Breaking: North Charleston cop about to go free!!!

[Jarlaxle]

The video says it all. Scott was running away before Slager drew and fired . . . eight times. He is going to prison. Graham vs. Connor is not an absolute blanket of immunity to kill an unarmed man running away with his back to the officer.

If he walks (and he might), then police truly have a licence to kill anyone, at any time, for any reason they want, in any manner that they choose.

If that were to happen, I imagine the leadership will order them forever after to travel two to a car.

Naah. Costs too much. Not to mention: with all the crap in the cars, they frequently CAN'T.

 

[MikeK]

Naah. Costs too much. Not to mention: with all the crap in the cars, they frequently CAN'T.

They very well could if they would put an end to the useless, counterproductive drug-war bullshit which presently occupies about eighty or more percent of our law-enforcement resources, from ordinary street cops to judges, court and prison personnel. The cost is enormous and the results are utterly wasteful because drugs remain just as available today, if not moreso, than they were when Reagan initiated this insanity.

Insanity is the right word if we consider the War on Drugs has meant doing the same thing over and over and over for thirty-plus years while expecting and hoping to achieve a different result. And even though nothing changes they just keep on doing it -- over and over and over.

Watch the TV reality series, COPS, and you'll see that three out of every five actions the police involve themselves in are drug related, typically some minor bullshit in which no-one has been harmed and nothing will be solved. Drug abuse is a medical and social problem in which law-enforcement's involvement does much more harm than good.

 

[dannyboys]

Naah. Costs too much. Not to mention: with all the crap in the cars, they frequently CAN'T.

They very well could if they would put an end to the useless, counterproductive drug-war bullshit which presently occupies about eighty or more percent of our law-enforcement resources, from ordinary street cops to judges, court and prison personnel. The cost is enormous and the results are utterly wasteful because drugs remain just as available today, if not moreso, than they were when Reagan initiated this insanity.

Insanity is the right word if we consider the War on Drugs has meant doing the same thing over and over and over for thirty-plus years while expecting and hoping to achieve a different result. And even though nothing changes they just keep on doing it -- over and over and over.

Watch the TV reality series, COPS, and you'll see that three out of every five actions the police involve themselves in are drug related, typically some minor bullshit in which no-one has been harmed and nothing will be solved. Drug abuse is a medical and social problem in which law-enforcement's involvement does much more harm than good.

Many illegal drugs seriously impair the person taking them. Ever seen someone who's just taken illegal drugs try to drive a car?
Would you want your family driving on the same road as an impaired driver?
Ever seen a twelve year old girl high on CM?
Would you be OK if the girl was your daughter?How would you feel about the sub-human scum who got your little girl addicted to CM?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

But . . . it is not an immunity blanket to shield officers from murder.

Slager murdered Scott.

Huh? If the SCOTUS says it's legal....it's LEGAL. Immunity isn't needed for something that isn't illegal.

Scott used a weapon on Scott. And fled. SCOTUS says under that circumstance....the cop can use deadly force to prevent his escape. It's law.

The cop should have used....

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Untrue.

Actually it's in the video.

Which part?

The part where he drops the taser next to the guy he just shot in the back.

Yep. As trained...he gathered all loose equipment.

You saw a taser being planted (then picked back up).

You've got your order backward. Slager picks something up on his way to the down suspect. Then drops it beside the suspect.

In the indictment, the prosecuters allege that was the taser. If Slager's account was correct he wouldn't need to move the taser closer to the victim he just shot.

Worse, Slager never alleges that the taser was used against him, as his defense attorney claims. There's no mention of this in any incident report. Slager instead claims that he feared it would be. Nor were there any injuries reported for Slager consistent with the use of a taser. Nor were there any fingerprints from Scott on the taser.

The defense attorney made up the claim that a taser had been used on Slager out of whole cloth. Based on nothing.

The cop could have walked behind him until he ran out of breath and then slapped the cuffs on. This was a needless use of lethal force.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Naah. Costs too much. Not to mention: with all the crap in the cars, they frequently CAN'T.

They very well could if they would put an end to the useless, counterproductive drug-war bullshit which presently occupies about eighty or more percent of our law-enforcement resources, from ordinary street cops to judges, court and prison personnel. The cost is enormous and the results are utterly wasteful because drugs remain just as available today, if not moreso, than they were when Reagan initiated this insanity.

Insanity is the right word if we consider the War on Drugs has meant doing the same thing over and over and over for thirty-plus years while expecting and hoping to achieve a different result. And even though nothing changes they just keep on doing it -- over and over and over.

Watch the TV reality series, COPS, and you'll see that three out of every five actions the police involve themselves in are drug related, typically some minor bullshit in which no-one has been harmed and nothing will be solved. Drug abuse is a medical and social problem in which law-enforcement's involvement does much more harm than good.

