Articles
   
       
Pics/Video
       
Wake 101
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WakeWorld Home
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Non-Wakeboarding Discussion

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       07-14-2016, 12:38 PM Reply   
Here is proof, If you can't follow simple instruction's It doesn't matter if your Black or White your gonna get blasted.

Disclaimer Graphic footage Point blank Shotgun and Pistol Action!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...oble-shooting/
Old     (Laker1234)      Join Date: Mar 2010       07-14-2016, 1:02 PM Reply   
I sympathize with the family and what a tragedy, but how hard is it to put your hands up and get on the ground. No one, including the police officers, wants to get shot. Another difference is that this video shows the incident in its entirety and not selectively edited by the media.
Old    deltahoosier            07-14-2016, 1:34 PM Reply   
Looks like another suicide by cop (which also gets included in "cops shoot unarmed man" statistic. Sad situation all the way around. The cops don't want to pull the trigger either.
Old     (denverd1)      Join Date: May 2004 Location: Tyler       07-14-2016, 1:45 PM Reply   
jeez WTF is wrong with people??? put your hands up!! pretty easy.
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       07-14-2016, 1:49 PM Reply   
It says they had a K-9 unit there. I can't figure out why they didn't use that first.
Old     (timmyb)      Join Date: Apr 2007       07-14-2016, 2:01 PM Reply   
I don't think they would have shot him if he had both of his hands in front of him. Having 1 hand behind your back is asking for trouble. Can't they taze him though? Do you really need to kill someone? Why wasn't the dog used? Hopefully they watch the video of themselves and think about how they could handle the same situation differently next time.
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       07-14-2016, 2:05 PM Reply   
How many agree with me when I say if everything in this scenario was the same except for the guy that got shot was black there would be huge implications civil unrest, and the normal Mayhem that occurs when a white police officer shoots a black man.
Old    deltahoosier            07-14-2016, 3:10 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by grant_west View Post
How many agree with me when I say if everything in this scenario was the same except for the guy that got shot was black there would be huge implications civil unrest, and the normal Mayhem that occurs when a white police officer shoots a black man.
Bingo.... There was a cop that had to kill a naked guy sleeping on a bench in Oakland. The cop goes to wake him up. They guy jumped up and started fighting with the cop to get his gun. Cop ends up shooting the guy.

The news paper headline: "cop shoots unarmed black man". Never mentioned the cop was black. Most of the time this is designed to make society unstable. People need to start researching leftist politics and how they work.
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       07-14-2016, 3:27 PM Reply   
yup and the min you say things like
Quote:
"People need to start researching leftist politics and how they work"
people start breaking out the "Tin Foil" statements. Problem is people don't want to hear idea's that make them un comfortable or challenge their belief. Most gravitate to people spewing their side of the story.Everything else is blasphemy!
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       07-14-2016, 3:29 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
The news paper headline: "cop shoots unarmed black man". Never mentioned the cop was black. Most of the time this is designed to make society unstable. People need to start researching leftist politics and how they work.
I don't know if it has anything to do with leftist politics, thats just journalism, sensational headlines sell papers. Most papers sell entertainment based on truth. Sometimes only small amounts of truth required....
Old    deltahoosier            07-14-2016, 4:15 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
I don't know if it has anything to do with leftist politics, thats just journalism, sensational headlines sell papers. Most papers sell entertainment based on truth. Sometimes only small amounts of truth required....
While I can agree with that to a certain point (look at all the facebook adds), it is extremely noticeable in strong leftist areas. Maybe there are playing to their audience? With that said, it is a slippery slope. These papers are not little mom and pop shops. They reach a lot of people and have pull and they write this stuff. At what point is it agenda vs headline grabbing especially when the whole article supports the narrative of the headline?

