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.
What does his gang affiliation have to do with the pertinent (but yet unknown) facts of this situation?
If he was a gang member and did threaten the officer with a gun, the officer was justified in using deadly force.
If he was not a gang member and did threaten the officer with a gun, the officer was justified in using deadly force.
If he was a gang member and didn't threaten the officer with a gun the officer was not justified in using deadly force.
If he wasn't a gang member and didn't threaten the officer with a gun, the officer was not justified in using deadly force.
Whether this is justified or not has nothing to do with his being a gang member. It has to do with his actions before the officer shot him, which we don't know at this point, so why are people posting the pictures like they mean anything to the situation?
IF IF IF. Maybe he should have chosen a different path away from the gangs and he would not have been in the situation of running from the cops. Anything positive from gang membership we're missing?
Is your argument that police officers should shoot and kill all gang members? Is your argument that police officers should shoot and kill all individuals who run from them? If not, what is your point?
What does his gang affiliation have to do with the pertinent (but yet unknown) facts of this situation?
If he was a gang member and did threaten the officer with a gun, the officer was justified in using deadly force.
If he was not a gang member and did threaten the officer with a gun, the officer was justified in using deadly force.
If he was a gang member and didn't threaten the officer with a gun the officer was not justified in using deadly force.
If he wasn't a gang member and didn't threaten the officer with a gun, the officer was not justified in using deadly force.
Whether this is justified or not has nothing to do with his being a gang member. It has to do with his actions before the officer shot him, which we don't know at this point, so why are people posting the pictures like they mean anything to the situation?
I agree with what you said there in the middle... 100%.
However, him being in a gang would be relevant in this case in the sense that, you know, people in gangs tend to commit a disproportionate amount of crime compared to people who are not in gangs.
Posting this information is merely posting information. How is it any different than the news articles stating that he had kids, was getting his GED, or that his mom heard he'd been shot in the back?
I really hope they get this investigation done quickly AND thoroughly. My heart goes out to his family, especially his kids. This has to be very tough for them.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Is your argument that police officers should shoot and kill all gang members? Is your argument that police officers should shoot and kill all individuals who run from them? If not, what is your point?
Yes... I don't think that the pictures prove anything, in and of themselves. It is relevant to note that the deceased appears to have been part of a violent gang, but beyond that, this means nothing in the grand scheme except that he was likely to have a record and/or have committed crimes in the past.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Whose actions led the suspect to run from the police? Whose actions led the officer to shoot? Sure, all deaths need to be investigated to establish whose actions were the trigger. But unless the officer had a hidden agenda in becoming an officer, I would easily believe that without the suspect's actions the suspect would still be alive.
Is your argument that police officers should shoot and kill all gang members? Is your argument that police officers should shoot and kill all individuals who run from them? If not, what is your point?
While I agree that his criminal record, gang affiliation, etc. are pertinent details, they don't add up to "and it's okay to shoot you multiple times in the back."
But, we also do not know exactly where this man was shot, if he ever pulled a gun on the officer, etc.
The details are sketchy. I don't think any piece of factual information is irrelevant, though.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Whose actions led the suspect to run from the police? Whose actions led the officer to shoot? Sure, all deaths need to be investigated to establish whose actions were the trigger. But unless the officer had a hidden agenda in becoming an officer, I would easily believe that without the suspect's actions the suspect would still be alive.
These are the types of questions that I hope the investigation answers.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
While I agree that his criminal record, gang affiliation, etc. are pertinent details, they don't add up to "and it's okay to shoot you multiple times in the back."
But, we also do not know exactly where this man was shot, if he ever pulled a gun on the officer, etc.
The details are sketchy. I don't think any piece of factual information is irrelevant, though.
Agreed. You said it better than I did. His criminal record and gang ties in no way make shooting him ok.
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.
