"cleavland?" Really? :dohDo you really believe that the cop from cleavland that got on top of the hood of the car where the 2 suspects were in feared for his life? and that's why he did what he did? did the 2 people in car actually corner him where he had to jump on the car and start shooting?
"cleavland?" Really? :doh
Could be the excessive exposure to PU 94.And he did it twice... is there a reason for that?
Do you really believe that the cop from cleavland that got on top of the hood of the car where the 2 suspects were in feared for his life? and that's why he did what he did? did the 2 people in car actually corner him where he had to jump on the car and start shooting?
I haven't kept up with this one very much, but weren't they using the car as a weapon? If so, then I think it's entirely plausible that he feared for his life.Do you really believe that the cop from cleavland that got on top of the hood of the car where the 2 suspects were in feared for his life? and that's why he did what he did? did the 2 people in car actually corner him where he had to jump on the car and start shooting?
It was believed they were armed.
The vehicle was used as a weapon.
It is reasonable for anyone who is confronting them to be scared for their life in such circumstances. Even Officers.
And he did it twice... is there a reason for that?
Pull on a uniform, pin on a badge, strap up and you do it. Then tell us all how its done.The vehicle was at a complete stop and riddled by a hundred bullets, so the car and the inhabitants where almost certainly not a danger.
The shooting took place because they mistook an engine backfiring as gun fire and shot and killed 2 unarmed inhabitants of that car.
Pull on a uniform, pin on a badge, strap up and you do it. Then tell us all how its done.
So a 4000 pound car is not a weapon?That is nonsense of course, not just police officers are allowed an opinion because if that were the case a lot more people are going to get killed without a good reason.
The police has to be monitored by the public to make sure they do not abuse their powers. Two unarmed individuals riddled with a hundred bullets are most likely not that much of a threat anymore that some dirty harry wannabee has to jump on the hood of a car and shoot at the 2 people inside a number of times. The officers should have approached with guns drawn and assessed the situation, not go dirty harry.
Especially because there was never one shot fired at them in the first place.
You do realize that your whole "you had to be there to have a valid opinion" spiel is just an indicator that you have no legitimate argument, right? All it is is a weak attempt to shut down opposing views without providing any substance. You can either effectively argue your side, or you cannot.So a 4000 pound car is not a weapon?
Otherwise, were you there? You an eye witness?
That is nonsense of course, not just police officers are allowed an opinion because if that were the case a lot more people are going to get killed without a good reason.
The police has to be monitored by the public to make sure they do not abuse their powers. Two unarmed individuals riddled with a hundred bullets are most likely not that much of a threat anymore that some dirty harry wannabee has to jump on the hood of a car and shoot at the 2 people inside a number of times. The officers should have approached with guns drawn and assessed the situation, not go dirty harry.
Especially because there was never one shot fired at them in the first place.
You do realize that your whole "you had to be there to have a valid opinion" spiel is just an indicator that you have no legitimate argument, right? All it is is a weak attempt to shut down opposing views without providing any substance. You can either effectively argue your side, or you cannot.
Actually, no, you probably don't realize that. Carry on.
Pull on a uniform, pin on a badge, strap up and you do it. Then tell us all how its done.
Are you being obtuse intentionally, or is it naturally unavoidable? My point was generic, as you have been using this same tactic in other similar threads lately, not case specific. I re-read my post and the fact that it's generic is obvious.I was not there. And neither was he. So the hyperbole and "appeal to emotion" about two poor unarmed blacks being "killed". Is total BS.
Are you being obtuse intentionally, or is it naturally unavoidable? My point was generic, as you have been using this same tactic in other similar threads lately, not case specific. I re-read my post and the fact that it's generic is obvious.
You think. And I believe that you honestly believe that. In actuality, you use it to prove you have no point.I use it a lot to prove a point.
So a 4000 pound car is not a weapon?
Otherwise, were you there? You an eye witness?
After more than 100 bullets into the car, with multiple bullets going into the 2 people inside the car, at the moment the rest of the police officers stopped shooting, all they had to do was wait and see for a second but from what I have read, this police officer is the only one who continued to shoot.
And if the car was still a weapon, then why jump on the hood of the car to shoot them sitting in the car. That shows that the car was no longer a weapon.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?