Buddy of mine I went to school with just got murdered by a cop...
08-04-2010, 08:09 PM
#41
We expect more from those who are permitted to be in law enforcement. We don't expect them to be little bitches who react to their feelings getting hurt. BooFuckingWho
The guy's friend said the guy was never aggressive and that the officer never identified himself. Witness reports contradict that. That alone makes the friend's entire story about how it happened outside suspect. Without the whole story of what happened outside, blaming the officer for outright murder is wrong. Again, the officer was reacting to the other guy's aggression. Was it an overreaction? No one here knows. What we do know is the dude plainly displayed aggression and started the whole thing. NO one can argue that.
Couple that with the fact I am a trained professional.
"Oh no! You walked up to me while I had a gun pointed at you, I'm scared, so I will shoot you." Sure, if you're an untrained vagina.
Is this your argument?
If you point a gun at someone to arrest them and they make a move towards you when they have already been really aggressive, you shoot them. Armed or not. Anyone with sense knows you don't let someone come up on you close enough to make it physical once you have the gun out. Use some sense people. Once you point the gun at someone, you better damn well be better to use it if they make a move towards you.
As such, we can deal with the fact they get PAID and are NOT fired when they shoot someone until the conclusion of the investigation. But, if I shot you because you called me a name and displayed aggression while I had a gun pointed at you, would I still have a job and would I still be free to walk the streets? NO, because we expect LEOs to be held to a higher standard than little gun-carrying pussies on the street.
That's why we give them a badge.
08-04-2010, 08:17 PM
#42
I will again state this aside from any other arguments:
The fact the guy used a racial slur (and in front of his child) lends credence to the action the cop took.
This shines extremely negative on the cop and shows intent and motivation, IMO.
If an unarmed man is belligerent and aggressive, and approaches a trained professional who has a weapon.... why shoot him?
Because emotions got the best of you.
The fact the guy used a racial slur (and in front of his child) lends credence to the action the cop took.
This shines extremely negative on the cop and shows intent and motivation, IMO.
If an unarmed man is belligerent and aggressive, and approaches a trained professional who has a weapon.... why shoot him?
Because emotions got the best of you.
08-04-2010, 08:29 PM
#43
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (26)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western Section
Posts: 571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You obviously can't read either. I've never said that he was shot because of using a racial slur. I explained quite the opposite plain as day how it WILL be used in the officer's defense to illustrate the character and volatility the man was displaying and the extreme aggression he was displaying. It's not the racial slur, it's the total sum of his actions. Can you not understand that when it is explained plainly to you?
I suppose you have never been trained to handle a weapon in a heated situation, because you obviously don't get it based on this:
What is the trained professional supposed to do with the weapon, let the guy who was VERY aggressive take it from him and use it? THINK for a minute before you post. Officers are trained that when they pull their gun on a VERY aggressive person to subdue them, that if the person makes any more that could compromise control of the weapon. . .to shoot them. If you can't understand that from the things that I have previously explained, you have no hope of ever clearly thinking outside of the typical "the cop MUST be wrong" mentality.
He got shot because he demonstrated clear aggression that made the officer attempt to take control of the situation at gunpoint. He then made a move that forced the officer to do what he was trained to do.
From the article:
I suppose you have never been trained to handle a weapon in a heated situation, because you obviously don't get it based on this:
If an unarmed man is belligerent and aggressive, and approaches a trained professional who has a weapon.... why shoot him?
He got shot because he demonstrated clear aggression that made the officer attempt to take control of the situation at gunpoint. He then made a move that forced the officer to do what he was trained to do.
From the article:
“I want to clear that up right now,” Parks said. “Racial comments simply had nothing to do with it. The outcome came from the victim being aggressive towards the officer.”
08-04-2010, 09:36 PM
#44
08-05-2010, 12:13 AM
#46
The use of deadly force is clearly, albeit narrowly, defined. Now, will the DA and IA find that the responsive force was commensurate with the threat? Who knows? None of us were there, and the bantering/speculation is just that.
The racial remarks, in a provocative and aggressive context, represent an interesting dynamic to the cops defense. To say that they are wholly irrelevant is uninformed - they were obviously a component to the perceived aggression and threat. Equally ignorant is any position that states they were the sole motivation of the shooting.
08-05-2010, 10:59 AM
#47
12 Second Club
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,898
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tazer, mace, choke hold, sure. I can see those being a reasonable response.
Shot unarmed in your own vehicle by an offduty rookie with a sensitivity to namecalling ? Wow, just wow.
Take a look at how a similar (non-fatal) situation worked out for Steve Foley, former Chargers player :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_F...oting_incident
Although settlement terms were not at first disclosed, it was reported a few days later that Foley received a $5.5 million settlement from the city of Coronado.[16]
Too bad we can't trust law enforcement to not behave like little ******* alpha-complex kids on a playground sometimes. If this is an example of his training, every DUI he ever pulled over would wind up in the hospital/morgue, I guarantee a DUI will be calling him every name in the book and threatening him physically even more too. What kind of career does this guy expect to have in law enforcement if he can't control his actions - especially OFF DUTY ?
At the end of the day, did the guy really have to die at gunpoint over returning some parts and losing his temper, even if he was calling the cop names ? That's what happens when you pull out your gun to control the situation, there's a good chance you're gonna shoot/kill someone, especially if it's your intent to do so. If that's not the desired outcome, use another method of force.
Rob (Bad30th)
Shot unarmed in your own vehicle by an offduty rookie with a sensitivity to namecalling ? Wow, just wow.
Take a look at how a similar (non-fatal) situation worked out for Steve Foley, former Chargers player :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_F...oting_incident
Although settlement terms were not at first disclosed, it was reported a few days later that Foley received a $5.5 million settlement from the city of Coronado.[16]
Too bad we can't trust law enforcement to not behave like little ******* alpha-complex kids on a playground sometimes. If this is an example of his training, every DUI he ever pulled over would wind up in the hospital/morgue, I guarantee a DUI will be calling him every name in the book and threatening him physically even more too. What kind of career does this guy expect to have in law enforcement if he can't control his actions - especially OFF DUTY ?
At the end of the day, did the guy really have to die at gunpoint over returning some parts and losing his temper, even if he was calling the cop names ? That's what happens when you pull out your gun to control the situation, there's a good chance you're gonna shoot/kill someone, especially if it's your intent to do so. If that's not the desired outcome, use another method of force.
Rob (Bad30th)
08-05-2010, 12:42 PM
#48
You obviously can't read either. I've never said that he was shot because of using a racial slur. I explained quite the opposite plain as day how it WILL be used in the officer's defense to illustrate the character and volatility the man was displaying and the extreme aggression he was displaying. It's not the racial slur, it's the total sum of his actions. Can you not understand that when it is explained plainly to you?
I suppose you have never been trained to handle a weapon in a heated situation, because you obviously don't get it based on this:
What is the trained professional supposed to do with the weapon, let the guy who was VERY aggressive take it from him and use it? THINK for a minute before you post. Officers are trained that when they pull their gun on a VERY aggressive person to subdue them, that if the person makes any more that could compromise control of the weapon. . .to shoot them. If you can't understand that from the things that I have previously explained, you have no hope of ever clearly thinking outside of the typical "the cop MUST be wrong" mentality.
He got shot because he demonstrated clear aggression that made the officer attempt to take control of the situation at gunpoint. He then made a move that forced the officer to do what he was trained to do.
From the article:
I suppose you have never been trained to handle a weapon in a heated situation, because you obviously don't get it based on this:
What is the trained professional supposed to do with the weapon, let the guy who was VERY aggressive take it from him and use it? THINK for a minute before you post. Officers are trained that when they pull their gun on a VERY aggressive person to subdue them, that if the person makes any more that could compromise control of the weapon. . .to shoot them. If you can't understand that from the things that I have previously explained, you have no hope of ever clearly thinking outside of the typical "the cop MUST be wrong" mentality.
He got shot because he demonstrated clear aggression that made the officer attempt to take control of the situation at gunpoint. He then made a move that forced the officer to do what he was trained to do.
From the article:
I proved where one of your statements to make a point, actually supports the counterpoint.
Learn how to come up with a valid argument, one that you can defend and support, then return to the conversation.
Obviously my reading comprehension is sufficient because it has been adequately used to handle your weak arguments.
Try comprehending my one very basic point: A trained professional should act just like that, "trained" and "professional". I expect him to be able to handle a situation with an unarmed belligerent person that does not result in his death. The way he handled the situation is like any ******** with a gun and a temper.
08-05-2010, 04:46 PM
#49
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (26)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western Section
Posts: 571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tazer, mace, choke hold, sure. I can see those being a reasonable response.
Shot unarmed in your own vehicle by an offduty rookie with a sensitivity to namecalling ? Wow, just wow.
Take a look at how a similar (non-fatal) situation worked out for Steve Foley, former Chargers player :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_F...oting_incident
Although settlement terms were not at first disclosed, it was reported a few days later that Foley received a $5.5 million settlement from the city of Coronado.[16]
Too bad we can't trust law enforcement to not behave like little ******* alpha-complex kids on a playground sometimes. If this is an example of his training, every DUI he ever pulled over would wind up in the hospital/morgue, I guarantee a DUI will be calling him every name in the book and threatening him physically even more too. What kind of career does this guy expect to have in law enforcement if he can't control his actions - especially OFF DUTY ?
