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.
It would also be interesting to know how many of these people were in the middle of physically hurting a cop or civilian when they were subsequently killed by police. How many were not listening to police orders to drop their weapon, stop firing/stabbing/whatever, and back away with their hands up. How many were on drugs that alter their behavior and make them uncontrollably violent and/or strong, like PCP.
By the way, ever notice how the loudest complainers of 'big government' are the same crowd that fall all over themselves to run interference for the government when the government is killing its own people? They're all opposed to 'big government' when someone advocates raising taxes to pay for education or health care, but when government in the form of uniformed individuals shooting unarmed people in the back makes an appearance, they're the biggest authoritarian-lackeys around.
Anyway, the question arises - is this just human nature, or are we doing it wrong here in the United States? Food for thought:
Location: When you take flak it means you are on target
7,646 posts, read 9,971,600 times
Reputation: 16466
I think the premise is that many police killings are a shoot first, unjustified situation.
How do you justify the apparent disparity of unarmed black killings?
It would be interesting to see how many were direct intervention to protect people - probably like none. The poluce usually aren't there to save a victim. These shootings are after the fact or are a result of police stopping criminals (which does indirectly save people).
Location: Free State of Florida, Support our police
5,865 posts, read 3,310,322 times
Reputation: 9150
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamies
I think the premise is that many police killings are a shoot first, unjustified situation.
How do you justify the apparent disparity of unarmed black killings?
It would be interesting to see how many were direct intervention to protect people - probably like none. The poluce usually aren't there to save a victim. These shootings are after the fact or are a result of police stopping criminals (which does indirectly save people).
PS add two more unarmed victims in Chicago today.
99% deserved everything they got!!!! How do you justify the disparity of black men committing over 50% of the murders in the United States. So actually the police kill less blacks in percentages than black that commit murders in the United States. Great restraint by the cops!!!!!!!!!
I think the premise is that many police killings are a shoot first, unjustified situation.
How do you justify the apparent disparity of unarmed black killings?
It would be interesting to see how many were direct intervention to protect people - probably like none. The poluce usually aren't there to save a victim. These shootings are after the fact or are a result of police stopping criminals (which does indirectly save people).
PS add two more unarmed victims in Chicago today.
You can't change the facts.
I mean if a lot of police/suspect involvement is with blacks, it'll count as blacks.
There are some systematic problem in PD across the states but unarmed doesn't mean they are not guilty.
If I approach an officer in threatening manner, officer needs to protect himself and may shoot.
I agree they should not shoot to kill but shoot to disable but that's another can of worms.
Doesn't surprise me can't deal with every situation perfectly your going to get a few bad apples in the police departments. Who do I see every night on the news pointing a gun at a store clerk for $40 in his cash register a black man. Do I say all black men are criminals? It's the same thing your and other news is saying the same thing about police department.
Apparently you missed the premise - the black men were UNARMED. How did they kill when they were unarmed?
I'm not sticking up for criminals, but there does apparently need to be a devils advocate on this.
Tell you what:
YOU stand there in uniform and let an unarmed man charge you, knowing that you have a gun and he doesn't. What do you think he's going to do when he gets his hands on your gun?
Michael Brown asked for it and he got it. Should have just done as he was told.
(That's actually pretty funny, "How did they kill when they were unarmed?"........Like you can't hurt anyone if you "ain't armed")
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.