All I am saying is understand your history and how these things play out. In order to make people to vote for more centralized control, you have to make them believe that local control is not working. We have Chicago community organizers calling for the police to be disbanded when blacks are murdering blacks by the thousands in that city. It does not make sense. Why would you want the one thing standing in the way of the movie "The Purge" from playing out in your city to be disbanded?
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       07-14-2016, 8:13 PM Reply   
I agree, all media needs to be critically evaluated when considering their message. The human condition doesn't lend itself to that tho, normally we just listen to what reinforce our currently beliefs and ignore/pooh pooh which doesn't.
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       07-14-2016, 9:58 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by timmyb View Post
I don't think they would have shot him if he had both of his hands in front of him. Having 1 hand behind your back is asking for trouble. Can't they taze him though? Do you really need to kill someone? Why wasn't the dog used? Hopefully they watch the video of themselves and think about how they could handle the same situation differently next time.
It's clear you have no idea of what a possible lethal force encounter entails. You don't bring a taser to a situation in which a person is believed to be armed. That's a sure fire way to end up dead. Taser failure rates are not something to bet your life on. Not to mention when an armed individual is hit with a taser it causes their muscles to constrict which means bang your dead. Second you don't ever send a police k9 into a situation in which you believe an individual is armed. The K9 is an officer. You don't send an unarmed officer in to am armed conflict. That's sure fire way to end up with a dead K9 partner. It's clear you don't have the first clue of how law enforcement or possible deadly encounters work. Maybe you need to educate yourself after watching the video on possible outcomes.
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       07-14-2016, 10:47 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by xstarrider View Post
It's clear you have no idea of what a possible lethal force encounter entails. You don't bring a taser to a situation in which a person is believed to be armed. That's a sure fire way to end up dead. Taser failure rates are not something to bet your life on. Not to mention when an armed individual is hit with a taser it causes their muscles to constrict which means bang your dead. Second you don't ever send a police k9 into a situation in which you believe an individual is armed. The K9 is an officer. You don't send an unarmed officer in to am armed conflict. That's sure fire way to end up with a dead K9 partner. It's clear you don't have the first clue of how law enforcement or possible deadly encounters work. Maybe you need to educate yourself after watching the video on possible outcomes.
Whoa. I never knew they considered the life of a K-9 at the same level as a human life. I've also never thought of a bad as$ German Shepard as unarmed either. This particular case is full of opportunities for Monday morning QB'ing, but I'm not going there. I just think the whole thing is sad.
Old     (bcd)      Join Date: Jun 2012       07-15-2016, 6:20 AM Reply   
Did you not watch that video? Isn't it clear he wanted to be killed by the police? They told him about 10-20 times that he was going to be shot if he didn't show them both hands.

I do agree with you on the sad part. It's sad that even with body cameras, there are still people arguing that the police were wrong to shoot him.
Old     (bcd)      Join Date: Jun 2012       07-15-2016, 6:22 AM Reply   
They had no way of knowing if he had a weapon or not, so you have to assume for the worst case scenario.
Old     (ord27)      Join Date: Oct 2005       07-15-2016, 7:05 AM Reply   
I agree that it was a justified shooting. But, I also don't understand why they didn't rush him and secure his arms, once he had been shot and was on the ground. Having said that, I'm sure that the police have other concerns; blood contamination being one of them
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       07-15-2016, 8:05 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcd View Post
Did you not watch that video? Isn't it clear he wanted to be killed by the police? They told him about 10-20 times that he was going to be shot if he didn't show them both hands.

I do agree with you on the sad part. It's sad that even with body cameras, there are still people arguing that the police were wrong to shoot him.
Yes, I watched it. I also never said they were wrong to shoot him. I just want to understand the tactics and policies they have and the reasons behind them. I'm not advocating anything or voicing an opinion. I'm waiting for swatguy to answer... And yes. It seems that he wanted to be killed by police. Wouldn't it have been awesome to have had a K9 go tear him a new one and save his life in the process?
Old     (buffalow)      Join Date: Apr 2002       07-15-2016, 8:28 AM Reply   
This would have been a great opportunity to use a shotgun with bean bag - assuming there was 1-2 officers that had live firearms prepared. I agree the taser or K9 is not the correct application here, but I am not sure that killing him is either. I just wrapped up my CCW permit and learned alot - mainly only pull the trigger if you are being threatened in close range and in this case the officers are within the 21' and under threat. They gave him ample warnings. If he had just taken his hand from behind his back, they would likely have detained or tazed him. I also agree if the young man had been black this would have been a **** show. Not the case if he were asian or hispanic. Its all very sad, but authority has little authority any more and that is sad. I would never be a coo, but having nothing by the highest admiration and respect of them. If I get pulled over, I follow the rules! Why would I not if I am doing nothing wrong.

