I Call Upon All USMB Liberals To Answer This Question >>>

[esalla]

I don't know why the 2 cops didn't just take him to the ground and cuff him they certainly had plenty of time to

Plenty of time ? All within a 1/2 second, huh ?

There are many posts within this thread that answer your question.

It didn’t take 1/2 a second to walk around the car, you forget we can all see the video

and the video only shows a portion of the entire event

Right, but again you're the one claiming that the cops could have taken the woman beater who ignored the court order to stay away from her down. Where is the video showing that?

So you don't think 2 cops could put one guy on the ground?

And FYI I already acknowledged that the guy had warrants and was not obeying lawful orders by the police.

The question is why didn't they take him to the ground and cuff him instead of letting him open the door of his car and reach in?

Because it's DANGEROUS. They had a poor angle and position and would have had to grab him from behind moving away from them. How do you people never put things together. What happened in Atlanta when that happened? Two cops got in a wrestling match. He grabbed a taser and shot it at them.

Also, being shot with a taser and not being affected is correlated with being on drugs, which makes him more dangerous.

This thing that they only needed to tackle him while reaching out from behind is flat our retarded.

WHAT HAPPENED IN ATLANTA? Seriously, you think they just wrestle him for a trophy or something?

Blake would have walked away and so would the cops if he OBEYED them. If he had a gripe, then take it up later

It's not more dangerous than letting a person open his car door and reach inside for a weapon.

He was unarmed outside of the car.

And the cops get paid to do a dangerous job so that is not an excuse

Don't hate the player, hate the game. They did what they were trained to do.

Durr.....

So cops are trained to let a criminal walk away from them, open a car door and reach for a weapon?

Nonsense question. They had no reason to believe that Blake was reaching for a weapon. Only that he was trying to get into his car. (That's what people usually do when they open their car doors.)

That the guy you're defending was a felon with a warrant, beats women, ignored a restraining order and ignored the cops trying to arrest him wasn't evidence he might have a gun.

Have you had an IQ test to see if you have one?

None of that matters as you can not shoot someone in the back......................

Link?

What we know about the career of the officer who shot Jacob Blake

Rusten Sheskey said in an August 2019 interview that what he likes most about police work "is that you're dealing with people on perhaps the worst day of their lives and you can try and help them."

www.nbcnews.com

The dorky cop was suspended and is going to jail.

Get over it, fools arguing here are not changing anything

 

[esalla]

First, your premise is false. Blake was not involved in a serious crime.

Second, until an officer clear sees a weapon he has no authority to shoot anyone. Guessing that someone might have a weapon is not valid reason to shoot them.

Third, in America it has always been considered an act of EXTREME cowardice to shoot a man in the back. Obviously, when a person's back is to you, they are no threat.

Maybe someday you will post when you have a modicum of knowlkedge of the subject matter.

First, I have no "premise" about any "serious crime"

Second, you are absolutely wrong. Officers are trained in their police academies to shoot suspects whose hands disappear from view. They are REQUIRED to do that. There is no guess. Officers must shoot regardless of if a gun is present or not.

Third, Again, you are absolutely wrong. Shooting in the back has nothing to do with this. Shooting a suspect whose HANDS DISAPPEAR, is standard police procedure all over America. It makes no difference what the orientation of the suspect's body is to the officer. Any time suspect's hands disappear they are immediately a lethal threat. Period.

Also this has nothing to do with cowardice. This is police self-defense, not a duel.

First, your question DID assert a "serious crime":

"If YOU were a police officer, and you were questioning somebody about a serious crime, and he suddenly bolts away from you, and then reaches into a car, with his hands now not visible to you, what do you do ? "

Second, no police do not have the authority to shoot someone just because their hands disappear from view. The idea is ludicrous. You're saying that if someone puts their hands in their pockets, the police can shoot them?

Third, shooting someone in the back is an act of cowardice, and if the police are trained to do that then they're trained to be cowards.

The only time police shooting are justified is when the person is a definite threat to the police officer or someone else. Not when the cop guesses that the person might be a threat.

Well, you're making your argument using part of the actual facts, and leaving out some pertinent facts.

What facts are those?

I'm not here to do your homework, skippy. Go back and review the facts, look at your post, and see what you left out.

In other words, you got NOTHING.

In other words, you're too fucking lazy to post all the facts and not just the cherry picked facts you wish to argue.
You did not present all the facts to create a viable discussion.

So you expect me to submit some type of summary of EVERYTHING involved in this case?

Well, Yes I am, you're the one putting up an argument using some and not all the facts.

Neither facts or arguments here are relevant to this case.

But have fun pretending

 

[Meister]

I don't know why the 2 cops didn't just take him to the ground and cuff him they certainly had plenty of time to

Plenty of time ? All within a 1/2 second, huh ?

There are many posts within this thread that answer your question.

