miami shot protester, then laugh about it on tape

[laFiera]

Pretty sad state of affairs; it won't be long before they start mowing down protesters a la tiananmen square style

watch video

 

[DangerAardvark]

That cardboard could have had sharp edges. We don't know the full story!

 

[theeedude]

Florida is a banana republic in the US.
It's funny how they like to lecture Cuba on civil rights.

 

[Phokus]

<redneck>What are you kidding? Real men shoot unarmed, peaceful women and laugh about it later. It's the manly thing to do these days!</redneck>

 

[laFiera]

Originally posted by: DangerAardvark
That cardboard could have had sharp edges. We don't know the full story!

yep, those sharp edges are quite lethal when a woman is holding it up to a few dozen gods dressed up in darth vader outfits

 

[dahunan]

Republican led state

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: laFiera
another reason why to worship and love the usa cops!

Making stupid generalizations like that makes you look just as idiotic as the cops that shot her in the back with rubber bullets. Is English your first language btw?

Your title is kind of misleading, the first thing that I thought was that they actually shot someone with real bullets not non-leathal ammo. Anyways, it appears as though they shot her when she was just standing there, very bad decision IMO. If the crowd was going crazy and they were shooting the rubber bullets for that reason I could understand it, but not if she is just standing there, even if she was refusing to move, in that case I'd think the better alternative would be to take her into custody since she didn't really seem combative, or worst case scenario use pepper spray.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: dahunan
Republican led state

Ah yes, that must be it, Democrats have never had anything to do with law enforcement using excessive force. Let me guess, you were born on April 20, 1993?

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: laFiera
another reason why to worship and love the usa cops!

Making stupid generalizations like that makes you look just as idiotic as the cops that shot her in the back with rubber bullets. Is English your first language btw?

Your title is kind of misleading, the first thing that I thought was that they actually shot someone with real bullets not non-leathal ammo. Anyways, it appears as though they shot her when she was just standing there, very bad decision IMO. If the crowd was going crazy and they were shooting the rubber bullets for that reason I could understand it, but not if she is just standing there, even if she was refusing to move, in that case I'd think the better alternative would be to take her into custody since she didn't really seem combative, or worst case scenario use pepper spray.

How about leave her alone. You know like the 1st amendement requires.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: laFiera
another reason why to worship and love the usa cops!

Making stupid generalizations like that makes you look just as idiotic as the cops that shot her in the back with rubber bullets. Is English your first language btw?

Your title is kind of misleading, the first thing that I thought was that they actually shot someone with real bullets not non-leathal ammo. Anyways, it appears as though they shot her when she was just standing there, very bad decision IMO. If the crowd was going crazy and they were shooting the rubber bullets for that reason I could understand it, but not if she is just standing there, even if she was refusing to move, in that case I'd think the better alternative would be to take her into custody since she didn't really seem combative, or worst case scenario use pepper spray.

How about leave her alone. You know like the 1st amendement requires.

That would be a command decision, not something the cops on the front line in riot gear would be making....

Edit - BTW, why were the cops trying to break up that protest? Did they meet any violent resistance, violent acts, vandalism, etc...?

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: laFiera
another reason why to worship and love the usa cops!

Making stupid generalizations like that makes you look just as idiotic as the cops that shot her in the back with rubber bullets. Is English your first language btw?

Your title is kind of misleading, the first thing that I thought was that they actually shot someone with real bullets not non-leathal ammo. Anyways, it appears as though they shot her when she was just standing there, very bad decision IMO. If the crowd was going crazy and they were shooting the rubber bullets for that reason I could understand it, but not if she is just standing there, even if she was refusing to move, in that case I'd think the better alternative would be to take her into custody since she didn't really seem combative, or worst case scenario use pepper spray.

How about leave her alone. You know like the 1st amendement requires.

That would be a command decision, not something the cops on the front line in riot gear would be making....

It does matter what command says. The cops are not allowed to break the law because they where order to do so.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: laFiera
another reason why to worship and love the usa cops!

Making stupid generalizations like that makes you look just as idiotic as the cops that shot her in the back with rubber bullets. Is English your first language btw?

Your title is kind of misleading, the first thing that I thought was that they actually shot someone with real bullets not non-leathal ammo. Anyways, it appears as though they shot her when she was just standing there, very bad decision IMO. If the crowd was going crazy and they were shooting the rubber bullets for that reason I could understand it, but not if she is just standing there, even if she was refusing to move, in that case I'd think the better alternative would be to take her into custody since she didn't really seem combative, or worst case scenario use pepper spray.

How about leave her alone. You know like the 1st amendement requires.