Many illegal drugs seriously impair the person taking them. Ever seen someone who's just taken illegal drugs try to drive a car?
Would you want your family driving on the same road as an impaired driver?
Ever seen a twelve year old girl high on CM?
Would you be OK if the girl was your daughter?How would you feel about the sub-human scum who got your little girl addicted to CM?

Exactly. Idiots who want to legalize that shit have no idea what they're asking for.

 

[MikeK]

Exactly. Idiots who want to legalize that shit have no idea what they're asking for.

Considering the fact that drugs are no less available today than they were when Ronald Reagan escalated the War on Drugs, what exactly has been achieved by all the expense and effort? In spite of all the cops wasting their time and the enormous prison populations there has been no reduction in recreational drug use. But you want to keep doing the same thing over and over and over.

Right?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The War on Drugs can never be won, the crusaders are simply wrong; the harm overall is much worse than decriminalization and those societal costs and harms that would come with it could hurt America.

 

[David_42]

Exactly. Idiots who want to legalize that shit have no idea what they're asking for.

Considering the fact that drugs are no less available today than they were when Ronald Reagan escalated the War on Drugs, what exactly has been achieved by all the expense and effort? In spite of all the cops wasting their time and the enormous prison populations there has been no reduction in recreational drug use. But you want to keep doing the same thing over and over and over.

Right?

You pothead trolls spawn out of thin air. I already addressed this thoroughly here. I put in my time with you druggies and here is the proof

Why the War on Drugs is Constitutional, Will Never End, and Shouldn't

Irascible Crusader is me.

OLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

 

[bucs90]

Exactly. Idiots who want to legalize that shit have no idea what they're asking for.

Considering the fact that drugs are no less available today than they were when Ronald Reagan escalated the War on Drugs, what exactly has been achieved by all the expense and effort? In spite of all the cops wasting their time and the enormous prison populations there has been no reduction in recreational drug use. But you want to keep doing the same thing over and over and over.

Right?

You pothead trolls spawn out of thin air. I already addressed this thoroughly here. I put in my time with you druggies and here is the proof

Why the War on Drugs is Constitutional, Will Never End, and Shouldn't

Irascible Crusader is me.

OLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

Whoa hey!! A new member of C-FAG!!

 

[M14 Shooter]

Scott wrestled the taser away from Slager, stood and pointed it at him
Facing his own taser...Slager drew his firearm as trained and initiated stopping the threat
Scott turned to flee and slung the taser away
Slager...looking through his pistol sights...never saw the taser be thrown and thought he was aiming at an armed Scott

Presuming this is demonstratively plausible -- the officer, rightfully, either does not see a trial or is acquitted.

 

[bucs90]

Scott wrestled the taser away from Slager, stood and pointed it at him
Facing his own taser...Slager drew his firearm as trained and initiated stopping the threat
Scott turned to flee and slung the taser away
Slager...looking through his pistol sights...never saw the taser be thrown and thought he was aiming at an armed Scott

Presuming this is demonstratively plausible -- the officer, rightfully, either does not see a trial or is acquitted.

The South Carolina police academy teaches the "1 + 1" model of force. From what i hear...it's similar to one the Navy MPs once used in their EOF (escalation of force) model.

In that model...you go to 1 level of force higher than what the suspect uses against you. If they are using punches...you use taser. If they have a taser or bat or knife...you go to gun.

Slager thought Scott bad his Taser and tried to use it on him. That's his argument. And...SCOTUS ruling Graham v. Connor says if a suspect uses a weapon vs an officer...deadly force CAN BE used to make the arrest.

So....by his academy training....it was NOT following procedure to run tackle him, use a taser or baton or spray. 1 + 1 vs a taser is a gun. His academy training taught it. SCOTUS allows for it.

Was he OBLIGATED to wait for backup to arrive? No. In fact...with the passengers location unknown...he needed to stop the situation quickly. Would it have been smarter to wait? YES.

The arrest was going to legal. Slager was not obligated to wait to make the arrest. Slager thought the suspect was armed with his taser. SCOTUS says deadly force can be used. His academy training says 1 + 1 vs a taser = a gun.



Was Slager's action unwise, dumb and ugly? Yes.

Was it LEGAL? YES.

Folks....he's gonna be free as a bird.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Scott wrestled the taser away from Slager, stood and pointed it at him
Facing his own taser...Slager drew his firearm as trained and initiated stopping the threat
Scott turned to flee and slung the taser away
Slager...looking through his pistol sights...never saw the taser be thrown and thought he was aiming at an armed Scott

Presuming this is demonstratively plausible -- the officer, rightfully, either does not see a trial or is acquitted.