It didn’t take 1/2 a second to walk around the car, you forget we can all see the video

and the video only shows a portion of the entire event

Right, but again you're the one claiming that the cops could have taken the woman beater who ignored the court order to stay away from her down. Where is the video showing that?

So you don't think 2 cops could put one guy on the ground?

And FYI I already acknowledged that the guy had warrants and was not obeying lawful orders by the police.

The question is why didn't they take him to the ground and cuff him instead of letting him open the door of his car and reach in?

Because it's DANGEROUS. They had a poor angle and position and would have had to grab him from behind moving away from them. How do you people never put things together. What happened in Atlanta when that happened? Two cops got in a wrestling match. He grabbed a taser and shot it at them.

Also, being shot with a taser and not being affected is correlated with being on drugs, which makes him more dangerous.

This thing that they only needed to tackle him while reaching out from behind is flat our retarded.

WHAT HAPPENED IN ATLANTA? Seriously, you think they just wrestle him for a trophy or something?

Blake would have walked away and so would the cops if he OBEYED them. If he had a gripe, then take it up later

It's not more dangerous than letting a person open his car door and reach inside for a weapon.

He was unarmed outside of the car.

And the cops get paid to do a dangerous job so that is not an excuse

Don't hate the player, hate the game. They did what they were trained to do.

Durr.....

So cops are trained to let a criminal walk away from them, open a car door and reach for a weapon?

Nonsense question. They had no reason to believe that Blake was reaching for a weapon. Only that he was trying to get into his car. (That's what people usually do when they open their car doors.)

That the guy you're defending was a felon with a warrant, beats women, ignored a restraining order and ignored the cops trying to arrest him wasn't evidence he might have a gun.

Have you had an IQ test to see if you have one?

None of that matters as you can not shoot someone in the back......................

Link?

What we know about the career of the officer who shot Jacob Blake

Rusten Sheskey said in an August 2019 interview that what he likes most about police work "is that you're dealing with people on perhaps the worst day of their lives and you can try and help them."

www.nbcnews.com

The dorky cop was suspended and is going to jail.

Get over it, fools arguing here are not changing anything

So, let me get this straight, you're deflecting away from a question that I asked?
figures

 

[Meister]

I don't know why the 2 cops didn't just take him to the ground and cuff him they certainly had plenty of time to

Plenty of time ? All within a 1/2 second, huh ?

There are many posts within this thread that answer your question.

It didn’t take 1/2 a second to walk around the car, you forget we can all see the video

and the video only shows a portion of the entire event

Right, but again you're the one claiming that the cops could have taken the woman beater who ignored the court order to stay away from her down. Where is the video showing that?

So you don't think 2 cops could put one guy on the ground?

And FYI I already acknowledged that the guy had warrants and was not obeying lawful orders by the police.

The question is why didn't they take him to the ground and cuff him instead of letting him open the door of his car and reach in?

Because it's DANGEROUS. They had a poor angle and position and would have had to grab him from behind moving away from them. How do you people never put things together. What happened in Atlanta when that happened? Two cops got in a wrestling match. He grabbed a taser and shot it at them.

Also, being shot with a taser and not being affected is correlated with being on drugs, which makes him more dangerous.

This thing that they only needed to tackle him while reaching out from behind is flat our retarded.

WHAT HAPPENED IN ATLANTA? Seriously, you think they just wrestle him for a trophy or something?

Blake would have walked away and so would the cops if he OBEYED them. If he had a gripe, then take it up later

It's not more dangerous than letting a person open his car door and reach inside for a weapon.

He was unarmed outside of the car.

And the cops get paid to do a dangerous job so that is not an excuse

Don't hate the player, hate the game. They did what they were trained to do.

Durr.....

So cops are trained to let a criminal walk away from them, open a car door and reach for a weapon?

Nonsense question. They had no reason to believe that Blake was reaching for a weapon. Only that he was trying to get into his car. (That's what people usually do when they open their car doors.)

That the guy you're defending was a felon with a warrant, beats women, ignored a restraining order and ignored the cops trying to arrest him wasn't evidence he might have a gun.

Have you had an IQ test to see if you have one?

None of that matters as you can not shoot someone in the back......................

Link?

What we know about the career of the officer who shot Jacob Blake

Rusten Sheskey said in an August 2019 interview that what he likes most about police work "is that you're dealing with people on perhaps the worst day of their lives and you can try and help them."

www.nbcnews.com

The dorky cop was suspended and is going to jail.

