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

[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

For the umpteenth time it's preferable to be behind someone if you want to put him on the ground. Only you think it's easier to put a guy on the ground from in front of him

For the umpteenth time, taking him down isn't the challenge. That's like 5% of it

no it's more like 95% of it

No...it’s like 5% of it and not as easy as you think. Ever been in a fight? Real tough fight?

Yeah I've been in fights. I grew up in the shit end of a city and am well acquainted with violence. I know that 2 guys can almost always take down one unarmed guy.



2 cops armed with various weapons and trained to physically subdue people should always be able to take down one unarmed guy.

You're obviously lying since you take two guys fighting a wanted felon who had walked through two taser shots so cavalierly. Anyone who had been in a real fight would have realized how risky and dangerous that is

Haha. How do you know he cavalierly walked through two tasers?! Did you get that from the same source that told you he “raced around the car” and that the cops had a “bad angle” to take him down when they were directly behind him?

You still have yet to state what you would do if you were one of the police officers. Don’t hate the player hate the game. Police officers aren’t trained to wrestle suspects. They are actually trained not to. Don’t allow facts in the way of your moral thinking...

I’ve answered it several times now. Stop trolling

You said “tackle” and then ran it back and then said they need more training. Which is it?

All of the above

So you don’t know. Fantastic. Then stop criticizing the police officers and critique the system.

I know what happened was wrong. Whether the responsibility is on the cops for mishandling per their training or not is what needs to be determined and acted upon

You can't spin your way out of that the sexual assaulter who violated his victim's restraining order that you're defending had the choice, not the cops you wanted to be killed for your leftist ideology

I don’t want any cops to be killed. Another ridiculous lie you’re telling

No but you also don’t want to give them credit for a difficult job

I’ve worked with cops for years and they have an extremely difficult job and I give them a tremendous amount of credit. They have a huge responsibility but that doesn’t mean I won’t call out people who abuse their power

So it's OK then you want to get cops killed because you're protecting a guy who beats women then ignores the restraining order because you think it helps your political beliefs. Swell guy you are

No of course not. Do you have a learning deficiency? I never said anything close to what you pretend I’m saying. I don’t want the cops to get killed and the only thing I’m defending that guy of is from getting 7 bullets in the back. He should have been arrested

And the sexual assaulter you're protecting should have obeyed the cops. It's on him.

You'd suddenly get that if it weren't for the orange many you hate so much

In what way have I protected Blake?

I've also said that he should have obeyed the police and he should have been arrested for not obeying. I don't know what Trump has to do with any of this, are you bringing him up because you don't have anything else to fling at this debate?

Blake was being arrested if he obeyed. There was a warrant out for his arrest and he violated the restraining order to stay away from his sexual assault victim.

You're protecting the sexual predator by supporting him resisting arrest and blaming the cops for his choices

I don’t support him resisting arrest nor have I ever said anything of the sort. This is you lying again. Prove me wrong and show the quote where I supported him resisting arrest

You're word parsing. Of course you're supporting him resisting arrest. You're arguing that at the point he got into his car, the cops had to let him kill a cop and drive away

That’s not what I’m arguing. That’s a lie.

You've offered nothing else other than to keep saying you're batman and would have subdued him before he got in the car. That's still your answer to well, he did get into the car, well, it's their fault they should have stopped him first because you'd have used the Wonder Woman lasso on him.

You've said nothing other than that mantra about what they do since he did get to the car

Once he gets to the car the 3 officers pull him out of the car. If they see a weapon and he threatens them with it then it is justified to fire

You mean the ones that are still alive do that. Exactly, you want dead cops.

No one would be that stupid as to think that you can pull a guy with a gun out of a car and wait to see if he has a gun before you shoot him and he won't have started shooting already.

You want dead cops. Check and mate.

But you try that. I hope your kids like their new step dad

No, last thing I want is dead cops. I have tremendous respect for the job they do.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say that cops should see a weapon or be mortally threatened by a perp before killing them

But that is subjective. Is a rock “mortally threatening”?

It depends on what the person is trying to do with it

????? So it’s subjective and if a cop feels threatened they may shoot. Yes or no?

That’s what’s being investigated. Every cop is going to say they felt threatened so the facts need to line up

Facts? There is subjectivity here. Obviously if you resist arrest you’re risking a lot, possibly your life. Doesn’t it make sense not to resist arrest?

Yes not resisting would make the most sense

Therefore maybe instead of vilifying our police officers and burning and looting we should just not resist and not make martyrs out of those who do? Glad you finally saw the light.

I’ve been saying that the whole time genius.... except for the part about Cops where I think they should be held accountable when they abuse their power.

No one is disputing that.

Well you are accusing me of vilifying the cops so you kind of are disputing that

Because that was the crux of your argument. That he should have done something different. I asked what and you said you didn’t know but that he is a professional. Then I educated you that cops aren’t trained to tackle and get into hand to hand combat. Don’t walk it back because you’re embarrassed. Your argument was flawed. We then agreed we need to fix the system but first and foremost resisting arrest is stupid.

We agree on all that except for your assertion that cops aren’t trained in H2H. They are trained to arrest subjects and what to do if a perp runs or resists. The automatic answer is not empty your clip into his back at close range

No they are not. They are trained to cuff you but not to wrestle and such. You’re incorrect.

 

[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

For the umpteenth time it's preferable to be behind someone if you want to put him on the ground. Only you think it's easier to put a guy on the ground from in front of him

For the umpteenth time, taking him down isn't the challenge. That's like 5% of it

no it's more like 95% of it

No...it’s like 5% of it and not as easy as you think. Ever been in a fight? Real tough fight?