That would be a command decision, not something the cops on the front line in riot gear would be making....

It does matter what command says. The cops are not allowed to break the law because they where order to do so.

Sorry, you can't just pick and choose what you feel like doing in a situation like that, its not like a traffic stop and the amount of discretion that you can use...

Why were the cops trying to break up that protest? Did they meet any violent resistance, violent acts, vandalism, etc...?

 

[JD50]

BTW, there are certain places that you can and can't hold protests (which is a good thing), I have a feeling the cops were probably enforcing this....

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: laFiera
another reason why to worship and love the usa cops!

Making stupid generalizations like that makes you look just as idiotic as the cops that shot her in the back with rubber bullets. Is English your first language btw?

Your title is kind of misleading, the first thing that I thought was that they actually shot someone with real bullets not non-leathal ammo. Anyways, it appears as though they shot her when she was just standing there, very bad decision IMO. If the crowd was going crazy and they were shooting the rubber bullets for that reason I could understand it, but not if she is just standing there, even if she was refusing to move, in that case I'd think the better alternative would be to take her into custody since she didn't really seem combative, or worst case scenario use pepper spray.

How about leave her alone. You know like the 1st amendement requires.

That would be a command decision, not something the cops on the front line in riot gear would be making....

It does matter what command says. The cops are not allowed to break the law because they where order to do so.

Sorry, you can't just pick and choose what you feel like doing in a situation like that, its not like a traffic stop and the amount of discretion that you can use...

Why were the cops trying to break up that protest? Did they meet any violent resistance, violent acts, vandalism, etc...?

Clear the person didn't break the law or she would have been arrested. There is no indication she was doing anything but peacefully protesting the police presence.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: laFiera
another reason why to worship and love the usa cops!

Making stupid generalizations like that makes you look just as idiotic as the cops that shot her in the back with rubber bullets. Is English your first language btw?

Your title is kind of misleading, the first thing that I thought was that they actually shot someone with real bullets not non-leathal ammo. Anyways, it appears as though they shot her when she was just standing there, very bad decision IMO. If the crowd was going crazy and they were shooting the rubber bullets for that reason I could understand it, but not if she is just standing there, even if she was refusing to move, in that case I'd think the better alternative would be to take her into custody since she didn't really seem combative, or worst case scenario use pepper spray.

How about leave her alone. You know like the 1st amendement requires.

That would be a command decision, not something the cops on the front line in riot gear would be making....

Edit - BTW, why were the cops trying to break up that protest? Did they meet any violent resistance, violent acts, vandalism, etc...?

Isn't that what Himmler, Eichman, Goebbels, concentration camp guards...etc said? "I wasn't in command!!!!!!"

Please, "reasonable man" should apply here as with anything else. This is clearly a case of the cops going on a power trip while serving their masters.

 

[dualsmp]

Many police departments have a gang member mentality in many cities around the U.S.. Pretty disgusting looking at all those police laughing at the woman shot in the forehead with a rubber bullet, and referring to the protesters as "scurrying cockroaches." Remember, men in darth vader outfits are always the good guys.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: laFiera
another reason why to worship and love the usa cops!

Making stupid generalizations like that makes you look just as idiotic as the cops that shot her in the back with rubber bullets. Is English your first language btw?

Your title is kind of misleading, the first thing that I thought was that they actually shot someone with real bullets not non-leathal ammo. Anyways, it appears as though they shot her when she was just standing there, very bad decision IMO. If the crowd was going crazy and they were shooting the rubber bullets for that reason I could understand it, but not if she is just standing there, even if she was refusing to move, in that case I'd think the better alternative would be to take her into custody since she didn't really seem combative, or worst case scenario use pepper spray.

How about leave her alone. You know like the 1st amendement requires.

That would be a command decision, not something the cops on the front line in riot gear would be making....

It does matter what command says. The cops are not allowed to break the law because they where order to do so.

Sorry, you can't just pick and choose what you feel like doing in a situation like that, its not like a traffic stop and the amount of discretion that you can use...

Why were the cops trying to break up that protest? Did they meet any violent resistance, violent acts, vandalism, etc...?

Clear the person didn't break the law or she would have been arrested. There is no indication she was doing anything but peacefully protesting the police presence.

I understand that and I even noted it in my previous posts, you seem to have a problem with the cops being there at all and trying to break up the protest, but you can't even answer my question as to what the circumstances were....

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: laFiera
another reason why to worship and love the usa cops!

Making stupid generalizations like that makes you look just as idiotic as the cops that shot her in the back with rubber bullets. Is English your first language btw?

