Video of San Francisco BART police officer appearing to execute suspect who is lying on the ground

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: Cogman
This (former) cop needs to go to jail. Cops shouldn't have special rules that make it ok for them to kill someone on accident (IE they get discharged as a punishment). It is BS that we have some double standards for them just because they have a uniform and are in charge of enforcing the law.

IMO a cop should never be able to fire his gun without the fear that there might be criminal charges as a result. Just because the state gives you a firearm doesn't mean that they sanction every bullet you fire.

You do realize that all police officers have to already account for every bullet they fired in the field and they have to give valid reasons as to why they decided to discharge their weapon in front of a police commission after a shooting has occurred? Second having police officers second guess themselves all the time is not a policy I would like to see implemented period. A police officer second guessing each and every action would basically give criminals the upper hand and our society based on law and order would degenerate rather quickly in chaos.

There is no law and order if those enforcing the law and order are above the law.

We'll find out once everything is said and done.

 

[Zebo]

Rule # 2 of gun safety is: Never let the muzzle of a gun point at anything you do not want to destroy or kill.
http://www.bobtuley.com/safety_rules.htm

Why are cops immune from this rule and use their guns to threaten suspects all the time? Obviously this rule is in place so senseless murders like this do not happen when emotions like racism, rage, or feelings of usurping the weapons holder authority take over among other things. Cops in general are control freaks on a power trip - I'm sure this young man who was killed, egged on by his troop, resisted, talked shit, and maybe even swung at cop - this did not sit well with the cop so he blasted him. That is a 2nd degree murder. A rage killing no different than stumbling upon your old lady with another guy and blasting them.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: Cogman

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: Cogman
This (former) cop needs to go to jail. Cops shouldn't have special rules that make it ok for them to kill someone on accident (IE they get discharged as a punishment). It is BS that we have some double standards for them just because they have a uniform and are in charge of enforcing the law.

IMO a cop should never be able to fire his gun without the fear that there might be criminal charges as a result. Just because the state gives you a firearm doesn't mean that they sanction every bullet you fire.

You do realize that all police officers have to already account for every bullet they fired in the field and they have to give valid reasons as to why they decided to discharge their weapon in front of a police commission after a shooting has occurred? Second having police officers second guess themselves all the time is not a policy I would like to see implemented period. A police officer second guessing each and every action would basically give criminals the upper hand and our society based on law and order would degenerate rather quickly in chaos.

Tell me then, what is happening to this cop who clearly should be charged with manslaughter? Is he being charged for anything? Yes, they have to account for the bullets they fire, but so what? The most that will happen to them in 99% of case is they loose their badge. Other then that, nothing, maybe a 3 week vacation.

No one in this thread has suggested that this police officer should not be charged with manslaughter. Right now there is an ongoing investigation about what exactly happened. I know it's easy to get into a knee-jerk emotional lynch mob mentality but the legal process must be allowed to proceed forward. We are after all a nation of laws first and foremost.

Somehow, I expect it to be a more serious issue when an individual is killed/endangered.

Well that is an assumption you are making based on your opinion.

The only thing the cop should be (and validly so) second guessing is the use of firearms. I am all for somebody by necessity having to take in consideration the consequences of using a firearm. Surprisingly, most situations that cops run into don't require the use of their firearm, so I doubt very highly that the world will descend into anarchy because cops become more cautious when using them.

Do you have any idea how many bullets are fired nation wide by cops? Believe it or not it is ridiculously low compared to the number of arrests made nation wide each year. You have more of threat of being killed by a fellow citizen then you do by a police officer. In fact the biggest killer of youth in the inner city by those wielding firearms are other youth.

There are even a few countries that don't allow their cops firearms, and they haven't descended into complete chaos. Surprising I know.

That is a very naive view. Those countries have very different cultures then ours and the prevalence of guns and violence amongst their citizens are no doubt lower then ours. Even in the US we have different levels of crime from city to city which means there is no one perfect solution. Do yourself a favor and take trip to Oakland and go live in some of the higher crime areas for about month and lets see if you come back with this view of yours. Oakland as whole ( It only has 400,000 residents ) based on the number of homicides is proportionally a more dangerous city to live then New York city which is way larger by a few million more people.

http://www.cityrating.com/city...?city=Oakland&state=CA

There is no investigation going on. The DA is just dragging his feet before he announces that the shootings was justified in two weeks. Why two weeks? you ask well that is when the biggest story of the year is planned and the DA will be able to announce the finding with no press coverage.

