Chicago: Nip It In The Bud

[ogibillm]

right up until he shoots a man on the ground you have a point.
once shot, on the ground, and only armed with a 3" knife there's no reason to shoot him some more.
what may have started as a justified shooting ended with murder.

No. You got to give the officer some leeway. He was pumped up and firing a semi automatic weapon. In the heat of the moment it is easy to empty a magazine in a fraction of a moment.

You have to evaluate the shooting in its totality. You cannot break it down into segments.

What you are talking about is science. The parasympathetic and sympathetic nervous system. Adrenaline dumps. The "fog" of stressful conflict. It's why cops or soldiers can shoot 10-20 rounds and when asked say they shot 4 or 5. Brain just dumb down and reacts.

But libs refuse to even discuss this science. It's the same science that can cause a thug robbing a gas station to fire a shot and kill the clerk....and later say they don't remember it or didn't mean to. 50% chance they really didnt. Brain just does crazy shit under high stress.

he shot a guy lying on the ground repeatedly - after shooting him when he didn't pose an imminent threat.

i don't doubt that it's easy to keep squeezing that trigger in those situations, i just think that when you change your aim to shoot at a guy on the ground it's a little different than firing into the same place repeatedly.

The kid was hopped up on PCP. Also, there was no audio on the video. So, we do not know everything that was happening. As far as anyone knows, the perp could have been saying he had a gun and was going to kill them all.

well let's just make up all kinds of scenarios. maybe he was saying he was going to give them all lollipops.

maybe he did say that. but he didn't have a gun so he certainly never brandished one, or pointed it, or made any threatening moves. so what difference does it make?

 

[Iron Head]

right up until he shoots a man on the ground you have a point.
once shot, on the ground, and only armed with a 3" knife there's no reason to shoot him some more.
what may have started as a justified shooting ended with murder.

No. You got to give the officer some leeway. He was pumped up and firing a semi automatic weapon. In the heat of the moment it is easy to empty a magazine in a fraction of a moment.

You have to evaluate the shooting in its totality. You cannot break it down into segments.

What you are talking about is science. The parasympathetic and sympathetic nervous system. Adrenaline dumps. The "fog" of stressful conflict. It's why cops or soldiers can shoot 10-20 rounds and when asked say they shot 4 or 5. Brain just dumb down and reacts.

But libs refuse to even discuss this science. It's the same science that can cause a thug robbing a gas station to fire a shot and kill the clerk....and later say they don't remember it or didn't mean to. 50% chance they really didnt. Brain just does crazy shit under high stress.

he shot a guy lying on the ground repeatedly - after shooting him when he didn't pose an imminent threat.

i don't doubt that it's easy to keep squeezing that trigger in those situations, i just think that when you change your aim to shoot at a guy on the ground it's a little different than firing into the same place repeatedly.

Meh....they train to keep sights on target.

But....just watched the video. It was a bad shoot. The first couple I was okay with legally...although morally a taser would've been more appropriate.

But the threat dropped. You must stop shooting once the threat is down. I can understand one or two "heat of the moment" continuation shots. But not that.

This cop threw himself under the bus.




That said....pass the popcorn. A good riot is gonna break out!!

i could almost give a pass on the first few shots, even though there is no real threat and there certainly wasn't one that warranted lethal force - but that's a lot easier to say in hindsight.
but once he's down to keep firing - that's not about stopping a threat that's about killing a guy - and that's murder.

What if the fatal shot was inflicted in one of the first couple of shots? The kid died in the ambulance.

If the first couple shots could have caused the death, and they were ok in your mind, then it is justifiable. Correct?

 

[Iron Head]

I saw the video. There was no "rampaging".

Bottom line is that cops are not and should not be judge, jury and executioner. The cop murdered a man and needs to pay the price for that.

right up until he shoots a man on the ground you have a point.
once shot, on the ground, and only armed with a 3" knife there's no reason to shoot him some more.
what may have started as a justified shooting ended with murder.

