2aGuy, you'll love this!

[airplanemechanic]

Off duty female cop puts 3 caps in a mans ass after he tries to rob some families at gunpoint in front of a school. He later dies. This happened in Brazil.

Warning: Graphic Content

https://nypost.com/video/hero-mom-s..._medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_2894014

Yes, WOMEN should conceal carry!!!

 

[S.J.]

Scratch one scumbag.

 

[toobfreak]

Off duty female cop puts 3 caps in a mans ass after he tries to rob some families at gunpoint in front of a school. He later dies. This happened in Brazil.

Warning: Graphic Content

https://nypost.com/video/hero-mom-s..._medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_2894014

Yes, WOMEN should conceal carry!!!

He later died, but at least she shot him in the ass and gave him a chance to survive and didn't go for a chest or head shot like an American cop does even when they have the chance to do otherwise.

 

[airplanemechanic]

You do realize she shot the dude in his chest right? I was being sarcastic saying she put three caps in his ass, I didn't actually mean she shot him in the glutmous maximus.

 

[Pop23]

Off duty female cop puts 3 caps in a mans ass after he tries to rob some families at gunpoint in front of a school. He later dies. This happened in Brazil.

Warning: Graphic Content

https://nypost.com/video/hero-mom-s..._medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_2894014

Yes, WOMEN should conceal carry!!!

This was posted before, but I never get tired of seeing it.

As someone else on this board would say........

God bless that woman and you all.......,

And I hope the gunman burns in hell.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Off duty female cop puts 3 caps in a mans ass after he tries to rob some families at gunpoint in front of a school. He later dies. This happened in Brazil.

Warning: Graphic Content

https://nypost.com/video/hero-mom-s..._medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_2894014

Yes, WOMEN should conceal carry!!!

My Kinda Woman!!!

 

[airplanemechanic]

I can tell by the way his body reacted when she shot him he would have never walked again. His leg immediately went out straight and never moved. The bullet probably damaged nerves going to his leg.

 

[pismoe]

best policy for cops or homeowners is 2 to center mass then a head shot . None of this wounding to Stop BS .

 

[Godboy]

Off duty female cop puts 3 caps in a mans ass after he tries to rob some families at gunpoint in front of a school. He later dies. This happened in Brazil.

Warning: Graphic Content

https://nypost.com/video/hero-mom-s..._medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_2894014

Yes, WOMEN should conceal carry!!!

He later died, but at least she shot him in the ass and gave him a chance to survive and didn't go for a chest or head shot like an American cop does even when they have the chance to do otherwise.

^ What a dummy!

 

[pismoe]

YEP , dats the end of him ,

 

[Taz]

Off duty female cop puts 3 caps in a mans ass after he tries to rob some families at gunpoint in front of a school. He later dies. This happened in Brazil.

Warning: Graphic Content

https://nypost.com/video/hero-mom-s..._medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_2894014

Yes, WOMEN should conceal carry!!!

Geez, don't encourage him.

 

[Sahba]

too bad the victims couldn't have protected themselves (precluded from carry & all) ... rare to have a cop there in time..

 

[toobfreak]

You do realize she shot the dude in his chest right? I was being sarcastic saying she put three caps in his ass, I didn't actually mean she shot him in the glutmous maximus.

No, I assume if you say she shot him in the ass, you mean she shot him in the ass, and it looked like he was bleeding from there.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Off duty female cop puts 3 caps in a mans ass after he tries to rob some families at gunpoint in front of a school. He later dies. This happened in Brazil.

Warning: Graphic Content

https://nypost.com/video/hero-mom-s..._medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_2894014

Yes, WOMEN should conceal carry!!!

He later died, but at least she shot him in the ass and gave him a chance to survive and didn't go for a chest or head shot like an American cop does even when they have the chance to do otherwise.

I suppose what you're saying is that you'd rather criminals go to jail so that the government can waste more taxpayer money keeping them alive in there?

 

[toobfreak]

Off duty female cop puts 3 caps in a mans ass after he tries to rob some families at gunpoint in front of a school. He later dies. This happened in Brazil.

Warning: Graphic Content

https://nypost.com/video/hero-mom-s..._medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_2894014

Yes, WOMEN should conceal carry!!!

He later died, but at least she shot him in the ass and gave him a chance to survive and didn't go for a chest or head shot like an American cop does even when they have the chance to do otherwise.

I suppose what you're saying is that you'd rather criminals go to jail so that the government can waste more taxpayer money keeping them alive in there?

So you think only guilty people go to jail, and once a convict, you are a subhuman species with no rights, no value and even keeping you alive is a waste? I can think of one other person who would agree with you, who saw all prisoners as scum to do with as he chose with no innate rights. Maybe you heard of him, he was Adolf Hitler.

 

[JimBowie1958]

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Off duty female cop puts 3 caps in a mans ass after he tries to rob some families at gunpoint in front of a school. He later dies. This happened in Brazil.

Warning: Graphic Content

https://nypost.com/video/hero-mom-s..._medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_2894014

Yes, WOMEN should conceal carry!!!

