Another Black Loser Gets Shot By Police - Jacob Blake Deserved What He Got

[TheLonelySquire]

A black man quietly walking into his truck was shot by a cop. His children were watching in the truck.
Here's the video. Anyone feel free to tell me why this man got shot. This is murder.
Expect huge protests. Not just on Wisconsin. But in the nation.

In defense of the police I would say this guy got aced because the cops thought he was reaching for a weapon after disobeying their orders to stop. The fact that his children were watching and that he was walking quietly are immaterial.

Also, I agree there will be protests and that more democratic controlled cities will be burned and plundered. It will be must watch tv on the weekend I would think.

Bottom line is, if the police tell you to stop, you stop. You don't ignore them, walk away from them and try to enter a vehicle which may or may not have a deadly weapon inside it. That's a good way to get shot.

Finally, I think this guy is still alive, no? So how is it murder?

 

[kaz]

Cops for years got away with breaking the law. Turn about is fair play.

So you think just because some cops in the past did wrong things it justifies attacking other innocent cops today? You are the epitome of an idiot.

Absolutely not. That's why it's so important to weed out the cops who can't do the job without killing unarmed people.

You keep ignoring it, but it's a flash second to grab a gun and shoot a cop dead. You keep ignoring that.

Nope. Already answered you. The cops should have never let him open the door to his car. They fucked up. Now their facing attempted murder charges. Which is really, kind of unfair. Clearly their training didn't prepare them for this.

Why shouldn't they have allowed him to open his door?

Kaz is making excuses for shooting him seven times, in the back, at point blank range, in front of his children. He claims the cops thought he was reaching for a gun.

There's nothing at all wrong with him opening his door, unless he was going for a gun. If that's what the cops were worried bout, they should have never let him open the door. Kaz is just dancing. Anything to defend the home team.

When you say things like "in front of his children" you show that you're appealing to emotion, not logic.

Why did he defy cops in front of his children? What a terrible example that was

Again, why was he not allowed to get in his car and leave?

Because the police discovered that there was a warrant for his arrest...

When? How? He had no obligation to tell them anything. He had committed no crime.

Yes, he did. There was an open warrant out for his arrest which had absolutely nothing to do with this incident...

He had committed no crime in breaking up a fight. He is free to leave.

That's what the cops had to sort out. Being in the middle of a fight is clearly probable cause

 

[Orangecat]

There are options outside of filling his back full of holes and why shouldn't they have let him leave?

Your ignorance is astounding.

 

[WEATHER53]

He is lawfully authorized to assess the situation and issue such an obedience directive. At that point what you think might be your rights have been vacated
If a court determines the direction was without merit then you will prevail but in the mean time you expose yourself to great lawful peril
You are as always speaking from an emotion standpoint as to what you feel should have happened based on what you feel did happen.

Well, you know, you're just as entitled as the next person to emotionally feel that "such an obedience directive" was "issued." Whatever helps you sleep better at night.

Helps me stay alive and not so much sleeping
Knowing and obeying the law goes a long way versus being a belligerent anti social thug

 

[Meathead]

Yeah, I did, in fact. But, as I said - I'm white, so they gave me the benefit of the doubt.

And hey - I get it. Most white people (myself included) have a base fear of large angry black men. Those people shouldn't be cops.

Had you pegged for a wigger btw.

A wigger? Is this another white nationalist term?

We believe you. No one would ever make things up on the internet.

 

[kaz]

All of the riots and looting unchecked are further understood by the criminal element that they can get away with more and more lawbreaking and it’s turning out poorly for the dummies

Cops for years got away with breaking the law. Turn about is fair play.

Only you and your ilk will suffer with that philosophy.

Hardly. There is a news story every day now where a police officer is being held accountable for actions that he would have got a pass in the past.

In the past these two would still be out patrolling today.

Unarmed whites, latinos, and Asians are killed by the cops all the time, yet we almost never hear about that.

Aren't you the least bit curious to understand why?

Well whites are 7X the populatoon but 1/5th the shootings by police and top 20 metro police forces are over 50% minorities so who is gunning for whom?

Doesn't change the fact that shootings of unarmed people who aren't black gets absolutely zero attention.

Yep. And shooting of blacks get attention no matter how stupid the black who gets shot is. It's about skin color. Period.

George Floyd was murdered. Others were not. But they are all treated the same based only on their black skin

And here's something else I want to put out there...

I hate comply-or-die culture as much as anyone...Even so, those are the rules of how to not get shot by the cops that we're operating under, and I sure don't want to get shot...So there you have it.

I know what you're saying, but it's a very dangerous job for cops too. There are no easy answers. A lot of widows out there. The system has to be you comply with cops and follow up later when they are wrong.

The problem are the Democrat police union contracts that prevent cops with a pattern from being disciplined. Like the cop who murdered George Floyd

Cop unions aren't any different from any other....They make it nearly impossible to get rid of the incompetent and the malignant....Every "public servant" union needs to be abolished.

Floyd wasn't murdered...He OD-ed.

It's not the cop unions I'm blaming, it's the Democrat city counsels that make the deals with them agreeing that bad cops are protected. Some even when they do get fired go from city to city.

Of course the union asks for that. But the city doesn't have to give it to them. Then who are melting down over dirty cops? The same city counsels that approved the deals protecting the bad cops

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

One shot would have been enough since the cop wasn't even threatened in any way.

 

[jbrownson0831]

One shot would have been enough since the cop wasn't even threatened in any way.

Of course, Lt Columbo......

 

[Orangecat]

I have no idea what you are rambling about or how it applies to anything I said.

