BLM, or WLM? [MOD WARNING: FIRST POST]

BattleCorp

Overheal wrote: »

Why so many flippant questions?

Do you think he deserved to be shot? Do you think his warrant has any bearing on him being shot? I've seen reports to the contrary, that cops didn't know his information when the interaction occurred. So, it would seem his priors and outstanding warrants are moot.

I won't sit on the fence. I think he deserved to be shot. He resisted arrest. Disobeyed a lawful command by a police officer. Proceeded to go to his car and possibly retrieve something that could have put the police officer's lives in danger.

What were the police supposed to do? Wait until he was armed? Fcuk that.

Hell yeah, he deserved to be shot. He was a fcuking idiot for acting the boll1x while the cops had their guns drawn on him.

By the way, I'm not bringing his past into it. I'm just basing the above statment on the video I watched.

Foxtrol

mynamejeff wrote: »

if I post a link showing that the cops were aware of the warrant (from the caller) and that's why he was resisting arrest will you response shift again ?


Fairly disgusting your blind defence of a child rapist just because he is black too tbf but each to their own ,

your not coming out of this to well again

Look at the poster crying earlier that they wanted sources than multiple pictures and video of the wannabe rambo shooter last night now throwing out completely unsubstantiated allegations.

Why am I not surprised :rolleyes:

statesaver

Overheal wrote: »

Then you've never seen suicide by cop before.

He's still alive though so maybe you should ask him if he's suicidal. I have no report he is on suicide watch. Do you?

Not all suicides succeed, thankfully. But him .......

Hope he never walks again, he won't be able to harm anyone else in his wheelchair.

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

Then you've never seen suicide by cop before.

He's still alive though so maybe you should ask him if he's suicidal. I have no report he is on suicide watch. Do you?

Oh. My. God.

Give yourself a break man.

The man was ignored all the police instructions despite their guns being drawn and despite them physically attempting to restrain him, reached into his car to retrieve something concealed which any person can tell you, WILL result in being shot.

Knowing this, he still did what he did, which does look like he was prepared and willing to be shot. Which by my reasoning would qualify as suicide by cop.

But go on, enlighten me as to how I am wrong for having an opinion on what I think something looked like, post up a wall of text, or call me vile and disgusting

Gerry Hatrick

DelaneyIn wrote: »

It’s a felony and rape of a minor.

He also has previous for resisting arrest and for having an illegal gun.

Anyway, now that he’s supposedly paralysed from the waist down, he won’t be raping anyone again. At least that’s something.

Hopefully this bastards victim feels some sense of justice has been served.

mynamejeff

Overheal wrote: »

Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Anyone being killed by police is a tragedy of justice.

Actually it was the Dunne, who called him a child rapist. The Dunne since was forced to retract that statement over a lack of credible evidence supporting the allegation. Unless you have any to share, none has been provided to this thread, barring a tweet showing a photo of a warrant for 3rd degree sexual assault, which neither confirms guilt nor the age or sex of the alleged victim.

So you were wrong , again


do you think the warrant was so that the allegation could be investigated ? yet he chose to resist the cops an try get into a car for what reason we don't know yet ,

do you know why he wanted to fight and or flee the investigation ?

3rd degree sexual assault is defined as a sexual assault by a adult on some one between 14 and 16 .

http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/Statutes/TITLE11/11-37/11-37-6.HTM

I wonder what his previous history with the police is , because that is relevant as to how the police dealt with him and the outcome

clearly the more that becomes known about the incident the more the initial police statement about waiting to have all the facts before jumping to judgment is important.

unless of course you want to loot yourself a new pair of nikes and burn down a cop station

Foxtrol

BattleCorp wrote: »

I won't sit on the fence. I think he deserved to be shot. He resisted arrest. Disobeyed a lawful command by a police officer. Proceeded to go to his car and possibly retrieve something that could have put the police officer's lives in danger.

What were the police supposed to do? Wait until he was armed? Fcuk that.

Hell yeah, he deserved to be shot. He was a fcuking idiot for acting the boll1x while the cops had their guns drawn on him.

By the way, I'm not bringing his past into it. I'm just basing the above statment on the video I watched.

Police are supposed to do a better job at deescalating the situation and not shooting a man 7 times in the back a metre from his kids?

Due to low entry requirements, terrible training, near zero accountability it is a complete lottery whether you get a decent cop or a 'warrior' cop that will escalate things and kill you with minimal justification.

mynamejeff

Foxtrol wrote: »

Look at the poster crying earlier that they wanted sources than multiple pictures and video of the wannabe rambo shooter last night now throwing out completely unsubstantiated allegations.

Why am I not surprised :rolleyes:

lol you best keep waiting ,

more coming out about this poor innocent young brother by the hour foxTROL

MisterAnarchy

Biker79 wrote: »

My God. What utter goons.

This is what Douglas Murray is referring to in ' The Madness of Crowds '

His words were deeply prophetic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0eg_q8fCmA

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

And people OTT have called them "absolute scum" etc - the same things said of actual rapists and killers. There's seemingly no bar for these insults other than 'person with an agenda I don't like? Absolute scum!'

