• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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!

Video Shows Unarmed Black Man Pleading With Arms Raised

RogueWarrior said:
Apologies. It seems he was hit once but


Was it the same officer who fired 3 shots or did 3 officers 'panic'. They are only reporting about one officer firing. Maybe they are wrong...
Click to expand...

The article says "an officer fired three times" so it seems only one person shot.
 
Vox said:
Silly.

There is no video of the shooting, so we don't know what happened at the time the shot was fired.

At this point there is no evidence that police did anything wrong.

When we see video of the time the shot was actually fired we will know.

Otherwise.......wild speculation.

I'm guessing it was an accident because an aimed shot would have struck the body (and probably the body of the man in front).
Click to expand...

I consider the police shooting someone for an alleged "offense" that does not result in any criminal charge as something very wrong. When the police reply "I don't know" when a person asks why they were shot and then handcuffed then that indicates something was done wrong.
 
Josie said:
Right. If this police officer was just out to kill black people he wouldn't have shot him in the leg.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to jump to conclusions on intent like that. But now knowing it was three shots from what appears to be one officer... that doesn't seem so accidental. At first I thought it was one shot possibly accidentally squeezed off, but three? At best for the officer he went into panic mode for some reason.

On a side note, what a horrible shot this guy is. Two misses and a leg shot?
 
Yeah, if there were actually three shots fired then it must have been an accidental discharge of an automatic weapon. One touch of the trigger can fire three shots with an automatic weapon.

Accidents happen.

The cop will be disciplined for carelessness, no doubt. Citizen will get a cash settlement.

Can't know for sure until we see video of the time of the shot or shots.
 
Vox said:
Yeah, if there were actually three shots fired then it must have been an accidental discharge of an automatic weapon. One touch of the trigger can fire three shots with an automatic weapon.

Accidents happen.

The cop will be disciplined for carelessness, no doubt. Citizen will get a cash settlement.

Can't know for sure until we see video of the time of the shot or shots.
Click to expand...

How exactly does one accidentally fire three rounds?

Correct me any police reading this but aren't you trained to group shot three at a time?
 
poweRob said:
How exactly does one accidentally fire three rounds?
Click to expand...

By being careless and accidentally pulling the trigger on an automatic weapon.

Shouldn't have happened.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I consider the police shooting someone for an alleged "offense" that does not result in any criminal charge as something very wrong. When the police reply "I don't know" when a person asks why they were shot and then handcuffed then that indicates something was done wrong.
Click to expand...

Until we see video of the time the shot was fired, we don't know what the suspects were doing at that time.
 
Vox said:
Until we see video of the time the shot was fired, we don't know what the suspects were doing at that time.
Click to expand...

We do know that no charges were filed yet three shots were fired. Shoot first and investigate later?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
We do know that no charges were filed yet three shots were fired. Shoot first and investigate later?
Click to expand...

Right now it looks to be an accident.

If one of the suspects did something that looked like reaching for a weapon the shooting would be justified.

Video did not last long enough to show the shooting.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Exactly. And if that's how it turns out, he should find a new career, right after going to the man he shot, falling to his knees, and begging for forgiveness - oh, and washing the guys car for the next ten years, once a week, and waxing it every six months... oh, and baking him a birthday cake, a nice three layer cake, every year from now on.
Click to expand...

I wonder how much permanent damage there is to the guy's leg? Unlike Hollywood people don't just walk away from a bullet wound. Bullets go in and sometimes leave a much larger hole going out (depending the type of bullet and some cops used very damaging bullets), or move in a different direction and do even more damage.

Legs aren't just flesh and bones. There's a nervous system in their too.

What a stupid SOB of a cop. He makes the rest look really bad.
 
Vox said:
Right now it looks to be an accident.

If one of the suspects did something that looked like reaching for a weapon the shooting would be justified.

Video did not last long enough to show the shooting.
Click to expand...

You cannot have it both ways. ;)

Anything that justified a shooting should certainly justify criminal charges.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
You cannot have it both ways. ;)

Anything that justified a shooting should certainly justify criminal charges.
Click to expand...

He's doing his finest to defend the cop. Let him.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
You cannot have it both ways. ;)

Anything that justified a shooting should certainly justify criminal charges.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily.

If a suspect fails to obey instructions and appears to be reaching for a weapon they might be shot and not charged with anything.......especially in this case with an autistic person involved.
 
Vox said:
Not necessarily.

If a suspect fails to obey instructions and appears to be reaching for a weapon they might be shot and not charged with anything.......especially in this case with an autistic person involved.
Click to expand...