This world is ready for a massive revolution and all the signs are there.
Old     (bcd)      Join Date: Jun 2012       07-15-2016, 8:36 AM Reply   
While it would be awesome to see the k9 tear him a new one, I can understand why they did not release the dog. The dog usually bites in the arm, leaving one arm free. If he did have a gun, the dog is not going to be able to neutralize the threat. My brother in law was a k9 officer and I've seen what they are capable of, and it is impressive. Also, while it's just a dog to you, it's more often than not part of that officer's family. I'm sure risking the dogs life to save the life of a guy acting like that guy was acting was definitely in the back of that officer's mind, right out wrong.
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       07-15-2016, 8:43 AM Reply   
what I find refreshing is the wider acceptance of body cams from the police. I think if Darren Wilson had a body cam, his footage could have squashed the whole Furgerson dust up, as well as the birth of the BLM movment.

IMO police should welcome the use of body cams because if they are acting in a professional manner it's going to show. Another thing I'm seeing for the first time is talks from the black Comunity about telling or teaching their Comunity " for their own safety is to obey the officers commands" and Mutual respect for human life. WOW that's a refreshing idea!

I'm sorry but if you don't want to obey simple commands and especially if your armed and that go's doubble for when you have broken the law. Then prepair to be dispatched. I hate to see the police having to take out the trash but IMO that's what many of these people are. These people always have a way of flipping the script and some how they are the victim.
Old     (bcd)      Join Date: Jun 2012       07-15-2016, 8:44 AM Reply   
Side note, my brother in law was in a pursuit, don't remember what for. The guy stops on a bridge, gets out, runs over the to edge, and starts to climb over the rail to jump to certain death. Brother in law risks his life to pull him back, k9 bites the guy, and his life is saved. Perfect story, he didn't get shot or die to continue the national debate on police brutality. This guy turns around and sues the police department for his injuries and wins.
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       07-15-2016, 10:09 AM Reply   
With regards to body cameras. Most officers would agree these days they are needed. It's obvious people don't believe or trusts a policeman's word these days. On the flip side the camera only shows one portion of a situation and has a narrow view. It doesn't take into account what happened prior to that camera going in. The other issue we run in to is that things transpire so fast in deadly force encounters that you may forget to turn it on. Now you're instantly a murderer because the fact you didn't turn it on means it was not a good shoot.

Another issue is the fact these videos and scenarios are released to the public instantly with no facts, background , or details well before any trial or investigation is conducted. Those involved in these situations are convicted in the court of public opinion immediately. Their careers and families are destroyed before they even get a chance to show their side. Videos are cut and certain portions extracted to show the complete worse case scenario knowing full well that's not the entire case. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? How can someone expect to get a fair trial when public opinion and politicians are calling for their heads. I have no problem with videos being released. But the should not be allowed to be released to the public until the trial ( if warranted ) or the investigation is complete. There is too much outside influence and grandstanding to appease people who base their opinions off a 10 second video clip with 0 facts. Obviously with the first major cases that showed the facts to be the complete opposite of what the politicians and media wanted.

