.