Yeah I've been in fights. I grew up in the shit end of a city and am well acquainted with violence. I know that 2 guys can almost always take down one unarmed guy.



2 cops armed with various weapons and trained to physically subdue people should always be able to take down one unarmed guy.

You're obviously lying since you take two guys fighting a wanted felon who had walked through two taser shots so cavalierly. Anyone who had been in a real fight would have realized how risky and dangerous that is

Haha. How do you know he cavalierly walked through two tasers?! Did you get that from the same source that told you he “raced around the car” and that the cops had a “bad angle” to take him down when they were directly behind him?

You still have yet to state what you would do if you were one of the police officers. Don’t hate the player hate the game. Police officers aren’t trained to wrestle suspects. They are actually trained not to. Don’t allow facts in the way of your moral thinking...

I’ve answered it several times now. Stop trolling

You said “tackle” and then ran it back and then said they need more training. Which is it?

All of the above

So you don’t know. Fantastic. Then stop criticizing the police officers and critique the system.

I know what happened was wrong. Whether the responsibility is on the cops for mishandling per their training or not is what needs to be determined and acted upon

You can't spin your way out of that the sexual assaulter who violated his victim's restraining order that you're defending had the choice, not the cops you wanted to be killed for your leftist ideology

I don’t want any cops to be killed. Another ridiculous lie you’re telling

No but you also don’t want to give them credit for a difficult job

I’ve worked with cops for years and they have an extremely difficult job and I give them a tremendous amount of credit. They have a huge responsibility but that doesn’t mean I won’t call out people who abuse their power

So it's OK then you want to get cops killed because you're protecting a guy who beats women then ignores the restraining order because you think it helps your political beliefs. Swell guy you are

No of course not. Do you have a learning deficiency? I never said anything close to what you pretend I’m saying. I don’t want the cops to get killed and the only thing I’m defending that guy of is from getting 7 bullets in the back. He should have been arrested

And the sexual assaulter you're protecting should have obeyed the cops. It's on him.

You'd suddenly get that if it weren't for the orange many you hate so much

In what way have I protected Blake?

I've also said that he should have obeyed the police and he should have been arrested for not obeying. I don't know what Trump has to do with any of this, are you bringing him up because you don't have anything else to fling at this debate?

Blake was being arrested if he obeyed. There was a warrant out for his arrest and he violated the restraining order to stay away from his sexual assault victim.

You're protecting the sexual predator by supporting him resisting arrest and blaming the cops for his choices

I don’t support him resisting arrest nor have I ever said anything of the sort. This is you lying again. Prove me wrong and show the quote where I supported him resisting arrest

You're word parsing. Of course you're supporting him resisting arrest. You're arguing that at the point he got into his car, the cops had to let him kill a cop and drive away

That’s not what I’m arguing. That’s a lie.

You've offered nothing else other than to keep saying you're batman and would have subdued him before he got in the car. That's still your answer to well, he did get into the car, well, it's their fault they should have stopped him first because you'd have used the Wonder Woman lasso on him.

You've said nothing other than that mantra about what they do since he did get to the car

Once he gets to the car the 3 officers pull him out of the car. If they see a weapon and he threatens them with it then it is justified to fire

You mean the ones that are still alive do that. Exactly, you want dead cops.

No one would be that stupid as to think that you can pull a guy with a gun out of a car and wait to see if he has a gun before you shoot him and he won't have started shooting already.

You want dead cops. Check and mate.

But you try that. I hope your kids like their new step dad

No, last thing I want is dead cops. I have tremendous respect for the job they do.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say that cops should see a weapon or be mortally threatened by a perp before killing them

But that is subjective. Is a rock “mortally threatening”?

It depends on what the person is trying to do with it

????? So it’s subjective and if a cop feels threatened they may shoot. Yes or no?

That’s what’s being investigated. Every cop is going to say they felt threatened so the facts need to line up

Facts? There is subjectivity here. Obviously if you resist arrest you’re risking a lot, possibly your life. Doesn’t it make sense not to resist arrest?

Yes not resisting would make the most sense

Therefore maybe instead of vilifying our police officers and burning and looting we should just not resist and not make martyrs out of those who do? Glad you finally saw the light.

I’ve been saying that the whole time genius.... except for the part about Cops where I think they should be held accountable when they abuse their power.

No one is disputing that.

Well you are accusing me of vilifying the cops so you kind of are disputing that

Because that was the crux of your argument. That he should have done something different. I asked what and you said you didn’t know but that he is a professional. Then I educated you that cops aren’t trained to tackle and get into hand to hand combat. Don’t walk it back because you’re embarrassed. Your argument was flawed. We then agreed we need to fix the system but first and foremost resisting arrest is stupid.

We agree on all that except for your assertion that cops aren’t trained in H2H. They are trained to arrest subjects and what to do if a perp runs or resists. The automatic answer is not empty your clip into his back at close range

No they are not. They are trained to cuff you but not to wrestle and such. You’re incorrect.

So if they try and cuff me and I get loose and run away they’re trained to shoot and kill me.?Is that what you’re saying?

 

[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

For the umpteenth time it's preferable to be behind someone if you want to put him on the ground. Only you think it's easier to put a guy on the ground from in front of him

For the umpteenth time, taking him down isn't the challenge. That's like 5% of it

no it's more like 95% of it

No...it’s like 5% of it and not as easy as you think. Ever been in a fight? Real tough fight?