He later died, but at least she shot him in the ass and gave him a chance to survive and didn't go for a chest or head shot like an American cop does even when they have the chance to do otherwise.

I suppose what you're saying is that you'd rather criminals go to jail so that the government can waste more taxpayer money keeping them alive in there?

So you think only guilty people go to jail, and once a convict, you are a subhuman species with no rights, no value and even keeping you alive is a waste? I can think of one other person who would agree with you, who saw all prisoners as scum to do with as he chose with no innate rights. Maybe you heard of him, he was Adolf Hitler.

Actually, Hitler felt that way about what he saw as his political opponent, what he threw in jail are people who disagree with him, something Alarmists want to do, and a common mindset of the left. You can't strawman me if Hitler and I have no similarities. In fact, unlike Hitler, I almost feel like we're better off with no state whatsoever.

As a matter of fact, in order to be allowed to shoot someone, they have to perceive them as a threat, and as of right now, most police wear body cameras and have cameras on their cars. This means that police are pressured into NOT shooting unless absolutely necessary. While I don't agree with the police existing at all, I do think that this is among the best ways to ensure that their actions are at least within legal boundaries.

I'd also like to point out that you didn't bother answering my question before constructing that strawman of yours.

 

[toobfreak]

Off duty female cop puts 3 caps in a mans ass after he tries to rob some families at gunpoint in front of a school. He later dies. This happened in Brazil.

Warning: Graphic Content

https://nypost.com/video/hero-mom-s..._medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_2894014

Yes, WOMEN should conceal carry!!!

He later died, but at least she shot him in the ass and gave him a chance to survive and didn't go for a chest or head shot like an American cop does even when they have the chance to do otherwise.

I suppose what you're saying is that you'd rather criminals go to jail so that the government can waste more taxpayer money keeping them alive in there?

So you think only guilty people go to jail, and once a convict, you are a subhuman species with no rights, no value and even keeping you alive is a waste? I can think of one other person who would agree with you, who saw all prisoners as scum to do with as he chose with no innate rights. Maybe you heard of him, he was Adolf Hitler.

As a matter of fact, in order to be allowed to shoot someone, they have to perceive them as a threat, and as of right now, most police wear body cameras and have cameras on their cars. This means that police are pressured into NOT shooting unless absolutely necessary.

You are an amateur trying to play footsie with an expert here. Don't try to claim strawman to any argument you have no answer for. Your claim of absolute power is ridiculous. There is no difference between the deadly force of a gun and the deadly force of a car, and if they can't shoot someone unless they view him as a threat (totally subjective on the officer's part) then they can't run someone over with their car either who was clearly no threat. He was an unarmed man actually just trying to run away.

If I came after you with my car, you would run too. Cop, civilian, it doesn't matter. And the fact that many view the police as an unjust, absolute threat gives them as much right to carry guns as the police reason for gunning a guy down in his backyard with nothing but a cellphone. The fact that police use unnecessary excessive deadly force ALL THE TIME as their first response to a situation is proof alone that the body cams, etc., do NOT prevent abuses! Those cameras are there to collect information on YOU, not the police, half the time they are NOT released to the public (at least not until lengthy examination and possible editing), and camera or not, the police have the final power to internally decide among themselves separate from any external public review whether or not anything was wrong.

The very fact that you argue in defense of methods used that would have been deemed horrific just a few years ago is proof alone of your absolutist, authoritarian world view. I only hope someday you are wrongly confused with a person of interest, perhaps wrongly charged and convicted by a crooked judge or prosecutor, maybe your house confused with the wrong one and broken into at 4AM by a SWAT team and gunned down, are stalked, harassed, ruined, until finally run down by a car by the authorities in their zeal that "anything goes" once you are classified a "convict" or "outcast of society." Then let's hear how your tune changes.

America, once land of "opportunity," quickly becoming the fascist state where once classified as an "outcast" (right or wrong), the door is slammed behind you never to be let back in again.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

You are an amateur trying to play footsie with an expert here. Don't try to claim strawman to any argument you have no answer for. Your claim of absolute power is ridiculous. There is no difference between the deadly force of a gun and the deadly force of a car, and if they can't shoot someone unless they view him as a threat (totally subjective on the officer's part) then they can't run someone over with their car either who was clearly no threat. He was an unarmed man actually just trying to run away.

I already answered you, twice in fact. You're only claiming I didn't answer in an attempt to invalidate my argument without actually making one against it.

On the officer's personal part, one could view a 'threat' as subjective, but considering they have cameras on themselves and their vehicles, and news teams following them around when anything happens, it's not a matter of how the officer sees it, in the end, but how everyone else sees it. There have been several cases already that the media has attempted to manipulate, the left is still confused as to what happened in each of them.

Even if you had a point there, it's not any different from the problem with the government as a whole. They're allowed to enforce their will upon us, capable of stealing, kidnapping, and murdering any one of us for not following said will.

If I came after you with my car, you would run too. Cop, civilian, it doesn't matter. And the fact that many view the police as an unjust, absolute threat gives them as much right to carry guns as the police reason for gunning a guy down in his backyard with nothing but a cellphone. The fact that police use unnecessary excessive deadly force ALL THE TIME as their first response to a situation is proof alone that the body cams, etc., do NOT prevent abuses! Those cameras are there to collect information on YOU, not the police, half the time they are NOT released to the public (at least not until lengthy examination and possible editing), and camera or not, the police have the final power to internally decide among themselves separate from any external public review whether or not anything was wrong.