Really can you provide us with a link that backs up your assertion? I'd love to know where you got this top secret info from or is it that maybe you are just using hysterics to rally up more knee jerk responses?

Just wait. Or tell me what could possible take 2 weeks. At any rate it is corruption find me one other murder that is that clear cut and video typed from multiple angles where the person gets to sit at home for weeks on end while the DA claims they are "investigating".

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: Cogman

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: Cogman
This (former) cop needs to go to jail. Cops shouldn't have special rules that make it ok for them to kill someone on accident (IE they get discharged as a punishment). It is BS that we have some double standards for them just because they have a uniform and are in charge of enforcing the law.

IMO a cop should never be able to fire his gun without the fear that there might be criminal charges as a result. Just because the state gives you a firearm doesn't mean that they sanction every bullet you fire.

You do realize that all police officers have to already account for every bullet they fired in the field and they have to give valid reasons as to why they decided to discharge their weapon in front of a police commission after a shooting has occurred? Second having police officers second guess themselves all the time is not a policy I would like to see implemented period. A police officer second guessing each and every action would basically give criminals the upper hand and our society based on law and order would degenerate rather quickly in chaos.

Tell me then, what is happening to this cop who clearly should be charged with manslaughter? Is he being charged for anything? Yes, they have to account for the bullets they fire, but so what? The most that will happen to them in 99% of case is they loose their badge. Other then that, nothing, maybe a 3 week vacation.

No one in this thread has suggested that this police officer should not be charged with manslaughter. Right now there is an ongoing investigation about what exactly happened. I know it's easy to get into a knee-jerk emotional lynch mob mentality but the legal process must be allowed to proceed forward. We are after all a nation of laws first and foremost.

Somehow, I expect it to be a more serious issue when an individual is killed/endangered.

Well that is an assumption you are making based on your opinion.

The only thing the cop should be (and validly so) second guessing is the use of firearms. I am all for somebody by necessity having to take in consideration the consequences of using a firearm. Surprisingly, most situations that cops run into don't require the use of their firearm, so I doubt very highly that the world will descend into anarchy because cops become more cautious when using them.

Do you have any idea how many bullets are fired nation wide by cops? Believe it or not it is ridiculously low compared to the number of arrests made nation wide each year. You have more of threat of being killed by a fellow citizen then you do by a police officer. In fact the biggest killer of youth in the inner city by those wielding firearms are other youth.

There are even a few countries that don't allow their cops firearms, and they haven't descended into complete chaos. Surprising I know.

That is a very naive view. Those countries have very different cultures then ours and the prevalence of guns and violence amongst their citizens are no doubt lower then ours. Even in the US we have different levels of crime from city to city which means there is no one perfect solution. Do yourself a favor and take trip to Oakland and go live in some of the higher crime areas for about month and lets see if you come back with this view of yours. Oakland as whole ( It only has 400,000 residents ) based on the number of homicides is proportionally a more dangerous city to live then New York city which is way larger by a few million more people.

http://www.cityrating.com/city...?city=Oakland&state=CA

There is no investigation going on. The DA is just dragging his feet before he announces that the shootings was justified in two weeks. Why two weeks? you ask well that is when the biggest story of the year is planned and the DA will be able to announce the finding with no press coverage.

Really can you provide us with a link that backs up your assertion? I'd love to know where you got this top secret info from or is it that maybe you are just using hysterics to rally up more knee jerk responses?

Just wait. Or tell me what could possible take 2 weeks. At any rate it is corruption find me one other murder that is that clear cut and video typed from multiple angles where the person gets to sit at home for weeks on end while the DA claims they are "investigating".

If it's taking to long for you then that is a sign of your impatient nature and not a sign of the quality or integrity of the investigation itself. Your assumptions are purely speculative in nature as to why it is taking so long.

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Rule # 2 of gun safety is: Never let the muzzle of a gun point at anything you do not want to destroy or kill.
http://www.bobtuley.com/safety_rules.htm

Why are cops immune from this rule and use their guns to threaten suspects all the time? Obviously this rule is in place so senseless murders like this do not happen when emotions like racism, rage, or feelings of usurping the weapons holder authority take over among other things. Cops in general are control freaks on a power trip - I'm sure this young man who was killed, egged on by his troop, resisted, talked shit, and maybe even swung at cop - this did not sit well with the cop so he blasted him. That is a 2nd degree murder. A rage killing no different than stumbling upon your old lady with another guy and blasting them.