Yeah I've been in fights. I grew up in the shit end of a city and am well acquainted with violence. I know that 2 guys can almost always take down one unarmed guy.



2 cops armed with various weapons and trained to physically subdue people should always be able to take down one unarmed guy.

You're obviously lying since you take two guys fighting a wanted felon who had walked through two taser shots so cavalierly. Anyone who had been in a real fight would have realized how risky and dangerous that is

Haha. How do you know he cavalierly walked through two tasers?! Did you get that from the same source that told you he “raced around the car” and that the cops had a “bad angle” to take him down when they were directly behind him?

You still have yet to state what you would do if you were one of the police officers. Don’t hate the player hate the game. Police officers aren’t trained to wrestle suspects. They are actually trained not to. Don’t allow facts in the way of your moral thinking...

I’ve answered it several times now. Stop trolling

You said “tackle” and then ran it back and then said they need more training. Which is it?

All of the above

So you don’t know. Fantastic. Then stop criticizing the police officers and critique the system.

I know what happened was wrong. Whether the responsibility is on the cops for mishandling per their training or not is what needs to be determined and acted upon

You can't spin your way out of that the sexual assaulter who violated his victim's restraining order that you're defending had the choice, not the cops you wanted to be killed for your leftist ideology

I don’t want any cops to be killed. Another ridiculous lie you’re telling

No but you also don’t want to give them credit for a difficult job

I’ve worked with cops for years and they have an extremely difficult job and I give them a tremendous amount of credit. They have a huge responsibility but that doesn’t mean I won’t call out people who abuse their power

So it's OK then you want to get cops killed because you're protecting a guy who beats women then ignores the restraining order because you think it helps your political beliefs. Swell guy you are

No of course not. Do you have a learning deficiency? I never said anything close to what you pretend I’m saying. I don’t want the cops to get killed and the only thing I’m defending that guy of is from getting 7 bullets in the back. He should have been arrested

And the sexual assaulter you're protecting should have obeyed the cops. It's on him.

You'd suddenly get that if it weren't for the orange many you hate so much

In what way have I protected Blake?

I've also said that he should have obeyed the police and he should have been arrested for not obeying. I don't know what Trump has to do with any of this, are you bringing him up because you don't have anything else to fling at this debate?

Blake was being arrested if he obeyed. There was a warrant out for his arrest and he violated the restraining order to stay away from his sexual assault victim.

You're protecting the sexual predator by supporting him resisting arrest and blaming the cops for his choices

I don’t support him resisting arrest nor have I ever said anything of the sort. This is you lying again. Prove me wrong and show the quote where I supported him resisting arrest

You're word parsing. Of course you're supporting him resisting arrest. You're arguing that at the point he got into his car, the cops had to let him kill a cop and drive away

That’s not what I’m arguing. That’s a lie.

You've offered nothing else other than to keep saying you're batman and would have subdued him before he got in the car. That's still your answer to well, he did get into the car, well, it's their fault they should have stopped him first because you'd have used the Wonder Woman lasso on him.

You've said nothing other than that mantra about what they do since he did get to the car

Once he gets to the car the 3 officers pull him out of the car. If they see a weapon and he threatens them with it then it is justified to fire

You mean the ones that are still alive do that. Exactly, you want dead cops.

No one would be that stupid as to think that you can pull a guy with a gun out of a car and wait to see if he has a gun before you shoot him and he won't have started shooting already.

You want dead cops. Check and mate.

But you try that. I hope your kids like their new step dad

No, last thing I want is dead cops. I have tremendous respect for the job they do.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say that cops should see a weapon or be mortally threatened by a perp before killing them

But that is subjective. Is a rock “mortally threatening”?

It depends on what the person is trying to do with it

????? So it’s subjective and if a cop feels threatened they may shoot. Yes or no?

That’s what’s being investigated. Every cop is going to say they felt threatened so the facts need to line up

Facts? There is subjectivity here. Obviously if you resist arrest you’re risking a lot, possibly your life. Doesn’t it make sense not to resist arrest?

Yes not resisting would make the most sense

Therefore maybe instead of vilifying our police officers and burning and looting we should just not resist and not make martyrs out of those who do? Glad you finally saw the light.

I’ve been saying that the whole time genius.... except for the part about Cops where I think they should be held accountable when they abuse their power.

No one is disputing that.

Well you are accusing me of vilifying the cops so you kind of are disputing that

Because that was the crux of your argument. That he should have done something different. I asked what and you said you didn’t know but that he is a professional. Then I educated you that cops aren’t trained to tackle and get into hand to hand combat. Don’t walk it back because you’re embarrassed. Your argument was flawed. We then agreed we need to fix the system but first and foremost resisting arrest is stupid.

We agree on all that except for your assertion that cops aren’t trained in H2H. They are trained to arrest subjects and what to do if a perp runs or resists. The automatic answer is not empty your clip into his back at close range

No they are not. They are trained to cuff you but not to wrestle and such. You’re incorrect.

So if they try and cuff me and I get loose and run away they’re trained to shoot and kill me.?Is that what you’re saying?

If you try and run and may pose a threat, yes, otherwise no. If they see you running toward kids in a school yard, yes. If they see you running to an apartment building, no.

 

[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

For the umpteenth time it's preferable to be behind someone if you want to put him on the ground. Only you think it's easier to put a guy on the ground from in front of him

For the umpteenth time, taking him down isn't the challenge. That's like 5% of it

no it's more like 95% of it

No...it’s like 5% of it and not as easy as you think. Ever been in a fight? Real tough fight?