Get over it, fools arguing here are not changing anything

You have got to be the most disingenuous poster on the board...bar none.
Administrative leave is not being suspended.
From your own source:
Sheskey, 31, and the other officers who were involved in the confrontation were placed on administrative leave while the investigation by local, state and federal officials continues, Kaul said.
That's standard operating procedure, and in no way an indication of guilt.
Where in your link does it say he's going to jail? It doesn't, it's just one of your pathetic lies to make your point.
For a person that has a self proclaimed 130 IQ, you're only using 8 points of it when you post.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I don't know why the 2 cops didn't just take him to the ground and cuff him they certainly had plenty of time to

Plenty of time ? All within a 1/2 second, huh ?

There are many posts within this thread that answer your question.

You think that the video captured the entire event?

I keep asking people who say what you do that the cops could have taken the woman beater who ignored the court order to stay away from her down from behind while he raced to the car if they saw video that I didn't, but all of you have said no. Did you?

Raced to the car? Can you point out the section of the video where he “raced to the car.“ Let me know the time code where he did anything but walk and I’ll check it out

He walked briskly. If the officers were trained in H2H combat they would not have had to draw their weapons. Also, why send a woman officer there? Makes no sense.

That made me laugh out loud. Thank you.
1. He didn’t walk briskly, he walked, watch the video
2. You really think cops with guns aren’t trained to apprehend and arrest subjects?! Are you serious?
3. Why not send a woman officer? Don’t be a dick

You're just word parsing and bickering now, you couldn't be more clear you have nothing

No I’m it word parsing I’m calling out the BS spin you all are trying to use to justify this shooting. THERES A VIDEO WE CAN ALL SEE WHAT HAPPENED!! Stop lying about what happened. You said he “raced to the car” that’s a straight up lie. He clearly walked

What would you have done if you were one of the cops?

How much time does he have to think about it, verses how much time did the cops have to
think about it. It's not a fair question.

Even still I d like to know.

 

[protectionist]

Second, no police do not have the authority to shoot someone just because their hands disappear from view. The idea is ludicrous. You're saying that if someone puts their hands in their pockets, the police can shoot them?

Third, shooting someone in the back is an act of cowardice, and if the police are trained to do that then they're trained to be cowards.

The only time police shooting are justified is when the person is a definite threat to the police officer or someone else. Not when the cop guesses that the person might be a threat.

Again, this is the result of what happens when you allow liberals to run your education system. Total ignorance of law enforcement & guns.

Again - You are simply WRONG, and you have no idea what you're talking about. Every police academy in America teaches recruits to shoot immediately when the suspect's hands disappear, and of course they must do that. You need to read the thread before coming busting in here not knowing anything, with lots of emotion and ZERO knowledge.

Read the words of Tulsa, OK police officer Betty Shelby who was cleared of all charges, by a multi-racial jury, after she instantly shot and killed Terrence Crutcher, when just like Jacob Blake, his hands disappeared into his vehicle. Se Post # 139.

YES, of course the police can, and MUST, shoot them when they put their hands in their pocket. This is exactly what happened in the case of police officer Jeronimo Yanez, who reached into his jacket was was instantly shot dead by police officer Jeronimo Yanez, of the St Anthony, Minnesota, police dept.

Yanez, of course was acquitted of all charges when it was ascertained that Castille had allowed his hands to disappear in the darkness of the car's lower interior, and even appeared that Castille was reaching for and pulling out his gun. (after Yanez told him not to touch it)

As for shooting in the back, you've been watching too many TV westerns. Too bad you didn't have as much education in police procedure.

You are untrained in police work, and you obviously are just guessing on all of this. Your guesses are wrong.

YES, "The only time police shooting are justified is when the person is a definite threat to the police officer or someone else" and by police academy definition, that is when a suspect's hands disappear, or they appear to have something in them which could be a gun. I'll go with the standard police procedure, rather than your wild guesses.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I don't know why the 2 cops didn't just take him to the ground and cuff him they certainly had plenty of time to

Plenty of time ? All within a 1/2 second, huh ?

There are many posts within this thread that answer your question.

It didn’t take 1/2 a second to walk around the car, you forget we can all see the video

and the video only shows a portion of the entire event

Right, but again you're the one claiming that the cops could have taken the woman beater who ignored the court order to stay away from her down. Where is the video showing that?

So you don't think 2 cops could put one guy on the ground?

And FYI I already acknowledged that the guy had warrants and was not obeying lawful orders by the police.

The question is why didn't they take him to the ground and cuff him instead of letting him open the door of his car and reach in?

Because it's DANGEROUS. They had a poor angle and position and would have had to grab him from behind moving away from them. How do you people never put things together. What happened in Atlanta when that happened? Two cops got in a wrestling match. He grabbed a taser and shot it at them.

Also, being shot with a taser and not being affected is correlated with being on drugs, which makes him more dangerous.

This thing that they only needed to tackle him while reaching out from behind is flat our retarded.

WHAT HAPPENED IN ATLANTA? Seriously, you think they just wrestle him for a trophy or something?

Blake would have walked away and so would the cops if he OBEYED them. If he had a gripe, then take it up later

It's not more dangerous than letting a person open his car door and reach inside for a weapon.