The last thing is that there are millions of videos showing the savagery , disrespect , assaults and crazy fubar situations an officer goes through daily. Why are those not plastered all over the news. Why isn't the public showed the ugliness and complete lack of regard for human life officers see daily. Why isn't the public shown the actual split second timing it takes to make the hardest decision an officer has to make. The fact is this. No good officer goes to work wanting to shoot someone. Even before this movement it meant a years of lawsuits, stress , dealing with everyone Monday morning qb'n every decision you made. Anyone who says it doesn't change you is lying

Last edited by xstarrider; 07-15-2016 at 10:13 AM.
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       07-15-2016, 10:14 AM Reply   
^^^Good story, BCD. Bad ending.
Old    TheWakeIsReal            07-15-2016, 10:41 AM Reply   
It's hard to trust some cops words when stuff like this comes out due to body cams.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2qgwx4yrO4
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       07-15-2016, 12:26 PM Reply   
TheWake;
I guess I just see things different. I would have liked "Patrick" to answer questions like a MAN. Straight up yes, no, answers. I had to watch the video a few times to figure out he was guilty of nothing. Because by the way he acted he acted totally guilty. If you don't have any warrants why be evasive. Is clearly stating your name to a police officer a big deal?
Old     (ord27)      Join Date: Oct 2005       07-15-2016, 1:05 PM Reply   
Grant, I normally side with you on almost every political stance that's taken here on WW. This time. I'm not sure.

Hopeful, with the use of these cameras, the public will become more responsive and cooperative, and the police will do things more "by the book".

Officer Bob clearly did not ask for ID. I felt that he wanted to go for the handcuffs to soon. But, had the dude just put his hands on the car to be searched, it would have been over a lot sooner
Old     (stevo8290)      Join Date: Sep 2008       07-15-2016, 1:27 PM Reply   
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlWMunmMwqo


pretty much sums up my thoughts on most police shootings. Don't run, don't be a dumb ass and you are not likely to get shot by the police. White or black. Like Kevin Gates says in this video, when they come up to talk to you, they are ignorant to what you are doing. If you don't have anything to hide, prove them wrong and be polite and you will be fine. They have a job to do and we need them.
Old     (timmyb)      Join Date: Apr 2007       07-15-2016, 5:17 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by xstarrider View Post
It's clear you have no idea of what a possible lethal force encounter entails. You don't bring a taser to a situation in which a person is believed to be armed. That's a sure fire way to end up dead. Taser failure rates are not something to bet your life on. Not to mention when an armed individual is hit with a taser it causes their muscles to constrict which means bang your dead. Second you don't ever send a police k9 into a situation in which you believe an individual is armed. The K9 is an officer. You don't send an unarmed officer in to am armed conflict. That's sure fire way to end up with a dead K9 partner. It's clear you don't have the first clue of how law enforcement or possible deadly encounters work. Maybe you need to educate yourself after watching the video on possible outcomes.
I watched my BIL get shot by the SWAT team a split second after they shot him with bean bags out of a 12 gauge as he was falling face forward on the ground. Luckily he turned as he was falling to the ground and instead of the sniper getting him in the heart, they got him in the left elbow and blew out his entire forearm. He lived and won that lawsuit BTW.

What's your background on a possible lethal force encounter?
Old     (hookedonboardin)      Join Date: Oct 2006       07-15-2016, 7:25 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by timmyb View Post
I watched my BIL get shot by the SWAT team a split second after they shot him with bean bags out of a 12 gauge as he was falling face forward on the ground. Luckily he turned as he was falling to the ground and instead of the sniper getting him in the heart, they got him in the left elbow and blew out his entire forearm. He lived and won that lawsuit BTW.

What's your background on a possible lethal force encounter?
16 yrs worth in the murder, shooting, and street gang capital of America. Interesting story about your BIL with 0 details. You do understand winning a judgement in a civil lawsuit for being shot doesn't mean in was a bad shoot or that it was wrong. Do you know what the burden of proof is for civil litigation? It's much lower and requires no legal basis It's based on the reasonableness standard which is subjective. Not based on case law. I am sure he was just minding his own business and the swat team just showed up w a sniper and a less lethal option out of the blue because they were bored.

