• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

*Official* Ongoing Police Misconduct Thread -- Experiment Terminated 6/27/14

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
she became angry and retrieved a handgun
Click to expand...
Family members said that Golden had grabbed a gun and fired two shots into the ground. After disobeying Stem's orders to put the weapon, Golden was fired at four times and hit in the arm and chest.
Click to expand...

Based on the reporting, the officer did everything right.
 
Well I didn't see this as police misconduct, so I didn't put it in there, this is more like media/mayor misconduct.
 
I have no issues with this. I hope the guy takes the city council to the cleaners.

You brandish a weapon and shoot it, you are a deadly threat. If he had shot her in the arm, like some are suggesting, and missed, she could have shot and killed him. She was a deadly threat. Doesn't matter what age, race, or gender.
 
The woman was obviously armed and had discharged the weapon. This was no "thought the cell phone/wallet/comb/empty-hand was a gun, so I emptied my clip into her!"
 
jerk-chicken said:
I'll rather wait for more information
Click to expand...

what info?

the ladies nephew gave a eye witness account. She had her license taken away and was mad. he wouldn't give her the keys to her car so she got her gun. he ran off and called the police. they showed up. asked her to drop the weapon 3 times. she fired twice they returned fire.

in the correct thread on this there is links to him saying it.

sadly the shot was justified. the firing was not. the city is going to be out a bunch of money.
 
nobody cares because somehow this is trying to make it seem ok the cop killed this woman........

maybe if people weren't so deathly afraid of the nazi SS, they wouldn't feel the need to try to defend themselves against them....



woman lived 93 wonderful years, and it was ended by an American thug cop. i say she's a martyr



i dont leave my house after dark anymore because it's gotten that bad here (north texas), that there's about a 1 in 3 chance if you make the drive from my neighborhood into town after dark, you'll get pulled over.

and once you're pulled over, there's actually a recognizable chance you might not make it through the routine stop with your life...


so yeah, these days, i plan to defend myself against LEO if it happens, i would much rather just avoid it all together and stay home after dark, and spend minimum amount of time in public places patrolled/stalked by johhny 5-0, wants your head smashed on the floor...
 
waggy said:
what info?

the ladies nephew gave a eye witness account. She had her license taken away and was mad. he wouldn't give her the keys to her car so she got her gun. he ran off and called the police. they showed up. asked her to drop the weapon 3 times. she fired twice they returned fire.

in the correct thread on this there is links to him saying it.

sadly the shot was justified. the firing was not. the city is going to be out a bunch of money.
Click to expand...
NM in that case.

Done deal.

You pull a gun on cops and start shooting after they tell you to drop it three times and start shooting, game over.

A three year old can kill someone with a gun, if they hit the trigger right.

Martyr my ass.
 
Last edited:
LegendKiller said:
I hope the guy takes the city council to the cleaners.
Click to expand...

Texas is an at-will state. Unless he's a commie liberal and anti-business and so joined a union, he can be let go for any reason that doesn't violate federal civil rights statutes. Shooting 93 year olds is not a protected civil right.
 
Last edited:
DominionSeraph said:
Texas is an at-will state. Unless he's a commie liberal and anti-business and so joined a union, he can be let go for any reason that doesn't violate federal civil rights statutes. Shooting 93 year olds is not a protected civil right.
Click to expand...

Texas is a prison state, literally... 1 in 73 adults in texas is incarcerated.
 
DominionSeraph said:
Texas is an at-will state. Unless he's a commie liberal and anti-business and so joined a union, he can be let go for any reason that doesn't violate federal civil rights statutes. Shooting 93 year olds is not a protected civil right.
Click to expand...

There are tons of exceptions to at-will, everybody knows this.

It was part of his job to protect society and himself. They cannot deny his right to personal safety in the line of duty, period.
 