He was unarmed outside of the car.

And the cops get paid to do a dangerous job so that is not an excuse

Don't hate the player, hate the game. They did what they were trained to do.

Durr.....

So cops are trained to let a criminal walk away from them, open a car door and reach for a weapon?

Nonsense question. They had no reason to believe that Blake was reaching for a weapon. Only that he was trying to get into his car. (That's what people usually do when they open their car doors.)

That the guy you're defending was a felon with a warrant, beats women, ignored a restraining order and ignored the cops trying to arrest him wasn't evidence he might have a gun.

Have you had an IQ test to see if you have one?

None of that matters as you can not shoot someone in the back......................

My IQ is 130, what is yours dopey

You may if you feel like they may turn and shoot you back. Mine was 148 but I was 26 when I took the test 13 yrs ago.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I don't know why the 2 cops didn't just take him to the ground and cuff him they certainly had plenty of time to

Plenty of time ? All within a 1/2 second, huh ?

There are many posts within this thread that answer your question.

You think that the video captured the entire event?

I keep asking people who say what you do that the cops could have taken the woman beater who ignored the court order to stay away from her down from behind while he raced to the car if they saw video that I didn't, but all of you have said no. Did you?

Raced to the car? Can you point out the section of the video where he “raced to the car.“ Let me know the time code where he did anything but walk and I’ll check it out

He walked briskly. If the officers were trained in H2H combat they would not have had to draw their weapons. Also, why send a woman officer there? Makes no sense.

That made me laugh out loud. Thank you.
1. He didn’t walk briskly, he walked, watch the video
2. You really think cops with guns aren’t trained to apprehend and arrest subjects?! Are you serious?
3. Why not send a woman officer? Don’t be a dick

You're just word parsing and bickering now, you couldn't be more clear you have nothing

No I’m it word parsing I’m calling out the BS spin you all are trying to use to justify this shooting. THERES A VIDEO WE CAN ALL SEE WHAT HAPPENED!! Stop lying about what happened. You said he “raced to the car” that’s a straight up lie. He clearly walked

Right, there's a video. Yet you keep contradicting the video as if we didn't see it and we don't know you're lying. The cops were behind him.

Blake had a choice. The cops didn't. You can't hide from that

Cops were behind him... best position to restrain him. He walked to his car door... he didn’t race there as you incorrectly said. The cops did have a choice. Restrain him without using lethal force. We didn’t see what happened leading up to the video so we will have to see what witness testimony says since the cops weren’t wearing body cams.

can we agree that every cop should have an active body cam on during each arrest?

Restrain how? He brushed off two taser attacks. What specifically would you do. What do you mean by “restrain”?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I don't know why the 2 cops didn't just take him to the ground and cuff him they certainly had plenty of time to

Plenty of time ? All within a 1/2 second, huh ?

There are many posts within this thread that answer your question.

It didn’t take 1/2 a second to walk around the car, you forget we can all see the video

and the video only shows a portion of the entire event

Right, but again you're the one claiming that the cops could have taken the woman beater who ignored the court order to stay away from her down. Where is the video showing that?

So you don't think 2 cops could put one guy on the ground?

And FYI I already acknowledged that the guy had warrants and was not obeying lawful orders by the police.

The question is why didn't they take him to the ground and cuff him instead of letting him open the door of his car and reach in?

Because it's DANGEROUS. They had a poor angle and position and would have had to grab him from behind moving away from them. How do you people never put things together. What happened in Atlanta when that happened? Two cops got in a wrestling match. He grabbed a taser and shot it at them.

Also, being shot with a taser and not being affected is correlated with being on drugs, which makes him more dangerous.

This thing that they only needed to tackle him while reaching out from behind is flat our retarded.

WHAT HAPPENED IN ATLANTA? Seriously, you think they just wrestle him for a trophy or something?

Blake would have walked away and so would the cops if he OBEYED them. If he had a gripe, then take it up later

It's not more dangerous than letting a person open his car door and reach inside for a weapon.

He was unarmed outside of the car.

And the cops get paid to do a dangerous job so that is not an excuse

Don't hate the player, hate the game. They did what they were trained to do.

Durr.....

So cops are trained to let a criminal walk away from them, open a car door and reach for a weapon?

Nonsense question. They had no reason to believe that Blake was reaching for a weapon. Only that he was trying to get into his car. (That's what people usually do when they open their car doors.)

That the guy you're defending was a felon with a warrant, beats women, ignored a restraining order and ignored the cops trying to arrest him wasn't evidence he might have a gun.

Have you had an IQ test to see if you have one?

None of that matters as you can not shoot someone in the back......................

Link?