No. You got to give the officer some leeway. He was pumped up and firing a semi automatic weapon. In the heat of the moment it is easy to empty a magazine in a fraction of a moment.

You have to evaluate the shooting in its totality. You cannot break it down into segments.

WHAT??

He was "pumped up" so it was okay to murder the kid? A trained cop can't control his own gun?

If that's true then NO civilian should ever own a gun.

The "totality" is that the cop murdered a kid in the street. If Illinois is a capital punishment state, I hope he gets the death penalty that he chose to mete out to the kid.

The OP is racist slime. If the dead kid were white and the cop black, his rant would be completely different. Face it - equal rights under the law.

fAiL s0n....then go live in a society where you can go do anything the fuck you want. In the meantime, we non-zombies like the way law enforcement handled this one.

Assholes like this knucklehead fail in the connect the dots exercise. This savage may well have knifed somebody else to death without the decisive action taken by the police. Worse, the guy gets locked up for a couple or years for disorderly conduct and resisting arrest and comes back on the street and stabs a dozen people to death. No thanks..........the progressive limpwristers can take their circus side-show and form their own beautiful country and call it Scratchmyassville USA. HAPPY NOW!!!

Are you really advocating that police perform the jobs of judge, jury, and executioner?

Wrong analysis. The cop was not acting as judge. Rather,he was protecting the public.

 

[ogibillm]

No. You got to give the officer some leeway. He was pumped up and firing a semi automatic weapon. In the heat of the moment it is easy to empty a magazine in a fraction of a moment.

You have to evaluate the shooting in its totality. You cannot break it down into segments.

What you are talking about is science. The parasympathetic and sympathetic nervous system. Adrenaline dumps. The "fog" of stressful conflict. It's why cops or soldiers can shoot 10-20 rounds and when asked say they shot 4 or 5. Brain just dumb down and reacts.

But libs refuse to even discuss this science. It's the same science that can cause a thug robbing a gas station to fire a shot and kill the clerk....and later say they don't remember it or didn't mean to. 50% chance they really didnt. Brain just does crazy shit under high stress.

he shot a guy lying on the ground repeatedly - after shooting him when he didn't pose an imminent threat.

i don't doubt that it's easy to keep squeezing that trigger in those situations, i just think that when you change your aim to shoot at a guy on the ground it's a little different than firing into the same place repeatedly.

Meh....they train to keep sights on target.

But....just watched the video. It was a bad shoot. The first couple I was okay with legally...although morally a taser would've been more appropriate.

But the threat dropped. You must stop shooting once the threat is down. I can understand one or two "heat of the moment" continuation shots. But not that.

This cop threw himself under the bus.




That said....pass the popcorn. A good riot is gonna break out!!

i could almost give a pass on the first few shots, even though there is no real threat and there certainly wasn't one that warranted lethal force - but that's a lot easier to say in hindsight.
but once he's down to keep firing - that's not about stopping a threat that's about killing a guy - and that's murder.

What if the fatal shot was inflicted in one of the first couple of shots? The kid died in the ambulance.

If the first couple shots could have caused the death, and they were ok in your mind, then it is justifiable. Correct?

no. it's not justifiable because the shooting wasn't justified for one, and the cop still intended to murder the kid.

 

[Iron Head]

right up until he shoots a man on the ground you have a point.
once shot, on the ground, and only armed with a 3" knife there's no reason to shoot him some more.
what may have started as a justified shooting ended with murder.

No. You got to give the officer some leeway. He was pumped up and firing a semi automatic weapon. In the heat of the moment it is easy to empty a magazine in a fraction of a moment.

You have to evaluate the shooting in its totality. You cannot break it down into segments.

What you are talking about is science. The parasympathetic and sympathetic nervous system. Adrenaline dumps. The "fog" of stressful conflict. It's why cops or soldiers can shoot 10-20 rounds and when asked say they shot 4 or 5. Brain just dumb down and reacts.

