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.
[...] In fact, the caption to the picture even supports this: "The man who put his hands up can be seen above attempting to cover himself as the gunman fired off his rifle. " [...]
You have the wrong caption, that is for the photo above on that page. You need to look with more care.
He is right on the first video a lot of lives ruined-- and it could go either way. BUT I am betting this will go to trail but NOT anytime soon.
Right because due process and a right to a speedy trial are of course trumped by politics.
I don't care if it's the left, the right....whatever....equal treatment under the law (Hey, isn't that the core point of BLM? One I happen to agree with.)
I'm saddened that the right and left can be so outraged when one from "their side" is getting the shaft or the other side is getting what they think is a pass.....but then are utterly incapable of seeing the other side being mistreated by the law as well at times.
The Kenosha DA has no serious case, certainly not murder and they know it. But they're going to stall to appease the mob until colder weather arises and then will find some lame excuse and blame others when they drop or greatly reduce the charges.
Grosskreutz is facing perpendicular to Rittenhouse. He's clearly exiting the conflict. In fact, the caption to the picture even supports this: "The man who put his hands up can be seen above attempting to cover himself as the gunman fired off his rifle. "Again, what I see from this clip is him holding his hands up and making a run for it to get away. I could be wrong, it's obviously a poor video. But all will be revealed over time, so we shall see.
Lol, if you watch the full video Grossk (the guy with the pistol in his hand) is clearly not trying to get away.
I mean seriously there are so many clear videos of the incident you must be getting your information from sources that are trying to create a false story.
This is like watching sports with my late father-in-law. His team could grab a guy by the facemask whip him to the ground and publically urinate on them....and he would deny any foul occurred.
So you're comparing a guy who was shot in the back 7 times to a guy who himself shoots three people. Are you for real?
Absolutely "for real". Blake was not a "victim", he's the idiot whose actions precipitated this whole thing. He was the one who was victimizing a female, who then called 9-1-1. The cops are mandated to respond. Blake, at that point, is legally obligated to stop his criminal activity, and comply with all lawful orders by the police. Did he do that? Heck no, he physically resists the police, takes out a curved "karambit" style knife (clearly visible in the video), disobeys orders to stop, and tries to enter a vehicle with children in it. Since he was carrying a knife, the cops could no longer try and physically restrain him, so one of them discharged their firearm repeatedly until Blake no longer presented a threat, just exactly as they they trained to do. The cop in that case is going to be drinking soda pop and sharing stories with the cop who shot Michael Brown, believe me. The guy who shot the video did way more to help the cop's case than Jacob Blake's.
With respect to the "Go Fund Me" for Blake, people are free to give their money to whomever they choose. I personally have not done that yet, but I am a hundred times more likely to give support to Kyle Rittenhouse than Jacob Blake (and may cut a check to his defense fund, who knows). One is a criminal abuser of women, and the other tried to stop violence in a neighboring community and had to defend himself from violent thugs. But the biggest difference between Kyle Rittenhouse and Jacob Blake? Kyle's gonna walk.
Absolutely "for real". Blake was not a "victim", he's the idiot whose actions precipitated this whole thing. He was the one who was victimizing a female, who then called 9-1-1. The cops are mandated to respond. Blake, at that point, is legally obligated to stop his criminal activity, and comply with all lawful orders by the police. Did he do that? Heck no, he physically resists the police, takes out a curved "karambit" style knife (clearly visible in the video), disobeys orders to stop, and tries to enter a vehicle with children in it. Since he was carrying a knife, the cops could no longer try and physically restrain him, so one of them discharged their firearm repeatedly until Blake no longer presented a threat, just exactly as they they trained to do. The cop in that case is going to be drinking soda pop and sharing stories with the cop who shot Michael Brown, believe me. The guy who shot the video did way more to help the cop's case than Jacob Blake's.
With respect to the "Go Fund Me" for Blake, people are free to give their money to whomever they choose. I personally have not done that yet, but I am a hundred times more likely to give support to Kyle Rittenhouse than Jacob Blake (and may cut a check to his defense fund, who knows). One is a criminal abuser of women, and the other tried to stop violence in a neighboring community and had to defend himself from violent thugs. But the biggest difference between Kyle Rittenhouse and Jacob Blake? Kyle's gonna walk.
The issue here is due process.
Police are not, and never have been, the judge and jury. Everyone is entitled to their day in court.
Duterte in the Philippines has death squads roaming the city streets. Thus for their victims there is no due process as in our country, suspects are killed outright, some are presumably innocent and killed mistakenly. We do not have that here, at least not yet ... supposedly.
We do have the presumption of innocence, and police are not allowed to determine guilt or innocence, they can only make a case before a court of the law on behalf of the people of the state.