WTF. Failure to immediately and completely obey is NOT grounds for execution. Now cops don't even need to see a gun to shoot you, they just have to be able to imagine a scenario in which you might possibly have a gun, and, as a result of this mental image, feel fear! Nuts.
 
Vox said:
Not necessarily.

If a suspect fails to obey instructions and appears to be reaching for a weapon they might be shot and not charged with anything.......especially in this case with an autistic person involved.
Click to expand...

I do not want to live in the dangerous authoritarian police state that you seem to want. I do not want government agents killing civilians merely over a failure to immediately obey instructions.

In the other thread, you want people to not make assumptions and wait for facts. Yet, every single one of your posts makes a string of baseless exculpatory assumptions on behalf of the officer.



Everything we do know looks like the officer did some pretty serious wrong, regardless of whether it was an accident. It's perfectly reasonable to be highly skeptical of the officer's actions. If a new full video comes out that shows facts that prove the cop behaved reasonably, then people who are now skeptical will likely change their opinion to account for the new facts. But you're treating the absence of exculpatory facts as a reason to assume that there will be exculpatory facts in the future. That's bad.
 
Last edited:
Vox said:
Not necessarily.

If a suspect fails to obey instructions and appears to be reaching for a weapon they might be shot and not charged with anything.......especially in this case with an autistic person involved.
Click to expand...

Police officers often do much more than simply appear to be reaching for a (possible?) weapon - is that "threatening action" grounds to shoot them (in self defense)? BTW the autistic person was "involved" with total non-compliance, while playing with a toy truck, and was not shot.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Police officers often do much more than simply appear to be reaching for a (possible?) weapon - is that "threatening action" grounds to shoot them (in self defense)? BTW the autistic person was "involved" with total non-compliance, while playing with a toy truck, and was not shot.
Click to expand...

How do you know that? Have you seen the video of the actual shooting?
 
Mr Person said:
I do not want to live in the dangerous authoritarian police state that you seem to want. I do not want government agents killing civilians merely over a failure to immediately obey instructions.

In the other thread, you want people to not make assumptions and wait for facts. Yet, every single one of your posts makes a string of baseless exculpatory assumptions on behalf of the officer.



Everything we do know looks like the officer did some pretty serious wrong, regardless of whether it was an accident. It's perfectly reasonable to be highly skeptical of the officer's actions. If a new full video comes out that shows facts that prove the cop behaved reasonably, then people who are now skeptical will likely change their opinion to account for the new facts. But you're treating the absence of exculpatory facts as a reason to assume that there will be exculpatory facts in the future. That's bad.
Click to expand...

No, it's not. I'm open to getting some facts. Hope they arrive soon.
 
GhostlyJoe said:
WTF. Failure to immediately and completely obey is NOT grounds for execution. Now cops don't even need to see a gun to shoot you, they just have to be able to imagine a scenario in which you might possibly have a gun, and, as a result of this mental image, feel fear! Nuts.
Click to expand...

No, it's normal.

That's the way the world is at this point. On a gun call, if a suspect refuses to cooperate and reaches as if for a gun......he will be shot.

Suspects need better training.
 
"Hands up don't shoot" is a lie.
 
Vox said:
No, it's normal.

That's the way the world is at this point. On a gun call, if a suspect refuses to cooperate and reaches as if for a gun......he will be shot.

Suspects need better training.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should have to attend some sort of academy before becoming a suspect. :)
 
poweRob said:
Now the force is circling the wagons and not talking to the press about it. You'd think the chief would at least make a comment about how they are looking into it or something.
Click to expand...

Yup, cops always cover for cops.

Anyone that stands up for the cops here is insane.
 
Ikari said:
It's more like "hands up, get shot anyway"
Click to expand...

Police are humans so they are going to make mistakes. The real Bad Guys are the Progressive/Liberal/Socialist who gleefully gloat when they do. You almost never see Conservative/Libertarians doing this.
 
Casca XV said:
Police are humans so they are going to make mistakes. The real Bad Guys are the Progressive/Liberal/Socialist who gleefully gloat when they do. You almost never see Conservative/Libertarians doing this.
Click to expand...

You're right. I love it when the government shoots people needlessly :roll:

Police are government agents, while they may "make mistakes", mistakes which cost the lives and health of the citizenry need to be properly punished and prevented. Being human doesn't excuse shooting people.

But thanks for the ignorant, partisan propaganda. That really helps a debate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom