Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I have not had to fight for my life mainly because I don’t put myself into the position to have to. Soldiers do in wartime and are trained on how to handle those situations. Same thing for our police.You have never been in a fight for your very life, have you?You take him down to the ground and arrest him. You don’t shoot him 7 times in the back... why is this complicated for you people to understand?Lets roll play for a moment...That's what most witness reports said. No, I'm sure of much of anything, except the guy got shot in the back 7 times. I ain't saying it was justified or not, certainly we oughta wait for the official report before making any judgments.
In your estimation, what would justify shooting an unarmed man in the back seven times?
You are the police officer. You have a violent felon who is wanted. You dont find this out until you and your fellow officers arrive at the scene of a domestic dispute where an assault has occurred. When you try to effect an arrest the subject resists violently and escapes your control. You pursue him and he gets the drop on you by opening a car door and reaching under the seat. You can not see what it is this individual is grabbing from under the seat.
What do you do? The man has ignored your verbal commands and fought violently to escape custody.
Do you wait to see what it is he has in his hands or do you act on the potential threat? You have exactly 1/5 of one second to make this decision. If he has a loaded gun you will be dead before you can react to what you have seen..
What would YOU DO?
Its not so cut and dried as you would like to believe.
I love arm chair fools... Try that from the officers perspective... You are not clairvoyant..You dont know that the officers were not in imminent danger.
Sure I do.
There was no gun. No gun, no imminent danger. The cop may have believed he was in imminent danger, and he was wrong...
Ask the question without the childish provocation and I’ll give you a serious answerCan we all agree that had this violent sexual assault negro just calmly complied with the officers he'd be standing on his own two feet today?
I got all the respect in the world for good cops who do a job that I would not be able to do. But I can also see when bad cops and poorly trained cops abuse their power which is what happened here in this case. Obviously
Tackle the guy and cuff him. Don’t shoot him 7 times in the back. This isn’t complicated no matter how hard you try and dress it upAgain you miss the forest through the trees.... Its what led up to the weapons discharge... Violent felon, Domestic assault call, violently escapes custody, then trys to grab something the officers can not see from under the seat... The felon refuses verbal commands.. You have 1/5 of one second to make this decision, shoot or no shoot... And your fellow officers who were just assaulted are not in a position to help you... Decide! Your life depends on it!If an officers fight or flight causes them to shoot an unarmed citizen 7 times in the back then that officer is poorly trained, unfit for the job, or guilty of murder. It is an earned responsibility to wear a badge and to carry a gun to enforce our laws. Not everybody is cut out for it. Those who do the job right are hero’s in my eyes. Those who don’t are to be held responsible for their actions.Ive been in this life and death decision a number of times. Fortunately for me I had officers with me to effect the arrest with a taser.You take him down to the ground and arrest him. You don’t shoot him 7 times in the back... why is this complicated for you people to understand?Lets roll play for a moment...That's what most witness reports said. No, I'm sure of much of anything, except the guy got shot in the back 7 times. I ain't saying it was justified or not, certainly we oughta wait for the official report before making any judgments.
In your estimation, what would justify shooting an unarmed man in the back seven times?
You are the police officer. You have a violent felon who is wanted. You dont find this out until you and your fellow officers arrive at the scene of a domestic dispute where an assault has occurred. When you try to effect an arrest the subject resists violently and escapes your control. You pursue him and he gets the drop on you by opening a car door and reaching under the seat. You can not see what it is this individual is grabbing from under the seat.
What do you do? The man has ignored your verbal commands and fought violently to escape custody.
Do you wait to see what it is he has in his hands or do you act on the potential threat? You have exactly 1/5 of one second to make this decision. If he has a loaded gun you will be dead before you can react to what you have seen..
What would YOU DO?
Your a fool and have no clue what is like to make split second decisions on limited information that can end someones or your own life. When you get into "Fight or Flight" and your adrenaline gets going, you can fire 7 rounds before you cognitively realize that you have fired your weapon. That is why we train officers monthly in these types of scenarios. Even seasoned officers sometimes can not tell you how many rounds they fired. I've done investigations where the officer recalls only firing once and they have spent 5-7 rounds.
I have not had to fight for my life mainly because I don’t put myself into the position to have to. Soldiers do in wartime and are trained on how to handle those situations. Same thing for our police.You have never been in a fight for your very life, have you?You take him down to the ground and arrest him. You don’t shoot him 7 times in the back... why is this complicated for you people to understand?Lets roll play for a moment...That's what most witness reports said. No, I'm sure of much of anything, except the guy got shot in the back 7 times. I ain't saying it was justified or not, certainly we oughta wait for the official report before making any judgments.
In your estimation, what would justify shooting an unarmed man in the back seven times?
You are the police officer. You have a violent felon who is wanted. You dont find this out until you and your fellow officers arrive at the scene of a domestic dispute where an assault has occurred. When you try to effect an arrest the subject resists violently and escapes your control. You pursue him and he gets the drop on you by opening a car door and reaching under the seat. You can not see what it is this individual is grabbing from under the seat.
What do you do? The man has ignored your verbal commands and fought violently to escape custody.
Do you wait to see what it is he has in his hands or do you act on the potential threat? You have exactly 1/5 of one second to make this decision. If he has a loaded gun you will be dead before you can react to what you have seen..
What would YOU DO?
Its not so cut and dried as you would like to believe.
You go right a head and try that... how many pole bearers do you want?Tackle the guy and cuff him. Don’t shoot him 7 times in the back. This isn’t complicated no matter how hard you try and dress it upAgain you miss the forest through the trees.... Its what led up to the weapons discharge... Violent felon, Domestic assault call, violently escapes custody, then trys to grab something the officers can not see from under the seat... The felon refuses verbal commands.. You have 1/5 of one second to make this decision, shoot or no shoot... And your fellow officers who were just assaulted are not in a position to help you... Decide! Your life depends on it!If an officers fight or flight causes them to shoot an unarmed citizen 7 times in the back then that officer is poorly trained, unfit for the job, or guilty of murder. It is an earned responsibility to wear a badge and to carry a gun to enforce our laws. Not everybody is cut out for it. Those who do the job right are hero’s in my eyes. Those who don’t are to be held responsible for their actions.Ive been in this life and death decision a number of times. Fortunately for me I had officers with me to effect the arrest with a taser.You take him down to the ground and arrest him. You don’t shoot him 7 times in the back... why is this complicated for you people to understand?Lets roll play for a moment...That's what most witness reports said. No, I'm sure of much of anything, except the guy got shot in the back 7 times. I ain't saying it was justified or not, certainly we oughta wait for the official report before making any judgments.
In your estimation, what would justify shooting an unarmed man in the back seven times?
You are the police officer. You have a violent felon who is wanted. You dont find this out until you and your fellow officers arrive at the scene of a domestic dispute where an assault has occurred. When you try to effect an arrest the subject resists violently and escapes your control. You pursue him and he gets the drop on you by opening a car door and reaching under the seat. You can not see what it is this individual is grabbing from under the seat.
What do you do? The man has ignored your verbal commands and fought violently to escape custody.
Do you wait to see what it is he has in his hands or do you act on the potential threat? You have exactly 1/5 of one second to make this decision. If he has a loaded gun you will be dead before you can react to what you have seen..
What would YOU DO?
Your a fool and have no clue what is like to make split second decisions on limited information that can end someones or your own life. When you get into "Fight or Flight" and your adrenaline gets going, you can fire 7 rounds before you cognitively realize that you have fired your weapon. That is why we train officers monthly in these types of scenarios. Even seasoned officers sometimes can not tell you how many rounds they fired. I've done investigations where the officer recalls only firing once and they have spent 5-7 rounds.
You go right a head and try that... how many pole bearers do you want?
I watched the cop follow the unarmed guy around the car and then shoot him in the back. He had many opportunities to make the arrest. This shooting was an over reaction. 7 shots!!! You’re not going to justify thatI have not had to fight for my life mainly because I don’t put myself into the position to have to. Soldiers do in wartime and are trained on how to handle those situations. Same thing for our police.You have never been in a fight for your very life, have you?You take him down to the ground and arrest him. You don’t shoot him 7 times in the back... why is this complicated for you people to understand?Lets roll play for a moment...That's what most witness reports said. No, I'm sure of much of anything, except the guy got shot in the back 7 times. I ain't saying it was justified or not, certainly we oughta wait for the official report before making any judgments.
In your estimation, what would justify shooting an unarmed man in the back seven times?
You are the police officer. You have a violent felon who is wanted. You dont find this out until you and your fellow officers arrive at the scene of a domestic dispute where an assault has occurred. When you try to effect an arrest the subject resists violently and escapes your control. You pursue him and he gets the drop on you by opening a car door and reaching under the seat. You can not see what it is this individual is grabbing from under the seat.
What do you do? The man has ignored your verbal commands and fought violently to escape custody.
Do you wait to see what it is he has in his hands or do you act on the potential threat? You have exactly 1/5 of one second to make this decision. If he has a loaded gun you will be dead before you can react to what you have seen..
What would YOU DO?
Its not so cut and dried as you would like to believe.
Ive done BOTH.... People who have never had to fight for thier very lives have no clue what happens to the human body when it enters "fight or flight"...
I am still waiting for confirmation on what actually happened..
Good for you... Where did you get your x-ray vision eyes?I love arm chair fools... Try that from the officers perspective... You are not clairvoyant..You dont know that the officers were not in imminent danger.
Sure I do.
There was no gun. No gun, no imminent danger. The cop may have believed he was in imminent danger, and he was wrong...
Clairvoyant? No. A cop for eight years? Yeah.
I wore a badge for eight years...
I am still waiting for confirmation on what actually happened..
But in the mean while let's go burn down some buildings...
Not everyone can control their involuntary muscle movements in a fight or flight condition. Again, until I have the facts I will not judge this officer.I watched the cop follow the unarmed guy around the car and then shoot him in the back. He had many opportunities to make the arrest. This shooting was an over reaction. 7 shots!!! You’re not going to justify thatI have not had to fight for my life mainly because I don’t put myself into the position to have to. Soldiers do in wartime and are trained on how to handle those situations. Same thing for our police.You have never been in a fight for your very life, have you?You take him down to the ground and arrest him. You don’t shoot him 7 times in the back... why is this complicated for you people to understand?Lets roll play for a moment...That's what most witness reports said. No, I'm sure of much of anything, except the guy got shot in the back 7 times. I ain't saying it was justified or not, certainly we oughta wait for the official report before making any judgments.
In your estimation, what would justify shooting an unarmed man in the back seven times?
You are the police officer. You have a violent felon who is wanted. You dont find this out until you and your fellow officers arrive at the scene of a domestic dispute where an assault has occurred. When you try to effect an arrest the subject resists violently and escapes your control. You pursue him and he gets the drop on you by opening a car door and reaching under the seat. You can not see what it is this individual is grabbing from under the seat.
What do you do? The man has ignored your verbal commands and fought violently to escape custody.
Do you wait to see what it is he has in his hands or do you act on the potential threat? You have exactly 1/5 of one second to make this decision. If he has a loaded gun you will be dead before you can react to what you have seen..
What would YOU DO?
Its not so cut and dried as you would like to believe.
Ive done BOTH.... People who have never had to fight for thier very lives have no clue what happens to the human body when it enters "fight or flight"...
If that officer can’t control himself in pressure situations then he has no business wearing the badge. My guess is he won’t be wearing it for much longerNot everyone can control their involuntary muscle movements in a fight or flight condition. Again, until I have the facts I will not judge this officer.I watched the cop follow the unarmed guy around the car and then shoot him in the back. He had many opportunities to make the arrest. This shooting was an over reaction. 7 shots!!! You’re not going to justify thatI have not had to fight for my life mainly because I don’t put myself into the position to have to. Soldiers do in wartime and are trained on how to handle those situations. Same thing for our police.You have never been in a fight for your very life, have you?You take him down to the ground and arrest him. You don’t shoot him 7 times in the back... why is this complicated for you people to understand?Lets roll play for a moment...That's what most witness reports said. No, I'm sure of much of anything, except the guy got shot in the back 7 times. I ain't saying it was justified or not, certainly we oughta wait for the official report before making any judgments.
In your estimation, what would justify shooting an unarmed man in the back seven times?
You are the police officer. You have a violent felon who is wanted. You dont find this out until you and your fellow officers arrive at the scene of a domestic dispute where an assault has occurred. When you try to effect an arrest the subject resists violently and escapes your control. You pursue him and he gets the drop on you by opening a car door and reaching under the seat. You can not see what it is this individual is grabbing from under the seat.
What do you do? The man has ignored your verbal commands and fought violently to escape custody.