What we know about the career of the officer who shot Jacob Blake

Rusten Sheskey said in an August 2019 interview that what he likes most about police work "is that you're dealing with people on perhaps the worst day of their lives and you can try and help them."

www.nbcnews.com

The dorky cop was suspended and is going to jail.

Get over it, fools arguing here are not changing anything

You complain a lot

 

[Slade3200]

I don't know why the 2 cops didn't just take him to the ground and cuff him they certainly had plenty of time to

Plenty of time ? All within a 1/2 second, huh ?

There are many posts within this thread that answer your question.

You think that the video captured the entire event?

I keep asking people who say what you do that the cops could have taken the woman beater who ignored the court order to stay away from her down from behind while he raced to the car if they saw video that I didn't, but all of you have said no. Did you?

Raced to the car? Can you point out the section of the video where he “raced to the car.“ Let me know the time code where he did anything but walk and I’ll check it out

He walked briskly. If the officers were trained in H2H combat they would not have had to draw their weapons. Also, why send a woman officer there? Makes no sense.

That made me laugh out loud. Thank you.
1. He didn’t walk briskly, he walked, watch the video
2. You really think cops with guns aren’t trained to apprehend and arrest subjects?! Are you serious?
3. Why not send a woman officer? Don’t be a dick

You're just word parsing and bickering now, you couldn't be more clear you have nothing

No I’m it word parsing I’m calling out the BS spin you all are trying to use to justify this shooting. THERES A VIDEO WE CAN ALL SEE WHAT HAPPENED!! Stop lying about what happened. You said he “raced to the car” that’s a straight up lie. He clearly walked

Right, there's a video. Yet you keep contradicting the video as if we didn't see it and we don't know you're lying. The cops were behind him.

Blake had a choice. The cops didn't. You can't hide from that

Cops were behind him... best position to restrain him. He walked to his car door... he didn’t race there as you incorrectly said. The cops did have a choice. Restrain him without using lethal force. We didn’t see what happened leading up to the video so we will have to see what witness testimony says since the cops weren’t wearing body cams.

can we agree that every cop should have an active body cam on during each arrest?

Restrain how? He brushed off two taser attacks. What specifically would you do. What do you mean by “restrain”?

Brushed off two taser attacks huh? That’s interesting. I guess they had no other choice but to put 7 in his back. Super logic!

 

[Slade3200]

I don't know why the 2 cops didn't just take him to the ground and cuff him they certainly had plenty of time to

Plenty of time ? All within a 1/2 second, huh ?

There are many posts within this thread that answer your question.

It didn’t take 1/2 a second to walk around the car, you forget we can all see the video

and the video only shows a portion of the entire event

Right, but again you're the one claiming that the cops could have taken the woman beater who ignored the court order to stay away from her down. Where is the video showing that?

So you don't think 2 cops could put one guy on the ground?

And FYI I already acknowledged that the guy had warrants and was not obeying lawful orders by the police.

The question is why didn't they take him to the ground and cuff him instead of letting him open the door of his car and reach in?

Because it's DANGEROUS. They had a poor angle and position and would have had to grab him from behind moving away from them. How do you people never put things together. What happened in Atlanta when that happened? Two cops got in a wrestling match. He grabbed a taser and shot it at them.

Also, being shot with a taser and not being affected is correlated with being on drugs, which makes him more dangerous.

This thing that they only needed to tackle him while reaching out from behind is flat our retarded.

WHAT HAPPENED IN ATLANTA? Seriously, you think they just wrestle him for a trophy or something?

Blake would have walked away and so would the cops if he OBEYED them. If he had a gripe, then take it up later

It's not more dangerous than letting a person open his car door and reach inside for a weapon.

He was unarmed outside of the car.

And the cops get paid to do a dangerous job so that is not an excuse

Don't hate the player, hate the game. They did what they were trained to do.

Durr.....

So cops are trained to let a criminal walk away from them, open a car door and reach for a weapon?

Nonsense question. They had no reason to believe that Blake was reaching for a weapon. Only that he was trying to get into his car. (That's what people usually do when they open their car doors.)

That the guy you're defending was a felon with a warrant, beats women, ignored a restraining order and ignored the cops trying to arrest him wasn't evidence he might have a gun.

Have you had an IQ test to see if you have one?

None of that matters as you can not shoot someone in the back......................

My IQ is 130, what is yours dopey

You may if you feel like they may turn and shoot you back. Mine was 148 but I was 26 when I took the test 13 yrs ago.

148?! Wow man you’re smart... mines only 69. I should probably start listening to you more. Do you have a blog I can follow?

 

[protectionist]

Brushed off two taser attacks huh? That’s interesting. I guess they had no other choice but to put 7 in his back. Super logic!

No matter how much we inform these dolts, the stupidities continue to flow.

YES, they had no other choice but to put 7 in his back. Once again - are you dense ?

