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

[pknopp]

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...

Who says they knew who he was? He was under no obligation to give them his name. Where does it state all of this?

 

[pknopp]

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

Not quite.

IN almost every jurisdiction in this country, placing your hand on another can be considered assault. The cops will only arrest someone for that, though, if the person who was grabbed insists on it, and then it's almost never prosecuted.

And that happened?

But, technically, if you grab someone to break up a fight you've committed a crime. I worked as a bouncer here a few years back, and was arrested for assault because I broke up fights. Not once was I charged with a crime...

You should have sued.

 

[Meathead]

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?

Anecdotal answers hold little sway but you asked.

My son and his girlfriend was moving one day. They were riding in the back of the truck with some of their stuff because three people were already up front (perfectly legal in WV). I was on my way to meet them to help them unload when he calls me and tells me they were just pulled over. It was around 3 blocks from the house they were moving to.

I drive up and they have the drivers, drivers license and were asking my son and his girlfriend for theirs. I asked the officer why. He said they were stopped for riding in the back of a truck. I told them that is not illegal and told my son and his girlfriend that they didn't have to do anything.

I quickly pulled a news article on the subject. The officer then said "well, we wanted to make sure they were being safe". I asked if they were riding in an unsafe, unlawful manner? "The officer said they were not". I asked the officer to give the driver back his drivers license and let them go on their way, that they had no reason to stop them.

After some discussion among themselves they did.

So yes, I would. They were out fishing. That needs to stop.

Did you finish high school? You really are one stupid mofo.

 

[Mac-7]

Why would they taser someone for breaking up a fight?

As I say, reports are sketchy

but from the video it appears they were trying to stop him from getting in his car

 

[Mac-7]

You are making things up. There is zero indications he did anything illegal. He broke up a fight.

And if there was an outstanding warrant for his arrest on some unrelated charge?

 

[pknopp]

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

Sorry, Ace, once again, you show a dangerous ignorance of reality. It's not up to YOU to decide you committed no crime. It's not up to YOU to decide you are free to leave. The police officer decides that, and HE will tell you if you are free to leave and when.

Unless he can state a reason for legally detaining you, you can leave.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

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

One shot would most likely immediately incapacitate him. If it doesn't, another shot can be made. Not that I agree with ANY shots being fired.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

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.

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

Sorry, Ace, once again, you show a dangerous ignorance of reality. It's not up to YOU to decide you committed no crime. It's not up to YOU to decide you are free to leave. The police officer decides that, and HE will tell you if you are free to leave and when.

Unless he can state a reason for legally detaining you, you can leave.

I seriously hope you get to live in the world you're advocating, where blacks have immunity from the cops. You really deserve it

 

[pknopp]

Name what? The Constitution? The Bill of Rights? Why do you think police forces pay out millions and millions in settlements every year?

Can ONE of you Lefty Asswipes EVER stop being a child?

NAME THE ORDER A COP MIGHT GIVE YOU THAT YOU ARE NOT LEGALLY REQUIRED TO FOLLOW.

Or are you like Biden unable to remember from one minute to the next what bullshit you claimed?

Brian Encinia ordered Sandra Bland to put out her cigarette. He went ballistic when she did not and got himself fired.

Cities have to pay out millions and millions every year for the officers violations of people's civil rights.

 

[Orangecat]

The word nuance doesn't mean what you seem to think it does.

Incorrect.

 

[theHawk]

If Democrats cared about these “black lives”, they would do press conferences and get on CNN and tell blacks to obey cops and to wait to get their day in court.

 

[Grumblenuts]

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...

Here's your evidence:

Online court records indicate Kenosha County prosecutors charged Blake on July 6 with sexual assault, trespassing and disorderly conduct in connection with domestic abuse. An arrest warrant was issued the following day. The records contain no further details and do not list an attorney for Blake.
It was unclear whether that case had anything to do with the shooting.

Unclear because they'd obviously had plenty of time to arrest him if they still considered the matter serious or unresolved. We don't know whether he was still considered "a suspect in another crime." We don't know that "the police found out who he was, and that there was a warrant for his arrest." We also don't know that he committed any crime in this case to begin with. We do know that at least one of the cops did.