Yeah I've been in fights. I grew up in the shit end of a city and am well acquainted with violence. I know that 2 guys can almost always take down one unarmed guy.



2 cops armed with various weapons and trained to physically subdue people should always be able to take down one unarmed guy.

You're obviously lying since you take two guys fighting a wanted felon who had walked through two taser shots so cavalierly. Anyone who had been in a real fight would have realized how risky and dangerous that is

Haha. How do you know he cavalierly walked through two tasers?! Did you get that from the same source that told you he “raced around the car” and that the cops had a “bad angle” to take him down when they were directly behind him?

You still have yet to state what you would do if you were one of the police officers. Don’t hate the player hate the game. Police officers aren’t trained to wrestle suspects. They are actually trained not to. Don’t allow facts in the way of your moral thinking...

I’ve answered it several times now. Stop trolling

You said “tackle” and then ran it back and then said they need more training. Which is it?

All of the above

So you don’t know. Fantastic. Then stop criticizing the police officers and critique the system.

I know what happened was wrong. Whether the responsibility is on the cops for mishandling per their training or not is what needs to be determined and acted upon

You can't spin your way out of that the sexual assaulter who violated his victim's restraining order that you're defending had the choice, not the cops you wanted to be killed for your leftist ideology

I don’t want any cops to be killed. Another ridiculous lie you’re telling

No but you also don’t want to give them credit for a difficult job

I’ve worked with cops for years and they have an extremely difficult job and I give them a tremendous amount of credit. They have a huge responsibility but that doesn’t mean I won’t call out people who abuse their power

So it's OK then you want to get cops killed because you're protecting a guy who beats women then ignores the restraining order because you think it helps your political beliefs. Swell guy you are

No of course not. Do you have a learning deficiency? I never said anything close to what you pretend I’m saying. I don’t want the cops to get killed and the only thing I’m defending that guy of is from getting 7 bullets in the back. He should have been arrested

And the sexual assaulter you're protecting should have obeyed the cops. It's on him.

You'd suddenly get that if it weren't for the orange many you hate so much

In what way have I protected Blake?

I've also said that he should have obeyed the police and he should have been arrested for not obeying. I don't know what Trump has to do with any of this, are you bringing him up because you don't have anything else to fling at this debate?

Blake was being arrested if he obeyed. There was a warrant out for his arrest and he violated the restraining order to stay away from his sexual assault victim.

You're protecting the sexual predator by supporting him resisting arrest and blaming the cops for his choices

I don’t support him resisting arrest nor have I ever said anything of the sort. This is you lying again. Prove me wrong and show the quote where I supported him resisting arrest

You're word parsing. Of course you're supporting him resisting arrest. You're arguing that at the point he got into his car, the cops had to let him kill a cop and drive away

That’s not what I’m arguing. That’s a lie.

You've offered nothing else other than to keep saying you're batman and would have subdued him before he got in the car. That's still your answer to well, he did get into the car, well, it's their fault they should have stopped him first because you'd have used the Wonder Woman lasso on him.

You've said nothing other than that mantra about what they do since he did get to the car

Once he gets to the car the 3 officers pull him out of the car. If they see a weapon and he threatens them with it then it is justified to fire

You mean the ones that are still alive do that. Exactly, you want dead cops.

No one would be that stupid as to think that you can pull a guy with a gun out of a car and wait to see if he has a gun before you shoot him and he won't have started shooting already.

You want dead cops. Check and mate.

But you try that. I hope your kids like their new step dad

No, last thing I want is dead cops. I have tremendous respect for the job they do.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say that cops should see a weapon or be mortally threatened by a perp before killing them

But that is subjective. Is a rock “mortally threatening”?

It depends on what the person is trying to do with it

????? So it’s subjective and if a cop feels threatened they may shoot. Yes or no?

That’s what’s being investigated. Every cop is going to say they felt threatened so the facts need to line up

Facts? There is subjectivity here. Obviously if you resist arrest you’re risking a lot, possibly your life. Doesn’t it make sense not to resist arrest?

Yes not resisting would make the most sense

Therefore maybe instead of vilifying our police officers and burning and looting we should just not resist and not make martyrs out of those who do? Glad you finally saw the light.

I’ve been saying that the whole time genius.... except for the part about Cops where I think they should be held accountable when they abuse their power.

No one is disputing that.

Well you are accusing me of vilifying the cops so you kind of are disputing that

Because that was the crux of your argument. That he should have done something different. I asked what and you said you didn’t know but that he is a professional. Then I educated you that cops aren’t trained to tackle and get into hand to hand combat. Don’t walk it back because you’re embarrassed. Your argument was flawed. We then agreed we need to fix the system but first and foremost resisting arrest is stupid.

We agree on all that except for your assertion that cops aren’t trained in H2H. They are trained to arrest subjects and what to do if a perp runs or resists. The automatic answer is not empty your clip into his back at close range

No they are not. They are trained to cuff you but not to wrestle and such. You’re incorrect.

So if they try and cuff me and I get loose and run away they’re trained to shoot and kill me.?Is that what you’re saying?

If you try and run and may pose a threat, yes, otherwise no. If they see you running toward kids in a school yard, yes. If they see you running to an apartment building, no.

Ok well in this case if he wasn’t seen holding a weapon then I don’t think that shooting was justified on the predicate that he might get a weapon. If he was holding a weapon then that changes things. We will see

 

[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

For the umpteenth time it's preferable to be behind someone if you want to put him on the ground. Only you think it's easier to put a guy on the ground from in front of him

For the umpteenth time, taking him down isn't the challenge. That's like 5% of it

no it's more like 95% of it

No...it’s like 5% of it and not as easy as you think. Ever been in a fight? Real tough fight?