If the guy with the cellphone wasn't coming after the cop, he couldn't be portrayed as a threat, especially with video evidence. I do agree that we have just as much right to carry guns, however, anyone can expect that drawing it on someone else who has a gun gives them the right to draw and fire, as then you're threatening them. Hence the fact that everyone should be armed.

Just because you call deadly force unnecessary, that doesn't make it true. Much like calling yourself an expert.

I do agree with the last part. Basically, my opinion is this: The state should not have a police force, however, as long as they do, they should be allowed to use deadly force when they or anyone else is threatened. This saves tax dollars, jail cells, and lives. Of course, if everyone were armed, they wouldn't be needed.

The very fact that you argue in defense of methods used that would have been deemed horrific just a few years ago is proof alone of your absolutist, authoritarian world view. I only hope someday you are wrongly confused with a person of interest, perhaps wrongly charged and convicted by a crooked judge or prosecutor, maybe your house confused with the wrong one and broken into at 4AM by a SWAT team and gunned down, are stalked, harassed, ruined, until finally run down by a car by the authorities in their zeal that "anything goes" once you are classified a "convict" or "outcast of society." Then let's hear how your tune changes.

I'm not authoritarian at all, I barely agree with the state existing in the first place, and I'm not even sure about that.

I'm sure hoping something bad happens to me is an argument, but as of right now, I can't tell what you're hoping to accomplish with that personal attack.

Also, my argument was not that anything goes, my argument was that when the police or someone else is threatened, they can be shot. You came to anything going on your own.

Besides, if I ended up killed, I'd probably consider that a win. I don't really want to live on this planet anymore<3

 

[toobfreak]

You are an amateur trying to play footsie with an expert here. Don't try to claim strawman to any argument you have no answer for. Your claim of absolute power is ridiculous. There is no difference between the deadly force of a gun and the deadly force of a car, and if they can't shoot someone unless they view him as a threat (totally subjective on the officer's part) then they can't run someone over with their car either who was clearly no threat. He was an unarmed man actually just trying to run away.

I already answered you, twice in fact. You're only claiming I didn't answer in an attempt to invalidate my argument without actually making one against it.

On the officer's personal part, one could view a 'threat' as subjective, but considering they have cameras on themselves and their vehicles, and news teams following them around when anything happens, it's not a matter of how the officer sees it, in the end, but how everyone else sees it. There have been several cases already that the media has attempted to manipulate, the left is still confused as to what happened in each of them.

Even if you had a point there, it's not any different from the problem with the government as a whole. They're allowed to enforce their will upon us, capable of stealing, kidnapping, and murdering any one of us for not following said will.

If I came after you with my car, you would run too. Cop, civilian, it doesn't matter. And the fact that many view the police as an unjust, absolute threat gives them as much right to carry guns as the police reason for gunning a guy down in his backyard with nothing but a cellphone. The fact that police use unnecessary excessive deadly force ALL THE TIME as their first response to a situation is proof alone that the body cams, etc., do NOT prevent abuses! Those cameras are there to collect information on YOU, not the police, half the time they are NOT released to the public (at least not until lengthy examination and possible editing), and camera or not, the police have the final power to internally decide among themselves separate from any external public review whether or not anything was wrong.

If the guy with the cellphone wasn't coming after the cop, he couldn't be portrayed as a threat, especially with video evidence. I do agree that we have just as much right to carry guns, however, anyone can expect that drawing it on someone else who has a gun gives them the right to draw and fire, as then you're threatening them. Hence the fact that everyone should be armed.

Just because you call deadly force unnecessary, that doesn't make it true. Much like calling yourself an expert.

I do agree with the last part. Basically, my opinion is this: The state should not have a police force, however, as long as they do, they should be allowed to use deadly force when they or anyone else is threatened. This saves tax dollars, jail cells, and lives. Of course, if everyone were armed, they wouldn't be needed.

The very fact that you argue in defense of methods used that would have been deemed horrific just a few years ago is proof alone of your absolutist, authoritarian world view. I only hope someday you are wrongly confused with a person of interest, perhaps wrongly charged and convicted by a crooked judge or prosecutor, maybe your house confused with the wrong one and broken into at 4AM by a SWAT team and gunned down, are stalked, harassed, ruined, until finally run down by a car by the authorities in their zeal that "anything goes" once you are classified a "convict" or "outcast of society." Then let's hear how your tune changes.

I'm not authoritarian at all, I barely agree with the state existing in the first place, and I'm not even sure about that.

I'm sure hoping something bad happens to me is an argument, but as of right now, I can't tell what you're hoping to accomplish with that personal attack.

Also, my argument was not that anything goes, my argument was that when the police or someone else is threatened, they can be shot. You came to anything going on your own.

Besides, if I ended up killed, I'd probably consider that a win. I don't really want to live on this planet anymore<3

You talk too much but say too little.