Seven shots in a man's back messes that whole thing up, the implications for our country go far beyond any one case. It is as wrong to kill a suspect without trial as to kill a stranger or a business partner or a neighbor or a spouse. It is always wrong.
Absolutely "for real". Blake was not a "victim", he's the idiot whose actions precipitated this whole thing. He was the one who was victimizing a female, who then called 9-1-1. The cops are mandated to respond. Blake, at that point, is legally obligated to stop his criminal activity, and comply with all lawful orders by the police. Did he do that? Heck no, he physically resists the police, takes out a curved "karambit" style knife (clearly visible in the video), disobeys orders to stop, and tries to enter a vehicle with children in it. Since he was carrying a knife, the cops could no longer try and physically restrain him, so one of them discharged their firearm repeatedly until Blake no longer presented a threat, just exactly as they they trained to do. The cop in that case is going to be drinking soda pop and sharing stories with the cop who shot Michael Brown, believe me. The guy who shot the video did way more to help the cop's case than Jacob Blake's.
With respect to the "Go Fund Me" for Blake, people are free to give their money to whomever they choose. I personally have not done that yet, but I am a hundred times more likely to give support to Kyle Rittenhouse than Jacob Blake (and may cut a check to his defense fund, who knows). One is a criminal abuser of women, and the other tried to stop violence in a neighboring community and had to defend himself from violent thugs. But the biggest difference between Kyle Rittenhouse and Jacob Blake? Kyle's gonna walk.
LOL! Firing a 9mm at point blank range into a guy's back back is more than enough to neutralize a potential knife attack. The guy's back was to the cop, there wasn't even a threat at that point so shooting even a single bullet into the guy is questionable. A double-tap is how you make damn sure the guy isn't moving any more and completely unwarranted given the circumstance. But seven bullets at point blank range into a man's back? That's a cop who's out of his mind with hate. Don't even pretend that was necessary to stop him. That is so far beyond self-defense that you should be ashamed of yourself by trying to pawn off such idiocy.
LOL! Firing a 9mm at point blank range into a guy's back back is more than enough to neutralize a potential knife attack. The guy's back was to the cop, there wasn't even a threat at that point so shooting even a single bullet into the guy is questionable. A double-tap is how you make damn sure the guy isn't moving any more and completely unwarranted given the circumstance. But seven bullets at point blank range into a man's back? That's a cop who's out of his mind with hate. Don't even pretend that was necessary to stop him. That's about the stupidest thing I've read in this thread.
Or fear. A lot of these cops are extremely fearful. Say "boo" and they empty their 17 round Glocks. Cops should go back to carrying 6 shot revolvers.
Police are not, and never have been, the judge and jury. Everyone is entitled to their day in court.
Duterte in the Philippines has death squads roaming the city streets. Thus for their victims there is no due process as in our country, suspects are killed outright, some are presumably innocent and killed mistakenly. We do not have that here, at least not yet ... supposedly.
We do have the presumption of innocence, and police are not allowed to determine guilt or innocence, they can only make a case before a court of the law on behalf of the people of the state.
Seven shots in a man's back messes that whole thing up, the implications for our country go far beyond any one case. It is as wrong to kill a suspect without trial as to kill a stranger or a business partner or a neighbor or a spouse. It is always wrong.
Most of your post, I cannot argue with. Until you got to the part about equating the cop who shot Blake with a "Death Squad". Far from acting as "Judge, Jury, and Executioner", I see the cops who interacted with Blake having little recourse in what unfolded.
1) They were called to the scene of a domestic disturbance, they had no choice except to respond.
2) They were notified en-route that there was a male subject on site with an active felony warrant, with a past history of domestic violence.
3) From the moment they arrived, whatever violent actions that ensued were entirely based on the actions of Blake. Police respond to escalating violence in kind; Blake escalated because he knew that he would likely be going to jail because of the outstanding warrant. The police present used verbal commands, which were ignored, then escalated to non-deadly force (physical restraint), which did not stop Blake. They then escalated to other non-deadly force (a Taser), which also did not stop Blake, who brandished a knife, ignored repeated commands to stop, likely with added warnings he would be shot if he did not comply.
4) I can witness on the video, almost textbook escalation of force by Blake, and then the police. At the point Blake entered a vehicle with children present, still armed with the knife, he left the police no choice but to resort to deadly force. My guess this is per their training, and department policy. Hardly a case of being "Judge, Jury, and Executioner". This situation was entirely up to Blake to de-escalate at any time, which he could have done by complying with a lawful order to stop.