I am going to completely speculate here on the details and let me know how far off I am. Guy surrounded for whatever reason needed to be taken into custody by police ( weather to protect himself (suicide) or protect public. Would not go and obey commands still while consider armed with something. Beanbag officer makes split second decision to shoot him , sniper thinks bad guy discharged his weapon instead and shoots. Plausible??????? 100percent.........No ill will , and in matter of fractions of seconds was justified. Yet lawsuit was filed because offender's family didn't actually fire a weapon, the noise was beanbag shotgun( which sounds exactly like real shotgun). So he was awarded damages. Does that mean any officer was incorrect in their actions? Based on the circumstances everyone acted appropriately. Terrible situation but whose really at fault here is the question . Again a complete speculation on my part, but a situation that can happen in which a lawsuit is won when everything that transpired was a direct result of one single individuals lack of cooperation with the police.
Old     (hookedonboardin)      Join Date: Oct 2006       07-15-2016, 7:44 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWakeIsReal View Post
It's hard to trust some cops words when stuff like this comes out due to body cams.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2qgwx4yrO4
You mean stuff like this where a simple answer to a simple question and being cordial could have ended everything before it started. What's the warrant for? What the resemblance? They're at the exact address and have an exact description , of which this guy fits , and matches. You then see and hear him not give a straight answer . He disregards verbal commands and then begins to physically resist control, raise his feet in an attempt to keep officers at bay. The then attempts to lock himself inside the vehicle and that's when he was tased. To me numerous chances given to just cooperate. All of which he chose to disregard. It could have simply ended when he just says my name is Patrick #^^*> here's my id. Instead he wants to play games . Those games make him appear even more like someone with something to hide.
The laws in most states are consistent when it comes to police custody. In some form or another it states no citizen has the right to resist arrest , even if they feel that arrest is unwarranted. His actions not giving a perceived straight answer, pulling away, sticking up feet to kick at and block officers and then topping it off with an attempt to close the car door are all forms of resisting. Again why does he end up tased? Because he wants to play games.

Last edited by hookedonboardin; 07-15-2016 at 7:47 PM.
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       07-15-2016, 9:08 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ord27 View Post
Grant, I normally side with you on almost every political stance that's taken here on WW. This time. I'm not sure.

Hopeful, with the use of these cameras, the public will become more responsive and cooperative, and the police will do things more "by the book".

Officer Bob clearly did not ask for ID. I felt that he wanted to go for the handcuffs to soon. But, had the dude just put his hands on the car to be searched, it would have been over a lot sooner
No doubt he should have asked for ID, and told the person why he was being detained and questioned. Asking why he's being ordered to do things is a reasonable question regardless of his legal right to the answer. While I understand the logic of doing what the cops ask without talking back, you really can't expect that all people will do that. And a reasonable level of interaction to explain the situation is way better than the public having to pay huge medical bills for all involved just because the cops are "too busy" to actually spend the time to defuse rather than escalate.

People who see things as black and white are never going to reach the right conclusion. When you see the cops bust someone's a$$ because they don't want to tell them why they are there, it's the tax payer who is footing the bill for that cracked skull. And it may be $100's of thousands. The cops were in absolutely no eminent danger in that video. It wouldn't have cut into their donut time too much to explain why he was being investigated.

And yes... I would always give anyone the same advice. Do exactly what the cops tell you to do. You have no rights when dealing with the police. They can arrest you with virtual impunity. Only after you post bail, pay a lawyer $3K, and see a judge do you begin to have rights. All the costs that precede that are your loss regardless of your innocence.
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       07-15-2016, 9:33 PM Reply   
Okay this thread went way off track. Assuming "swatguy" is literally just that, I want to learn the tactical reasons why they didn't send Rover in to set this guy straight before pumping him full of lead. Seems the guy still stood a chance of living after he was on the ground. Couldn't they have turned the dog on him right after they shot him the first time(s) just to make sure he was a non-threat? I'm not even saying that's what should have been done. I'm just curious as to what the police policies are and why.