But libs refuse to even discuss this science. It's the same science that can cause a thug robbing a gas station to fire a shot and kill the clerk....and later say they don't remember it or didn't mean to. 50% chance they really didnt. Brain just does crazy shit under high stress.

he shot a guy lying on the ground repeatedly - after shooting him when he didn't pose an imminent threat.

i don't doubt that it's easy to keep squeezing that trigger in those situations, i just think that when you change your aim to shoot at a guy on the ground it's a little different than firing into the same place repeatedly.

The kid was hopped up on PCP. Also, there was no audio on the video. So, we do not know everything that was happening. As far as anyone knows, the perp could have been saying he had a gun and was going to kill them all.

well let's just make up all kinds of scenarios. maybe he was saying he was going to give them all lollipops.

maybe he did say that. but he didn't have a gun so he certainly never brandished one, or pointed it, or made any threatening moves. so what difference does it make?

You were not there. From everything I have seen it was justifiable.

 

[ogibillm]

I saw the video. There was no "rampaging".

Bottom line is that cops are not and should not be judge, jury and executioner. The cop murdered a man and needs to pay the price for that.

right up until he shoots a man on the ground you have a point.
once shot, on the ground, and only armed with a 3" knife there's no reason to shoot him some more.
what may have started as a justified shooting ended with murder.

No. You got to give the officer some leeway. He was pumped up and firing a semi automatic weapon. In the heat of the moment it is easy to empty a magazine in a fraction of a moment.

You have to evaluate the shooting in its totality. You cannot break it down into segments.

WHAT??

He was "pumped up" so it was okay to murder the kid? A trained cop can't control his own gun?

If that's true then NO civilian should ever own a gun.

The "totality" is that the cop murdered a kid in the street. If Illinois is a capital punishment state, I hope he gets the death penalty that he chose to mete out to the kid.

The OP is racist slime. If the dead kid were white and the cop black, his rant would be completely different. Face it - equal rights under the law.

fAiL s0n....then go live in a society where you can go do anything the fuck you want. In the meantime, we non-zombies like the way law enforcement handled this one.

Assholes like this knucklehead fail in the connect the dots exercise. This savage may well have knifed somebody else to death without the decisive action taken by the police. Worse, the guy gets locked up for a couple or years for disorderly conduct and resisting arrest and comes back on the street and stabs a dozen people to death. No thanks..........the progressive limpwristers can take their circus side-show and form their own beautiful country and call it Scratchmyassville USA. HAPPY NOW!!!

Are you really advocating that police perform the jobs of judge, jury, and executioner?

Wrong analysis. The cop was not acting as judge. Rather,he was protecting the public.

by shooting a wounded man lying on the ground? he wasn't protecting anyone, he was acting as an executioner.

 

[ogibillm]

No. You got to give the officer some leeway. He was pumped up and firing a semi automatic weapon. In the heat of the moment it is easy to empty a magazine in a fraction of a moment.

You have to evaluate the shooting in its totality. You cannot break it down into segments.

What you are talking about is science. The parasympathetic and sympathetic nervous system. Adrenaline dumps. The "fog" of stressful conflict. It's why cops or soldiers can shoot 10-20 rounds and when asked say they shot 4 or 5. Brain just dumb down and reacts.

But libs refuse to even discuss this science. It's the same science that can cause a thug robbing a gas station to fire a shot and kill the clerk....and later say they don't remember it or didn't mean to. 50% chance they really didnt. Brain just does crazy shit under high stress.

he shot a guy lying on the ground repeatedly - after shooting him when he didn't pose an imminent threat.

i don't doubt that it's easy to keep squeezing that trigger in those situations, i just think that when you change your aim to shoot at a guy on the ground it's a little different than firing into the same place repeatedly.

The kid was hopped up on PCP. Also, there was no audio on the video. So, we do not know everything that was happening. As far as anyone knows, the perp could have been saying he had a gun and was going to kill them all.

well let's just make up all kinds of scenarios. maybe he was saying he was going to give them all lollipops.

maybe he did say that. but he didn't have a gun so he certainly never brandished one, or pointed it, or made any threatening moves. so what difference does it make?