 

[Slade3200]

Brushed off two taser attacks huh? That’s interesting. I guess they had no other choice but to put 7 in his back. Super logic!

No matter how much we inform these dolts, the stupidities continue to flow.

YES, they had no other choice but to put 7 in his back. Once again - are you dense ?

Not dense, just see things differently than you do and I didn't see a need for shooting that man 7 times in the back

 

[esalla]

I don't know why the 2 cops didn't just take him to the ground and cuff him they certainly had plenty of time to

Plenty of time ? All within a 1/2 second, huh ?

There are many posts within this thread that answer your question.

It didn’t take 1/2 a second to walk around the car, you forget we can all see the video

and the video only shows a portion of the entire event

Right, but again you're the one claiming that the cops could have taken the woman beater who ignored the court order to stay away from her down. Where is the video showing that?

So you don't think 2 cops could put one guy on the ground?

And FYI I already acknowledged that the guy had warrants and was not obeying lawful orders by the police.

The question is why didn't they take him to the ground and cuff him instead of letting him open the door of his car and reach in?

Because it's DANGEROUS. They had a poor angle and position and would have had to grab him from behind moving away from them. How do you people never put things together. What happened in Atlanta when that happened? Two cops got in a wrestling match. He grabbed a taser and shot it at them.

Also, being shot with a taser and not being affected is correlated with being on drugs, which makes him more dangerous.

This thing that they only needed to tackle him while reaching out from behind is flat our retarded.

WHAT HAPPENED IN ATLANTA? Seriously, you think they just wrestle him for a trophy or something?

Blake would have walked away and so would the cops if he OBEYED them. If he had a gripe, then take it up later

It's not more dangerous than letting a person open his car door and reach inside for a weapon.

He was unarmed outside of the car.

And the cops get paid to do a dangerous job so that is not an excuse

Don't hate the player, hate the game. They did what they were trained to do.

Durr.....

So cops are trained to let a criminal walk away from them, open a car door and reach for a weapon?

Nonsense question. They had no reason to believe that Blake was reaching for a weapon. Only that he was trying to get into his car. (That's what people usually do when they open their car doors.)

That the guy you're defending was a felon with a warrant, beats women, ignored a restraining order and ignored the cops trying to arrest him wasn't evidence he might have a gun.

Have you had an IQ test to see if you have one?

None of that matters as you can not shoot someone in the back......................

Link?

What we know about the career of the officer who shot Jacob Blake

Rusten Sheskey said in an August 2019 interview that what he likes most about police work "is that you're dealing with people on perhaps the worst day of their lives and you can try and help them."

www.nbcnews.com

The dorky cop was suspended and is going to jail.

Get over it, fools arguing here are not changing anything

So, let me get this straight, you're deflecting away from a question that I asked?
figures

The dorky cop was suspended and is going to jail.

Get over it, fools arguing here are not changing anything

And no question from you is changing anything

 

[esalla]

I don't know why the 2 cops didn't just take him to the ground and cuff him they certainly had plenty of time to

Plenty of time ? All within a 1/2 second, huh ?

There are many posts within this thread that answer your question.

It didn’t take 1/2 a second to walk around the car, you forget we can all see the video

and the video only shows a portion of the entire event

Right, but again you're the one claiming that the cops could have taken the woman beater who ignored the court order to stay away from her down. Where is the video showing that?

So you don't think 2 cops could put one guy on the ground?

And FYI I already acknowledged that the guy had warrants and was not obeying lawful orders by the police.

The question is why didn't they take him to the ground and cuff him instead of letting him open the door of his car and reach in?

Because it's DANGEROUS. They had a poor angle and position and would have had to grab him from behind moving away from them. How do you people never put things together. What happened in Atlanta when that happened? Two cops got in a wrestling match. He grabbed a taser and shot it at them.

Also, being shot with a taser and not being affected is correlated with being on drugs, which makes him more dangerous.

This thing that they only needed to tackle him while reaching out from behind is flat our retarded.

WHAT HAPPENED IN ATLANTA? Seriously, you think they just wrestle him for a trophy or something?

Blake would have walked away and so would the cops if he OBEYED them. If he had a gripe, then take it up later

It's not more dangerous than letting a person open his car door and reach inside for a weapon.

He was unarmed outside of the car.

And the cops get paid to do a dangerous job so that is not an excuse

Don't hate the player, hate the game. They did what they were trained to do.

Durr.....

So cops are trained to let a criminal walk away from them, open a car door and reach for a weapon?

Nonsense question. They had no reason to believe that Blake was reaching for a weapon. Only that he was trying to get into his car. (That's what people usually do when they open their car doors.)

That the guy you're defending was a felon with a warrant, beats women, ignored a restraining order and ignored the cops trying to arrest him wasn't evidence he might have a gun.

Have you had an IQ test to see if you have one?

None of that matters as you can not shoot someone in the back......................

Link?

What we know about the career of the officer who shot Jacob Blake

Rusten Sheskey said in an August 2019 interview that what he likes most about police work "is that you're dealing with people on perhaps the worst day of their lives and you can try and help them."

www.nbcnews.com

The dorky cop was suspended and is going to jail.

Get over it, fools arguing here are not changing anything

You have got to be the most disingenuous poster on the board...bar none.
Administrative leave is not being suspended.
From your own source:
Sheskey, 31, and the other officers who were involved in the confrontation were placed on administrative leave while the investigation by local, state and federal officials continues, Kaul said.
That's standard operating procedure, and in no way an indication of guilt.
Where in your link does it say he's going to jail? It doesn't, it's just one of your pathetic lies to make your point.
For a person that has a self proclaimed 130 IQ, you're only using 8 points of it when you post.

Wrong again, hey at least you are perfectly wrong

Administrative Leave is a form of suspension from the workplace, often pending the outcome of some form of investigation. ... Each firm may have its own policies and procedures for how to determine whether administrative leave is necessary, what specifically constitutes administrative leave, or at what point it is imposed.Jan 5, 2018

 

[esalla]

I don't know why the 2 cops didn't just take him to the ground and cuff him they certainly had plenty of time to

Plenty of time ? All within a 1/2 second, huh ?

There are many posts within this thread that answer your question.

It didn’t take 1/2 a second to walk around the car, you forget we can all see the video

and the video only shows a portion of the entire event

Right, but again you're the one claiming that the cops could have taken the woman beater who ignored the court order to stay away from her down. Where is the video showing that?

So you don't think 2 cops could put one guy on the ground?

And FYI I already acknowledged that the guy had warrants and was not obeying lawful orders by the police.

The question is why didn't they take him to the ground and cuff him instead of letting him open the door of his car and reach in?

Because it's DANGEROUS. They had a poor angle and position and would have had to grab him from behind moving away from them. How do you people never put things together. What happened in Atlanta when that happened? Two cops got in a wrestling match. He grabbed a taser and shot it at them.

Also, being shot with a taser and not being affected is correlated with being on drugs, which makes him more dangerous.

This thing that they only needed to tackle him while reaching out from behind is flat our retarded.

WHAT HAPPENED IN ATLANTA? Seriously, you think they just wrestle him for a trophy or something?

Blake would have walked away and so would the cops if he OBEYED them. If he had a gripe, then take it up later

It's not more dangerous than letting a person open his car door and reach inside for a weapon.

He was unarmed outside of the car.

And the cops get paid to do a dangerous job so that is not an excuse

Don't hate the player, hate the game. They did what they were trained to do.

Durr.....

So cops are trained to let a criminal walk away from them, open a car door and reach for a weapon?

Nonsense question. They had no reason to believe that Blake was reaching for a weapon. Only that he was trying to get into his car. (That's what people usually do when they open their car doors.)

That the guy you're defending was a felon with a warrant, beats women, ignored a restraining order and ignored the cops trying to arrest him wasn't evidence he might have a gun.

Have you had an IQ test to see if you have one?

None of that matters as you can not shoot someone in the back......................

My IQ is 130, what is yours dopey

You may if you feel like they may turn and shoot you back. Mine was 148 but I was 26 when I took the test 13 yrs ago.

So you can shoot anyone not facing you that might have a pencil....................

This is psychotic and this ball less nerd is going to jail

No way a fag nerd like this should have a gun, a 10 year old girl could kick the shit out of him

 

[esalla]

I don't know why the 2 cops didn't just take him to the ground and cuff him they certainly had plenty of time to

Plenty of time ? All within a 1/2 second, huh ?

There are many posts within this thread that answer your question.

It didn’t take 1/2 a second to walk around the car, you forget we can all see the video

and the video only shows a portion of the entire event

Right, but again you're the one claiming that the cops could have taken the woman beater who ignored the court order to stay away from her down. Where is the video showing that?

So you don't think 2 cops could put one guy on the ground?

And FYI I already acknowledged that the guy had warrants and was not obeying lawful orders by the police.

The question is why didn't they take him to the ground and cuff him instead of letting him open the door of his car and reach in?

Because it's DANGEROUS. They had a poor angle and position and would have had to grab him from behind moving away from them. How do you people never put things together. What happened in Atlanta when that happened? Two cops got in a wrestling match. He grabbed a taser and shot it at them.

Also, being shot with a taser and not being affected is correlated with being on drugs, which makes him more dangerous.

This thing that they only needed to tackle him while reaching out from behind is flat our retarded.

WHAT HAPPENED IN ATLANTA? Seriously, you think they just wrestle him for a trophy or something?

Blake would have walked away and so would the cops if he OBEYED them. If he had a gripe, then take it up later

It's not more dangerous than letting a person open his car door and reach inside for a weapon.