I have to disagree. The video does not show any sort of evidence of this officer being blinded by rage and out of control. The video does in fact show his reaction as being somewhat surprised and confused once the gun goes off. If he were to be charged with 2nd degree murder he would walk period.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: Cogman

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: Cogman
This (former) cop needs to go to jail. Cops shouldn't have special rules that make it ok for them to kill someone on accident (IE they get discharged as a punishment). It is BS that we have some double standards for them just because they have a uniform and are in charge of enforcing the law.

IMO a cop should never be able to fire his gun without the fear that there might be criminal charges as a result. Just because the state gives you a firearm doesn't mean that they sanction every bullet you fire.

You do realize that all police officers have to already account for every bullet they fired in the field and they have to give valid reasons as to why they decided to discharge their weapon in front of a police commission after a shooting has occurred? Second having police officers second guess themselves all the time is not a policy I would like to see implemented period. A police officer second guessing each and every action would basically give criminals the upper hand and our society based on law and order would degenerate rather quickly in chaos.

Tell me then, what is happening to this cop who clearly should be charged with manslaughter? Is he being charged for anything? Yes, they have to account for the bullets they fire, but so what? The most that will happen to them in 99% of case is they loose their badge. Other then that, nothing, maybe a 3 week vacation.

No one in this thread has suggested that this police officer should not be charged with manslaughter. Right now there is an ongoing investigation about what exactly happened. I know it's easy to get into a knee-jerk emotional lynch mob mentality but the legal process must be allowed to proceed forward. We are after all a nation of laws first and foremost.

Somehow, I expect it to be a more serious issue when an individual is killed/endangered.

Well that is an assumption you are making based on your opinion.

The only thing the cop should be (and validly so) second guessing is the use of firearms. I am all for somebody by necessity having to take in consideration the consequences of using a firearm. Surprisingly, most situations that cops run into don't require the use of their firearm, so I doubt very highly that the world will descend into anarchy because cops become more cautious when using them.

Do you have any idea how many bullets are fired nation wide by cops? Believe it or not it is ridiculously low compared to the number of arrests made nation wide each year. You have more of threat of being killed by a fellow citizen then you do by a police officer. In fact the biggest killer of youth in the inner city by those wielding firearms are other youth.

There are even a few countries that don't allow their cops firearms, and they haven't descended into complete chaos. Surprising I know.

That is a very naive view. Those countries have very different cultures then ours and the prevalence of guns and violence amongst their citizens are no doubt lower then ours. Even in the US we have different levels of crime from city to city which means there is no one perfect solution. Do yourself a favor and take trip to Oakland and go live in some of the higher crime areas for about month and lets see if you come back with this view of yours. Oakland as whole ( It only has 400,000 residents ) based on the number of homicides is proportionally a more dangerous city to live then New York city which is way larger by a few million more people.

http://www.cityrating.com/city...?city=Oakland&state=CA

There is no investigation going on. The DA is just dragging his feet before he announces that the shootings was justified in two weeks. Why two weeks? you ask well that is when the biggest story of the year is planned and the DA will be able to announce the finding with no press coverage.

Really can you provide us with a link that backs up your assertion? I'd love to know where you got this top secret info from or is it that maybe you are just using hysterics to rally up more knee jerk responses?

Just wait. Or tell me what could possible take 2 weeks. At any rate it is corruption find me one other murder that is that clear cut and video typed from multiple angles where the person gets to sit at home for weeks on end while the DA claims they are "investigating".

If it's taking to long for you then that is a sign of your impatient nature and not a sign of the quality or integrity of the investigation itself. Your assumptions are purely speculative in nature as to why it is taking so long.

Yes me and the Attorney General are both confused why the DA in the case needs two weeks.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/...9/01/11/MNJ815787S.DTL

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: Cogman

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: Cogman
This (former) cop needs to go to jail. Cops shouldn't have special rules that make it ok for them to kill someone on accident (IE they get discharged as a punishment). It is BS that we have some double standards for them just because they have a uniform and are in charge of enforcing the law.

IMO a cop should never be able to fire his gun without the fear that there might be criminal charges as a result. Just because the state gives you a firearm doesn't mean that they sanction every bullet you fire.

You do realize that all police officers have to already account for every bullet they fired in the field and they have to give valid reasons as to why they decided to discharge their weapon in front of a police commission after a shooting has occurred? Second having police officers second guess themselves all the time is not a policy I would like to see implemented period. A police officer second guessing each and every action would basically give criminals the upper hand and our society based on law and order would degenerate rather quickly in chaos.

