T.G.G. Moogly
Traditional Atheist
A better title for this thread would be, "How not to get bit by the cobra in you kitchen and the rattlesnakes in your bedroom."
Attacking the cop means the perp can arm himself with the officer's gun. Unarmed !=harmless.Of course, the guy being armed clouds the issue. I think the problem most people have with police shootings is that they happen when the victim is unarmed.
Sounds like all the commotion about cops shooting black people might be starting to have some effect.
Shootings have always been a very small fraction of all police encounters regardless of race. Loren's point is that getting shot depends on your behavior (like Michael Brown attacking the cop), not race. This guy was treated courteously because he was courteous himself.Sounds like all the commotion about cops shooting black people might be starting to have some effect.
You are purposely misunderstanding what I wrote.America, where being less than courteous can result in summary execution.
You can do that in a place like UK where people rarely have guns. In the US where guns are common police have to be armed.Sooooo... the solution is to stop letting cops carry guns, as criminals could easily take those guns away. I think that would solve the issue of police shootings pretty well.
Because you can shoot the perp before they can take the gun away from you (ranged weapon and all that). More Indiana Jones, less the all too common trope in moves where the good guy throws his gun away in order to have a "fair" fistfight with the bad guy.Of course, saying that perps can apparently easily disarm a cop and take their gun.. doesn't that contradict the whole idea of owning a gun for protection? If it can so easily be taken, why bother having one in the first place?
They should be held responsible when they did something wrong but not when the witchhunt against them is built on lies - "hands up don't shoot", "he only had a sandwich", "he didn't do nothing" etc.It's always a good idea to refrain from giving cops shit, but this does not relieve police from responsibility in how they use their power. And they do have power. Let's stop bootlicking and hold them responsible for fuck's sake, regardless of whether the powerless are rude or immature.
They should be held responsible when they did something wrong but not when the witchhunt against them is built on lies - "hands up don't shoot", "he only had a sandwich", "he didn't do nothing" etc.It's always a good idea to refrain from giving cops shit, but this does not relieve police from responsibility in how they use their power. And they do have power. Let's stop bootlicking and hold them responsible for fuck's sake, regardless of whether the powerless are rude or immature.
I made mention of this before when a FB friend of mine posted this. Let's assume for a minute that this guy HADN'T handled it correctly. Let's say he was verbally confrontational. Does he then deserve to be killed?
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
That is not cooperating and deserves a misdemeanor. Which means the officer can drag him out of the car. If the victim's gun falls out of his back pocket when that happens then the officer can fear for his life. Some people in the forum think that an officer's fear for his life is justification for shooting the victim.
I think if I were reading what I wrote above, I might think it is a bit cartoonish and unreal, but if you look at real incidents of police stops, escalations and fear, they are also unreal.
What nonsense. First off, there is no "anti-cop" crowd. Second, it doesn't matter which of these events gets coverage and which do not. Those of us critical of how policing works in this country are focused upon a culture which seems to systematically target minorities (especially African Americans) and pile abuse after abuse upon them. This issue is much larger than any single incident, which is something that the anti-accountability crowd seems to ignore.They should be held responsible when they did something wrong but not when the witchhunt against them is built on lies - "hands up don't shoot", "he only had a sandwich", "he didn't do nothing" etc.
+1
Police officers should be held to a higher standard and have very thick skin. (We should also be wary of lowering standards for recruits to meet political goals.) The reason these debates go on and on, it seems, is that the anti-cop crowd is generally bad at choosing its martyrs and villain police examples. This crowd may simply be desiring to push an agenda rather than be genuinely interested in the facts surrounding a selected occurrence. After all, why do some incidents garner social media outrage while others do not? For example: http://www.surenews.com/crime/shocking-leaked-video-shows-police-chief-candidate-sadistically-tasering-non-combative-inmates/
(However, one should never grab a falling gun anyway--when people do that once in a while they go bang.)
(However, one should never grab a falling gun anyway--when people do that once in a while they go bang.)
And when they don't grab them they can also go bang once in a while.
I didn't see it say that it was a concealed carry. If it was an open carry then there aren't any courses you need to take to carry it.How the hell can a gun just discharge if the safety is on?
I'm pretty sure that carrying with the safety off is not taught in most concealed carry courses.
What nonsense. First off, there is no "anti-cop" crowd. Second, it doesn't matter which of these events gets coverage and which do not. Those of us critical of how policing works in this country are focused upon a culture which seems to systematically target minorities (especially African Americans) and pile abuse after abuse upon them. This issue is much larger than any single incident, which is something that the anti-accountability crowd seems to ignore.+1
Police officers should be held to a higher standard and have very thick skin. (We should also be wary of lowering standards for recruits to meet political goals.) The reason these debates go on and on, it seems, is that the anti-cop crowd is generally bad at choosing its martyrs and villain police examples. This crowd may simply be desiring to push an agenda rather than be genuinely interested in the facts surrounding a selected occurrence. After all, why do some incidents garner social media outrage while others do not? For example: http://www.surenews.com/crime/shocking-leaked-video-shows-police-chief-candidate-sadistically-tasering-non-combative-inmates/
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
I didn't see it say that it was a concealed carry. If it was an open carry then there aren't any courses you need to take to carry it.How the hell can a gun just discharge if the safety is on?
I'm pretty sure that carrying with the safety off is not taught in most concealed carry courses.
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
How the hell can a gun just discharge if the safety is on?
I'm pretty sure that carrying with the safety off is not taught in most concealed carry courses.