Yeah I've been in fights. I grew up in the shit end of a city and am well acquainted with violence. I know that 2 guys can almost always take down one unarmed guy.



2 cops armed with various weapons and trained to physically subdue people should always be able to take down one unarmed guy.

You're obviously lying since you take two guys fighting a wanted felon who had walked through two taser shots so cavalierly. Anyone who had been in a real fight would have realized how risky and dangerous that is

Haha. How do you know he cavalierly walked through two tasers?! Did you get that from the same source that told you he “raced around the car” and that the cops had a “bad angle” to take him down when they were directly behind him?

You still have yet to state what you would do if you were one of the police officers. Don’t hate the player hate the game. Police officers aren’t trained to wrestle suspects. They are actually trained not to. Don’t allow facts in the way of your moral thinking...

I’ve answered it several times now. Stop trolling

You said “tackle” and then ran it back and then said they need more training. Which is it?

All of the above

So you don’t know. Fantastic. Then stop criticizing the police officers and critique the system.

I know what happened was wrong. Whether the responsibility is on the cops for mishandling per their training or not is what needs to be determined and acted upon

You can't spin your way out of that the sexual assaulter who violated his victim's restraining order that you're defending had the choice, not the cops you wanted to be killed for your leftist ideology

I don’t want any cops to be killed. Another ridiculous lie you’re telling

No but you also don’t want to give them credit for a difficult job

I’ve worked with cops for years and they have an extremely difficult job and I give them a tremendous amount of credit. They have a huge responsibility but that doesn’t mean I won’t call out people who abuse their power

So it's OK then you want to get cops killed because you're protecting a guy who beats women then ignores the restraining order because you think it helps your political beliefs. Swell guy you are

No of course not. Do you have a learning deficiency? I never said anything close to what you pretend I’m saying. I don’t want the cops to get killed and the only thing I’m defending that guy of is from getting 7 bullets in the back. He should have been arrested

And the sexual assaulter you're protecting should have obeyed the cops. It's on him.

You'd suddenly get that if it weren't for the orange many you hate so much

In what way have I protected Blake?

I've also said that he should have obeyed the police and he should have been arrested for not obeying. I don't know what Trump has to do with any of this, are you bringing him up because you don't have anything else to fling at this debate?

Blake was being arrested if he obeyed. There was a warrant out for his arrest and he violated the restraining order to stay away from his sexual assault victim.

You're protecting the sexual predator by supporting him resisting arrest and blaming the cops for his choices

I don’t support him resisting arrest nor have I ever said anything of the sort. This is you lying again. Prove me wrong and show the quote where I supported him resisting arrest

You're word parsing. Of course you're supporting him resisting arrest. You're arguing that at the point he got into his car, the cops had to let him kill a cop and drive away

That’s not what I’m arguing. That’s a lie.

You've offered nothing else other than to keep saying you're batman and would have subdued him before he got in the car. That's still your answer to well, he did get into the car, well, it's their fault they should have stopped him first because you'd have used the Wonder Woman lasso on him.

You've said nothing other than that mantra about what they do since he did get to the car

Once he gets to the car the 3 officers pull him out of the car. If they see a weapon and he threatens them with it then it is justified to fire

You mean the ones that are still alive do that. Exactly, you want dead cops.

No one would be that stupid as to think that you can pull a guy with a gun out of a car and wait to see if he has a gun before you shoot him and he won't have started shooting already.

You want dead cops. Check and mate.

But you try that. I hope your kids like their new step dad

No, last thing I want is dead cops. I have tremendous respect for the job they do.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say that cops should see a weapon or be mortally threatened by a perp before killing them

But that is subjective. Is a rock “mortally threatening”?

It depends on what the person is trying to do with it

????? So it’s subjective and if a cop feels threatened they may shoot. Yes or no?

That’s what’s being investigated. Every cop is going to say they felt threatened so the facts need to line up

Facts? There is subjectivity here. Obviously if you resist arrest you’re risking a lot, possibly your life. Doesn’t it make sense not to resist arrest?

Yes not resisting would make the most sense

Therefore maybe instead of vilifying our police officers and burning and looting we should just not resist and not make martyrs out of those who do? Glad you finally saw the light.

I’ve been saying that the whole time genius.... except for the part about Cops where I think they should be held accountable when they abuse their power.

No one is disputing that.

Well you are accusing me of vilifying the cops so you kind of are disputing that

Because that was the crux of your argument. That he should have done something different. I asked what and you said you didn’t know but that he is a professional. Then I educated you that cops aren’t trained to tackle and get into hand to hand combat. Don’t walk it back because you’re embarrassed. Your argument was flawed. We then agreed we need to fix the system but first and foremost resisting arrest is stupid.

We agree on all that except for your assertion that cops aren’t trained in H2H. They are trained to arrest subjects and what to do if a perp runs or resists. The automatic answer is not empty your clip into his back at close range

No they are not. They are trained to cuff you but not to wrestle and such. You’re incorrect.

So if they try and cuff me and I get loose and run away they’re trained to shoot and kill me.?Is that what you’re saying?

If you try and run and may pose a threat, yes, otherwise no. If they see you running toward kids in a school yard, yes. If they see you running to an apartment building, no.

Ok well in this case if he wasn’t seen holding a weapon then I don’t think that shooting was justified on the predicate that he might get a weapon. If he was holding a weapon then that changes things. We will see

The police officers believed he and possibly other civilians were in danger. If Blake is white, this is a non story.