Tell me then, what is happening to this cop who clearly should be charged with manslaughter? Is he being charged for anything? Yes, they have to account for the bullets they fire, but so what? The most that will happen to them in 99% of case is they loose their badge. Other then that, nothing, maybe a 3 week vacation.

No one in this thread has suggested that this police officer should not be charged with manslaughter. Right now there is an ongoing investigation about what exactly happened. I know it's easy to get into a knee-jerk emotional lynch mob mentality but the legal process must be allowed to proceed forward. We are after all a nation of laws first and foremost.

Somehow, I expect it to be a more serious issue when an individual is killed/endangered.

Well that is an assumption you are making based on your opinion.

The only thing the cop should be (and validly so) second guessing is the use of firearms. I am all for somebody by necessity having to take in consideration the consequences of using a firearm. Surprisingly, most situations that cops run into don't require the use of their firearm, so I doubt very highly that the world will descend into anarchy because cops become more cautious when using them.

Do you have any idea how many bullets are fired nation wide by cops? Believe it or not it is ridiculously low compared to the number of arrests made nation wide each year. You have more of threat of being killed by a fellow citizen then you do by a police officer. In fact the biggest killer of youth in the inner city by those wielding firearms are other youth.

There are even a few countries that don't allow their cops firearms, and they haven't descended into complete chaos. Surprising I know.

That is a very naive view. Those countries have very different cultures then ours and the prevalence of guns and violence amongst their citizens are no doubt lower then ours. Even in the US we have different levels of crime from city to city which means there is no one perfect solution. Do yourself a favor and take trip to Oakland and go live in some of the higher crime areas for about month and lets see if you come back with this view of yours. Oakland as whole ( It only has 400,000 residents ) based on the number of homicides is proportionally a more dangerous city to live then New York city which is way larger by a few million more people.

http://www.cityrating.com/city...?city=Oakland&state=CA

There is no investigation going on. The DA is just dragging his feet before he announces that the shootings was justified in two weeks. Why two weeks? you ask well that is when the biggest story of the year is planned and the DA will be able to announce the finding with no press coverage.

Really can you provide us with a link that backs up your assertion? I'd love to know where you got this top secret info from or is it that maybe you are just using hysterics to rally up more knee jerk responses?

Just wait. Or tell me what could possible take 2 weeks. At any rate it is corruption find me one other murder that is that clear cut and video typed from multiple angles where the person gets to sit at home for weeks on end while the DA claims they are "investigating".

If it's taking to long for you then that is a sign of your impatient nature and not a sign of the quality or integrity of the investigation itself. Your assumptions are purely speculative in nature as to why it is taking so long.

Yes me and the Attorney General are both confused why the DA in the case needs two weeks.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/...9/01/11/MNJ815787S.DTL

Jerry Brown's move has more to do with trying to interject some calm to the situation by demonstrating that the higher external powers in government are watching the handling of the case. Jerry has not gone on the record on whether on not he believes charges should be filed at all.

 

[Onita]

Originally posted by: smack Down


Yes me and the Attorney General are both confused why the DA in the case needs two weeks.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/...9/01/11/MNJ815787S.DTL

I'd say he probably doesn't wanna screw this up... taking time to figure out what to charge him with?

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: rpkelly

Originally posted by: smack Down


Yes me and the Attorney General are both confused why the DA in the case needs two weeks.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/...9/01/11/MNJ815787S.DTL

I'd say he probably doesn't wanna screw this up... taking time to figure out what to charge him with?

Charge him with murder 2 and give the jury the option of finding guilty of murder 2 or involuntary manslaughter.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Rule # 2 of gun safety is: Never let the muzzle of a gun point at anything you do not want to destroy or kill.
http://www.bobtuley.com/safety_rules.htm

Why are cops immune from this rule and use their guns to threaten suspects all the time? Obviously this rule is in place so senseless murders like this do not happen when emotions like racism, rage, or feelings of usurping the weapons holder authority take over among other things.

You have no clue. That "rule" is intended to prevent accidents, not murders.

Cops in general are control freaks on a power trip - I'm sure this young man who was killed, egged on by his troop, resisted, talked shit, and maybe even swung at cop - this did not sit well with the cop so he blasted him. That is a 2nd degree murder. A rage killing no different than stumbling upon your old lady with another guy and blasting them.

You've made your bias against police officers obvious.