He was unarmed outside of the car.

And the cops get paid to do a dangerous job so that is not an excuse

Don't hate the player, hate the game. They did what they were trained to do.

Durr.....

So cops are trained to let a criminal walk away from them, open a car door and reach for a weapon?

Nonsense question. They had no reason to believe that Blake was reaching for a weapon. Only that he was trying to get into his car. (That's what people usually do when they open their car doors.)

That the guy you're defending was a felon with a warrant, beats women, ignored a restraining order and ignored the cops trying to arrest him wasn't evidence he might have a gun.

Have you had an IQ test to see if you have one?

None of that matters as you can not shoot someone in the back......................

Link?

What we know about the career of the officer who shot Jacob Blake

Rusten Sheskey said in an August 2019 interview that what he likes most about police work "is that you're dealing with people on perhaps the worst day of their lives and you can try and help them."

www.nbcnews.com

The dorky cop was suspended and is going to jail.

Get over it, fools arguing here are not changing anything

You complain a lot

And I have never shot anyone in the back either........................ Face shots are way more fun

 

[healthmyths]

Liberals who claim that Jason Blake was shot unjustly (which probably is all liberals in this forum), please answer this >.

If YOU were a police officer, and you were questioning somebody about a serious crime, and he suddenly bolts away from you, and then reaches into a car, with his hands now not visible to you, what do you do ?

He should never have gotten to his car door. Simple as that. They already had weapons trained on him and they should have done a takedown before it went as far as it did. They had the numbers. And not seeing his hands isn't justification to pump 7 rounds point plank into his back. That had to be the most dangerous and sloppy police procedure (If you can call it that) I have ever seen. It endangered not only the perp but the cops themselves.

It's not a liberal or conservative or even a Party of the Rump, it's a Police Procedure and Safety thing and a cop who just wanted to kill someone in the heat of the moment.

Once again..emotion, subjectivity, and obviously NO experience in dealing with this situation is your comment:
"it's a Police Procedure and Safety thing and a cop who just wanted to kill someone in the heat of the moment."
Where did you get the idea "it's a police procedure"?
A) Police aren't allowed to use excessive force or treat the arrestee cruelly; this is universal and protected by the U.S. Constitution.
B) FACTS... Florida Statute Section 776.051 provides the law relating to use of force in resisting an arrest.

• A person is not justified in the use or threatened use of force to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer, or
• to resist a law enforcement officer who is engaged in the execution of a legal duty,
• if the law enforcement officer was acting in good faith, and
• he or she is known, or reasonably appears, to be a law enforcement officer.

Self Defense - Justifiable Use of Deadly Force | Jacksonville Criminal Defense Lawyers

Free Consultation - Call (904) 642-3332 - Lasnetski Gihon Law is dedicated to serving our clients with a range of legal services including Criminal Defense and Crime cases. Self Defense - Justifiable Use of Deadly Force - Jacksonville Criminal Defense Lawyer

www.slgattorneysflorida.com

Now the above is Florida law and if you know differently for Kenosha, Wisc... please provide otherwise you are just guessing!

 

[healthmyths]

, it's a Police Procedure and Safety thing and a cop who just wanted to kill someone in the heat of the moment.

How do you ascertain that this cop "wanted to kill someone" ?

You are trying to justify the shooting. There can be NO way to justify it, ever.

NO way? So being the "PERFECT" being you are what would you do to uphold the law?
Blake fought the police. Tasering didn't work. The three cops said.. “They were also yelling drop the knife,” White told NBC News.

Did Jacob Blake Have A Weapon? We Examine The Facts - The Police Tribune

Kenosha, WI – The public has been told through rumor alone that Jacob Blake was unarmed when he was shot by Kenosha police on Sunday. Officials have refused to confirm or deny if Jacob Blake was armed, and so we cannot definitively say if he had a weapon. UPDATE: Wisconsin DOJ confirmed...

bluelivesmatter.blue

So what would YOU do Mr. Perfect oh yea being a perfect person you would simple command Blake to not resist!
The rest of us including the cops are plain simple humans. And a normal human reaction when someone is threatening us with a knife,
we "RESIST"!!! Now who has more of a right to "RESIST"? Blake who was being arrested for assaulting a woman warrant and was resisting
arrest? Of course being the "PERFECT" person you are you know such things so evidently you AREN"T perfect! And the FACTS point this out!

 

[Tax Man]

Liberals who claim that Jason Blake was shot unjustly (which probably is all liberals in this forum), please answer this >.

If YOU were a police officer, and you were questioning somebody about a serious crime, and he suddenly bolts away from you, and then reaches into a car, with his hands now not visible to you, what do you do ?

From what I saw he did not bolt and told the officer what he was going to do. Also seven shots in the back is just a little to much as a leg shot would have put him on the ground.