Your title is kind of misleading, the first thing that I thought was that they actually shot someone with real bullets not non-leathal ammo. Anyways, it appears as though they shot her when she was just standing there, very bad decision IMO. If the crowd was going crazy and they were shooting the rubber bullets for that reason I could understand it, but not if she is just standing there, even if she was refusing to move, in that case I'd think the better alternative would be to take her into custody since she didn't really seem combative, or worst case scenario use pepper spray.

How about leave her alone. You know like the 1st amendement requires.

That would be a command decision, not something the cops on the front line in riot gear would be making....

Edit - BTW, why were the cops trying to break up that protest? Did they meet any violent resistance, violent acts, vandalism, etc...?

Isn't that what Himmler, Eichman, Goebbels, concentration camp guards...etc said? "I wasn't in command!!!!!!"

Please, "reasonable man" should apply here as with anything else. This is clearly a case of the cops going on a power trip while serving their masters.

Wow, comparing breaking up a protest, or just moving the protest (I have no idea since no one can answer these questions...) to the holocaust, thats pretty stupid. Since you obviously didn't bother reading the whole thread, or even what you just quoted, I'll say it again. "just as idiotic as the cops that shot her in the back with rubber bullets" "very bad decision IMO". I don't agree with them shooting here, thats absolutely wrong.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: laFiera
another reason why to worship and love the usa cops!

Making stupid generalizations like that makes you look just as idiotic as the cops that shot her in the back with rubber bullets. Is English your first language btw?

Your title is kind of misleading, the first thing that I thought was that they actually shot someone with real bullets not non-leathal ammo. Anyways, it appears as though they shot her when she was just standing there, very bad decision IMO. If the crowd was going crazy and they were shooting the rubber bullets for that reason I could understand it, but not if she is just standing there, even if she was refusing to move, in that case I'd think the better alternative would be to take her into custody since she didn't really seem combative, or worst case scenario use pepper spray.

How about leave her alone. You know like the 1st amendement requires.

That would be a command decision, not something the cops on the front line in riot gear would be making....

Edit - BTW, why were the cops trying to break up that protest? Did they meet any violent resistance, violent acts, vandalism, etc...?

Isn't that what Himmler, Eichman, Goebbels, concentration camp guards...etc said? "I wasn't in command!!!!!!"

Please, "reasonable man" should apply here as with anything else. This is clearly a case of the cops going on a power trip while serving their masters.

Wow, comparing breaking up a protest, or just moving the protest (I have no idea since no one can answer these questions...) to the holocaust, thats pretty stupid. Since you obviously didn't bother reading the whole thread, or even what you just quoted, I'll say it again. "just as idiotic as the cops that shot her in the back with rubber bullets" "very bad decision IMO". I don't agree with them shooting here, thats absolutely wrong.

Shooting unarmed citizens in the head, is shooting unarmed citizens in the head.

 

[dualsmp]

Originally posted by: JD50
BTW, there are certain places that you can and can't hold protests (which is a good thing), I have a feeling the cops were probably enforcing this....

Please explain how it's a "good thing".

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: laFiera
another reason why to worship and love the usa cops!

Making stupid generalizations like that makes you look just as idiotic as the cops that shot her in the back with rubber bullets. Is English your first language btw?

Your title is kind of misleading, the first thing that I thought was that they actually shot someone with real bullets not non-leathal ammo. Anyways, it appears as though they shot her when she was just standing there, very bad decision IMO. If the crowd was going crazy and they were shooting the rubber bullets for that reason I could understand it, but not if she is just standing there, even if she was refusing to move, in that case I'd think the better alternative would be to take her into custody since she didn't really seem combative, or worst case scenario use pepper spray.

How about leave her alone. You know like the 1st amendement requires.

That would be a command decision, not something the cops on the front line in riot gear would be making....

It does matter what command says. The cops are not allowed to break the law because they where order to do so.

Sorry, you can't just pick and choose what you feel like doing in a situation like that, its not like a traffic stop and the amount of discretion that you can use...

Why were the cops trying to break up that protest? Did they meet any violent resistance, violent acts, vandalism, etc...?

Clear the person didn't break the law or she would have been arrested. There is no indication she was doing anything but peacefully protesting the police presence.

I understand that and I even noted it in my previous posts, you seem to have a problem with the cops being there at all and trying to break up the protest, but you can't even answer my question as to what the circumstances were....

I did it answer it. She was doing nothing wrong. If she was she would have been arrested.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: laFiera
another reason why to worship and love the usa cops!

Making stupid generalizations like that makes you look just as idiotic as the cops that shot her in the back with rubber bullets. Is English your first language btw?

