- Joined
- Aug 31, 2018
- Messages
- 19,882
- Reaction score
- 3,781
Maybe ask the democrat mayor? While you are there maybe ask why he wont release the footage?
Maybe ask the democrat mayor? While you are there maybe ask why he wont release the footage?This begs a good question.....
Why is it so easy for us to get Blakes history, but almost impossible for us to see the service record of the officer who shot him.
As people like you like to point out, most of these victims have sort of record. Ironically, when the dust settles, it usually comes out the the officers also had a history of excessive force charges against them too.
That dont matter though, right? They have a scary job and if someone ends up shot needlessly, we just have to accept that as an unfortunate side effect.
Maybe ask the democrat mayor? While you are there maybe ask why he wont release the footage?
Not asking about the footage.
Im asking why it so easy for all of us to find out informatin about Blake within hours of the incident, but we cant do a simple search and get info regarding the officers involved and thier work history (i.e. how often have they been written up for excessive force or how many times they have been accused, etc...).
That isnt an issue with the mayor, its an issue with the union making sure that info is locked up tighter than Fort Knox.
Ask the democrat mayor. He is in charge...literally. I'm guessing he wont release anything because it shows the shooting was warranted.
Try reading for comprehension this time.....
I am not concerned with the video footage. It has nothing to do with the question I am asking. My question has nothing to do with the validity of the shooting. Again, it matters not to the question I want you to answer. So here again is the question you have missed twice now:
Why cant we get access to the work record of a police officer with the same ease as we can get the arrest record of a general citizen?
Ask the democrat mayor. He is in charge...literally. I'm guessing he wont release anything because it shows the shooting was warranted.
We have all seen on the news that another arrest went wrong. Why???
The reason for that is why something has to change. When people black or white are arrested THEY HAVE TO STOP FIGHTING THE POLICE.
Surrender, do what the police say, dont fight and talk later!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How could the shooting be warranted? Or are you simply a racist?
Im running out of ways to answer you so that you understand that the mayor is in charge of what you are asking for. Why are you asking oyher people why the mayor isnt giving you what you want? Weird.
lol...who knew mayors werent actually in charge!The mayor isnt why a cops work record isnt public record. The union is.
Im not the one encouraging black people to fight police and get killed. That would be your ilk. The purest form of racists I have ever seen. Also, you are voting foe
r Joe Biden right? Right. Hes the guy that eulogized a bona fide KKK exalted cyclops. Yeah buddy...there is a racist here and it isnt me. Tell us more about how you want blacks to fight police instead of obeying their orders. Im fascinated by actual racists.
lol...who knew mayors werent actually in charge!
I already explained it about 5 times now. Not doing it again.This has nothing to do with my question. Quit your irrelevant Repug whining.
Explain to me how that shooting could have been warranted. In my opinion, the only plausible explanation for your outlandish statement is that you are indeed a racist. If that is what you are, then just admit it. I would actually have more respect for you for being honest for a change.
Way to act like police unions dont have an inordinate amount of power....
he still slowing getting into a car when hes shot in the back what the **** is your point?
Thinking this is a good question is funny.This begs a good question.....
Why is it so easy for us to get Blakes history, but almost impossible for us to see the service record of the officer who shot him.
Usually? Charges? No. Allegations - sometimes.As people like you like to point out, most of these victims have sort of record. Ironically, when the dust settles, it usually comes out the the officers also had a history of excessive force charges against them too.
For the same reason you can't bring up a prior criminal offense in trial without valid reason.Not asking about the footage.
Im asking why it so easy for all of us to find out informatin about Blake within hours of the incident, but we cant do a simple search and get info regarding the officers involved and thier work history (i.e. how often have they been written up for excessive force or how many times they have been accused, etc...).
That isnt an issue with the mayor, its an issue with the union making sure that info is locked up tighter than Fort Knox.
Wow!This has nothing to do with my question. Quit your irrelevant Repug whining.
Explain to me how that shooting could have been warranted. In my opinion, the only plausible explanation for your outlandish statement is that you are indeed a racist. If that is what you are, then just admit it. I would actually have more respect for you for being honest for a change.
1. Are trying to say slowly?
2. This was a violent person who was just combative, supposedly armed and resisting arrest.
Getting into a vehicle, regardless if it was "slowly" or not, is a situation that would allow and justify lethal force to stop the person.
Thinking this is a good question is funny.
There is a difference between the two.
One is a public criminal record while the other one is not.
Usually? Charges? No. Allegations - sometimes.
