• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If a violent felon fires on police, should they "be allowed" to fire back?

ModerationNow!

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Messages
2,080
Reaction score
935
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Consider these facts:

The Breonna Taylor shooting case was considered by a grand jury today, who chose not to charge the police with murder. One cop was SEPARATELY charged with other crimes, but that was unrelated to the police officers who fired into the apartment where Taylor and her boyfriend lived.

The "news" media, democrats and especially BLM, have portrayed the events related to the shooting inconsistency and dishonestly. Their "narrative" goes like this: "the racist police showed up to Breonna's home, and arbitrarily murdered her for NO REASON, other than racism"!

First of all, B. Taylor was going out with a violent drug trafficker, and she'd been linked to his trafficking, because she'd been repeatedly seen in and out of her boyfriend's separate drug stash house.

More importantly, the police came to their apartment to serve a "NO KNOCK" arrest and search warrant, after conducting an investigation into the 2. They were allowed to just kick the door in without notifying the 2 suspects of their presence, but they CHOSE TO KNOCK ANYWAY.

After knocking and making their presence as cops known, Taylor's boyfriend grabbed his gun and began firing at the officers THROUGH THE CLOSED DOOR! So the police fired back, and unfortunately, unintentionally shot Breonna. It's obviously bad that she died, but she WOULDN'T have died if her boyfriend didn't fire at the police, and/or if she wasn't living with a violent drug trafficker!

The reasonable and rational grand jury understood these facts, and realized that the police were in the right to return fire, when being fired on! So they didn't charge the officers who shot into their apartment with murder, plain and simply. Contrary to the left's narrative, this was NOT a matter of an innocent black woman being killed for no reason by racist cops....

Should police have to just stand by and be murdered by violent criminals, or should they be able to fire back when fired upon?
 

Whythink

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
794
Reaction score
430
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Consider these facts:

The Breonna Taylor shooting case was considered by a grand jury today, who chose not to charge the police with murder. One cop was SEPARATELY charged with other crimes, but that was unrelated to the police officers who fired into the apartment where Taylor and her boyfriend lived.

The "news" media, democrats and especially BLM, have portrayed the events related to the shooting inconsistency and dishonestly. Their "narrative" goes like this: "the racist police showed up to Breonna's home, and arbitrarily murdered her for NO REASON, other than racism"!

First of all, B. Taylor was going out with a violent drug trafficker, and she'd been linked to his trafficking, because she'd been repeatedly seen in and out of her boyfriend's separate drug stash house.

More importantly, the police came to their apartment to serve a "NO KNOCK" arrest and search warrant, after conducting an investigation into the 2. They were allowed to just kick the door in without notifying the 2 suspects of their presence, but they CHOSE TO KNOCK ANYWAY.

After knocking and making their presence as cops known, Taylor's boyfriend grabbed his gun and began firing at the officers THROUGH THE CLOSED DOOR! So the police fired back, and unfortunately, unintentionally shot Breonna. It's obviously bad that she died, but she WOULDN'T have died if her boyfriend didn't fire at the police, and/or if she wasn't living with a violent drug trafficker!

The reasonable and rational grand jury understood these facts, and realized that the police were in the right to return fire, when being fired on! So they didn't charge the officers who shot into their apartment with murder, plain and simply. Contrary to the left's narrative, this was NOT a matter of an innocent black woman being killed for no reason by racist cops....

Should police have to just stand by and be murdered by violent criminals, or should they be able to fire back when fired upon?
Many of the "facts" you list are disputed or simply false. Obviously, neither have all the information so honest mistakes happen.

The first item is to me, most critical. Kenneth Walker was the boyfriend who shot the police officer.

"He graduated from Valley High School, where he played football, and attended Western Kentucky University for two years, his father wrote in a sworn affidavit submitted in court documents."

The EX-boyfriend drug dealer was out of the picture. Walker claims he thought it was the ex breaking down the door and feared for their lives.

Walker also states he never heard the announcement of police. This could be miscommunication. If sleeping when that was announced, it is possible neither heard it.

Regarding the shooting. Walker fired 1 time when the door was broken in. Isn't that what the castle doctrine allows? Police returned fire 20 times+ hitting Breonna 5 times. The officer fired was because 3 bullets went into the next apartment. Think about that, possibly 4 or 5 non-criminals were shot "at" by police.

