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.
There is a saying which is appropropriate. You can outrun the officer but not the Motorola. [Or hide from a K-9.] Training is to keep the fellow in sight for the first 100yards, afterwards adrenalin exhausted and the fugitive is easier to contain. That is assuming a young fellow who can sprint. Fellow in the video kind of yomped away. He was already tired.
This seemes the most appropriate place for this, being controversial, but please move if not.
I am hoping someone, maybe a real lawyer or cop can offer insight on the recent shooting in So Carolina.
In many states there appear to be laws on the books that allow shooting a fleeing felon. (In the back?) In the recent shooting it would appear the "victim" had taken off, running from the cop at the car stop. This is a felony in most places. Resisting arrest, fleeing, etc.
So under that premis the cop was legal to shoot the guy in the back?
However, self defense rules say you can't use deadly force against someone who does not pose a deadly threat.
So which is it? The laws seem to be in conflict.
Well, first of all, the shooting I believe you are referring to was not shooting a felon. It was shooting a suspect. Unless he had already been convicted of a crime, he was not a felon.
Regardless of what the law says, though I'm almost certain what I'm about to say it the law, you can't just soot someone who is running. The only time that acceptable is if they are indeed dangerous. If they are armed and have shown or are suspected of violence, then shooting is reasonable, or at least legal. If unarmed and non dangerous... that cop has committed a murder.
So, a drug offender. Lets say someone gets pulled over, they find cocaine in their car, the guy runs, and the cops shoots. Not ok.
Doesn't matter how you put it Petch, it sounds like you are trying to defend executing a man for a misdemeanor. Thats not the America most people want to live in.
Hey did you know when I was young, I owed child support at one point? Because I could not afford to pay it. Now *I* am owed about 12K in child support because....my ex cannot afford to pay it. Neither I, nor she, deserve to be killed over it.
But you turn it into some horror, and blame the victim over it. classy.
Then you are not getting what I am saying. I was listening to TV and they may as well had a picture of an innocent child. The cop will go to jail. All I am saying is the domino effect of one's actions (breaking the law) led to another breaking the law and the outcome, neither go home. Imagine if he wouldn't have run. Why can't people just obey the law?
Here's the part you don't like. I see "both" broke the law and the domino was set into motion. Now two people may as well be dead.
Scott was not under arrest nor was the cop trying to arrest him. He was not a felon. There was not even a warrant for him, it turns out. He was murdered and the cop must pay with his own life now.
he was murdered.
but lets not try to whitewash this. He ran from the police officer, fought the cop off that included a Taser.
Mr. Scott did not deserve to die. the cop had no valid reason to pull the trigger.
But don't pass this off that the cop walked up and blew the guy away. Mr. Scott put himself in danger by having an altercation with the police officer.
That cop is a bad guy and needs to go to jail for a very long time.
But if we don't talk right about this, its going to create an attitude that will lead to more black men getting gunned down by the police. We feed the monster by not talking about this the right way. period.
Scott was not under arrest nor was the cop trying to arrest him. He was not a felon. There was not even a warrant for him, it turns out. He was murdered and the cop must pay with his own life now.
Actually there was a Bench warrant out for him that's been on the books since 2013 for over 18,000.00 back Support payments in child support. Be that as it may..That warrant is not a felony warrant..so what Loose cannon cop did was unwarranted and clearly against the policy ..The cop has the car..his license ..Scott could have been arrested later..fleeing on foot is NOT a felony charge either..SO He was killed by an angry cop..who claims fear for his life as he was hoping no one could prove differently..otherwise why would same cop jog back to taser and PLANT it by body????
As for why would he flee..I think there's plenty of reasons to do so..given so many examples of what has happens to them after getting handcuffed by cops..I do believe he knew what could happen ...No one wants to be stomped on once they get cuffed..never mind getting dead in backseat..cuffed then blamed on got a gun and self inflicted gunshot..Man..I' not saying ALL cops are like that..BUT sometimes the individual can sense when things will GO BADLY
Then you are not getting what I am saying. I was listening to TV and they may as well had a picture of an innocent child. The cop will go to jail. All I am saying is the domino effect of one's actions (breaking the law) let to another breaking the law and the outcome, neither go home. Imagine if he wouldn't have run (breaking the law). Why can't people just obey the law?
Here's the part you don't like. I see "both" broke the law and the domino was set into motion. Now two people may as well be dead.
One commited a misdemeanor, the other a homicide (Felony). Conveniently you swapped those two originally.
I DO get what you are saying, but you really are blaming a victim here. And its not right to do so.
Should I now blame the next person for shooting a cop, because obviously you are better off shooting first? I mean look at this! Why let the cops get the first shots in.....
but lets not try to whitewash this. He ran from the police officer, fought the cop off that included a Taser.
Mr. Scott did not deserve to die. the cop had no valid reason to pull the trigger.
But don't pass this off that the cop walked up and blew the guy away. Mr. Scott put himself in danger by having an altercation with the police officer.
That cop is a bad guy and needs to go to jail for a very long time.
But if we don't talk right about this, its going to create an attitude that will lead to more black men getting gunned down by the police. We feed the monster by not talking about this the right way. period.
Agree. The guy was a fool and now he is a dead fool. But you are being too casual about the cop. He stood there and shot at the guy like he was at a range - all calm and positioned. Eight times! He failed to give aid, though the man was likely dead anyway. Then he planted evidence and lied on his report. The death penalty is the message we need to send.
04-10-2015, 03:33 PM
i7pXFLbhE3gq
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDusty
Regardless of what the law says, though I'm almost certain what I'm about to say it the law, you can't just soot someone who is running. The only time that acceptable is if they are indeed dangerous. If they are armed and have shown or are suspected of violence, then shooting is reasonable, or at least legal. If unarmed and non dangerous... that cop has committed a murder.
Yep, and the cop knew it. Thus why he tried to stage the scene and plant evidence on the guy he'd just murdered.
But don't pass this off that the cop walked up and blew the guy away. Mr. Scott put himself in danger by having an altercation with the police officer.
That cop is a bad guy and needs to go to jail for a very long time.
But if we don't talk right about this, its going to create an attitude that will lead to more black men getting gunned down by the police. We feed the monster by not talking about this the right way. period.
^^^ that's what I am trying to say too! They are doing the same thing they did in the Furguson case, trying to make Scott to be totally innocent instead of using it as a moment to reach people to say, listen and certainly don't run or resist arrest. The outcome weather it's a increased sentence or the outcome of this case, the outcome is never good.
Actually there was a Bench warrant out for him that's been on the books since 2013 for over 18,000.00 back Support payments in child support. Be that as it may..That warrant is not a felony warrant..so what Loose cannon cop did was unwarranted and clearly against the policy ..The cop has the car..his license ..Scott could have been arrested later..fleeing on foot is NOT a felony charge either..SO He was killed by an angry cop..who claims fear for his life as he was hoping no one could prove differently..otherwise why would same cop jog back to taser and PLANT it by body????
As for why would he flee..I think there's plenty of reasons to do so..given so many examples of what has happens to them after getting handcuffed by cops..I do believe he knew what could happen ...No one wants to be stomped on once they get cuffed..never mind getting dead in backseat..cuffed then blamed on got a gun and self inflicted gunshot..Man..I' not saying ALL cops are like that..BUT sometimes the individual can sense when things will GO BADLY
The associate press reported this morning that there was no warrant as has been commonly assumed.
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.
