Without watching it and giving it clicks, I am guessing his conclusion is that the results of defunding police are great, and not at all horrible?"Some More News" is a YouTube news show that tries to be like John Oliver's 'Last Week Tonight'. Mixing comedy with coverage of real topics. Honestly, I find most of the comedy bits rather meh.. but the news parts are actually very interesting.
So their latest show is on 'defund the police'
Had he just stopped like a normal person and not led the cops on a long chase, there would be no reason to release the hounds.And before the "Why didn't he just stop" crowd arrives. The answer was given to the 911 operator.
Edit: And the confirmation of his fears were provided by the K9 operator.
There was no reason to release the hounds when it was done.Had he just stopped like a normal person and not led the cops on a long chase, there would be no reason to release the hounds.And before the "Why didn't he just stop" crowd arrives. The answer was given to the 911 operator.
Edit: And the confirmation of his fears were provided by the K9 operator.
Well, I am only part way through and though you are completely wrong about the content I admit that you’re probably right because guessing is probably more accurate than learning.Without watching it and giving it clicks, I am guessing his conclusion is that the results of defunding police are great, and not at all horrible?"Some More News" is a YouTube news show that tries to be like John Oliver's 'Last Week Tonight'. Mixing comedy with coverage of real topics. Honestly, I find most of the comedy bits rather meh.. but the news parts are actually very interesting.
So their latest show is on 'defund the police'
If you can think of a better way to defend freedom than requiring people to unquestioningly and immediately obey every command given by a police officer, then I would like to hear it.It's open season on people who don't comply with law enforcement. It's the American way.
Indeed. That's why the guy was fired.There was no reason to release the hounds when it was done.
Do you think people should have the right to flee from police during a traffic stop?If you can think of a better way to defend freedom than requiring people to unquestioningly and immediately obey every command given by a police officer, then I would like to hear it.
No I don't.Do you think people should have the right to flee from police during a traffic stop?If you can think of a better way to defend freedom than requiring people to unquestioningly and immediately obey every command given by a police officer, then I would like to hear it.
It seems you might have misinterpreted my comment. My point was that according to Derec, in America, defying the police gives them the authority to do whatever they want to you. It appears you're suggesting that because I disagree with an officer directing a K9 to attack a compliant individual, I don't understand or value the role of law enforcement. That's an unexpected conclusion.If you can think of a better way to defend freedom than requiring people to unquestioningly and immediately obey every command given by a police officer, then I would like to hear it.It's open season on people who don't comply with law enforcement. It's the American way.
Indeed. That's why the guy was fired.
Oh, good. Because your quip made it sound as if you thought it was a matter of "freedom" to disobey lawful orders from police, including getting pulled over while driving a truck. And that sounded a bit sovereign citizenish to me.No I don't.
No. Not for that alone.Do you think that the police should have the right to kill people if they attempt to do so?
The problem with these lawsuits is that often multimillion dollar settlements or verdicts happen ((almost) exclusively with black perps) even when the police did nothing wrong. Like the $32M verdict against police who killed the sovereign citizen nutter Korryn Gaines who threatened police with a shotgun.I observe once more that there seems to be an unnecessary financial burden on taxpayers due to certain police actions. Even when they had a clear-cut case against an individual for refusing to stop, a lapse in judgment from an officer led to a potential multi-million dollar lawsuit.
Yes. A lot of these lawsuits are only successful because of race of the plaintiffs.Right Mr. "black people filing race based frivolous lawsuits are making things more expensive for everyone" Derec?
I guess he should have listened to his lawyer.That's not why he was fired. He was fired because he kept blabbing on about the incident like a little bitch when he was instructed not to talk about it.
I definitely do not have time to watch an hour long video that was described as "meh" by the person who posted it.Well, I am only part way through and though you are completely wrong about the content I admit that you’re probably right because guessing is probably more accurate than learning.
The problem with these lawsuits is that often multimillion dollar settlements or verdicts happen ((almost) exclusively with black perps) even when the police did nothing wrong. Like the $32M verdict against police who killed the sovereign citizen nutter Korryn Gaines who threatened police with a shotgun.I observe once more that there seems to be an unnecessary financial burden on taxpayers due to certain police actions. Even when they had a clear-cut case against an individual for refusing to stop, a lapse in judgment from an officer led to a potential multi-million dollar lawsuit.
These lawsuits cannot be an incentive for police to behave better if they get successfully sued no matter whether they actually do anything wrong.
Yes. A lot of these lawsuits are only successful because of race of the plaintiffs.Right Mr. "black people filing race based frivolous lawsuits are making things more expensive for everyone" Derec?
There are; But they are incredibly rare.There are scenarios where lethal force against fleeing suspects is justified, however.
Why an officer? Officers are there to put themselves in danger, so the general public doesn't have to. That the target is an officer should make it less imperative to stop the offender, not more so.If the vehicle is used as a weapon to strike or drag an officer for example.
Sure. If there's a compelling reason to believe that they have an intent to kill innocent bystanders.Or when a perp is armed and showed himself to be a danger to others and is trying to flee the scene. You can't let somebody like that get away and hurt or kill an innocent bystander later.