And there should be no public record of unsupported or unsubstantiated allegations.
For the same reason you can't bring up a prior criminal offense in trial without valid reason.
It isn't relevant to the circumstances that present in the current situation.
1. You assume without evidence that he was fleeing.Not according to the Supreme Court. According to them, it is illegal to shoot a fleeing suspect. Take it up with them.
Because of people like you who want to wrongly use the information.Why are the actions and issues of an officer of the law not public record?
None of which are relevant to the specific issue in his case.We will use Derek Chauvin as an example. If it werent for the fact that he was being charged with murder, it would have never come out that he had been accused of excessive force 13 times and discipined for 4 of those incidents.
Because of people like you who want to wrongly use them.My question is why were at least the 4 times he was disciplined not a matter of public record.
And again, not relevant.Just like people had posted Blakes arrest record within hours of the incident, we should have been able to do the same with Chauvin, but couldn't because those records are not subject to public search.
:lamo You imagining irony does not mean there is irony there.I'm sure the irony of your statement escapes you, since there are many people who are claiming that Blakes past record would have been some justification for viewing him differently than any other suspect.It isn't relevant to the circumstances that present in the current situation.
1. Are trying to say slowly?
2. This was a violent person who was just combative, supposedly armed and resisting arrest.
Getting into a vehicle, regardless if it was "slowly" or not, is a situation that would allow and justify lethal force to stop the person.
Thinking this is a good question is funny.
There is a difference between the two.
One is a public criminal record while the other one is not.
Usually? Charges? No. Allegations - sometimes.
And there should be no public record of unsupported or unsubstantiated allegations.
For the same reason you can't bring up a prior criminal offense in trial without valid reason.
It isn't relevant to the circumstances that present in the current situation.
Wow!
So, becasue you do not understand the danger inherent in the situation, or understand how the police may have been justified in their actions, the other person is a racist?
That is some sad deluded illogical nonsense you are spewing.
im afraid you might have a weapon and that you might use it on me is not a good justification for murder
What the **** are you on about here?wood be a fine excuse to kill cops apparently
im afraid you might have a weapon and that you might use it on me is not a good justification for murderYou are speaking nonsense.
Again; This was a violent person who was just combative, supposedly armed and resisting arrest.
What the **** are you on about here?
Police are acting in a legal law enforcement capacity.
If you think what you said of "fine excuse" is okay, then you have something wrong with the way you think.
I hope it doesn't bite you in the ass.
'''Justice will be served:''' AG won'''t say whether Jacob Blake was armed during police-involved shootingYou are speaking nonsense.
Again; This was a violent person who was just combative, supposedly armed and resisting arrest.
What the **** are you on about here?
Police are acting in a legal law enforcement capacity.
If you think what you said of "fine excuse" is okay, then you have something wrong with the way you think.
I hope it doesn't bite you in the ass.
You are spewing nonsense.im afraid you might have a weapon and that you might use it on me is not a good justification for murder
its not legal for me to kill someone walking away from me getting into a car because i thick they might have weapon some place and might use it on me
letting cops get away with murder is more than a bite in the ass
Stop with the stupid nonsense.its not legal for me to kill someone walking away from me getting into a car because i thick they might have weapon some place and might use it on me
Really, stop with the nonsense. It was not murder.letting cops get away with murder is more than a bite in the ass
You are spewing nonsense.
Again; This was a violent person who was just combative, supposedly armed and resisting arrest.
That is what the police were dealing with.
Not simply a good citizen gettign in his car on his merry way.
Stop with the stupid nonsense.
1. This isn't about you, but about the police and the incident they were involved in.
2. Your narrative is off becasue you are not including the totality of the circumstances whihc go the officer making the decision to use lethal force.
Really, stop with the nonsense. It was not murder.
I see you have failed to refute what was provided and thus establish that you are not interested in any real discussion and instead just choose to just spew deluded nonsense.m afraid you might have a weapon and that you might use it on me is not a good justification for murder
its not legal for me to kill someone walking away from me getting into a car because i thick they might have weapon some place and might use it on me
letting cops get away with murder is more than a bite in the ass
the police cant be allowed to murder people
it looks like it was murder
shooting someone in the back who has not threatened you or any one with a weapon is murder
imagining someone has a weapon and being afraid they will turn it on you and shooting them in the back is murder
making up that someone had a weapon and yelling at them to drop it so your microphone can pick that up is murder
I see you have failed to refute what was provided and thus establish that you are not interested in any real discussion and instead just choose to just spew deluded nonsense.
Good luck with that.
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?