I don't know the law enough to know what charges are reasonable. However multiple people should be held accountable. The reckless nature of this incident should not ever happen again. Perhaps the judge is the ultimate person to blame. Perhaps the officers who believed a middle of the night warrant was needed. Do you realize the police were there to search for packages she may have received while dating the ex? Why not a 7am warrant?

I am not accusing anyone of racism. However, the lack of accountability is evidence of systematic racism. It is just wrong.




Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

jnug

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 23, 2018
Messages
15,409
Reaction score
5,040
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If a violent felon fires on police, should they "be allowed" to fire back?

Wrong question. The right questions:
- How did we let access to guns get so out of control that it is now the go to weapon for defense of any sort?
- Is it possibly more indicative of how messed up we are as a country that there is a gun under most pillows? Isn't that just as disturbing as WHACK JOB vigilantes patrolling city streets playing solder with semi-automatic rifles?
- When are we going to acknowledge systemic racism in this country......when.....will it be before or after we acknowledge human contribution to Climate Change?
- When are we going to acknowledge the horrific levels of bad policing we have in this country. That "raid" on Ms Taylor's home NEVER SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED in the first place.
 

Aunt Antifa

Hunter of my heart
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2020
Messages
8,616
Reaction score
3,339
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
Should people be allowed to fire on cops clearly violating the law?

2A and self-defense advocates will say yes all day. I dunno. I’m torn.
 

Whythink

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
794
Reaction score
430
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Sad that a discussion is not worthy of this topic.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

Tlrmln

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 17, 2019
Messages
4,322
Reaction score
1,388
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
There shouldn't be any no-knock warrants, and police should not be serving search warrants in the middle of the night, especially not in drug investigations (which shouldn't exist either).

But the individual police officers who were doing their job in the context where such warrants are permitted, should not be punished for doing it and following procedure.
 

Mr Person

A Little Bitter
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
39,601
Reaction score
22,522
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The legal status of the shooter is irrelevant to whether or not the police should use deadly force.

No knock warrants need to be done away with. Too many "mistakes". If a place really is that dangerous, surround it. Have announcements made from loudspeaker or even helicopter. Make sure they know you're there and what you're saying, and then you can more reasonably use force.

Taylor's death shows just how loose it is. They busted in, armed, unannounced, (weren't they in plainclothes), and the lawful firearm owner naturally assumed he was about to get killed by criminals. Turns out it was his girlfriend who got killed by criminals, only one of whom faces any charges, and not manslaughter charges.

Drunkenly break into the wrong house and then when the owner shoots at you, kill someone in that house yourself: hello 2nd degree murder, or at the very least voluntary manslaughter (if the jury feels bad for you). I say "drunkenly" because otherwise, you're obviously intending an armed home invasion. So did these cops, but they had their no-knock warrant which removes that bit from the puzzle (unless they lied to get it).





One of the heart-breaking things I read is that they tried to get the guy to admit his dead GF was in the drug business, when she wasn't.

Imagine being him. She's dead and this is what the "protect and serve" people are doing. Sickening.
 

Simpletruther

DP Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2019
Messages
3,298
Reaction score
511
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Consider these facts:

The Breonna Taylor shooting case was considered by a grand jury today, who chose not to charge the police with murder. One cop was SEPARATELY charged with other crimes, but that was unrelated to the police officers who fired into the apartment where Taylor and her boyfriend lived.

The "news" media, democrats and especially BLM, have portrayed the events related to the shooting inconsistency and dishonestly. Their "narrative" goes like this: "the racist police showed up to Breonna's home, and arbitrarily murdered her for NO REASON, other than racism"!

First of all, B. Taylor was going out with a violent drug trafficker, and she'd been linked to his trafficking, because she'd been repeatedly seen in and out of her boyfriend's separate drug stash house.

More importantly, the police came to their apartment to serve a "NO KNOCK" arrest and search warrant, after conducting an investigation into the 2. They were allowed to just kick the door in without notifying the 2 suspects of their presence, but they CHOSE TO KNOCK ANYWAY.

After knocking and making their presence as cops known, Taylor's boyfriend grabbed his gun and began firing at the officers THROUGH THE CLOSED DOOR! So the police fired back, and unfortunately, unintentionally shot Breonna. It's obviously bad that she died, but she WOULDN'T have died if her boyfriend didn't fire at the police, and/or if she wasn't living with a violent drug trafficker!

The reasonable and rational grand jury understood these facts, and realized that the police were in the right to return fire, when being fired on! So they didn't charge the officers who shot into their apartment with murder, plain and simply. Contrary to the left's narrative, this was NOT a matter of an innocent black woman being killed for no reason by racist cops....

Should police have to just stand by and be murdered by violent criminals, or should they be able to fire back when fired upon?
Should not have happened, police state tactics. But murder? Of course not, left fake narrative talkers have blood on their hands
 

bongsaway

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 16, 2019
Messages
13,390
Reaction score
5,861
Location
Flori-duh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Consider these facts:

The Breonna Taylor shooting case was considered by a grand jury today, who chose not to charge the police with murder. One cop was SEPARATELY charged with other crimes, but that was unrelated to the police officers who fired into the apartment where Taylor and her boyfriend lived.

The "news" media, democrats and especially BLM, have portrayed the events related to the shooting inconsistency and dishonestly. Their "narrative" goes like this: "the racist police showed up to Breonna's home, and arbitrarily murdered her for NO REASON, other than racism"!

First of all, B. Taylor was going out with a violent drug trafficker, and she'd been linked to his trafficking, because she'd been repeatedly seen in and out of her boyfriend's separate drug stash house.

More importantly, the police came to their apartment to serve a "NO KNOCK" arrest and search warrant, after conducting an investigation into the 2. They were allowed to just kick the door in without notifying the 2 suspects of their presence, but they CHOSE TO KNOCK ANYWAY.

After knocking and making their presence as cops known, Taylor's boyfriend grabbed his gun and began firing at the officers THROUGH THE CLOSED DOOR! So the police fired back, and unfortunately, unintentionally shot Breonna. It's obviously bad that she died, but she WOULDN'T have died if her boyfriend didn't fire at the police, and/or if she wasn't living with a violent drug trafficker!

The reasonable and rational grand jury understood these facts, and realized that the police were in the right to return fire, when being fired on! So they didn't charge the officers who shot into their apartment with murder, plain and simply. Contrary to the left's narrative, this was NOT a matter of an innocent black woman being killed for no reason by racist cops....

Should police have to just stand by and be murdered by violent criminals, or should they be able to fire back when fired upon?
The cops are banging at your door, it's two in the morning and they are not announcing themselves, as a matter of fact they are at the wrong house. The banging gets louder and then a battering ram starts being used on your door. You're a legal firearm owner and scared shitless because you don't know who is trying to break your door down. What do you do?
 

Simpletruther

DP Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2019
Messages
3,298
Reaction score
511
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The cops are banging at your door, it's two in the morning and they are not announcing themselves, as a matter of fact they are at the wrong house. The banging gets louder and then a battering ram starts being used on your door. You're a legal firearm owner and scared shitless because you don't know who is trying to break your door down. What do you do?
Not at wrong house no.

Who is claiming walker was in the wrong to shoot?
 

tres borrachos

HoHoHo
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 20, 2012
Messages
73,099
Reaction score
48,865
Location
New England
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Consider these facts:

The Breonna Taylor shooting case was considered by a grand jury today, who chose not to charge the police with murder. One cop was SEPARATELY charged with other crimes, but that was unrelated to the police officers who fired into the apartment where Taylor and her boyfriend lived.

The "news" media, democrats and especially BLM, have portrayed the events related to the shooting inconsistency and dishonestly. Their "narrative" goes like this: "the racist police showed up to Breonna's home, and arbitrarily murdered her for NO REASON, other than racism"!

First of all, B. Taylor was going out with a violent drug trafficker, and she'd been linked to his trafficking, because she'd been repeatedly seen in and out of her boyfriend's separate drug stash house.

More importantly, the police came to their apartment to serve a "NO KNOCK" arrest and search warrant, after conducting an investigation into the 2. They were allowed to just kick the door in without notifying the 2 suspects of their presence, but they CHOSE TO KNOCK ANYWAY.

After knocking and making their presence as cops known, Taylor's boyfriend grabbed his gun and began firing at the officers THROUGH THE CLOSED DOOR! So the police fired back, and unfortunately, unintentionally shot Breonna. It's obviously bad that she died, but she WOULDN'T have died if her boyfriend didn't fire at the police, and/or if she wasn't living with a violent drug trafficker!

