Phoenix police kill man at Metrocenter on bus

[AndyDwyer480]

Originally Posted by asufan

Oh without a doubt it is, and my definition is correct. To you, to comply means "I'll do whatever the hell I want, the meanie cop should know I'm not a threat". The fact is, the officer commanded the threat to show his hands. The minute he stopped following orders and decided to put his hands where the officer couldn't see them so he could pull up his pants - he stopped complying. Unless the police officer says "show me your hands unless your pants are falling down, then go ahead and reach for your waistband", you can't do that. He was a threat with a gun and was not compliant and a jury picked by both the defense and prosecution agreed with me

I can’t imagine that you are anything more than a troll. How can you watch a man crawl on the ground crying and begging for his life while he’s being yelled at by a psychopath with an AR 15 that has your ****ed in scribed in it and say that that man is not compliant?

What is compliant to you? No I don’t think that the “meanie cop is telling me what to do and I can do whatever I want” but if I’m doing exactly what he saying that he shouldn’t kill me now should he?

And on top of that, why do you want so many scared cowards running around with guns and badges? If there’s five of you there then you guys can’t jump on top of that guy and arrest him and set of murder him?

Come on.

How many times have you murdered somebody like that on video tape and got away with it? I’m assuming the answer is zero

[FrancaisDeutsch]

The country is denial about its gun violence problem. Nowadays everyone wants to solve problems with guns - the more guns, the merrier.

It's a sickness like the obesity epidemic, but much, much worse.

Allowing military-style weapons in the hands of civilians only increases the slaughter of both innocent civilians and police officers (makes their job to protect the public even harder). It doesn't matter if these weapons can be sold on the black market or not, that need to be banned outright. What's the purpose of an AR15? To kill in an instant!

A lot of people who defend gun rights don't understand that a lot of gun violence is done on impulse; it's not all planned and premeditated. The access to dangerous weapons in the heat of the moment often leads to death. Houses with guns are less safe than those without. It's common sense.

No one was ever about talking rights away from hunters. Hunt your behinds off - just be responsible and follow the law. But you don't need high-powered military firearms to do so. Satisfying men's egos with big boy guns is killing us.

Ralph Peters is a true conservative (I am not not) who makes 100% sense on the 2nd Amendment issue. But as any person with common decency and common sense, he said good-bye to Fox News.

[ji603]

Originally Posted by FrancaisDeutsch

The country is denial about its gun violence problem. Nowadays everyone wants to solve problems with guns - the more guns, the merrier.

It's a sickness like the obesity epidemic, but much, much worse.

Allowing military-style weapons in the hands of civilians only increases the slaughter of both innocent civilians and police officers (makes their job to protect the public even harder). It doesn't matter if these weapons can be sold on the black market or not, that need to be banned outright. What's the purpose of an AR15? To kill in an instant!

A lot of people who defend gun rights don't understand that a lot of gun violence is done on impulse; it's not all planned and premeditated. The access to dangerous weapons in the heat of the moment often leads to death. Houses with guns are less safe than those without. It's common sense.

No one was ever about talking rights away from hunters. Hunt your behinds off - just be responsible and follow the law. But you don't need high-powered military firearms to do so. Satisfying men's egos with big boy guns is killing us.

Ralph Peters is a true conservative (I am not not) who makes 100% sense on the 2nd Amendment issue. But as any person with common decency and common sense, he said good-bye to Fox News.

Ralph Peters is a light colonel weenie putz who should know better than to say that the 2nd amendment protects hunting rights. You’re right that an AR15 is designed to kill. What of it? My house is safer precisely because there’s a gun in it.

[kell490]

Everyone wants 100% criminals caught with 0% mistakes reality is never going to happen. It's so easy to sit here and watch videos and judge situations but none of you are out there dealing with dangerous situations making a split second decision. Sure there are bad officers out there who should not have a badge with cameras they are going to weed them out, but we have to also accept mistakes will be made.

I feel bad for the guy in the motel, and the guy at the bus stop but that's life not always fair.

[Bondurant]

Originally Posted by kell490

Everyone wants 100% criminals caught with 0% mistakes reality is never going to happen. It's so easy to sit here and watch videos and judge situations but none of you are out there dealing with dangerous situations making a split second decision. Sure there are bad officers out there who should not have a badge with cameras they are going to weed them out, but we have to also accept mistakes will be made.

I feel bad for the guy in the motel, and the guy at the bus stop but that's life not always fair.