IamDavid said:
lol, is this meant to mean anything? Texas loves making money. They import prisoners from other states. Damn smart if you ask me.
Click to expand...

lol hold on i wanna say something else about this



"Lol is this meant to mean anything?? Nazi's Hate Jews, they import jews from other states even, damn smart if you ask me"
 
zanejohnson said:
i dont leave my house after dark anymore because it's gotten that bad here (north texas), that there's about a 1 in 3 chance if you make the drive from my neighborhood into town after dark, you'll get pulled over.

and once you're pulled over, there's actually a recognizable chance you might not make it through the routine stop with your life....

so yeah, these days, i plan to defend myself against LEO if it happens, i would much rather just avoid it all together and stay home after dark, and spend minimum amount of time in public places patrolled/stalked by johhny 5-0, wants your head smashed on the floor...
Click to expand...

I have friends who live in north Texas and travel freely at night without issue. I feel the same where I live in southeast Texas.

I guess it may be best for you to stay home at night and post how scared you are on here rather than go out and act a fool resulting in you getting shot, possibly killed by a police officer.
 
zanejohnson said:
lol hold on i wanna say something else about this



"Lol is this meant to mean anything?? Nazi's Hate Jews, they import jews from other states even, damn smart if you ask me"
Click to expand...

are you on drugs again zane? because this is not a rational thought..
 
MongGrel said:
You pull a gun on cops and start shooting after they tell you to drop it three times and start shooting, game over.
Click to expand...

I don't see where it says that she fired a gun at the officer..

From that article:

Family members said that Golden had grabbed a gun and fired two shots into the ground. After disobeying Stem's orders to put the weapon, Golden was fired at four times and hit in the arm and chest.

Look at the sentence structure above.. Notice the period after the word ground. That period used as it was indicates the end of a sentence. Now look at the word After which follows, notice that the word is capitalized. Used in this manner that indicates the start of a new sentence.

Now if the article had read: "Golden had grabbed a gun and fired two shots into the ground, after disobeying Stem's orders to put the weapon. Golden was then fired at four times and hit in the arm and chest."

See what I did there?

Just by changing around some periods and commas I made it look like the lady shot the gun after being warned to put the gun down.

It seems that is what some people have taken those sentences to mean even though that is not what was said. Not sure if that is intentional, some sort of agenda driven twisting of words/meaning, or is it simply a result of poor reading comprehension?

How we got her fired two shots at a police officer from a family member saying she fired two shots into the ground I do not know.
 
LegendKiller said:
It was part of his job to protect society and himself. They cannot deny his right to personal safety in the line of duty, period.
Click to expand...

Did they arrest him? No. They fired him, that's an important distinction.

In basically every state with strong self defense laws there is no legal contradiction in your employer firing you for defending yourself and usually its a legal move for them. This is slightly different as he was executing his official duties but the onus is going to be on him to show why his employment was protected.

I find his firing appalling assuming there's not some sort of underlying cause like procedures leading up to the confrontation not being followed. Unfortunately, in Texas, there might be a Mexico-sized gulf between appalling and illegal.
 
unixwizzard said:
I don't see where it says that she fired a gun at the officer..

From that article:

Family members said that Golden had grabbed a gun and fired two shots into the ground. After disobeying Stem's orders to put the weapon, Golden was fired at four times and hit in the arm and chest.

Look at the sentence structure above.. Notice the period after the word ground. That period used as it was indicates the end of a sentence. Now look at the word After which follows, notice that the word is capitalized. Used in this manner that indicates the start of a new sentence.

Now if the article had read: "Golden had grabbed a gun and fired two shots into the ground, after disobeying Stem's orders to put the weapon. Golden was then fired at four times and hit in the arm and chest."

See what I did there?

Just by changing around some periods and commas I made it look like the lady shot the gun after being warned to put the gun down.

It seems that is what some people have taken those sentences to mean even though that is not what was said. Not sure if that is intentional, some sort of agenda driven twisting of words/meaning, or is it simply a result of poor reading comprehension?

How we got her fired two shots at a police officer from a family member saying she fired two shots into the ground I do not know.
Click to expand...

She fired shots. It is more than reasonable to assume that she is, at that point, a lethal threat to the officer's life. She wasn't spitting at him, she wasn't cursing him out, she was firing a firearm in a threatening manner and could very easily have pulled her gun up and shot him. Whether she did, nor not, is immaterial.

I am far from a big police nutter. I am disgusted by the proliferation of military hardware and the seemingly rampant abuses. However, this is not one of those cases.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top