The reasonable and rational grand jury understood these facts, and realized that the police were in the right to return fire, when being fired on! So they didn't charge the officers who shot into their apartment with murder, plain and simply. Contrary to the left's narrative, this was NOT a matter of an innocent black woman being killed for no reason by racist cops....

Should police have to just stand by and be murdered by violent criminals, or should they be able to fire back when fired upon?
If a violent felon fires on police, should they "be allowed" to fire back?

Of course. However, your use of the Breonna Taylor incident is wrong. Breonna Taylor didn't fire on the police. She was also not a violent felon. Or any kind of felon for that matter.
 

independentusa

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
7,791
Reaction score
3,010
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Apparently you have never been on a grand jury. I was the foreman of a federal grand jury for 18 months and I can tell you it is how and what "facts" are provided by the DA that makes the difference. It is all one sided, only the prosecutors can decide who testifies and what and how questions are asked. The prosecutors can either make the fact say the person is guilty or make them out to be innocent. One thing, there was one person who said he heard the cops identify themselves but no one else of the neighbors did. Were the ones who said that they heard nothing allowed to be questioned before the Grand jury. And was the jury allowed to ask where the person who heard the cops was when he heard them. Without knowing how and who was questioned in the grand jury, you can not say that because the jury did not indict that it was a good decision.
 

Athanasius68

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 27, 2016
Messages
15,231
Reaction score
2,505
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The legal status of the shooter is irrelevant to whether or not the police should use deadly force.

No knock warrants need to be done away with. Too many "mistakes". If a place really is that dangerous, surround it. Have announcements made from loudspeaker or even helicopter. Make sure they know you're there and what you're saying, and then you can more reasonably use force.

Taylor's death shows just how loose it is. They busted in, armed, unannounced, (weren't they in plainclothes), and the lawful firearm owner naturally assumed he was about to get killed by criminals. Turns out it was his girlfriend who got killed by criminals, only one of whom faces any charges, and not manslaughter charges.

Drunkenly break into the wrong house and then when the owner shoots at you, kill someone in that house yourself: hello 2nd degree murder, or at the very least voluntary manslaughter (if the jury feels bad for you). I say "drunkenly" because otherwise, you're obviously intending an armed home invasion. So did these cops, but they had their no-knock warrant which removes that bit from the puzzle (unless they lied to get it).





One of the heart-breaking things I read is that they tried to get the guy to admit his dead GF was in the drug business, when she wasn't.

Imagine being him. She's dead and this is what the "protect and serve" people are doing. Sickening.
The police had a legitimate reason to be there and had a lawful warrant.
They announced their presence. They were fired upon from behind a closed door. They returned fire.
A very terrible event. But nothing indictable on these police.
The one officer who was indicted was apparently firing from outside the building in the direction of the apartment. That was ridiculous and reckless and it is appropriate he was fired and indicted.
 

joko104

On Vacation
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
56,671
Reaction score
20,498
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Apparently you have never been on a grand jury. I was the foreman of a federal grand jury for 18 months and I can tell you it is how and what "facts" are provided by the DA that makes the difference. It is all one sided, only the prosecutors can decide who testifies and what and how questions are asked. The prosecutors can either make the fact say the person is guilty or make them out to be innocent. One thing, there was one person who said he heard the cops identify themselves but no one else of the neighbors did. Were the ones who said that they heard nothing allowed to be questioned before the Grand jury. And was the jury allowed to ask where the person who heard the cops was when he heard them. Without knowing how and who was questioned in the grand jury, you can not say that because the jury did not indict that it was a good decision.
Nor can you say the indictment was a good decision.
 

Casper

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
24,020
Reaction score
9,568
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Consider these facts:

The Breonna Taylor shooting case was considered by a grand jury today, who chose not to charge the police with murder. One cop was SEPARATELY charged with other crimes, but that was unrelated to the police officers who fired into the apartment where Taylor and her boyfriend lived.

The "news" media, democrats and especially BLM, have portrayed the events related to the shooting inconsistency and dishonestly. Their "narrative" goes like this: "the racist police showed up to Breonna's home, and arbitrarily murdered her for NO REASON, other than racism"!

