Depends on the climate. The garden exits are often locked up around here, you can go between the store and the garden but you can't go from the garden to the outside.
-
Features
Police Kill Man Attempting to "Open Carry" ..wait for it...
- Thread starter Ford
- Start date
Depends on the climate. The garden exits are often locked up around here, you can go between the store and the garden but you can't go from the garden to the outside.
Oh for fuck's sake, Loren. There are multiple entrances and exits at every WalMart in the country. Stop excusing incompetence. There is no excuse for those police to fail to TRY to evacuate and assess the situation instead of relying on one phone call. No excuse.
Cameras everywhere, a man on the phone saying where the gun-brandishing evil black man is standing. He's ON THE PHONE WITH THEM! "What aisle are you in now, sir? Is the man with the gun still nearby? Are you sure he is actually pointing it at people? Please leave the area now ("we don't need you to do that,") and go to the entrance and leave the store.
Stop excusing murder.
Regardless of how many exits there are, Crawford was obviously in the corner of the store and far away from the front door.
Toni
Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2011
- Messages
- 20,116
- Basic Beliefs
- Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
Summertime in OH: the garden door is open FFS. Must you be an apologist for every inexcusable police excess?
Interpret his actions? He never pointed the gun at anybody. I've seen the video. The 9-11 caller is either delusional or evil to make that call stating that the guy was pointing the gun at people. None of his actions while on the phone are aggressive in the least.
Might want to survey the scene next time then since the report was obviously false. The cop's careless behavior resulted in the death of an unarmed man. The cop's carelessness might see him charging to his own death if the day ever comes that he's actually blindly blundering into an armed conflict without first assessing the full situation.
He neither challenged the cop or swung the gun toward the cop.
Maybe the cop should have figured out a way to find out the person's position and what the guy was actually carrying before simply jumping out from behind the shelf and blazing away. You know, jump out from behind the shelf and blazing away is probably a good way to kill somebody that is not armed or expecting you. If there is an armed person back there spoiling for a fight then jumping out from behind the shelf and blazing away is probably a good way to get shot yourself.
Shadowy Man
Contributor
Since neither you nor I were there, we can't answer that question immediately, but I suppose at the end of the aisle. Or in the next aisle. Or in the other aisle. Pretty much almost anywhere where he could have heard them but not seen them.
Honestly, it doesn't take that many brain cells to figure out that it didn't have to go down this way.
You misunderstand.
The cop comes in and sees careless gun handling and challenges the guy.
The guy doesn't realize what the cop's problem is and turns towards the cop rather than dropping the gun. This causes the barrel of the gun to swing in the cop's direction. It's that swinging of the barrel that got him shot.
The fundamental problem here is treating a replica weapon as a toy rather than as a real weapon.
1. There was no "swinging barrel"
2. What got him shot was a lying liar who lied on the 911 call - Mr. Ritchie
3. What else got him shot were police officers who went charging in without any caution, and gunned a man down without even attempting to assess the situation first
QUIT BLAMING THE VICTIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 39,971
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
What kind of a moron would approach someone in that situation instead of communicating from a position of cover? Are cops that stupid? And I don't want to hear any crap about there not being cover.
I certainly agree the caller deserves some blame--I predict a civil suit.
That doesn't change the basic problem of handling a replica weapon like a toy and having it mistaken for real.
In an open carry state, which means your blaming of the victim fails again. Just quit blaming the victim!
Just because he was the victim doesn't mean he didn't have a major role in causing the situation.
Just because he was the victim doesn't mean I can't blame him! And applaud the people who victimized him!
He didn't do anything to cause this situation other than be at Wal-Mart at the same time as that lying, racist, piece of shit that called 911 on him.
Toni
Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2011
- Messages
- 20,116
- Basic Beliefs
- Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
You forget : Black men are not allowed to pick up merchandise in a Walmart and talk on a cell phone at the same time. Not while being black, anyhow.
And it doesn't mean he did.
1. He is living in an "open carry" state which means it is perfectly legal to walk around Walmart with a gun.
2. He wasn't actually carrying a real gun. He was carrying a BB gun sold by Walmart. Are you suggesting that customers in a store have a "major role in causing the situation" for carrying a product the store sells while still inside the store?
3. He had zero control over the lying liar who lied - Ritchie - who actually played the "major role in causing the situation"
4. None of the above has any bearing whatsoever on the fact that responding police failed to assess and secure the scene before opening fire and killing an innocent man.
Is it really so impossible for you to acknowledge that Crawford was an INNOCENT man here?
Even if you insist on defending the police action, must you really insist on doing it while BLAMING the INNOCENT victim?
Ah RavenSky, what you fail to realize is that there is no "innocent" victim here.
Except for maybe the cop that has to live with the fact that he just killed somebody.
George S
Veteran Member
The video changed my mind. I had tended to blame the caller giving bogus information, but now I place more blame on the police. Really, now, nobody checked the security cameras before storm-troopering in?
Watching the surveillance video it is clear that Crawford was doing none of the things that Ronald Ritchie claims Crawford was doing. John Crawford did not point the gun at people. John Crawford made no motion that could reasonably be mistaken for loading a rifle.
Shouldn't Ronald Ritchie be charged? Or would it be impossible to convict because you can't prove the negative that Ritchie was not mistaken but was deliberately lying.
Maybe Ritchies got excited and thought they'd be heroes thwarting the thug and thusly misperceived his actions and the 9/11 call was honest, just wrong. But I doubt it after watching the video with the transcript of the 9/11 call in my hand.
I'm leaning toward deliberate lying on the part of Ritchie and his wife. At first I thought they were just paranoid losers but the video so blatantly counters Ritchie's claims on the 9/11 tape that I cannot believe at this point that Ritchie was not deliberately making a false 9/11 call.
Jarhyn
Wizard
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2010
- Messages
- 15,317
- Gender
- Androgyne; they/them
- Basic Beliefs
- Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Because when someone has a rifle, ostensibly gearing up to commit a massacre, you have all the time in the world dallying and going through the store to the security room and browsing security tapes.
Good call. I'd rather see a guy who foolishly picked up an assault rifle (or something which is situationally indestinguishable from one) in a store get gunned down, than see someone who had an assault rifle in that same store empty a lot of rounds into the crowd. The police were trained badly, but it's not their fault for getting bad training and information. Ultimately it is on the lying racist shithead, and the department management that makes officers paranoid about active shooters.
Delaying action given information that there's a brewing active shooter situation is the wrong decision.
If the guy was white, he may not have gotten shot, but that doesn't change the fact that he should have been.