 

[basquebromance]

"FUCK THE GAMES AND PLAYOFFS!!! THIS IS SICK AND IS A REAL PROBLEM WE DEMAND JUSTICE! ITS CRAZY I DONT HAVE ANY WORDS BUT WTF MAN! THIS IS WHY WE DONT FEEL SAFE!!!!" - Donovan Mitchell of the Utah Jazz

"Cops feel so free to kill a black man but will let a mass murderer walk away in hand cuffs. How can we have hope shit will change when everyday we go on this app and see this shit WTF!

And if you’re defending this act...you’re a piece of shit and the part of the problem. Ya he’s walking away but that doesn’t mean you SHOOT MULTIPLE TIMES!!!" - Kyle Kuzma of the Lakers

 

[toobfreak]

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

Sorry, Ace, once again, you show a dangerous ignorance of reality. It's not up to YOU to decide you committed no crime. It's not up to YOU to decide you are free to leave. The police officer decides that, and HE will tell you if you are free to leave and when.

Unless he can state a reason for legally detaining you, you can leave.

WRONG. You can ASK an officer if you can leave or if you are being detained. Otherwise he will TELL you. If you are being detained, then you can ask if you may know the reason. I guarantee you no cop is going to refuse to give you a reason.

So are you going to decide you are an expert on the law and argue with the cop he cannot legally detail you for whatever reason?

I hope so.

You can try arguing that it isn't a lawful reason. Better still, after the arrest, call your attorney and fill charges of illegal detainment.

I hope you just tell the cop FU, you're leaving, then run and try to jump in your car and leave.

Right or wrong, like it or not, the police officer IS the authority when present and you WILL do what he asks.

You can protest it in court or get a cap in your ass.

 

[pknopp]

Why would they taser someone for breaking up a fight?

As I say, reports are sketchy

but from the video it appears they were trying to stop him from getting in his car

Yes, and the question is whether they had a legal right to stop him. From what we know they did not. Is there something we do not know? Maybe. But that would also bring up other questions. If they knew he was wanted why would they simple allow him to walk to his car to start with?

 

[pknopp]

You are making things up. There is zero indications he did anything illegal. He broke up a fight.

And if there was an outstanding warrant for his arrest on some unrelated charge?

The question is when did they discover that if so and why they did nothing when they discovered it right from the beginning?

 

[Meathead]

Name what? The Constitution? The Bill of Rights? Why do you think police forces pay out millions and millions in settlements every year?

Can ONE of you Lefty Asswipes EVER stop being a child?

NAME THE ORDER A COP MIGHT GIVE YOU THAT YOU ARE NOT LEGALLY REQUIRED TO FOLLOW.

Or are you like Biden unable to remember from one minute to the next what bullshit you claimed?

Brian Encinia ordered Sandra Bland to put out her cigarette. He went ballistic when she did not and got himself fired.

Cities have to pay out millions and millions every year for the officers violations of people's civil rights.

And she killed herself? Talk about stupid, she may even have eclipsed you.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

If Democrats cared about these “black lives”, they would do press conferences and get on CNN and tell blacks to obey cops and to wait to get their day in court.

That's what civilized people do. Unfortunately they've been taught to argue, fight and debate with authorities. They deserve the culture they've created for themselves. Cops should just drive on by when it is black on black crime.

 

[pknopp]

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.

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

Sorry, Ace, once again, you show a dangerous ignorance of reality. It's not up to YOU to decide you committed no crime. It's not up to YOU to decide you are free to leave. The police officer decides that, and HE will tell you if you are free to leave and when.

Unless he can state a reason for legally detaining you, you can leave.

I seriously hope you get to live in the world you're advocating, where blacks have immunity from the cops. You really deserve it

If you are unable to be honest I really have no desire to address anything you say.

 

[theHawk]

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...

Here's your evidence:

Online court records indicate Kenosha County prosecutors charged Blake on July 6 with sexual assault, trespassing and disorderly conduct in connection with domestic abuse. An arrest warrant was issued the following day. The records contain no further details and do not list an attorney for Blake.
It was unclear whether that case had anything to do with the shooting.

Unclear because they'd obviously had plenty of time to arrest him if they still considered the matter serious or unresolved. We don't know whether he was still considered "a suspect in another crime." We don't know that "the police found out who he was, and that there was a warrant for his arrest." We also don't know that he committed any crime in this case to begin with. We do know that at least one of the cops did.

So the piece of shit was being picked up for domestic violence.

Boy, the lefties really know how to pick their heroes.