I'm sure the cop killed the guy because he was mad that he was talking back. It makes a lot of sense to do that in front of dozens of witnesses.

 

[ultra laser]

Cops exist to protect their own asses and to serve their egos. Cops are not your friend.

 

[Farang]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Rule # 2 of gun safety is: Never let the muzzle of a gun point at anything you do not want to destroy or kill.
http://www.bobtuley.com/safety_rules.htm

Why are cops immune from this rule and use their guns to threaten suspects all the time?

I wonder the same thing. As a teen I had cops come guns blazing at me in broad daylight for a trespass. I won't get into details but it was a trespass in a wide open space where you don't even know you're trespassing. Apparently not enough of one for me to have been charged with anything, although they claimed a ticket was going to come in the mail. Absolutely no reason for a gun to be pointed at me and as someone who is experienced in firearms it really pissed me off. They didn't even wait for us to make any sort of movement that indicated we had weapons, they came running from over 50 yards out from their vehicles and the first second we noticed them running they were doing so with pistols pointed at us.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Farang

Originally posted by: Zebo
Rule # 2 of gun safety is: Never let the muzzle of a gun point at anything you do not want to destroy or kill.
http://www.bobtuley.com/safety_rules.htm

Why are cops immune from this rule and use their guns to threaten suspects all the time?

I wonder the same thing. As a teen I had cops come guns blazing at me in broad daylight for a trespass. I won't get into details but it was a trespass in a wide open space where you don't even know you're trespassing. Apparently not enough of one for me to have been charged with anything, although they claimed a ticket was going to come in the mail. Absolutely no reason for a gun to be pointed at me and as someone who is experienced in firearms it really pissed me off. They didn't even wait for us to make any sort of movement that indicated we had weapons, they came running from over 50 yards out from their vehicles and the first second we noticed them running they were doing so with pistols pointed at us.

You look suspicious though.

Black walking around with a cap and tassel on, I'd have my gun out too

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Zebo
Rule # 2 of gun safety is: Never let the muzzle of a gun point at anything you do not want to destroy or kill.
http://www.bobtuley.com/safety_rules.htm

Why are cops immune from this rule and use their guns to threaten suspects all the time? Obviously this rule is in place so senseless murders like this do not happen when emotions like racism, rage, or feelings of usurping the weapons holder authority take over among other things.

You have no clue. That "rule" is intended to prevent accidents, not murders.

Cops in general are control freaks on a power trip - I'm sure this young man who was killed, egged on by his troop, resisted, talked shit, and maybe even swung at cop - this did not sit well with the cop so he blasted him. That is a 2nd degree murder. A rage killing no different than stumbling upon your old lady with another guy and blasting them.

You've made your bias against police officers obvious.

I'm sure the cop killed the guy because he was mad that he was talking back. It makes a lot of sense to do that in front of dozens of witnesses.

No the rule is there in order to not kill things you don't intend to. Accident? there is no such thing if you follow proper gun safety unless equipment malfunctions.

I have at least 10 friends that are cops. I sponsored a FOP golf tournament. I go hunting and fishing with them. I can tell you at least 6/10 suffer from a Wyatt Erp mentality. Maybe it's needed when dealing with scum bags day in and day out but to deny it is pure ignorance and goes against psychological studies. http://www.heavybadge.com/10reason.htm

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: Zebo
Rule # 2 of gun safety is: Never let the muzzle of a gun point at anything you do not want to destroy or kill.
http://www.bobtuley.com/safety_rules.htm

Why are cops immune from this rule and use their guns to threaten suspects all the time? Obviously this rule is in place so senseless murders like this do not happen when emotions like racism, rage, or feelings of usurping the weapons holder authority take over among other things. Cops in general are control freaks on a power trip - I'm sure this young man who was killed, egged on by his troop, resisted, talked shit, and maybe even swung at cop - this did not sit well with the cop so he blasted him. That is a 2nd degree murder. A rage killing no different than stumbling upon your old lady with another guy and blasting them.

I have to disagree. The video does not show any sort of evidence of this officer being blinded by rage and out of control. The video does in fact show his reaction as being somewhat surprised and confused once the gun goes off. If he were to be charged with 2nd degree murder he would walk period.