"I heard what his lawyer said, that's enough for me. He's clearly innocent, no need for a trial"

 

[M14 Shooter]

Scott wrestled the taser away from Slager, stood and pointed it at him
Facing his own taser...Slager drew his firearm as trained and initiated stopping the threat
Scott turned to flee and slung the taser away
Slager...looking through his pistol sights...never saw the taser be thrown and thought he was aiming at an armed Scott

Presuming this is demonstratively plausible -- the officer, rightfully, either does not see a trial or is acquitted.

"I heard what his lawyer said, that's enough for me. He's clearly innocent"

Why did you choose to ignore the first 5 words of my post?

 

[bucs90]

Scott wrestled the taser away from Slager, stood and pointed it at him
Facing his own taser...Slager drew his firearm as trained and initiated stopping the threat
Scott turned to flee and slung the taser away
Slager...looking through his pistol sights...never saw the taser be thrown and thought he was aiming at an armed Scott

Presuming this is demonstratively plausible -- the officer, rightfully, either does not see a trial or is acquitted.

"I heard what his lawyer said, that's enough for me. He's clearly innocent, no need for a trial"

You lefties believed Mike Browns lawyer. Why not this one?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Scott wrestled the taser away from Slager, stood and pointed it at him
Facing his own taser...Slager drew his firearm as trained and initiated stopping the threat
Scott turned to flee and slung the taser away
Slager...looking through his pistol sights...never saw the taser be thrown and thought he was aiming at an armed Scott

Presuming this is demonstratively plausible -- the officer, rightfully, either does not see a trial or is acquitted.

"I heard what his lawyer said, that's enough for me. He's clearly innocent"

Why did you choose to ignore the first 5 words of my post?

I didn't ignore any part of your post. You said that as long as Slager's story is "plausible", there's no need for a trial.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Scott wrestled the taser away from Slager, stood and pointed it at him
Facing his own taser...Slager drew his firearm as trained and initiated stopping the threat
Scott turned to flee and slung the taser away
Slager...looking through his pistol sights...never saw the taser be thrown and thought he was aiming at an armed Scott

Presuming this is demonstratively plausible -- the officer, rightfully, either does not see a trial or is acquitted.

"I heard what his lawyer said, that's enough for me. He's clearly innocent, no need for a trial"

You lefties believed Mike Browns lawyer. Why not this one?

Must deflect! Must deflect! Must deflect!

 

[bucs90]

Scott wrestled the taser away from Slager, stood and pointed it at him
Facing his own taser...Slager drew his firearm as trained and initiated stopping the threat
Scott turned to flee and slung the taser away
Slager...looking through his pistol sights...never saw the taser be thrown and thought he was aiming at an armed Scott

Presuming this is demonstratively plausible -- the officer, rightfully, either does not see a trial or is acquitted.

"I heard what his lawyer said, that's enough for me. He's clearly innocent, no need for a trial"

You lefties believed Mike Browns lawyer. Why not this one?

Must deflect! Must deflect! Must deflect!

Haha...deflect? Hardly. Just a footnote.

But Scott's DNA is on the taser. He had it. And 1 + 1 vs taser is a gun. SCOTUS allows it. His academy teaches it.

Sorry....but your anger is gonna boil. He's going free.

 

[Skylar]

Scott wrestled the taser away from Slager, stood and pointed it at him
Facing his own taser...Slager drew his firearm as trained and initiated stopping the threat
Scott turned to flee and slung the taser away
Slager...looking through his pistol sights...never saw the taser be thrown and thought he was aiming at an armed Scott

Presuming this is demonstratively plausible -- the officer, rightfully, either does not see a trial or is acquitted.

Its not. Its not mentioned in any of the incident reports or police reports. And Scott's fingerprints aren't on the taser.

 

[Skylar]

Scott wrestled the taser away from Slager, stood and pointed it at him
Facing his own taser...Slager drew his firearm as trained and initiated stopping the threat
Scott turned to flee and slung the taser away
Slager...looking through his pistol sights...never saw the taser be thrown and thought he was aiming at an armed Scott

Presuming this is demonstratively plausible -- the officer, rightfully, either does not see a trial or is acquitted.

"I heard what his lawyer said, that's enough for me. He's clearly innocent, no need for a trial"

You lefties believed Mike Browns lawyer. Why not this one?

Must deflect! Must deflect! Must deflect!

Haha...deflect? Hardly. Just a footnote.

But Scott's DNA is on the taser. He had it. And 1 + 1 vs taser is a gun. SCOTUS allows it. His academy teaches it.

Or it was dropped next to his body after he was shot like the videos shows. All that DNA pouring out of the multiple gun shot wounds.

No fingerprints makes the revised account of slager's remarkably implausible