Pot....kettle... Of colour

mynamejeff

Foxtrol wrote: »

Police are supposed to do a better job at deescalating the situation and not shooting a man 7 times in the back a metre from his kids?

Due to low entry requirements, terrible training, near zero accountability it is a complete lottery whether you get a decent cop or a 'warrior' cop that will escalate things and kill you with minimal justification.

should have spoken to him first right ,

and when he escalated tried soft hand restraint then hard restraint ,

then tazer

and only used firearms when he tried to flee or retrieve something from a car ,


o wait that's what happened

Foxtrol

mynamejeff wrote: »

So you were wrong , again


do you think the warrant was so that the allegation could be investigated ? yet he chose to resist the cops an try get into a car for what reason we don't know yet ,

do you know why he wanted to fight and or flee the investigation ?

3rd degree sexual assault is defined as a sexual assault by a adult on some one between 14 and 16 .

http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/Statutes/TITLE11/11-37/11-37-6.HTM

I wonder what his previous history with the police is , because that is relevant as to how the police dealt with him and the outcome

clearly the more that becomes known about the incident the more the initial police statement about waiting to have all the facts before jumping to judgment is important.

unless of course you want to loot yourself a new pair of nikes and burn down a cop station

Eh, the law you linked is law from Rhode Island not Wisconsin. :rolleyes:

I can't see anywhere in Wisconsin law that says 3rd degree is related to age.

BattleCorp

Foxtrol wrote: »

Police are supposed to do a better job at deescalating the situation and not shooting a man 7 times in the back a metre from his kids?

Due to low entry requirements, terrible training, near zero accountability it is a complete lottery whether you get a decent cop or a 'warrior' cop that will escalate things and kill you with minimal justification.

You do realise that you can't always deescalate a situation. If someone doesn't want to comply and allow themselves to be arrested, then you have to use some sort of violence to get them to comply.

I've only seen the clip of the video where he is walking towards his car and the cops have their guns drawn. I didn't see what led up to that. I'm led to believe he broke free from the cops. If that's the case, that was where the cops were using non-lethal force but seemingly that didn't work.

Let me ask you two questions. Do you think he was a danger to the cops as he reached into the car? Would you be comfortable being a cop there in that situation?

Regarding your lottery comment, it's also a lottery as to whether a cop gets to go home at night or gets shot because they don't know what they are going to face from one minute to the next. It's a very different job from handing out cigarettes and chocolate in a SPAR shop.

statesaver

Foxtrol wrote: »

Police are supposed to do a better job at deescalating the situation and not shooting a man 7 times in the back a metre from his kids?

Due to low entry requirements, terrible training, near zero accountability it is a complete lottery whether you get a decent cop or a 'warrior' cop that will escalate things and kill you with minimal justification.

Jacob Blake police shooting was JUSTIFIED.

And will be seen as that in the courts.

Overheal

mynamejeff wrote: »

do you think the warrant was so that the allegation could be investigated ?

You know that's how the criminal justice system works. Charges are tried through due process in a court of law.

3rd degree sexual assault is defined as a sexual assault by a adult on some one between 14 and 16 .

http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/Statutes/TITLE11/11-37/11-37-6.HTM

That's Rhode Island statutes. This happened in Wisconsin. Try again.

I wonder what his previous history with the police is , because that is relevant as to how the police dealt with him and the outcome

No it's not. We have no indication they had any prior knowledge of who he was during the interaction, cops arrived to a heated call already underway they didn't stop to take names or run background checks that I can tell. So, it's very much irrelevant what his previous history was, it had no bearing on what transpired.

Foxtrol

Foxtrol wrote: »

Police are supposed to do a better job at deescalating the situation and not shooting a man 7 times in the back a metre from his kids?

Due to low entry requirements, terrible training, near zero accountability it is a complete lottery whether you get a decent cop or a 'warrior' cop that will escalate things and kill you with minimal justification.

Well I disagree. I think the police were left with no choice.

Jimbob1977

Tonight will prove interesting.

There are lots of scenarios possible.

1. Police and National Guard take charge

2. "Neighbourhood Watch" arm themselves and quieten the protesters.

3. The protesters increase in numbers, arm themselves and seek revenge/escalation.

4. Everything passes off peacefully

Antioch (home of the shooter) is across the state line in Illinois and could be a target.

A nice town like Kenosha doesn't deserve this.

Overheal

statesaver wrote: »

Jacob Blake police shooting was JUSTIFIED.

And will be seen as that in the courts.

You see the future now do you?

Does saying it in all caps make your conjecture more correct? How?

statesaver

statesaver wrote: »

Jacob Blake police shooting was JUSTIFIED.

And will be seen as that in the courts.

Given that a fair few of ye viewed the George Floyd killing as justified, I'm inclined to not trust your legal judgement.

Foxtrol

mynamejeff wrote: »

should have spoken to him first right ,

and when he escalated tried soft hand restraint then hard restraint ,

then tazer

and only used firearms when he tried to flee or retrieve something from a car ,


o wait that's what happened

You can't shoot someone for fleeing.

It is looking more and more like you have no idea how US laws work

Overheal

Deleted User wrote: »

Well I disagree. I think the police were left with no choice.