 

[protectionist]

What part of that don’t you understand?

I understand that you have not answered the question of the OP. Stop blabbering off topic and answer it, Mr Dodge. >>

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 ?

Your answer ?

 

[protectionist]

Again if he turned around and had a knife after backing up a step or two I would have shot his hand off and or shot him in the face. No way however that I shoot a man in the back 7 times unless he is in the act of murdering another person

What do you think this is, a duel ? This is police work, and the protocol is to shoot when suspects' hands disappear from view. Simple as that. Period.

I will say that as wrong as your answer is, at least you do answer the OP question (unlike some of the dodge boys in this thread)

 

[protectionist]

His current arrest warrant or violations doesn’t justify to shoot him at the back 7 times.

His hands disappearing (putting the cop in mortal danger) did. Clearly justifiable.

 

[protectionist]

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

For the umpteenth time it's preferable to be behind someone if you want to put him on the ground. Only you think it's easier to put a guy on the ground from in front of him

For the umpteenth time, taking him down isn't the challenge. That's like 5% of it

no it's more like 95% of it

No...it’s like 5% of it and not as easy as you think. Ever been in a fight? Real tough fight?

Yeah I've been in fights. I grew up in the shit end of a city and am well acquainted with violence. I know that 2 guys can almost always take down one unarmed guy.



2 cops armed with various weapons and trained to physically subdue people should always be able to take down one unarmed guy.

You're obviously lying since you take two guys fighting a wanted felon who had walked through two taser shots so cavalierly. Anyone who had been in a real fight would have realized how risky and dangerous that is

Haha. How do you know he cavalierly walked through two tasers?! Did you get that from the same source that told you he “raced around the car” and that the cops had a “bad angle” to take him down when they were directly behind him?

You still have yet to state what you would do if you were one of the police officers. Don’t hate the player hate the game. Police officers aren’t trained to wrestle suspects. They are actually trained not to. Don’t allow facts in the way of your moral thinking...

I’ve answered it several times now. Stop trolling

You said “tackle” and then ran it back and then said they need more training. Which is it?

All of the above

So you don’t know. Fantastic. Then stop criticizing the police officers and critique the system.

I know what happened was wrong. Whether the responsibility is on the cops for mishandling per their training or not is what needs to be determined and acted upon

You can't spin your way out of that the sexual assaulter who violated his victim's restraining order that you're defending had the choice, not the cops you wanted to be killed for your leftist ideology

I don’t want any cops to be killed. Another ridiculous lie you’re telling

No but you also don’t want to give them credit for a difficult job

I’ve worked with cops for years and they have an extremely difficult job and I give them a tremendous amount of credit. They have a huge responsibility but that doesn’t mean I won’t call out people who abuse their power

So it's OK then you want to get cops killed because you're protecting a guy who beats women then ignores the restraining order because you think it helps your political beliefs. Swell guy you are

No of course not. Do you have a learning deficiency? I never said anything close to what you pretend I’m saying. I don’t want the cops to get killed and the only thing I’m defending that guy of is from getting 7 bullets in the back. He should have been arrested

And the sexual assaulter you're protecting should have obeyed the cops. It's on him.

You'd suddenly get that if it weren't for the orange many you hate so much

In what way have I protected Blake?

I've also said that he should have obeyed the police and he should have been arrested for not obeying. I don't know what Trump has to do with any of this, are you bringing him up because you don't have anything else to fling at this debate?

Blake was being arrested if he obeyed. There was a warrant out for his arrest and he violated the restraining order to stay away from his sexual assault victim.

You're protecting the sexual predator by supporting him resisting arrest and blaming the cops for his choices

I don’t support him resisting arrest nor have I ever said anything of the sort. This is you lying again. Prove me wrong and show the quote where I supported him resisting arrest

You're word parsing. Of course you're supporting him resisting arrest. You're arguing that at the point he got into his car, the cops had to let him kill a cop and drive away

That’s not what I’m arguing. That’s a lie.

You've offered nothing else other than to keep saying you're batman and would have subdued him before he got in the car. That's still your answer to well, he did get into the car, well, it's their fault they should have stopped him first because you'd have used the Wonder Woman lasso on him.

You've said nothing other than that mantra about what they do since he did get to the car

Once he gets to the car the 3 officers pull him out of the car. If they see a weapon and he threatens them with it then it is justified to fire

You mean the ones that are still alive do that. Exactly, you want dead cops.

No one would be that stupid as to think that you can pull a guy with a gun out of a car and wait to see if he has a gun before you shoot him and he won't have started shooting already.

You want dead cops. Check and mate.

But you try that. I hope your kids like their new step dad

No, last thing I want is dead cops. I have tremendous respect for the job they do.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say that cops should see a weapon or be mortally threatened by a perp before killing them

But that is subjective. Is a rock “mortally threatening”?

It depends on what the person is trying to do with it

????? So it’s subjective and if a cop feels threatened they may shoot. Yes or no?

That’s what’s being investigated. Every cop is going to say they felt threatened so the facts need to line up

Facts? There is subjectivity here. Obviously if you resist arrest you’re risking a lot, possibly your life. Doesn’t it make sense not to resist arrest?

Yes not resisting would make the most sense

Therefore maybe instead of vilifying our police officers and burning and looting we should just not resist and not make martyrs out of those who do? Glad you finally saw the light.

I’ve been saying that the whole time genius.... except for the part about Cops where I think they should be held accountable when they abuse their power.

No one is disputing that.