The truth is, none of us know jack about any of the policies and training that go into policing despite most of the posts on this thread. Do we have any legit officers on this forum that can answer questions? I know there are plenty of wannabe lawyers and cops who think they have all the answers but they're mostly worthless to the rest of us that want nothing more than facts.
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       07-16-2016, 7:18 AM Reply   
Wake: I think that's the first post I have ever seen from you that I agree with and you did it with out hurling insults. Good Job!

I forgot who in this thread said it but why is there thousands of videos of police acting up, and the Media distributes them quite freely but the same Media Dosent distribute the people acting up. The way it's put out there It's like the cops are the only ones who are breaking the law and violating people's rights.

I love this guy stanly Roberts here in the bay Aera who has a show called "people behaving badly"

These in the videos below are the people the cops have to deal with. Any wonder why they have a low tollarance for BS.

http://youtu.be/UWnuyMUH-Tw

http://youtu.be/IAOnV-lOfJg
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       07-17-2016, 8:45 AM Reply   
Hooked PM inbound



To answer the question.
I am coming up on 18 yrs of service doing what the screen name implies. While no longer assigned to the SWAT unit , I am coming up on my 3rd year at the Tactical Training Unit where we train our officers on our Use of Force model. In a nut shell We place them in scenarios daily to train them on what the proper Use of Force is warranted under different situations. So I may have a little background in that.
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       07-17-2016, 8:48 AM Reply   
Double post
Old     (buffalow)      Join Date: Apr 2002       07-18-2016, 7:31 AM Reply   
Swat - thank you for your service. I do not have the patience or the balls to be an office must less a swat man. Many of my friends are officers or swat and they are incredible people devoted to serve. While there are bad cops in the world, there are many more bad people percentage wise. I hear stories every where of people trying to kill my friends, be messed up on drugs and have no clue where they are at, and over all disrespect that it is no wonder some cops go bad. I do not allow that as an excuse, but I know that i could not deal with it every day.

Thank you and be safe.
Old     (timmyb)      Join Date: Apr 2007       07-18-2016, 9:28 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by hookedonboardin View Post
16 yrs worth in the murder, shooting, and street gang capital of America. Interesting story about your BIL with 0 details. You do understand winning a judgement in a civil lawsuit for being shot doesn't mean in was a bad shoot or that it was wrong. Do you know what the burden of proof is for civil litigation? It's much lower and requires no legal basis It's based on the reasonableness standard which is subjective. Not based on case law. I am sure he was just minding his own business and the swat team just showed up w a sniper and a less lethal option out of the blue because they were bored.

I am going to completely speculate here on the details and let me know how far off I am. Guy surrounded for whatever reason needed to be taken into custody by police ( weather to protect himself (suicide) or protect public. Would not go and obey commands still while consider armed with something. Beanbag officer makes split second decision to shoot him , sniper thinks bad guy discharged his weapon instead and shoots. Plausible??????? 100percent.........No ill will , and in matter of fractions of seconds was justified. Yet lawsuit was filed because offender's family didn't actually fire a weapon, the noise was beanbag shotgun( which sounds exactly like real shotgun). So he was awarded damages. Does that mean any officer was incorrect in their actions? Based on the circumstances everyone acted appropriately. Terrible situation but whose really at fault here is the question . Again a complete speculation on my part, but a situation that can happen in which a lawsuit is won when everything that transpired was a direct result of one single individuals lack of cooperation with the police.
Nope. Was in his parents house and brand new neighbor thought he broke in. Parents show up at the same time as the police and police tell them they can't go in because there is an intruder. They tell the police that he has permission to be in the house (on the phone with him to prove to the cop) and please leave. Please leave turns into get off of my property which turns into you are trespassing. Argument between his Dad and the cop escalates as Dad try's to enter his own home and officer blocks him with weapon drawn and calls for backup because he still feels the need to be there since he is now apparently above the law. Situation gets out of control from there and BIL introduces guns to the situation and then holes up in the house. The whole thing would have never happened if the officer would have just left when asked. The officer in this case created a highly volatile situation and someone almost died over his mistake. There's a lot more but it's too long of a story to share on here but if we ever meet in person, be happy to share over a beer.

