Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 26 of 26 FirstFirst ... 16242526
Results 376 to 379 of 379
  1. #376
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    36,270
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    You'd have to point me to where I said having a weapon justified a cop shooting.
    You do understand this wasn't just a situation of 'a suspect having a weapon', right? In this case the supposed first thing officers saw when breaching the door was a person pointing, not just having, a weapon...and that shots were supposedly only fired when the suspect fired at them. That's far beyond just having a weapon.

    But while firing may have been justified, it never needed to have gotten to that...and certainly didn't require 32 shots combined by 3 officers.
    I wasn't talking about you and I wasn't talking specifically about this incident. I'm talking about in general. Cops get cleared of all wrongdoing in a lot of cases because they believed the suspect had a weapon or was reaching for it, even if the suspect wasn't reaching for it or didn't even have a weapon.

  2. #377
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Miami Heat
    Posts
    4,205
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    which is ironic because any suspect being armed is enough intent for them to open fire.
    How is this even an appropriate analogy? A cop who shoots an innocent person = the innocent person or their family can sue the city. A cop or their family can't sue the city if a person shoots the cop dead. So there's a liability issue as well as cops being held to a much higher standard than the average citizen that exists which you willfully ignored.

  3. #378
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    36,270
    Quote Originally Posted by OceanSpray View Post
    How is this even an appropriate analogy? A cop who shoots an innocent person = the innocent person or their family can sue the city. A cop or their family can't sue the city if a person shoots the cop dead. So there's a liability issue as well as cops being held to a much higher standard than the average citizen that exists which you willfully ignored.
    Being able to sue a city from wrongful death doesn’t justify or excuse police from shooting innocent people (or even guilty people who do not pose a lethal threat to them).

    As for them being held to a higher standard, apparently not. Cops seem to be able to open fire and kill people for standards that no other person could reasonably claim as self defense.
    Last edited by valade16; 10-05-2020 at 02:02 PM.

  4. #379
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    14,999
    Well cops SHOULD be held to a higher standard and most of the time are...but we keep finding out more and more how often that is NOT the case. It still should be, and that's part of the needed reform.

    Sure, a victim's family can sue the city and quite often get a sizeable settlement.
    How many of them would say 'ok, we're good, fair trade'

    That's just similar to the people that say, when someone is wrongly shot while still guilty of something (Kenosha)...'well maybe he shouldn't have resisted' or 'if he hadn't committed the crime in the first place'.....the point being, they may have deserved some time, but they didn't deserve to be shot or killed.
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

Page 26 of 26 FirstFirst ... 16242526

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •