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.
Let's see, cops aren't supposed to use their weapons, and they're not supposed to show up at riots where firecrackers, rocks, and bottles are being hurled at them. Now, they're not supposed to use drones? What will offend the bad guys next?
"Mean?" Give me a break. That was the best use of a drone I've seen yet.
I agree, like I posted a couple of times I'm just sad that they had to destroy a drone. LOL, it would have been awesome if they could have like they do in the movie, get near him and toss a hand grenade to take out that fool.
I dont know if you are a Conservative Republican or not. Don't know how that bears on putting down a dangerous animal.
I'm as right-wing as it gets and my understanding of the Constitution is quite good.
What we had in Dallas was a return to law and order. Shoot to kill is sometimes needed.
I wish I could have seen the cop's high-fives when the robot camera went dark.
Il point out that the reason we have this passage in the 14th amendment was to protect the WHITE southerners after the civil war who were being blown up, executed, having all the property taken and
being imprisoned because the police at the time (army) thought it was a good idea and used the KKK act as the law governing their actions. After the army killed thousands of people just because they used to own slaves or just looked at them badly this passage was entered into the 14th amendment to ensure people their rights to due process before the gov decided to kill them.
Now if you are interested in going back to that state of affairs, then just go ahead and accept that what the police are doing is fine. They will soon be going after YOU.
That Micah Johnson HAD to be taken out although I'm surprised the cops simply didn't riddle his butt with bullets tho there's probably more than's being talked about.
And comments like yours make me sad for our country because you appear incapable of seeing anything other than us/them or black/white.
I've attempted to have a thoughtful conversation about the use of force in this situation, and particularly, the robot bomb. If you can't do that, please don't respond to my comments.
I've said on here many times that I'm glad he's dead. But the issue is when deadly force is authorized when a defendant has been cornered somewhere. The fact that he killed 11 people doesn't justify the police killing him unless he's an ongoing threat. Some posters have said that he killed the 5th officer in the garage when the officer tried to get close to him. I haven't seen a news story that confirms that.
The justification for using deadly force is that a threat is imminent--not that something atrocious just occurred.
I find it interesting the people who describe themselves as conservative and generally suspicious of all things governmental seem to have a blind spot when it comes to the police. Then, unless it's Waco, or Ruby Ridge, or the Bundy clan, conservatives often seems to believe the more force the better. Shoot now, ask questions later.
While it's obvious that this shooter deserved to die, are you always comfortable with LEOs on the scene making the call?
Please... go read the law...
You are incorrect...and misguided....and seek to use a false narrative... I'm not sure how you came to your fallacious conclusions...
A person can easily be deemed legally a continuing threat by prior acts and refusing to surrender peacefully... the option of using a bomb robot was an excellent tactical plan reviewed in the middle of an on going plan to stop a threat.it was reviewed all the way up the chain of command real time. The chief said...just don't blow up the building... thinking about the safety of others
A person who kills others or is a threat to human life is the ONE who decides what happens. All the communications with this terrorist will be available at some point.over three hundred officers still have to be interviewed
I think you arguing not only a fallacious position but just being argumentative. Please review your point of view logically and legally and you will come to the inescapable conclusion the application of deadly force was "Reasonable necessary and fully justified by the circumstances"
This act of terrorism is something a child can understand... it just is. Well meaning activists would understand this... but what we see is blm had used false narratives for their terrorist rhetoric. Since this mass shooting several other policeman have been murdered in the US. You will hear little about it.. there won't be any matches or outrage..riots or mass shootings...
In Dallas the chief was black..our president is black..the attorney general is black. The head of homeland security is black .persons of color are filled into the government at every level... yet Obama sympathizes with blm..give them audience instead of shunning them.. we are never going to heal until we have leaders who seek to bring us together .
The use of deadly force bu American police is lower than for white Americans ... so more false garbage by people who want anarchy.
There comes a point when the lack of respect for police.. disproportionate rates of crime..lack of support by political powers that police will say we don't give a crap..especially when terrorists like blm are supported over people who work tirelessly to make communities better
Thanks
Btw..Osama was killed by King Obama who took a victory lap ...was that application of force appropriate?
Last edited by notmeofficer; 07-11-2016 at 06:17 PM..
Il point out that the reason we have this passage in the 14th amendment was to protect the WHITE southerners after the civil war who were being blown up, executed, having all the property taken and
being imprisoned because the police at the time (army) thought it was a good idea and used the KKK act as the law governing their actions. After the army killed thousands of people just because they used to own slaves or just looked at them badly this passage was entered into the 14th amendment to ensure people their rights to due process before the gov decided to kill them.
Now if you are interested in going back to that state of affairs, then just go ahead and accept that what the police are doing is fine. They will soon be going after YOU.
Don't think you can compare an occupying army in the defeated part of the country after a civil war during a timeframe the country was reuniting with a police department in this century.
So, while the history is interesting and one I was unaware of even as a white southerner, it doesn't apply in this situation.
Don't think you can compare an occupying army in the defeated part of the country after a civil war during a timeframe the country was reuniting with a police department in this century.
So, while the history is interesting and one I was unaware of even as a white southerner, it doesn't apply in this situation.
Of course it applies. It is called Law. Constitutional law at that.
By the way. Weather or not you are for them. The bundys are being held on the same law that persecuted the Southerners after the Civil war. The KKK act. So the government believes this law still applies and all laws associated with it such as due process.
Because they were afraid, werent very good at tactics and lacked patience of any form.
I sure hope they were at least a little afraid. If they weren't, they would be abnormal human beings and stupid. But, if you are inferring by that they didn't have the courage to shoot him, I reject that. These officers ran towards the shooter, one dying in the process, to resolve this situation.
Were not very good at tactics? I reject that logic as well, as I'm sure they had the best tactical swat/sniper teams at their disposal.
Lacked patience? Not something you or I have enough facts to judge one way or the other. If they lacked patience, they would have stormed the shooter and shot him one way or the other. So I am back to my original common sense assumption that they didn't have a safe way to take him out with a gun.
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.
, cops aren't supposed to use their weapons, and they're not supposed to show up at riots where firecrackers, rocks, and bottles are being hurled at them. Now, they're not supposed to use drones? What will offend the bad guys next?