He isn't my BIL anymore and he isn't a perfect person but luckily he didn't die as he someone's son and a father as well. Here's my point, the non-lethal alternative worked in this case (knocked the breath out of him, he was falling face first) yet police still felt that they needed to shoot to kill yet he did nothing that warranted a death sentence. How do we know? Because he is alive today, out of jail and running his own IT company.

Are human lives not worth anything anymore? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? What is with this country and killing? I went and saw Secret Life of Pets with my family and they mention killing in a kids movie about pets. WTF? Why did we need that in there? We have serial killers and murderers in prison right now that are on death row and will never be executed for actual crimes that they committed but the police are willing to take someone's life in an instant at a traffic stop because they feel that their life is in danger. It's a tough job that they have and I respect and honor them for doing it because dealing with real criminals is not something I personally want to deal with.
Old     (bftskir)      Join Date: Jan 2004       07-18-2016, 1:37 PM Reply   
When I went through the academy in 2010 they didnt teach you to shoot someone whos reaching for their waistband...at the range if the bad guy had tape over his gun...you couldn't shoot him...if no weapon is seen you can't just blast away
Old     (timmyb)      Join Date: Apr 2007       07-18-2016, 2:45 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by bftskir View Post
When I went through the academy in 2010 they didnt teach you to shoot someone whos reaching for their waistband...at the range if the bad guy had tape over his gun...you couldn't shoot him...if no weapon is seen you can't just blast away
That's good to know!
Old     (timmyb)      Join Date: Apr 2007       07-18-2016, 2:51 PM Reply   
I may have come across above as not caring about the officer's safety and that is not true at all. I really don't want to see anyone die but if an officer rolls up on the scene of an active shooter and he sees bodies laying everywhere and the suspect reloading his weapon, I wouldn't lose any sleep over the use of lethal force to take the perp down and save the tax payers some money and due process! Same for the Dallas shooter and using the robot to detonate an explosive which resulted in that guys death. He admitted to killing the fallen officers and there wasn't a safe entry/exit strategy for the LEO's to apprehend him and he didn't comply with their commands.
Old     (baitkiller)      Join Date: Jan 2010       07-18-2016, 4:00 PM Reply   
I watch this sub forum and read it often. I know a few of you personally and make sure my politics are private. Just smart business for me, no other real reason. But I want to say I'm terrified this thing goes to an open shoot. We are close. Real close to an open shoot. I have thought for years that a class war would be instigated and (that) war would last a few minutes or seconds before it turned into a race war. It seems the first part has been skipped for expediency.



Watch your ass and be careful out there. Rental boats and jet skis may be not such a big deal in the near future.


Jesus was a barefooter,
John
Old     (ord27)      Join Date: Oct 2005       07-18-2016, 4:48 PM Reply   
yea
a good friend of mine's son was approached today.
He is a young white kid. Three black young men approached him and told him that they were going to mess him up because he is white and blonde.

this was in Dallas

he was a sharp shooter in the military and runs a gun range in his off time. I'm sure that he was carrying

He managed to get back into his truck and flee. He said that the three men ran after him

this thing will probably get a lot worse before it gets better

and yes, I think Obama has to be at least partially blamed
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       07-18-2016, 11:23 PM Reply   
All you have to do is listen to the last part of obama's Dallas cop's service speech to KNOW he is the divider-in-chief. Pathetic. He's had literally dozens of opportunities to make repairs in race relations throughout his presidency and instead, has taken the low road on most of them-as though he's trying to "keep it real" for his homies. He is a walking waste of blood who has done nothing to even help blacks. Sad. So much for expecting a respectable voice of reason to come from the highest office in the country. So much for "hope and change." It was all a ruse and the morons that voted for him are all to blame as well. You democrats all have blood on your hands if this thing gets any more out of control.

Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 6:12 AM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2019 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us