Your title is kind of misleading, the first thing that I thought was that they actually shot someone with real bullets not non-leathal ammo. Anyways, it appears as though they shot her when she was just standing there, very bad decision IMO. If the crowd was going crazy and they were shooting the rubber bullets for that reason I could understand it, but not if she is just standing there, even if she was refusing to move, in that case I'd think the better alternative would be to take her into custody since she didn't really seem combative, or worst case scenario use pepper spray.

How about leave her alone. You know like the 1st amendement requires.

That would be a command decision, not something the cops on the front line in riot gear would be making....

Edit - BTW, why were the cops trying to break up that protest? Did they meet any violent resistance, violent acts, vandalism, etc...?

Isn't that what Himmler, Eichman, Goebbels, concentration camp guards...etc said? "I wasn't in command!!!!!!"

Please, "reasonable man" should apply here as with anything else. This is clearly a case of the cops going on a power trip while serving their masters.

Wow, comparing breaking up a protest, or just moving the protest (I have no idea since no one can answer these questions...) to the holocaust, thats pretty stupid. Since you obviously didn't bother reading the whole thread, or even what you just quoted, I'll say it again. "just as idiotic as the cops that shot her in the back with rubber bullets" "very bad decision IMO". I don't agree with them shooting here, thats absolutely wrong.

Shooting unarmed citizens in the head, is shooting unarmed citizens in the head.

wow man, how many times do I have to say it....I don't agree with them shooting her, thats absolutely wrong.

You don't even know what was going on there, neither do I, thats why I said that the better option would have been to take her into custody or pepper spray her if she was causing that big of a problem. If the protest was an unlawful protest and they were dispersing it, or they were just trying to move the protestors and she wasn't cooperating, they would have to do something. You don't just say, "oh noes, theres some lady in the road, lets go home boys..."

Now, you seemed to have a problem with the police doing ANYTHING in regards to this protest, yet you have no idea what was going on. Maybe you should look into it a little bit before making your knee jerk police hating response.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: dualsmp

Originally posted by: JD50
BTW, there are certain places that you can and can't hold protests (which is a good thing), I have a feeling the cops were probably enforcing this....

Please explain how it's a "good thing".

For instance, I commute to Northern VA from Maryland everyday. If there were absolutey no restriction on protests, 5 PETA nutjobs could go stand in the middle of I-95, each taking up a lane, and protest the use of beef everyday at rush hour. Do you think that would be a good thing?

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: laFiera
another reason why to worship and love the usa cops!

Making stupid generalizations like that makes you look just as idiotic as the cops that shot her in the back with rubber bullets. Is English your first language btw?

Your title is kind of misleading, the first thing that I thought was that they actually shot someone with real bullets not non-leathal ammo. Anyways, it appears as though they shot her when she was just standing there, very bad decision IMO. If the crowd was going crazy and they were shooting the rubber bullets for that reason I could understand it, but not if she is just standing there, even if she was refusing to move, in that case I'd think the better alternative would be to take her into custody since she didn't really seem combative, or worst case scenario use pepper spray.

How about leave her alone. You know like the 1st amendement requires.

That would be a command decision, not something the cops on the front line in riot gear would be making....

It does matter what command says. The cops are not allowed to break the law because they where order to do so.

Sorry, you can't just pick and choose what you feel like doing in a situation like that, its not like a traffic stop and the amount of discretion that you can use...

Why were the cops trying to break up that protest? Did they meet any violent resistance, violent acts, vandalism, etc...?

Clear the person didn't break the law or she would have been arrested. There is no indication she was doing anything but peacefully protesting the police presence.

I understand that and I even noted it in my previous posts, you seem to have a problem with the cops being there at all and trying to break up the protest, but you can't even answer my question as to what the circumstances were....

I did it answer it. She was doing nothing wrong. If she was she would have been arrested.

How do you know if she was doing something wrong when you don't even know the circumstances? If they were trying to move the protest or disperse it for lawful reasons and she wouldn't allow them to do that then she was doing something wrong....again, please explain to me the circumstances and what the police were trying to do when they were in formation walking towards her.

 

[smack Down]

Now, you seemed to have a problem with the police doing ANYTHING in regards to this protest, yet you have no idea what was going on. Maybe you should look into it a little bit before making your knee jerk police hating response.

No idea, she was walking down the street holding a sign. We have it on video. What more could you ask for. Maybe you require a HD video. Then to top it off we have a video of the police laugh about shooting her. It maybe a knee jerk response but only because it is so clear that the police where so wrong and should be in jail.