First of all, B. Taylor was going out with a violent drug trafficker, and she'd been linked to his trafficking, because she'd been repeatedly seen in and out of her boyfriend's separate drug stash house.

More importantly, the police came to their apartment to serve a "NO KNOCK" arrest and search warrant, after conducting an investigation into the 2. They were allowed to just kick the door in without notifying the 2 suspects of their presence, but they CHOSE TO KNOCK ANYWAY.

After knocking and making their presence as cops known, Taylor's boyfriend grabbed his gun and began firing at the officers THROUGH THE CLOSED DOOR! So the police fired back, and unfortunately, unintentionally shot Breonna. It's obviously bad that she died, but she WOULDN'T have died if her boyfriend didn't fire at the police, and/or if she wasn't living with a violent drug trafficker!

The reasonable and rational grand jury understood these facts, and realized that the police were in the right to return fire, when being fired on! So they didn't charge the officers who shot into their apartment with murder, plain and simply. Contrary to the left's narrative, this was NOT a matter of an innocent black woman being killed for no reason by racist cops....

Should police have to just stand by and be murdered by violent criminals, or should they be able to fire back when fired upon?
Yes, police should be able to shoot back that those that are firing at them, but no one else.
 

Athanasius68

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 27, 2016
Messages
15,231
Reaction score
2,505
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Apparently you have never been on a grand jury. I was the foreman of a federal grand jury for 18 months and I can tell you it is how and what "facts" are provided by the DA that makes the difference. It is all one sided, only the prosecutors can decide who testifies and what and how questions are asked. The prosecutors can either make the fact say the person is guilty or make them out to be innocent. One thing, there was one person who said he heard the cops identify themselves but no one else of the neighbors did. Were the ones who said that they heard nothing allowed to be questioned before the Grand jury. And was the jury allowed to ask where the person who heard the cops was when he heard them. Without knowing how and who was questioned in the grand jury, you can not say that because the jury did not indict that it was a good decision.
An indictment is not a conviction. All it is about is about the facts which support the claims of the prosecutor. Its not about evaluating those facts.
So one person said he heard the police ID themselves. That is a fact. Why others did not hear anything is a question of trial.
 

Crosscheck

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
10,256
Reaction score
7,601
Location
NW USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The police had a legitimate reason to be there and had a lawful warrant.
They announced their presence. They were fired upon from behind a closed door. They returned fire.
A very terrible event. But nothing indictable on these police.
The one officer who was indicted was apparently firing from outside the building in the direction of the apartment. That was ridiculous and reckless and it is appropriate he was fired and indicted.
You really believe they were just tapping on the door with the battering ram?

If I wake up in the middle of the night to the sound of someone busting down my front door the first thing I am grabbing is my pistol.

It is way too early for trick or treaters.
 

bongsaway

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 16, 2019
Messages
13,390
Reaction score
5,861
Location
Flori-duh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Why bother asking when everyone agrees he can shoot
And then what happens after the legal firearm owner shoots through his door at whoever is pounding down his door which happens to be the cops. Let me help, we probably have a dead legal firearm owner who was only trying to protect himself. And guess what happens to the cops who are at the wrong door and just killed an innocent person? Correct, nothing.
 

independentusa

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
7,791
Reaction score
3,010
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The police had a legitimate reason to be there and had a lawful warrant.
They announced their presence. They were fired upon from behind a closed door. They returned fire.
A very terrible event. But nothing indictable on these police.
The one officer who was indicted was apparently firing from outside the building in the direction of the apartment. That was ridiculous and reckless and it is appropriate he was fired and indicted.
The question is, why a warrant was issued? Was it because she was once the girl friend of the person the cops were after. You have to have reasonable cause for a warrant, and how did they convince a judge to issue the warrant? I would really want to know how they got the warrant. And they sot an unarmed person in bed. Did the police shoot without checking whether the person was armed?
 

Middle_Ground

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
2,313
Reaction score
1,078
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Apparently you have never been on a grand jury. I was the foreman of a federal grand jury for 18 months and I can tell you it is how and what "facts" are provided by the DA that makes the difference. It is all one sided, only the prosecutors can decide who testifies and what and how questions are asked. The prosecutors can either make the fact say the person is guilty or make them out to be innocent. One thing, there was one person who said he heard the cops identify themselves but no one else of the neighbors did. Were the ones who said that they heard nothing allowed to be questioned before the Grand jury. And was the jury allowed to ask where the person who heard the cops was when he heard them. Without knowing how and who was questioned in the grand jury, you can not say that because the jury did not indict that it was a good decision.
I was also on a grand jury a voted no on almost every bill that was brought up. The DA refused to be questioned on anything. It was like sheep. He would say this is what happened, tell stupid jokes, and then say you must indict and they did. Sorry but that system needs to go.

