Minnesota Officer Was 'Reacting to Presence of Gun,' Lawyer Says...

[Mycroft]

Clearly, you haven't been paying attention.

Im done with you being hardheaded.

Good day.

As someone who has repeatedly tired of sangha's tactics and his demand to have the last word, my advice is for you to do what I do: Dismiss him and let him have the last word. Like most trolls, if you don't feed him he eventually goes away.

 

[jonny5]

Police don't use a tazer (known to be quite glitchy and ineffective) when faced with a lethal threat. The last thing you would want would be to use a taser and have it fail which costs you your life. Im sure you family would appreciate how much you wanted to keep from killing another person when you are dead.

I didnt say it has to be a lethal threat. Shooting someone shooting at you would not be excessive force. Shooting someone crazy with a knife would be. Tazing a disruptive teenager in a high school would be. Using SWAT to investigate drug possession (which led to injuring a toddler), would be.

Georgia police threw a stun grenade in a 19-month-old's crib - Vox

 

[Caine]

I didnt say it has to be a lethal threat. Shooting someone shooting at you would not be excessive force. Shooting someone crazy with a knife would be. Tazing a disruptive teenager in a high school would be. Using SWAT to investigate drug possession (which led to injuring a toddler), would be.

Georgia police threw a stun grenade in a 19-month-old's crib - Vox

A knife can kill quite easily.... and taser don't exactly have a very long effective range.

Have you heard of the 21 foot rule?

Also, guns and drugs are notorious for being coupled together. Without knowing what information the officers had to justify a SWAT raid on a home, you just have a headline that makes something SOUND inappropriate.
If officers have information the leads them to believe that many subjects in a drug house are armed, they are going to equip themselves accordingly. Even if that information turns out to be incorrect when the actual event takes place.

 

[rocket88]

A lawyer for the suburban police officer who fatally shot a black man during a traffic stop said on Saturday that the race of the driver, Philando Castile, played no role in how his client responded, and that the officer “was reacting to the presence of a gun” when he opened fire.

“The shooting had nothing to do with race and everything to do with the presence of that gun,” Mr. Kelly said in an interview, noting that Officer Yanez is Latino.

Mr. Castile “was not following the directions of the police officer,” Mr. Kelly said, but he declined to provide further detail.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/10/u...o-the-presence-of-a-gun-lawyer-says.html?_r=0

He was reacting to the presence of a gun. A legal gun for which Mr. Castille had a concealed carry permit. I thought you guys supported the Second Amendment.

 

[jonny5]

A knife can kill quite easily.... and taser don't exactly have a very long effective range.

Have you heard of the 21 foot rule?

Also, guns and drugs are notorious for being coupled together. Without knowing what information the officers had to justify a SWAT raid on a home, you just have a headline that makes something SOUND inappropriate.
If officers have information the leads them to believe that many subjects in a drug house are armed, they are going to equip themselves accordingly. Even if that information turns out to be incorrect when the actual event takes place.

"Without knowing what information the officers had to justify a SWAT raid on a home" exactly. They didnt know either. They assumed, used excessive force, and people got hurt.

 

[Caine]

"Without knowing what information the officers had to justify a SWAT raid on a home" exactly. They didnt know either. They assumed, used excessive force, and people got hurt.

So... they told you every thing they knew in that investigation?

Cool story bro.

 

[jonny5]

So... they told you every thing they knew in that investigation?

Cool story bro.

Im not your bro, pal.

 

[Aberration]

BOTTOM LINE: When a cop pulls you over, DO EXACTLY AS HE ORDERS YOU TO DO. DON'T ACT ON YOUR OWN. If you do that, you will do fine.

And when they order you to strip so they can do a body cavity search on the side of the road? No. You have no legal obligation to do exactly as the officer orders.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[braindrain]

Actually that's not entirely true.

Cops practice shooting at blacks via target practice to make it emotionally easier to kill minorities.

There's a psychological effect to things like this that make it easier to shoot Black vs shooting other minorities. People on these very forums dismissed the statements of how this was inappropriate. I highly suggest you study up on some basics of psychology to understand why using images of Blacks and only Blacks is a horrible idea. And also keep in mind this story only got out because the cops were too lazy and sloppy and left their homemade targets up. Things like this are happening all over the country that don't go reported.

Cops literally practice killing Blacks and it's all for fun and glory. This is a systemic problem that needs to change and as long as cops have defenders for this kind of behvavior it never will change.

You know your own link doesn't back up your claim. Your own link says pictures of all races were used.
So tell me does it bother you to be this dishonest. And do you actually think any one would take the word of someone who is being so blatantly dishonest as being worth listening to.

 

[braindrain]

That's ridiculous.

The reason targets are often black on white or black on manila is because the contrast makes the target easier to see. It has nothing to do with race.

His own link disproves his claim. I don't think he is to concerned with the truth.