You were not there. From everything I have seen it was justifiable.

well you're a racist fuck, so you likely didn't need to see the video to reach your conclusion.

the video is pretty clear the kid didn't approach the officer. he didn't make threatening motions. the video does not support the shooting as justified.

 

[Iron Head]

I saw the video. There was no "rampaging".

Bottom line is that cops are not and should not be judge, jury and executioner. The cop murdered a man and needs to pay the price for that.

No. You got to give the officer some leeway. He was pumped up and firing a semi automatic weapon. In the heat of the moment it is easy to empty a magazine in a fraction of a moment.

You have to evaluate the shooting in its totality. You cannot break it down into segments.

WHAT??

He was "pumped up" so it was okay to murder the kid? A trained cop can't control his own gun?

If that's true then NO civilian should ever own a gun.

The "totality" is that the cop murdered a kid in the street. If Illinois is a capital punishment state, I hope he gets the death penalty that he chose to mete out to the kid.

The OP is racist slime. If the dead kid were white and the cop black, his rant would be completely different. Face it - equal rights under the law.

fAiL s0n....then go live in a society where you can go do anything the fuck you want. In the meantime, we non-zombies like the way law enforcement handled this one.

Assholes like this knucklehead fail in the connect the dots exercise. This savage may well have knifed somebody else to death without the decisive action taken by the police. Worse, the guy gets locked up for a couple or years for disorderly conduct and resisting arrest and comes back on the street and stabs a dozen people to death. No thanks..........the progressive limpwristers can take their circus side-show and form their own beautiful country and call it Scratchmyassville USA. HAPPY NOW!!!

Are you really advocating that police perform the jobs of judge, jury, and executioner?

Wrong analysis. The cop was not acting as judge. Rather,he was protecting the public.

by shooting a wounded man lying on the ground? he wasn't protecting anyone, he was acting as an executioner.

You don't know what in the hell you are talking about. I have already told you TWICE that you have to view the incident in its entirety. You cannot fairly judge it in segments.

 

[Iron Head]

What you are talking about is science. The parasympathetic and sympathetic nervous system. Adrenaline dumps. The "fog" of stressful conflict. It's why cops or soldiers can shoot 10-20 rounds and when asked say they shot 4 or 5. Brain just dumb down and reacts.

But libs refuse to even discuss this science. It's the same science that can cause a thug robbing a gas station to fire a shot and kill the clerk....and later say they don't remember it or didn't mean to. 50% chance they really didnt. Brain just does crazy shit under high stress.

he shot a guy lying on the ground repeatedly - after shooting him when he didn't pose an imminent threat.

i don't doubt that it's easy to keep squeezing that trigger in those situations, i just think that when you change your aim to shoot at a guy on the ground it's a little different than firing into the same place repeatedly.

The kid was hopped up on PCP. Also, there was no audio on the video. So, we do not know everything that was happening. As far as anyone knows, the perp could have been saying he had a gun and was going to kill them all.

well let's just make up all kinds of scenarios. maybe he was saying he was going to give them all lollipops.

maybe he did say that. but he didn't have a gun so he certainly never brandished one, or pointed it, or made any threatening moves. so what difference does it make?

You were not there. From everything I have seen it was justifiable.

well you're a racist fuck, so you likely didn't need to see the video to reach your conclusion.

the video is pretty clear the kid didn't approach the officer. he didn't make threatening motions. the video does not support the shooting as justified.

How can you possibly judge anything I said as racist? You are out of your mind.

 

[Iron Head]

What you are talking about is science. The parasympathetic and sympathetic nervous system. Adrenaline dumps. The "fog" of stressful conflict. It's why cops or soldiers can shoot 10-20 rounds and when asked say they shot 4 or 5. Brain just dumb down and reacts.

But libs refuse to even discuss this science. It's the same science that can cause a thug robbing a gas station to fire a shot and kill the clerk....and later say they don't remember it or didn't mean to. 50% chance they really didnt. Brain just does crazy shit under high stress.

he shot a guy lying on the ground repeatedly - after shooting him when he didn't pose an imminent threat.

i don't doubt that it's easy to keep squeezing that trigger in those situations, i just think that when you change your aim to shoot at a guy on the ground it's a little different than firing into the same place repeatedly.

