repoman
Contributor
Bullshit. Castile was sitting in a car with his hand in his pocket. Once he pulled it out, he would have to turn - plenty of time for Yanez to shoot multiple rounds.If you want until the gun is pulled you're dead.
agree
Bullshit. Castile was sitting in a car with his hand in his pocket. Once he pulled it out, he would have to turn - plenty of time for Yanez to shoot multiple rounds.If you want until the gun is pulled you're dead.
Or waited until he pulled out a gun. Instead, he panicked and killed Castile.
If you want until the gun is pulled you're dead.
If you want until the gun is pulled you're dead.
I agree. Castille shouldn't have waited or tried to reason with Yanez, he should have shot him the instant he came up to the window.
Or waited until he pulled out a gun. Instead, he panicked and killed Castile.
If you want until the gun is pulled you're dead.
That was rhetorical right? Loren doesn't believe anyone shot by the police is ever completely innocent.So you think it is better to kill innocent citizens instead?If you want until the gun is pulled you're dead.
Just wait until it's some right-wing white guy who is shot. Like in Ruby Ridge and Waco. I remember how the right-wingers howled about those incidents.That was rhetorical right? Loren doesn't believe anyone shot by the police is ever completely innocent.So you think it is better to kill innocent citizens instead?
LaVoy Finicum!!!
Reason said:The organization's spokesperson seems to think Castile's cannabis consumption is relevant, but it's not clear why.
As a follow up to this story and the annoying silence of the NRA.
Does Anti-Pot Prejudice Explain NRA's Reluctance to Condemn Philando Castile Shooting?
Reason said:The organization's spokesperson seems to think Castile's cannabis consumption is relevant, but it's not clear why.
As a follow up to this story and the annoying silence of the NRA.
Does Anti-Pot Prejudice Explain NRA's Reluctance to Condemn Philando Castile Shooting?
I think it's relevant because it would have blunted his recognition of the fact that the cop thought he was going for his gun.
I think it's relevant because it would have blunted his recognition of the fact that the cop thought he was going for his gun.
While I agree, I don't think it was the NRAs main reason for not supporting him.
While I agree, I don't think it was the NRAs main reason for not supporting him.
Either it was the pot, or they didn't want to criticize a cop. I think it was the pot.
Either it was the pot, or they didn't want to criticize a cop. I think it was the pot.
So the NRA has never criticized how the police have handled a situation with a gun?