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

[Moonglow]

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 ?

Knee to the kidney

 

[petro]

a cop who just wanted to kill someone in the heat of the moment.

Shit like this is why you are one of the site idiots. What a completley irresponsible stupid thing to say.

 

[petro]

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.

The OP left out a few facts, the dude was there violating a restraining order held by a woman he had sexually assaulted. He had a warrant for his arrest. He had already fought with police getting one in a head lock. He had been tasered twice with no effect, that would indicate he was most likely on drugs. You're right it should have never gotten that far, they should have shot him before he reached the car, non-deadly force had proven ineffective.

.

Lol I love how you’re retarded enough to believe all of this justified him getting shot. It’s not like the argument has anything to do with whether or not he’s a good person.

How would you have stopped him, he was going for a weapon and tasers didn't work.

.

What weapon?

A vehicle IS a weapon.

 

[Papageorgio]

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 ?

Only shoot if I see a weapon.

If you were a police officer and that is your criteria, you wouldn’t live a year.

That is SOP .

I forgot you are an expert. Where did you learn your skills of being a cop?

 

[forkup]

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 ?

Why ask liberals? Why not ask the police in Kenosha how they handle people who committed serious crimes and who might pose a treat?

Same police force.
Subject just committed 2 murders.
Subject is obviously armed and out after curfew

Hmms he seems to be obviously not shot, let alone 7 times and it seems that the police officers involved have found a way to not do so... in fact, they have found a way to not do ANYTHING to this person.

 

[protectionist]

Why ask liberals? Why not ask the police in Kenosha how they handle people who committed serious crimes and who might pose a treat?
View attachment 383096

Same police force.
Subject just committed 2 murders.
Subject is obviously armed and out after curfew

Hmms he seems to be obviously not shot, let alone 7 times and it seems that the police officers involved have found a way to not do so... in fact, they have found a way to not do ANYTHING to this person.

When you say "this person" you;re talking talking about the cop who shot Jason Blake ?

 

[protectionist]

Knee to the kidney

YOU'RE DEAD.

 

[protectionist]

If the cop did not have a gun, how would the cop stop him?

The old fashioned way....grab him, wrestle him down, the other cops handcuff him.

Pretty boy's may get their face punched in the struggle, but no one is shot and paralyzed with 7 bullets in the back.

YOU'RE DEAD. When suspect hands disappear, you have zero time to do anything other than shoot the suspect. Anything less, you're gambling, with your life as the stakes. It takes him 1/2 second to show a gun and fire it at you. That's why standard procedure is to shoot the instant the hands disappear (or if something indeterminable is in the hand - could be a cell phone in the dark)

The all-important rule never taught by schools is, with cops, always keep you hands VISIBLE & EMPTY.

 

[forkup]

Why ask liberals? Why not ask the police in Kenosha how they handle people who committed serious crimes and who might pose a treat?
View attachment 383096

Same police force.
Subject just committed 2 murders.
Subject is obviously armed and out after curfew

Hmms he seems to be obviously not shot, let alone 7 times and it seems that the police officers involved have found a way to not do so... in fact, they have found a way to not do ANYTHING to this person.

When you say "this person" you;re talking talking about the cop who shot Jason Blake ?

Nope I'm talking about Kyle Rittenhouse. The feigned ignorance is amusing though.

 

[Dana7360]

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 didn't suddenly bold away from police. All he did was open his car door then tried to climb into the driver seat.

The cop immediately started shooting when Mr. Blake has his back turned.

Stop lying.

Show where he bolted, show were he was reaching in his car. He was getting in his car. Within seconds of him turning his back to the cops, the cop open fire.

Stop lying.

 

[protectionist]

You know nothing about police training. You simply live in a make-believe fantasy world where you dream of yourself having skills and talents you can only dream about.

I know exactly what I'm talking about. National Guard training is the same ( I'm a National Guard veteran) You just are a common victim of the US MISeducation system, run by liberals, who are clueless when it comes to law enforcement & guns.

You shouldn't HAVE TO BE educated on this. Doesn't your common sense tell you that when a suspect reaches into a car (or his pocket, or behind him) and his hands disappear from your view, that it takes only a 1/2 second for him to shoot you ?

And you still haven't answered the question of the OP, you coward. Other liberals here have answered it. Reason is, you know what I'm saying (standard procedure for cops & National Guard) is correct.

You just can't put yourself in that cop's shoes can you ? So what would YOU DO ? Gamble with YOUR LIFE, for the convenience of a dirtbag like Jason Blake ? Oh, so hes paralyzed, is he ? Well maybe now some women and children will be safe from his sexual assaults.

 

[jknowgood]

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.

They tazed him and it didn't work. He should be 6 ft under. He raped a child.

 

[Dana7360]

The OP began a thread about a guy who got shot and pretends to be an expert on the subject and doesn't even know the guy's name.

He also started the thread with a lie.

The man wasn't bolting. He was walking in front of the cop, the cop had a weapon pulled and aimed at him. The cop grabbed his shirt. There is no bolting.

Within seconds of turning his back to the cop, the cop pumped 7 rounds into his back.

That isn't proper procedure.

The OP is prefaced on lies. I won't reply to lies with anything other than truth.

However, if the man was bolting, I would have let him bolt. I would not have pumped 7 bullets into his back.

How can someone be bolting and at the same time be any sort of threat? Especially with is back turned and without a weapon?

How can a person bolt with 5 cops with weapons drawn and when standing next to a car? There is no place to go.

So the whole thread is based on a lie.

A person who is running away and doesn't have any sort of weapon isn't any threat to that cop so there is no reason or need to pump 7 rounds into his back.

