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.
Lots of cops use them responsibly too. But we still have a lot of irresponsible murders by cops. And we have lots of irresponsible murders by licensed gun owners. The issue is not whether there are people who use them responsibly. The issue is whether we can trust everyone who has them to use them responsibly. And the answer is obviously no. And we can't use that as a basis for deciding who can have them, because we can't predict who is going to use them responsibly. So the only sane thing to do is get rid of 100% of them, including those used by cops. But only if we can find a way to get rid of all of them, including the ones hidden by criminals. Gun nuts say it's impossible, and that therefore gun control advocates want only criminals to have guns. But that's because gun nuts tend to be low-IQ redneck types. They don't have the brains to think of ways we could get rid of 100% of all guns. So they jump to the conclusion that everyone who isn't a gun nut wants criminals to be the only ones armed. And the argument goes in circles forever.
You responded to Year2525's comment: "I know, just get rid of irresponsible people!"
You're correct, eok. I believe that many of Year2525's posts are irresponsible. Therefore, by his logic, he should be gotten rid of. And yet, we know that's not reasonable.
Why do we have so many apologists for criminals? This guy had a lengthy criminal record, including assaulting a police officer. He had just got done beating up his wife and child, he we holding a knife (lethal weapon), he wasn't following police commands to drop the knife and get on the ground, etc, etc. etc.
I commend these officers for doing their job and doing it well. I don't feel sorry for Mr. Flores. Not one bit.
Just like I don't feel sorry for Mikey Brown, Freddie Grey or Travon Martin. (and no, it's not because they're minorities. I don't feel sorry for stupid white criminals either).
No, your perception is faulty.
No one has said that this guy (or virtually any of the other subjects whom are posted about in this forum should go free. Almost poster on this side of the issue advocates arresting them, trying them in a court of law, and taking whatever action a jury of their peers and the judge deem necessary. Putting someone in prison is not apologizing for them, It's advocating the legal American justice system, as opposed to extra-judicial police action.
You are comparing taking a pocket knife away from a child to disarming an adult on the street?
See how you twist things.
1. I didn't describe the knives I confiscated.
2. You can't describe the knife the perp in this case had.
3. The loaded gun I confiscated was not a pocket knife.
Maybe you've smacked yourself in the head too many times.
Its one thing to acknowledge that coverups happen, and to try to root them out, but to say they happen "more often than not"? Well, I've learned that when someone tells you "this is what I believe" followed by a statement with no factual basis, its very similar to his saying "this is what I feel." There is no rational argument with someone who hangs his hat on imaginary hatracks.
Which is exactly what you did when you said, "You are comparing taking a pocket knife away from a child to disarming an adult on the street?"
I am waiting for the other, clearer and more close-up video to be released. This one was made from more than 100 yards away and you can not possibly tell what he has in either hand. One thing I noticed is that both cops fire simultaneously, as though in response to a sudden threat, and the one on the right retreats as he fires while the one on the left does not. You would have to examine the footage frame by frame to see if there is a sudden movement by the subject before the two shots are fired. If he was still holding a knife after all that had gone before and made any sudden movement toward either officer then deadly force was justified.
I am waiting for the other, clearer and more close-up video to be released. This one was made from more than 100 yards away and you can not possibly tell what he has in either hand. One thing I noticed is that both cops fire simultaneously, as though in response to a sudden threat, and the one on the right retreats as he fires while the one on the left does not. You would have to examine the footage frame by frame to see if there is a sudden movement by the subject before the two shots are fired. If he was still holding a knife after all that had gone before and made any sudden movement toward either officer then deadly force was justified.
And I was taught that at 10-15 feet a cop can shoot a gun even faster.
Who taught you that?
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.