At the end of the day, did the guy really have to die at gunpoint over returning some parts and losing his temper, even if he was calling the cop names ? That's what happens when you pull out your gun to control the situation, there's a good chance you're gonna shoot/kill someone, especially if it's your intent to do so. If that's not the desired outcome, use another method of force.
Rob (Bad30th)
Shot unarmed in your own vehicle by an offduty rookie with a sensitivity to namecalling ? Wow, just wow.
Take a look at how a similar (non-fatal) situation worked out for Steve Foley, former Chargers player :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_F...oting_incident
Although settlement terms were not at first disclosed, it was reported a few days later that Foley received a $5.5 million settlement from the city of Coronado.[16]
Too bad we can't trust law enforcement to not behave like little ******* alpha-complex kids on a playground sometimes. If this is an example of his training, every DUI he ever pulled over would wind up in the hospital/morgue, I guarantee a DUI will be calling him every name in the book and threatening him physically even more too. What kind of career does this guy expect to have in law enforcement if he can't control his actions - especially OFF DUTY ?
At the end of the day, did the guy really have to die at gunpoint over returning some parts and losing his temper, even if he was calling the cop names ? That's what happens when you pull out your gun to control the situation, there's a good chance you're gonna shoot/kill someone, especially if it's your intent to do so. If that's not the desired outcome, use another method of force.
Rob (Bad30th)
- He was getting out of it going towards the officer while the officer had a gun on him
- The officer was far from a rookie.
Did you read the information provided at all before assuming a stance?
I even provided the excerpt where the non-biased Texas Ranger investigating said this was not a result of the slurs, but was a result of the deceased being aggressive towards the officer.
No seasoned officer is ever "off-duty."
The problem with your arguments is you first use them as a way to justify a response, yet at the same time it can be used against your argument.
I proved where one of your statements to make a point, actually supports the counterpoint.
Learn how to come up with a valid argument, one that you can defend and support, then return to the conversation.
Obviously my reading comprehension is sufficient because it has been adequately used to handle your weak arguments.
Try comprehending my one very basic point: A trained professional should act just like that, "trained" and "professional". I expect him to be able to handle a situation with an unarmed belligerent person that does not result in his death. The way he handled the situation is like any ******** with a gun and a temper.
I proved where one of your statements to make a point, actually supports the counterpoint.
Learn how to come up with a valid argument, one that you can defend and support, then return to the conversation.
Obviously my reading comprehension is sufficient because it has been adequately used to handle your weak arguments.
Try comprehending my one very basic point: A trained professional should act just like that, "trained" and "professional". I expect him to be able to handle a situation with an unarmed belligerent person that does not result in his death. The way he handled the situation is like any ******** with a gun and a temper.
Trained professional? I guess you don't know what that means either, because he reacted EXACTLY like his training taught him to. Most certainly you were never trained to handle a situation using a weapon. Once drawn to attempt to subdue a suspect who has been overly aggressive, you MUST use it if they make a move towards you.
I expect any belligerent person to react to a gun and officer commands appropriately. If they don't, I expect them to reap the consequences of not doing so. He should have reacted to officer commands appropriately. See that? This guy had obligations too. Not only the officer was involved in this altercation.
You haven't handled any arguments at all. You've given weak opinions not based on any of the information provided.
I can't keep repeating myself just because you guys won't listen, I'm out of here.
You guys should learn that no matter how much you hate cops, sometimes when they do something you don't like - they might not be in the wrong. 
...
08-05-2010, 05:15 PM
#51
TECH Resident
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gardena, Ca
Posts: 871
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cops are cops, period. they are trained to kill and no matter what, because of the system there's not a whole lot we as citizens can do but abide by they rule, but with in reason. Just think as cops as those ankle bitters, if you make them feel threated, they bark, well, cops shoot
08-05-2010, 10:51 PM
#52
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wonder how the cops daughter feels emotionally after seeing her father shoot and kill a man? The only situation the cop should have shot the man is if his(the cops) or others life was being threatened. They have so much more training than to just shoot someone, and that should be their last course of action. Detain and cuff should have been sufficient enough until the responding officer arrived on the scene. RIP
08-05-2010, 11:22 PM
#53
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (70)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Angeles, California (818)
Posts: 1,219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll play defense for the cop real quick,
we still don't know the whole story, the marine could have grabbed for the gun. I think a captain (I would hope at least) would have restraint and wouldn't jeopardize his career and his life pulling a gun for no reason.
Still, the marine was unarmed and shot in a kill zone, not in an arm or a leg like police are trained.
The cop should have
A. stayed inside, minding his own business.
B. wait for an on duty cop to arrive (police were called)
C. grabbed a stun gun if anything
The cop SHOULD be sitting in jail right now awaiting a trial/sentence. period.
we still don't know the whole story, the marine could have grabbed for the gun. I think a captain (I would hope at least) would have restraint and wouldn't jeopardize his career and his life pulling a gun for no reason.