 

[protectionist]

Nope I'm talking about Kyle Rittenhouse. The feigned ignorance is amusing though.

There is nothing feigned, Relax, junior. You'll get a free education here. It doesn't make sense to say that Rittenhouse has not had ANYTHING (YOUR WORD) done to him.

He's been hit with one count of first-degree intentional homicide; one count of first-degree reckless homicide; one count of attempted first-degree intentional homicide; two counts of first-degree reckless endangerment and one count of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18, all felonies, except the last one.

If convicted of intentional homicide, he could face a mandatory life sentence. That's a mighty LONGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG time for a kid whose only 17 years old.

And I don't HAVE TO ask police "how they handle people who committed serious crimes and who might pose a threat" I KNOW how that handle it. If you read this thread you wouldn't have to ask me that. Just read Post # 26, 69, or 72. (same as in the Betty Shelby - Terrence Crutcher case in Tulsa, OK)

 

[protectionist]

The OP began a thread about a guy who got shot and pretends to be an expert on the subject and doesn't even know the guy's name.

It;s obvious that YOU don't know what this thread is about. It's not about any "guy". It is about a scenario question, which you are too cowardly and/or stupid to answer. So instead, you create a scenario about me, to shield yourself from having to be in the position of answering the question.

 

[Marion Morrison]

The only source giving your version is the police union. Official investigators disagree.

It DOESN'T MATTER which "version" is correct. The video is all that is necessary.

How about if you answer the question of the OP ? Let's say YOU'RE wearing that blue uniform and a badge. What would YOU do ?

I refuse to play your silly game of fantasy. Being a cop is like being in combat and folks speculating on how they would react in combat is fraudulent, fruitless, and insulting.

This is why Cops receive training. I can't speak for cops but I can for Military. That training become second nature if you plan on staying alive. And your buddies rely on you doing what you are trained to do to keep them alive. A Cop that allows that person to make it all the way to the open car door completely failed his training. And you can't tell me any different. It's stupid to think otherwise.

Apparently they didn't have enough to subdue the guy where he was, and he broke free and went for a weapon in his car..At that point, there aren't too many options.

 

[forkup]

Nope I'm talking about Kyle Rittenhouse. The feigned ignorance is amusing though.

There is nothing feigned, Relax, junior. You'll get a free education here. It doesn't make sense to say that Rittenhouse has not had ANYTHING (YOUR WORD) done to him.

He's been hit with one count of first-degree intentional homicide; one count of first-degree reckless homicide; one count of attempted first-degree intentional homicide; two counts of first-degree reckless endangerment and one count of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18, all felonies, except the last one.

If convicted of intentional homicide, he could face a mandatory life sentence. That's a mighty LONGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG time for a kid whose only 17 years old.

And I don't HAVE TO ask police "how they handle people who committed serious crimes and who might pose a threat" I KNOW how that handle it. If you read this thread you wouldn't have to ask me that. Just read Post # 26, 69, or 72. (same as in the Betty Shelby - Terrence Crutcher case in Tulsa, OK)

Yet Rittenhouse was allowed to go home and be picked up later. So why is that NOT an option for Blake? And WHY is a person who ALREADY shot 3 people and is out after curfew holding an AR15 not an immediate danger to the police but another person NOT holding a weapon of any kind is so threatening it justifies SEVEN shots?

Condecent however much you want. Rittenhouse was NOT shot nor immediately apprehended. What justification is there for that?

 

[Jitss617]

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.

Just say if your a stupid black that will side with democrats you can do what ever you want lol

 

[protectionist]

He didn't suddenly bold away from police. All he did was open his car door then tried to climb into the driver seat.

The cop immediately started shooting when Mr. Blake has his back turned.

Stop lying.

Show where he bolted, show were he was reaching in his car. He was getting in his car. Within seconds of him turning his back to the cops, the cop open fire.

Stop lying.

There is no lie. Yes, he did bolt away from the cops, and they had to go after him, just before he reached into his car.

And oh, "all he did" huh / HA HA HA. Spoken like a true undereducated, infomation -deprived liberal victim of liberal OMISSION media, and liberal OMISSION "educaton".

There is no lying. What are you talking about. Yes, Blake opened his car door, reached into the car (as the video shows-we've all seen it), and turned his back to the cops, and he got shot shot. Getting in, reaching in, irrelevant. What matters is he allowed his hands to disappear from the cops.

Well, of course he got shot. He was a suspect being questioned by police, and he allowed his hands to disappear from the cop's view -automatic shoot signal.

And if you do that, YOU will be shot too. Aren't you glad you got such a good education ? Not as good as the one you're getting here now.

So now Dana, are you going to answer the OP question, or are you going to wimp out of it like Camp ?

 

[mascale]

Best recollection of the problem--skin color aside--is the level of breeze in the T-Shirt, according to the Trumped-Up mindset of the matter. The Trumped-Up uniform choked! In fact, Seven times!(?) And the two assisting caddies were not at all helpful(?)! There were likely still pedestrians and on-lookers yet to shoot--especially any off-white(?)!

And then there are the plane loads of thugs(?)! Even Protectionist-poster probably knows about those(?)! They're on their way--and everywhere(?)!

Contrasting, The Trumped-Up plane is on its way to restore some rational peace and order(?)!

Comparing and Contrasting again: Even the Trumped-Up White House resorts to yelling, screaming, ranting, and foaming at the Mouth! The time-frame likely matters. If the gun was drawn, intent to shoot was established. If the gun was not drawn, non-lethal methods were next to be put into play.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(This here, in fact, is thought rational peace and order, too--Matt 25: 14-30!)