I don't think I've ever been surprised at the end result of my holding a pistol and pulling the trigger. In fact, I think I'd be more surprised if it didn't fire a metal projectile at my intended target.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: Zebo
Rule # 2 of gun safety is: Never let the muzzle of a gun point at anything you do not want to destroy or kill.
http://www.bobtuley.com/safety_rules.htm

Why are cops immune from this rule and use their guns to threaten suspects all the time? Obviously this rule is in place so senseless murders like this do not happen when emotions like racism, rage, or feelings of usurping the weapons holder authority take over among other things. Cops in general are control freaks on a power trip - I'm sure this young man who was killed, egged on by his troop, resisted, talked shit, and maybe even swung at cop - this did not sit well with the cop so he blasted him. That is a 2nd degree murder. A rage killing no different than stumbling upon your old lady with another guy and blasting them.

I have to disagree. The video does not show any sort of evidence of this officer being blinded by rage and out of control. The video does in fact show his reaction as being somewhat surprised and confused once the gun goes off. If he were to be charged with 2nd degree murder he would walk period.

I agree he would walk because of boot lickers like you out there. OTOH - If a citizen shot an unarmed man like this video showed you'd be the first to vote conviction.

 

[bbdub333]

Originally posted by: ultra laser
Cops exist to protect their own asses and to serve their egos. Cops are not your friend.

We've already heard from the high schoolers, thank you.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
-snip-
Rethink the taser design ...... I don't think the taser needs to be black and have a normal gun grip. That is bad design.

I think that's a very good idea.

I se no reason that the taser must be that similar to a gun.

Put it in the shape of a flashlight etc

Fern

 

[Atheus]

Doesn't this happen all the time in the US? Obviously the videos make it a slightly different situation, but it won't change the underlying culture, will it?

 

[wkabel23]

cop apologists are amazing. this guy is clearly a bad apple, but y'all still shield him. what he did was inexcusable and he should face the consequences for it.

 

[smack Down]

Time for the needle in the cops arm?

http://carlosmiller.com/2009/0...-carrying-a-taser-gun/

Or do the apologist need more proof?

Also can anyone give a valid justification for the California Public Safety Officers Bill of Rights Act.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: smack Down
Time for the needle in the cops arm?

http://carlosmiller.com/2009/0...-carrying-a-taser-gun/

Or do the apologist need more proof?

Also can anyone give a valid justification for the California Public Safety Officers Bill of Rights Act.

Would never happen.


Negligent Homicide, he'll do a hard 15.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: smack Down
Time for the needle in the cops arm?

http://carlosmiller.com/2009/0...-carrying-a-taser-gun/

Or do the apologist need more proof?

Also can anyone give a valid justification for the California Public Safety Officers Bill of Rights Act.

Would never happen.


Negligent Homicide, he'll do a hard 15.

How is it negligent homicide?

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: smack Down
Time for the needle in the cops arm?

http://carlosmiller.com/2009/0...-carrying-a-taser-gun/

Or do the apologist need more proof?

Also can anyone give a valid justification for the California Public Safety Officers Bill of Rights Act.

Would never happen.


Negligent Homicide, he'll do a hard 15.

How is it negligent homicide?

Because if you believe the guy just felt like killing someone, you are blinded by your hate for authority.

He screwed up, and deserves to pay for it. Pretending he wanted to end his life over shooting one punk in front of a bunch of people just makes you look stupid.

 

[fallout man]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: smack Down
Time for the needle in the cops arm?

http://carlosmiller.com/2009/0...-carrying-a-taser-gun/

Or do the apologist need more proof?

Also can anyone give a valid justification for the California Public Safety Officers Bill of Rights Act.

Would never happen.


Negligent Homicide, he'll do a hard 15.

How is it negligent homicide?

Because if you believe the guy just felt like killing someone, you are blinded by your hate for authority.

He screwed up, and deserves to pay for it. Pretending he wanted to end his life over shooting one punk in front of a bunch of people just makes you look stupid.

What the fuck is wrong with you?

A person is dead because someone pulled out a gun and shot them.

That person is a LEO, so we next consider whether he was in danger/justified to use lethal force.

Video evidence shows that he was in no danger.

We then consider whether an accidental mishap of pulling the wrong weapon led to the death. We discuss the possibility that the guy had a gun-shaped taser, and pulled the wrong handle.

Please show me evidence of any police department that instructs LEO's to place "non-lethal" tasers next to their gun...

...because it seems that we're now presented with evidence that the likelihood of gun/taser confusion is NADDA, NIL, ZERO, BADDA-BING, BADDA-BOOM.

If you want to present the argument that the LEO went for his wizard wand instead of a gun, go right ahead.