Meh....they train to keep sights on target.

But....just watched the video. It was a bad shoot. The first couple I was okay with legally...although morally a taser would've been more appropriate.

But the threat dropped. You must stop shooting once the threat is down. I can understand one or two "heat of the moment" continuation shots. But not that.

This cop threw himself under the bus.




That said....pass the popcorn. A good riot is gonna break out!!

i could almost give a pass on the first few shots, even though there is no real threat and there certainly wasn't one that warranted lethal force - but that's a lot easier to say in hindsight.
but once he's down to keep firing - that's not about stopping a threat that's about killing a guy - and that's murder.

What if the fatal shot was inflicted in one of the first couple of shots? The kid died in the ambulance.

If the first couple shots could have caused the death, and they were ok in your mind, then it is justifiable. Correct?

no. it's not justifiable because the shooting wasn't justified for one, and the cop still intended to murder the kid.

So you are psychic now? You can divine the cop's intent simply by watching 20 seconds of a video?

Bullshit.

 

[ogibillm]

he shot a guy lying on the ground repeatedly - after shooting him when he didn't pose an imminent threat.

i don't doubt that it's easy to keep squeezing that trigger in those situations, i just think that when you change your aim to shoot at a guy on the ground it's a little different than firing into the same place repeatedly.

Meh....they train to keep sights on target.

But....just watched the video. It was a bad shoot. The first couple I was okay with legally...although morally a taser would've been more appropriate.

But the threat dropped. You must stop shooting once the threat is down. I can understand one or two "heat of the moment" continuation shots. But not that.

This cop threw himself under the bus.




That said....pass the popcorn. A good riot is gonna break out!!

i could almost give a pass on the first few shots, even though there is no real threat and there certainly wasn't one that warranted lethal force - but that's a lot easier to say in hindsight.
but once he's down to keep firing - that's not about stopping a threat that's about killing a guy - and that's murder.

What if the fatal shot was inflicted in one of the first couple of shots? The kid died in the ambulance.

If the first couple shots could have caused the death, and they were ok in your mind, then it is justifiable. Correct?

no. it's not justifiable because the shooting wasn't justified for one, and the cop still intended to murder the kid.

So you are psychic now? You can divine the cop's intent simply by watching 20 seconds of a video?

Bullshit.

right. when you shoot a guy already on the ground you're thinking it tickles.

 

[Katzndogz]

No one could let some kid out of his mind on PCP run around with a butcher knife.

 

[ogibillm]

How can you possibly judge anything I said as racist? You are out of your mind.

I am watching the news now. The negroes are starting to March and get rowdy in Chicago. It looks like it is going to be a long night there.

i've never known someone that wasn't racist to use the phrase 'the negroes'

 

[ogibillm]

No one could let some kid out of his mind on PCP run around with a butcher knife.

you own a 3" butcher knife?

i agree, he needed to be arrested. he did not need to be murdered in the street

 

[Iron Head]

Meh....they train to keep sights on target.

But....just watched the video. It was a bad shoot. The first couple I was okay with legally...although morally a taser would've been more appropriate.

But the threat dropped. You must stop shooting once the threat is down. I can understand one or two "heat of the moment" continuation shots. But not that.

This cop threw himself under the bus.




That said....pass the popcorn. A good riot is gonna break out!!

i could almost give a pass on the first few shots, even though there is no real threat and there certainly wasn't one that warranted lethal force - but that's a lot easier to say in hindsight.
but once he's down to keep firing - that's not about stopping a threat that's about killing a guy - and that's murder.

What if the fatal shot was inflicted in one of the first couple of shots? The kid died in the ambulance.

If the first couple shots could have caused the death, and they were ok in your mind, then it is justifiable. Correct?

no. it's not justifiable because the shooting wasn't justified for one, and the cop still intended to murder the kid.