Well you are accusing me of vilifying the cops so you kind of are disputing that

Because that was the crux of your argument. That he should have done something different. I asked what and you said you didn’t know but that he is a professional. Then I educated you that cops aren’t trained to tackle and get into hand to hand combat. Don’t walk it back because you’re embarrassed. Your argument was flawed. We then agreed we need to fix the system but first and foremost resisting arrest is stupid.

We agree on all that except for your assertion that cops aren’t trained in H2H. They are trained to arrest subjects and what to do if a perp runs or resists. The automatic answer is not empty your clip into his back at close range

FALSE! If the perp is a felon, under the Fleeing Felon Rule, cops are required to shoot the perp (in the back) to prevent him from escaping, to protect the community. They are also trained to "empty your clip into his back at close range" if the hands don't remain visible.

 

[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

For the umpteenth time it's preferable to be behind someone if you want to put him on the ground. Only you think it's easier to put a guy on the ground from in front of him

For the umpteenth time, taking him down isn't the challenge. That's like 5% of it

no it's more like 95% of it

No...it’s like 5% of it and not as easy as you think. Ever been in a fight? Real tough fight?

Yeah I've been in fights. I grew up in the shit end of a city and am well acquainted with violence. I know that 2 guys can almost always take down one unarmed guy.



2 cops armed with various weapons and trained to physically subdue people should always be able to take down one unarmed guy.

You're obviously lying since you take two guys fighting a wanted felon who had walked through two taser shots so cavalierly. Anyone who had been in a real fight would have realized how risky and dangerous that is

Haha. How do you know he cavalierly walked through two tasers?! Did you get that from the same source that told you he “raced around the car” and that the cops had a “bad angle” to take him down when they were directly behind him?

You still have yet to state what you would do if you were one of the police officers. Don’t hate the player hate the game. Police officers aren’t trained to wrestle suspects. They are actually trained not to. Don’t allow facts in the way of your moral thinking...

I’ve answered it several times now. Stop trolling

You said “tackle” and then ran it back and then said they need more training. Which is it?

All of the above

So you don’t know. Fantastic. Then stop criticizing the police officers and critique the system.

I know what happened was wrong. Whether the responsibility is on the cops for mishandling per their training or not is what needs to be determined and acted upon

You can't spin your way out of that the sexual assaulter who violated his victim's restraining order that you're defending had the choice, not the cops you wanted to be killed for your leftist ideology

I don’t want any cops to be killed. Another ridiculous lie you’re telling

No but you also don’t want to give them credit for a difficult job

I’ve worked with cops for years and they have an extremely difficult job and I give them a tremendous amount of credit. They have a huge responsibility but that doesn’t mean I won’t call out people who abuse their power

So it's OK then you want to get cops killed because you're protecting a guy who beats women then ignores the restraining order because you think it helps your political beliefs. Swell guy you are

No of course not. Do you have a learning deficiency? I never said anything close to what you pretend I’m saying. I don’t want the cops to get killed and the only thing I’m defending that guy of is from getting 7 bullets in the back. He should have been arrested

And the sexual assaulter you're protecting should have obeyed the cops. It's on him.

You'd suddenly get that if it weren't for the orange many you hate so much

In what way have I protected Blake?

I've also said that he should have obeyed the police and he should have been arrested for not obeying. I don't know what Trump has to do with any of this, are you bringing him up because you don't have anything else to fling at this debate?

Blake was being arrested if he obeyed. There was a warrant out for his arrest and he violated the restraining order to stay away from his sexual assault victim.

You're protecting the sexual predator by supporting him resisting arrest and blaming the cops for his choices

I don’t support him resisting arrest nor have I ever said anything of the sort. This is you lying again. Prove me wrong and show the quote where I supported him resisting arrest

You're word parsing. Of course you're supporting him resisting arrest. You're arguing that at the point he got into his car, the cops had to let him kill a cop and drive away

That’s not what I’m arguing. That’s a lie.

You've offered nothing else other than to keep saying you're batman and would have subdued him before he got in the car. That's still your answer to well, he did get into the car, well, it's their fault they should have stopped him first because you'd have used the Wonder Woman lasso on him.

You've said nothing other than that mantra about what they do since he did get to the car

Once he gets to the car the 3 officers pull him out of the car. If they see a weapon and he threatens them with it then it is justified to fire

You mean the ones that are still alive do that. Exactly, you want dead cops.

No one would be that stupid as to think that you can pull a guy with a gun out of a car and wait to see if he has a gun before you shoot him and he won't have started shooting already.

You want dead cops. Check and mate.

But you try that. I hope your kids like their new step dad

No, last thing I want is dead cops. I have tremendous respect for the job they do.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say that cops should see a weapon or be mortally threatened by a perp before killing them

But that is subjective. Is a rock “mortally threatening”?

It depends on what the person is trying to do with it

????? So it’s subjective and if a cop feels threatened they may shoot. Yes or no?

That’s what’s being investigated. Every cop is going to say they felt threatened so the facts need to line up

Facts? There is subjectivity here. Obviously if you resist arrest you’re risking a lot, possibly your life. Doesn’t it make sense not to resist arrest?

Yes not resisting would make the most sense

Therefore maybe instead of vilifying our police officers and burning and looting we should just not resist and not make martyrs out of those who do? Glad you finally saw the light.

I’ve been saying that the whole time genius.... except for the part about Cops where I think they should be held accountable when they abuse their power.

No one is disputing that.