Still, the marine was unarmed and shot in a kill zone, not in an arm or a leg like police are trained.
The cop should have
A. stayed inside, minding his own business.
B. wait for an on duty cop to arrive (police were called)
C. grabbed a stun gun if anything
The cop SHOULD be sitting in jail right now awaiting a trial/sentence. period.
they shoot to kill for a reason. if a guy pulls out a gun and cop draws and shoots, he isnt going to try to shoot the gun off his hands lol. its killed or be killed in situations like that.
for the dead marin, i feel bad for the family. but in reality we dont know what really happened. when an off duty cops intervenes he must have been doing something disruptive.
im not justifying the off duty cop. i know cops are trained to not interfere unless it is absolutely necessary.
08-06-2010, 06:33 PM
#55
I like how you talk about how much you know and how good your argument is. I suppose you don't understand that when they investigate an officer shooting they will establish a model of how the deceased was acting towards the officer and hateful slurs will be used simply as an example of the unbridled aggression the deceased was displaying towards the officer. As I have already said multiple times, the investigating Texas Ranger said it was not a result of the slurs but was a result of the aggressive actions of the deceased. Of course he did, otherwise it shows motivation for shooting the victim. they have already given you insight to the fact that it will be approached in the manner that I have told you it would.
Trained professional? I guess you don't know what that means either, because he reacted EXACTLY like his training taught him to. Most certainly you were never trained to handle a situation using a weapon. Once drawn to attempt to subdue a suspect who has been overly aggressive, you MUST use it if they make a move towards you. The difference we have is I expect more from the officer instead of a feeble reaction.
I expect any belligerent person to react to a gun and officer commands appropriately. If they don't, I expect them to reap the consequences of not doing so. He should have reacted to officer commands appropriately. See that? This guy had obligations too. Not only the officer was involved in this altercation.
You haven't handled any arguments at all. You've given weak opinions not based on any of the information provided.
I can't keep repeating myself just because you guys won't listen, I'm out of here. You guys should learn that no matter how much you hate cops, sometimes when they do something you don't like - they might not be in the wrong. I can't keep repeating myself just because you guys won't listen, I'm out of here. You guys should learn that no matter how much you like cops, sometimes when they do something you like - they might be in the wrong.
Trained professional? I guess you don't know what that means either, because he reacted EXACTLY like his training taught him to. Most certainly you were never trained to handle a situation using a weapon. Once drawn to attempt to subdue a suspect who has been overly aggressive, you MUST use it if they make a move towards you. The difference we have is I expect more from the officer instead of a feeble reaction.
I expect any belligerent person to react to a gun and officer commands appropriately. If they don't, I expect them to reap the consequences of not doing so. He should have reacted to officer commands appropriately. See that? This guy had obligations too. Not only the officer was involved in this altercation.
You haven't handled any arguments at all. You've given weak opinions not based on any of the information provided.
I can't keep repeating myself just because you guys won't listen, I'm out of here.
You guys should learn that no matter how much you hate cops, sometimes when they do something you don't like - they might not be in the wrong. I can't keep repeating myself just because you guys won't listen, I'm out of here. You guys should learn that no matter how much you like cops, sometimes when they do something you like - they might be in the wrong.
08-10-2010, 05:13 PM
#57
listen onebaddz first of all everything you have had to say in this thread is worthless and moot because of your gay *** avatar, Even if everything you said was exactly true correct and proven i still would not care because of that worthless pos you have next to your name, As matter of fact i feel like punching baby's and strangling puppies every single time i see it
second almost every post you make you pretty much contradicts your previous statement
third pull the leos **** out of your *** and you might realize that your full of ****
have a good day!
second almost every post you make you pretty much contradicts your previous statement
third pull the leos **** out of your *** and you might realize that your full of ****
have a good day!
08-11-2010, 06:06 PM
#59
Long story short; The Black Panthers post up guys with clubs outside of Philadelphia polling places during the Obama/McCain election. People get this on video. Videos go viral. The Bush Justice Department starts a case against the Black Panthers for Voter Intimidation. Obama's Justice Department then drops the slam-dunk case for "no apparent" reason. Black Panthers then laugh about the subject.
Wall Street Journal Story
Intimidation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU
Malik Shabazz, the leader of the Black Panthers, joking about the case after it's dropped.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JunrpGf5QRc
After all this **** I've completely lost faith in our justice system.
Wall Street Journal Story
Intimidation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU
Malik Shabazz, the leader of the Black Panthers, joking about the case after it's dropped.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JunrpGf5QRc
After all this **** I've completely lost faith in our justice system.
08-11-2010, 07:08 PM
#60
Teching In
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: City of Angels
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