That's because your education was sub-par and you lack the intellectual capacity to understand nuance. Not my problem, tbh.

 

[kaz]

One shot would have been enough since the cop wasn't even threatened in any way.

That makes no sense. If he was reaching for a gun that means the cop would still probably be dead

 

[WEATHER53]

Shooting a man in the back has always been considered cowardly.

Making things up is cowardly also. There was no gun in the car,

You seriously expect the police in that situation to allow him to go into his car? What are you, an idiot?

There are options outside of filling his back full of holes and why shouldn't they have let him leave?

It has been determined in many precedent cases that when police make an “obedience directive” that you are required by law to comply. Soft soap theoretical morality peddling is not an exception.

No it hasn't been. A police officer is never allowed to violate your rights.

He is lawfully authorized to assess the situation and issue such an obedience directive. At that point what you think might be your rights have been vacated

No they haven't. Such as his right to remain silent never gets dismissed.

If a court determines the direction was without merit then you will prevail but in the mean time you expose yourself to great lawful peril

That's been the argument and what we are going to change.

You are as always speaking from an emotion standpoint as to what you feel should have happened based on what you feel did happen.

Our civil rights are not emotional. They are the basis of the country.

Your “civil tights” do not vacate the law not lawful directives

"lawful".

Orders from a law enforcement officer. It’s not street court where the merits are debated

 

[dblack]

So, summing up the deplorables' argument: "Obey or die, bitches!"

 

[jbrownson0831]

So, summing up the deplorables' argument: "Obey or die, bitches!"

Actually its just use common sense and listen

 

[dblack]

So, summing up the deplorables' argument: "Obey or die, bitches!"

Actually its just use common sense and listen

When living in a fascist state - it's vital.

 

[jbrownson0831]

So, summing up the deplorables' argument: "Obey or die, bitches!"

Actually its just use common sense and listen

Oops sorry thats not fair....

 

[kaz]

Shooting a man in the back has always been considered cowardly.

Making things up is cowardly also. There was no gun in the car,

You seriously expect the police in that situation to allow him to go into his car? What are you, an idiot?

There are options outside of filling his back full of holes and why shouldn't they have let him leave?

It has been determined in many precedent cases that when police make an “obedience directive” that you are required by law to comply. Soft soap theoretical morality peddling is not an exception.

No it hasn't been. A police officer is never allowed to violate your rights.

He is lawfully authorized to assess the situation and issue such an obedience directive. At that point what you think might be your rights have been vacated

No they haven't. Such as his right to remain silent never gets dismissed.

If a court determines the direction was without merit then you will prevail but in the mean time you expose yourself to great lawful peril

That's been the argument and what we are going to change.

You are as always speaking from an emotion standpoint as to what you feel should have happened based on what you feel did happen.

Our civil rights are not emotional. They are the basis of the country.

Your “civil tights” do not vacate the law not lawful directives

"lawful".

Orders from a law enforcement officer. It’s not street court where the merits are debated

Exactly. Cops can and do make mistakes. But this is life or death for them too. They aren't robots. Obey them on the street and take up any issue with them later when lives aren't at risk

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

He also had this as his cover page on Facebook -- which is what most top level Antifa lieutenants have on their page to show they hate cops...View attachment 379033

Shooting a man in the back has always been considered cowardly.

Making things up is cowardly also. There was no gun in the car,

This isn't the Wild West genius ....

And yet that is what some seem to want. All the same, nothing has changed. Shooting a man in the back is cowardly.

So you should wait until he turns around and puts a few rounds in you?
No such thing as fair in a life or death situation.

With what? One of the kids happy meal toys?

We dont know if there was a gun or not.
But that cop didnt know either....

If you're using that line of reasoning to justify the shooting, then the police would be justified in shooting just about everyone they come in contact with. Run a stop sign? You might have a gun. Jaywalking? You might have a gun.

How stupid...

IF they refused to obey orders when police have detained them, they should be shot...

If we shoot more of these darkies -- maybe the other darkies will know their place...

That is how policing use to work back when this country was great -- we don't shoot darkies enough.....

Trump should campaign on that, but obviously, he shouldn't call them darkies -- because of democrat political correctness...

So, no link to the guy's Facebook page with that Antifa cover photo?

Didn't think so...

He hates police....he also had an open warrant for sexual assault and domestic violence....
View attachment 379043



This guy deserved what he got.....his kids will be better off without him, maybe he has some life insurance money he can leave them when he dies....

Say he is wanted. Wanted for a few things. So he decides to not care when the police approach him. Most people will comply. Why? Because extra charges from the approach to the actual arrest can occur. Which means more time. We will see what happened soon enough.

Which might have been the case if the cops hadn't decided to fill his back full of holes.

Had he complied it would never have happened.
Would you do the same if a cop told you to stop?

 

[jbrownson0831]

So, summing up the deplorables' argument: "Obey or die, bitches!"

Actually its just use common sense and listen

When living in a fascist state - it's vital.

Fascists like the leftist party that became became Nazi Germany??

 

[Canon Shooter]

He had committed no crime in breaking up a fight. He is free to leave.

He was a suspect in another crime. We know this because there was a warrant issued for his arrest. Once the police found out who he was, and that there was a warrant for his arrest, his involvement in breaking up a fight became secondary.

You need to educate yourself on how warrants work. There was not even the slightest chance of the police letting him go...

 

[dblack]

So, summing up the deplorables' argument: "Obey or die, bitches!"

Actually its just use common sense and listen

When living in a fascist state - it's vital.

Fascists like the leftist party that became became Nazi Germany??

Pretty much exactly like that, yes.