Nope. Instead of pacing him and pointing the gun at him the whole 5-10 seconds he's walking to the car, just take him down with an armlock/necklock, he has his back turned to 2-3 officers, are they not adequately trained to take someone down from behind? Amateur hour.

Overheal

Foxtrol wrote: »

You can't shoot someone for fleeing.

It is looking more and more like you have no idea how US laws work

They also don't know what fleeing is. They've also called it evading arrest - which is laughable. Simultaneously trying to argue he was fleeing the scene and trying to grab some kind of weapon (we have no reports he had a gun and witnesses say they saw no knife)

statesaver

Deleted User wrote: »

Given that a fair few of ye viewed the George Floyd killing as justified, I'm inclined to not trust your legal judgement.

Firstly, who's ye ?

Second, I never said George Floyd killing was justified.

Third, it's my option.

Get over yourself.

Meanwhile the teen who shot a protester last night has been charged with first degree murder and is on the run. And for the record if he got shot in the back seven times and ended up paralysed,I would not be celebrating as some posters here are.

Gerry Hatrick

Foxtrol wrote: »

Police are supposed to do a better job at deescalating the situation and not shooting a man 7 times in the back a metre from his kids?

Due to low entry requirements, terrible training, near zero accountability it is a complete lottery whether you get a decent cop or a 'warrior' cop that will escalate things and kill you with minimal justification.

Funny though we never hear liberals screeching when a cop attempts to de-escalate a situation and get's shot dead. Every time a police officer goes into do a days work in the US he/she risks being shot dead and leaving their family without a father/mother.

It's no wonder they are always on edge so don't preach from the sidelines about something you don't understand or it seems respect.

Seems like this lad was a nasty piece of work so no harm done.

Overheal

Deleted User wrote: »

Meanwhile the teen who shot a protester last night has been charged with first degree murder and is on the run. And for the record if he got shot in the back seven times and ended up paralysed,I would not be celebrating as some posters here are.

But but but! HES A CAREER CRIMINAL NOW PROTON. He DESERVES TO BE SHOT IN THE BACK

Foxtrol

BattleCorp wrote: »

You do realise that you can't always deescalate a situation. If someone doesn't want to comply and allow themselves to be arrested, then you have to use some sort of violence to get them to comply.

Some form of violence, not 7 bullets in the back.

I've only seen the clip of the video where he is walking towards his car and the cops have their guns drawn. I didn't see what led up to that. I'm led to believe he broke free from the cops. If that's the case, that was where the cops were using non-lethal force but seemingly that didn't work.

I don't see how you can claim we only know what is in the video and then also presume that the cops took all those steps.

The man didn't have a weapon on him and there is no evidence he was acting violently yet all 3 cops had their guns, not tasers out. If it turns out that all three tased him and used up all their pepper spray on him and he didnt go down then I understand them all having their guns drawn but that seems very unlikely.

Let me ask you two questions. Do you think he was a danger to the cops as he reached into the car?

Potentially but not enough to warrant putting 7 bullets in his back and risk the lives of 3 kids in the car.

Would you be comfortable being a cop there in that situation?

No but that is part of their job. If your response to being uncomfortable is shooting an unarmed man 7 times in the back then you need a new profession.

Regarding your lottery comment, it's also a lottery as to whether a cop gets to go home at night or gets shot because they don't know what they are going to face from one minute to the next. It's a very different job from handing out cigarettes and chocolate in a SPAR shop.

That is why most are extremely well paid for their educational/training achievements.

Overheal

Gerry Hatrick wrote: »

Funny though we never hear liberals screeching when a cop attempts to de-escalate a situation and get's shot dead. Every time a police officer goes into do a days work in the US he/she risks being shot dead and leaving their family without a father/mother.

It's no wonder they are always on edge so don't preach from the sidelines about something you don't understand or it seems respect.

Seems like this lad was a nasty piece of work so no harm done.

55 LEO deaths in 2018 (FBI)

686,665 Full Time LEOs in the US (not including PT or seasonal)

So the odds of being shot in a given year are what, approximately 0.008%.

Meaning you are just slightly more likely to be shot as a LEO than to be struck by lightning in a given year - which is 1 in 700,000.

If that has them constantly on edge they need to take a chill pill and quit sleeping with the gun under the pillow.

statesaver

Overheal wrote: »

You see the future now do you?

Does saying it in all caps make your conjecture more correct? How?

No.

No.

People need to stop defending the indefensible.
BLM / Antifa are thugs. Burning, Looting and Murdering their own communities and cities.
The cities they are burning are all democratic run cities. Not the smartest are they ?
Maybe if they started voting differently they might see different results.

Overheal

statesaver wrote: »

No.

No.

People need to stop defending the indefensible.
BLM / Antifa are thugs. Burning, Looting and Murdering their own communities and cities.
The cities they are burning are all democratic run cities. Not the smartest are they ?
Maybe if they started voting differently they might see different results.

This isn't the Antifa thread. Neither Antifa or BLM are an organization. It's like you saying capitalists are thugs. People who like vanilla ice cream are thugs. It's meaningless.