Well you are accusing me of vilifying the cops so you kind of are disputing that

Because that was the crux of your argument. That he should have done something different. I asked what and you said you didn’t know but that he is a professional. Then I educated you that cops aren’t trained to tackle and get into hand to hand combat. Don’t walk it back because you’re embarrassed. Your argument was flawed. We then agreed we need to fix the system but first and foremost resisting arrest is stupid.

We agree on all that except for your assertion that cops aren’t trained in H2H. They are trained to arrest subjects and what to do if a perp runs or resists. The automatic answer is not empty your clip into his back at close range

FALSE! If the perp is a felon, under the Fleeing Felon Rule, cops are required to shoot the perp (in the back) to prevent him from escaping, to protect the community. They are also trained to "empty your clip into his back at close range" if the hands don't remain visible.

Bullshit. I already posted the section of the law that proves you wrong. Stop lying and stop with the broken record arguments. Do better

 

[protectionist]

Bullshit. I already posted the section of the law that proves you wrong. Stop lying and stop with the broken record arguments. Do better

I don'tknow what you're talking about. (and neithr do you aparently). I just posted the fleeing felon rule (as I have many time sin this forum), and it didn't show up. I'll try again here it is again >>

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Under U.S. law the fleeing felon rule was limited in 1985 to non-lethal force in most cases by Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1. The justices held that deadly force "may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others."[3]

So therefore, as I said, >> "cops are required to shoot the perp (in the back) to prevent him from escaping, to protect the community." ("others")

A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead...however...Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force.
— Justice Byron White, Tennessee v. Garner[4][/QUOTE]

You're poor student. You get an F.

 

[Slade3200]

Bullshit. I already posted the section of the law that proves you wrong. Stop lying and stop with the broken record arguments. Do better

I don'tknow what you're talking about. (and neithr do you aparently). I just posted the fleeing felon rule (as I have many time sin this forum), and it didn't show up. I'll try again here it is again >>

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Under U.S. law the fleeing felon rule was limited in 1985 to non-lethal force in most cases by Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1. The justices held that deadly force "may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others."[3]

A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead...however...Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force.
— Justice Byron White, Tennessee v. Garner[4]

[/QUOTE]
Exactly! And what’s in debate here is whether deadly force was warranted

 

[protectionist]

Exactly! And what’s in debate here is whether deadly force was warranted

NO, that's NOT in debate, As you've been told 300 times in this thread, if a suspect's hand(s) disappear, cop must shoot immediately. This is evident even if it were not required by police rules.

If suspect hands disappear, he can, in 1/2 second, shoot the cop. Only way to prevent that, is to shoot the suspect immediately. So do you need to be told for the 301st time, or do you finally get this ?

 

[Slade3200]

Exactly! And what’s in debate here is whether deadly force was warranted

NO that's NOT in debate, As you've been told 300 times in this thread, if a suspect's hand)s) disappear, cop must shoot immediately. This is evident even if it were not required by police rules.

If suspect hands disapppear, he can, in 1/2 second, shoot the cop. Only way to prevent that, is to shoot the suspect immediately. So do you need to be told for the 301st time, or do you finally get this ?

I don’t believe you

 

[protectionist]

I don’t believe you

Doesn't matter what you believe. You can't argue with FACT.

And if you think it's not a fact that suspect can, in 1/2 second, shoot the cop, you must be pretty stupid.

This was delineated quite well in Post # 139. Guess what I don't believe" >>> YOU.

 

[Slade3200]

I don’t believe you

Doesn't matter what you believe. You can't argue with FACT.

And if you think it's not a fact that suspect can, in 1/2 second, shoot the cop, you must be pretty stupid.

Of course they can shoot in 1/2 a second. So what? They can do that while
Opening a door to a house or when a cop walks up to their car. If they have a weapon and are being aggressive then shooting is justified

 

[protectionist]

Of course they can shoot in 1/2 a second. So what? They can do that while
Opening a door to a house or when a cop walks up to their car. If they have a weapon and are being aggressive then shooting is justified

Yeah, you're stupid all right. And if you were the cop, and you did not shoot immediately when the suspect's hand disappears, you'd be DEAD.

Easy for you to talk, when you ARE NOT THAT COP, isn't it ?

You read post # 139. You know the score. You're just talking bullshit.

 

[Slade3200]

Of course they can shoot in 1/2 a second. So what? They can do that while
Opening a door to a house or when a cop walks up to their car. If they have a weapon and are being aggressive then shooting is justified

Yeah, you're stupid all right. And if you were the cop, and you did not shoot immediately when the suspect's hand disappears, you'd be DEAD.

Easy for you to talk, when you ARE NOT THAT COP, isn't it ?

You read post # 139. You know the score. You're just talking bullshit.

That’s bullshit. I’m not buying it. That means any perp that runs has a shoot to kill order as soon as a cop loses view of the perp or their hands. They amended the fleeing felon law for a reason

 

[protectionist]

That’s bullshit. I’m not buying it. That means any perp that runs has a shoot to kill order as soon as a cop loses view of the perp or their hands. They amended the fleeing felon law for a reason

Doesn't matter what you buy. What I said is FACT.

Now go take a job as a cop, and don't shoot suspects when their hands disappear. We'll send flowers.

BTW - WHAT amendment ?

 

[Slade3200]

That’s bullshit. I’m not buying it. That means any perp that runs has a shoot to kill order as soon as a cop loses view of the perp or their hands. They amended the fleeing felon law for a reason

Doesn't matter what you buy. What I said is FACT.

Now go take a job as a cop, and don't shoot suspects when their hands disappear. We'll send flowers.

It’s not a fact per the law that you posted