The Mesa hotel situation was one of the most egregious police shootings. Mitch Brailsford had a misconduct history and was a known "bad apple" that was allowed to serve. He barked out contradictory orders that even a sober man couldn't follow. Brailsford was seeking any excuse for a notch on his belt. This is not a simple matter of life isn't fair. We shouldn't need cameras to weed them out. Departments and police unions know who the bad actors are and refuse to weed them out until it's politically convenient to do so. That is the problem.

[BIG CATS]

Originally Posted by FrancaisDeutsch

The country is denial about its gun violence problem. Nowadays everyone wants to solve problems with guns - the more guns, the merrier.

It's a sickness like the obesity epidemic, but much, much worse.

Allowing military-style weapons in the hands of civilians only increases the slaughter of both innocent civilians and police officers (makes their job to protect the public even harder). It doesn't matter if these weapons can be sold on the black market or not, that need to be banned outright. What's the purpose of an AR15? To kill in an instant!

A lot of people who defend gun rights don't understand that a lot of gun violence is done on impulse; it's not all planned and premeditated. The access to dangerous weapons in the heat of the moment often leads to death. Houses with guns are less safe than those without. It's common sense.

No one was ever about talking rights away from hunters. Hunt your behinds off - just be responsible and follow the law. But you don't need high-powered military firearms to do so. Satisfying men's egos with big boy guns is killing us.

Ralph Peters is a true conservative (I am not not) who makes 100% sense on the 2nd Amendment issue. But as any person with common decency and common sense, he said good-bye to Fox News.

Get your head checked. But first, answer my questions below.


1) Is owning a firearm not a Constitutional right?


2) How does an AR15's killing capabilities differ from, say, a .44 Magnum revolver?


3) How many NRA members have killed people vs non-NRA members?


4) Will banning guns have any affect on crime? If so, please do share/elaborate.


5) Houses with guns are LESS safe than those w/o? Where are your facts? I think the gun violence in Chicago, etc, shoots down your ridiculous theory. Pun intended.




I'm curious to see what your liberal mind has to say. And please, like CNN, don't make ****e up to stroke your ignorance. Thank you.

[kell490]

Originally Posted by Bondurant

The Mesa hotel situation was one of the most egregious police shootings. Mitch Brailsford had a misconduct history and was a known "bad apple" that was allowed to serve. He barked out contradictory orders that even a sober man couldn't follow. Brailsford was seeking any excuse for a notch on his belt. This is not a simple matter of life isn't fair. We shouldn't need cameras to weed them out. Departments and police unions know who the bad actors are and refuse to weed them out until it's politically convenient to do so. That is the problem.

As I said I feel bad for the dead man, and the officer is no longer an employed the city is paying 75 million. The DA prosecuted him but the jury acquitted. We have a legal system that isn't perfect he was a bad apple if we didn't have that body camera footage nothing might change. The body cameras are making a difference will it fix everything no. In the end a jury right or wrong makes a decision it's not perfect. The body cameras will force police departments to get rid of the bad apples or the bad apples will just quit because they no longer will want to work with a camera recording everything they do.

[Zippyman]

Originally Posted by kell490

As I said I feel bad for the dead man, and the officer is no longer an employed the city is paying 75 million. The DA prosecuted him but the jury acquitted. We have a legal system that isn't perfect he was a bad apple if we didn't have that body camera footage nothing might change. The body cameras are making a difference will it fix everything no. In the end a jury right or wrong makes a decision it's not perfect. The body cameras will force police departments to get rid of the bad apples or the bad apples will just quit because they no longer will want to work with a camera recording everything they do.

I'd agree, the cameras are helping, but we need laws requiring that footage be released promptly after an incident & penalties for turning off cameras.. (Or a legal presumption of guilt against officers that turn them off). With power comes responsibility.

[kell490]

Originally Posted by Zippyman

I'd agree, the cameras are helping, but we need laws requiring that footage be released promptly after an incident & penalties for turning off cameras.. (Or a legal presumption of guilt against officers that turn them off). With power comes responsibility.

The hope is the bad apples will just retire out or quit their job they won't want to be under video surveillance all the time they know eventually they will get caught. These cameras are going to help with training as well these situations can be used for training future officers. To be honest there is no way anyone could pay me enough to ever become a law enforcement officer in this country. Your chances are high of getting shot and killed along with making a mistake ending up facing prison for shooting the wrong person. Every officer I talk to who is recently retired is so glad they are done none had a good thing to say about it.