5) The officer who shot Blake had maybe two or three seconds to decide on a course of action and follow through. His superiors, a commission, and maybe even a jury will determine whether he acted in accordance with policy and good judgement, I will defer to the self-identified LEO's on this thread for their analysis. If I were on the cop's jury, knowing only what I know right now, I would not only find him innocent, I'd give him a friggin' medal for not shooting Blake in the back of the skull, which was in his ability. Blake llived because this officer decided to incapacitate him vs. kill him.
6) What would YOU have done, had you been in the position of the officer who shot Blake, not knowing his intention or other access to a more lethal weapon? If you say, " I would've jumped on him", then you'd be dead, because remember, Blake was armed with a knife. Until some kind of Robocop is invented that can disarm and subdue criminals of any size, shape, or arms, we have to have human cops to subdue human offenders. And rhetoric such that you wrote, does not help, it only serves to inflame those who believe the way to solve "injustice" is to loot, riot, and burn.
7) I'm going to bet you have never called 9-1-1 because you were being attacked, and have never been a police officer. Should the cops have simply not responded to Blake's victim's call, and let things play out per "street" rules? Because if black communities no longer want police "interference", then all they have to do is defund their departments. But then don't expect police from neighboring communities to respond when guys like Blake begin victimizing people. You can't have it both ways. You sound like a thoughtful person, please think through what you wrote completely - in "theory", you are correct - but in the case of Jacob Blake, you are completely wrong in your assumptions and conclusion.
Most of your post, I cannot argue with. Until you got to the part about equating the cop who shot Blake with a "Death Squad". Far from acting as "Judge, Jury, and Executioner", I see the cops who interacted with Blake having little recourse in what unfolded.
1) They were called to the scene of a domestic disturbance, they had no choice except to respond.
2) They were notified en-route that there was a male subject on site with an active felony warrant, with a past history of domestic violence.
3) From the moment they arrived, whatever violent actions that ensued were entirely based on the actions of Blake. Police respond to escalating violence in kind; Blake escalated because he knew that he would likely be going to jail because of the outstanding warrant. The police present used verbal commands, which were ignored, then escalated to non-deadly force (physical restraint), which did not stop Blake. They then escalated to other non-deadly force (a Taser), which also did not stop Blake, who brandished a knife, ignored repeated commands to stop, likely with added warnings he would be shot if he did not comply.
4) I can witness on the video, almost textbook escalation of force by Blake, and then the police. At the point Blake entered a vehicle with children present, still armed with the knife, he left the police no choice but to resort to deadly force. My guess this is per their training, and department policy. Hardly a case of being "Judge, Jury, and Executioner". This situation was entirely up to Blake to de-escalate at any time, which he could have done by complying with a lawful order to stop.
5) The officer who shot Blake had maybe two or three seconds to decide on a course of action and follow through. His superiors, a commission, and maybe even a jury will determine whether he acted in accordance with policy and good judgement, I will defer to the self-identified LEO's on this thread for their analysis. If I were on the cop's jury, knowing only what I know right now, I would not only find him innocent, I'd give him a friggin' medal for not shooting Blake in the back of the skull, which was in his ability. Blake llived because this officer decided to incapacitate him vs. kill him.
6) What would YOU have done, had you been in the position of the officer who shot Blake, not knowing his intention or other access to a more lethal weapon? If you say, " I would've jumped on him", then you'd be dead, because remember, Blake was armed with a knife. Until some kind of Robocop is invented that can disarm and subdue criminals of any size, shape, or arms, we have to have human cops to subdue human offenders. And rhetoric such that you wrote, does not help, it only serves to inflame those who believe the way to solve "injustice" is to loot, riot, and burn.
7) I'm going to bet you have never called 9-1-1 because you were being attacked, and have never been a police officer. Should the cops have simply not responded to Blake's victim's call, and let things play out per "street" rules? Because if black communities no longer want police "interference", then all they have to do is defund their departments. But then don't expect police from neighboring communities to respond when guys like Blake begin victimizing people. You can't have it both ways. You sound like a thoughtful person, please think through what you wrote completely - in "theory", you are correct - but in the case of Jacob Blake, you are completely wrong in your assumptions and conclusion.
You are going through a lot of effort to make seven shots in a man's back seem justified. It isn't working, they are still shots in the back.
Or fear. A lot of these cops are extremely fearful. Say "boo" and they empty their 17 round Glocks. Cops should go back to carrying 6 shot revolvers.
They surely do need more and better training. I'll definitely agree with that. Unfortunately, this whole BS #DefundThePolice and #DisbandThePolice is going get them exactly the opposite. Unfortunate that the Democrats are so obedient to the rampaging mobs and their idiotic demands. We might have been able to vastly improve the quality of policing in America otherwise.
What happens when there are too few police with even less training? More mistakes. More police on the edge. More itchy trigger fingers.
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.
That is so far beyond self-defense that you should be ashamed of yourself by trying to pawn off such idiocy.