To the OP your question can't be answered in regards to the Taylor incident, neither person was a violent felon.
As far as the announced themselves as police narrative that's bullshit. 12 people interviewed 1 guy who was on his porch and the police told get in your house or be arrested heard this so called announcement.
If aide had been administered to Taylor at the time of the shooting then no charges horrible error, yada yada but no aide was rendered to the woman so depraved indifference for all of them sounds right to me. As far as the attorney general her life did not matter because at one time she was associated with a felon.
All of you guys saying no charges police did the right thing, you better hope the guy cooking meth in his house down the street gets arrested out somewhere and there isn't a no knock warrant issued with your address on it by accident.
 

SonOfDaedalus

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2017
Messages
11,582
Reaction score
6,695
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I don't know the law enough to know what charges are reasonable. However multiple people should be held accountable. The reckless nature of this incident should not ever happen again. Perhaps the judge is the ultimate person to blame. Perhaps the officers who believed a middle of the night warrant was needed. Do you realize the police were there to search for packages she may have received while dating the ex? Why not a 7am warrant?
I also don't know what charges make sense. These officers were just executing the warrant. They were definitely incompetent in terms of trigger discipline. They're poorly trained. But all of that is not criminal.

If the police knock on my door while I'm sleeping, I most likely wouldn't even wake up. I'm a hard sleeper. And if I did, I would need several minutes to orient myself as to what's going on.

If people are allowed to own guns to protect themselves, then police can't just break into people's homes unless they're sure the homeowner knows they're the police.

All this danger and risk to lives for a drug arrest?
 

SonOfDaedalus

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2017
Messages
11,582
Reaction score
6,695
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I was also on a grand jury a voted no on almost every bill that was brought up. The DA refused to be questioned on anything. It was like sheep. He would say this is what happened, tell stupid jokes, and then say you must indict and they did. Sorry but that system needs to go.

To the OP your question can't be answered in regards to the Taylor incident, neither person was a violent felon.
As far as the announced themselves as police narrative that's bullshit. 12 people interviewed 1 guy who was on his porch and the police told get in your house or be arrested heard this so called announcement.
If aide had been administered to Taylor at the time of the shooting then no charges horrible error, yada yada but no aide was rendered to the woman so depraved indifference for all of them sounds right to me. As far as the attorney general her life did not matter because at one time she was associated with a felon.
All of you guys saying no charges police did the right thing, you better hope the guy cooking meth in his house down the street gets arrested out somewhere and there isn't a no knock warrant issued with your address on it by accident.
I agree that not seeking medical assistance for Miss Taylor is inexcusable. If depraved indifference is the crime, then I totally agree it can be charged. But from what I understand, it's very hard to prove. It has to be extreme indifference to be charged.

But I feel like a lot of people want the police charged for shooting Taylor. I think that was clearly an accident by a bunch of poorly trained officers.
 

Middle_Ground

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
2,313
Reaction score
1,078
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I agree that not seeking medical assistance for Miss Taylor is inexcusable. If depraved indifference is the crime, then I totally agree it can be charged. But from what I understand, it's very hard to prove. It has to be extreme indifference to be charged.

But I feel like a lot of people want the police charged for shooting Taylor. I think that was clearly an accident by a bunch of poorly trained officers.
What more do you need to prove it other than the police officers own statements and actions, there buddy that took a bullet in the leg had treatment, triage immediately, Taylor laid in her own blood for 20-45 minutes while aide was rendered to the officer and the boyfriend was put in cuffs and charged promptly with attempted murder.
Then the incident report with Taylor with no injuries, then the no knock warrant becoming a knock and announce warrant, then the bribing of the criminal ex boyfriend, then no ballistics reports released.
I'm sorry but if they had rendered aide, not tried to cover up the bullshit, not tried to smear her name. I would be the first one here saying man this was tragic and those police officers did the best they could in a tough situation.
 
Top Bottom