So you are psychic now? You can divine the cop's intent simply by watching 20 seconds of a video?

Bullshit.

right. when you shoot a guy already on the ground you're thinking it tickles.

The cop's job was to put down the freak. He does not know if the perp is going to get up and charge him. Should the cop waited for the kid to stick that knife in his head before shooting? You don't have a fucking clue as to what you are talking about. You are insanely dense.

Secondly, if you watch the video you will see that some of those shots were missing the kid as he was lying on the road, evidenced by the white "smoke", or dust, popping up in front of the kid. The cop was obviously a very bad shot.

I guess you would feel differently if the cop dropped him with one shot to the head?

 

[Iron Head]

No one could let some kid out of his mind on PCP run around with a butcher knife.

you own a 3" butcher knife?

i agree, he needed to be arrested. he did not need to be murdered in the street

No murder was committed.

 

[Iron Head]

No one could let some kid out of his mind on PCP run around with a butcher knife.

you own a 3" butcher knife?

i agree, he needed to be arrested. he did not need to be murdered in the street

I am assuming that if the kid was white you would not be bitching because such a scenario would not afford you the opportunity to bitch about the false perception that cops are a bunch of murderous racists. You tube!

 

[ogibillm]

i could almost give a pass on the first few shots, even though there is no real threat and there certainly wasn't one that warranted lethal force - but that's a lot easier to say in hindsight.
but once he's down to keep firing - that's not about stopping a threat that's about killing a guy - and that's murder.

What if the fatal shot was inflicted in one of the first couple of shots? The kid died in the ambulance.

If the first couple shots could have caused the death, and they were ok in your mind, then it is justifiable. Correct?

no. it's not justifiable because the shooting wasn't justified for one, and the cop still intended to murder the kid.

So you are psychic now? You can divine the cop's intent simply by watching 20 seconds of a video?

Bullshit.

right. when you shoot a guy already on the ground you're thinking it tickles.

The cop's job was to put down the freak. He does not know if the perp is going to get up and charge him. Should the cop waited for the kid to stick that knife in his head before shooting? You don't have a fucking clue as to what you are talking about. You are insanely dense.

so it's your opinion that the mere act of holding the knife gave the cop license to shoot? seriously?

Secondly, if you watch the video you will see that some of those shots were missing the kid as he was lying on the road, evidenced by the white "smoke", or dust, popping up in front of the kid. The cop was obviously a very bad shot.

he shot him 16 times.his aim was good enough

I guess you would feel differently if the cop dropped him with one shot to the head?

no, i would still believe the shooting was illegal but there would be much, much, much more room for debate.
but what's the point of hypotheticals when we are dealing with a real live situation?

 

[ogibillm]

No one could let some kid out of his mind on PCP run around with a butcher knife.

you own a 3" butcher knife?

i agree, he needed to be arrested. he did not need to be murdered in the street

I am assuming that if the kid was white you would not be bitching because such a scenario would not afford you the opportunity to bitch about the false perception that cops are a bunch of murderous racists. You tube!

wtf are you talking about? if the kid was white the cop would be just as guilty of murder.

 

[Iron Head]

Obviously the kid was a serious danger to the public. The video shows at least 3 police cars: the one filming, the one parked ahead of the perp, and the one that pulls up before the shooting. There is no reason for such a show of force if the kid was not a serious danger.

Secondly, when the released part of the video begins the perp is running away from the police car that was filming and toward a parked vehicle. Why was he running? What did he do to provoke this?

If he is running then stops and starts walking there is every reason to think he might attack. Especially when his erratic behavior suggests that he is whacked out of his brain on drugs and because he is carrying a knife - a deadly weapon.

Finally, the cop that shoots was probably responding to a 911 call or a call for backup. He probably has a mindset that he is going into a very dangerous situation. He arrives to find a whack job with a knife that refuses to obey police orders. He obviously cannot approach out of fear of being attacked. Use of deadly force was the only viable option at this point. Also, remember that this all happened very quickly in a high pressure situation created by the perp.

Final verdict: the homicide was justified.