Do you wait to see what it is he has in his hands or do you act on the potential threat? You have exactly 1/5 of one second to make this decision. If he has a loaded gun you will be dead before you can react to what you have seen..
What would YOU DO?
Its not so cut and dried as you would like to believe.
Ive done BOTH.... People who have never had to fight for thier very lives have no clue what happens to the human body when it enters "fight or flight"...
That sir is the 64,000.00 dollar question...I am still waiting for confirmation on what actually happened..
But in the mean while let's go burn down some buildings...
I still want to know what was he going in that car to get
Everyone has problems in this state.. Its why we teach every officer that you NEVER place your finger on the trigger until you have made the mental decision to shoot.If that officer can’t control himself in pressure situations then he has no business wearing the badge. My guess is he won’t be wearing it for much longerNot everyone can control their involuntary muscle movements in a fight or flight condition. Again, until I have the facts I will not judge this officer.I watched the cop follow the unarmed guy around the car and then shoot him in the back. He had many opportunities to make the arrest. This shooting was an over reaction. 7 shots!!! You’re not going to justify thatI have not had to fight for my life mainly because I don’t put myself into the position to have to. Soldiers do in wartime and are trained on how to handle those situations. Same thing for our police.You have never been in a fight for your very life, have you?You take him down to the ground and arrest him. You don’t shoot him 7 times in the back... why is this complicated for you people to understand?Lets roll play for a moment...That's what most witness reports said. No, I'm sure of much of anything, except the guy got shot in the back 7 times. I ain't saying it was justified or not, certainly we oughta wait for the official report before making any judgments.
In your estimation, what would justify shooting an unarmed man in the back seven times?
You are the police officer. You have a violent felon who is wanted. You dont find this out until you and your fellow officers arrive at the scene of a domestic dispute where an assault has occurred. When you try to effect an arrest the subject resists violently and escapes your control. You pursue him and he gets the drop on you by opening a car door and reaching under the seat. You can not see what it is this individual is grabbing from under the seat.
What do you do? The man has ignored your verbal commands and fought violently to escape custody.
Do you wait to see what it is he has in his hands or do you act on the potential threat? You have exactly 1/5 of one second to make this decision. If he has a loaded gun you will be dead before you can react to what you have seen..
What would YOU DO?
Its not so cut and dried as you would like to believe.
Ive done BOTH.... People who have never had to fight for thier very lives have no clue what happens to the human body when it enters "fight or flight"...
The three children in the car with him, if he was trying to ignite a police car chase?if he was reaching for a gun,,,That's what most witness reports said. No, I'm sure of much of anything, except the guy got shot in the back 7 times. I ain't saying it was justified or not, certainly we oughta wait for the official report before making any judgments.
In your estimation, what would justify shooting an unarmed man in the back seven times?
Well, even if he was reaching for a gun (which he wasn't, as there was no gun in the car) the cop wouldn't be in imminent danger until the guy turned around. I know, it sounds silly, but it is what it is. Think about it: If the guy grabs a gun and doesn't turn around and aim it at the cop, the cop's not in danger of being shot.
So. there was no gun, so Blake wasn't reaching for a gun.
What else, then, could possibly justify shooting an unarmed man in the back seven times?
If that's the decision, then so be it. Maybe stop defunding police and burning neighborhoods down, and they can talk it out like grownups?If that’s the training the the training needs to be reformedYou take him down to the ground and arrest him. You don’t shoot him 7 times in the back... why is this complicated for you people to understand?Lets roll play for a moment...That's what most witness reports said. No, I'm sure of much of anything, except the guy got shot in the back 7 times. I ain't saying it was justified or not, certainly we oughta wait for the official report before making any judgments.
In your estimation, what would justify shooting an unarmed man in the back seven times?
You are the police officer. You have a violent felon who is wanted. You dont find this out until you and your fellow officers arrive at the scene of a domestic dispute where an assault has occurred. When you try to effect an arrest the subject resists violently and escapes your control. You pursue him and he gets the drop on you by opening a car door and reaching under the seat. You can not see what it is this individual is grabbing from under the seat.
What do you do? The man has ignored your verbal commands and fought violently to escape custody.
Do you wait to see what it is he has in his hands or do you act on the potential threat? You have exactly 1/5 of one second to make this decision. If he has a loaded gun you will be dead before you can react to what you have seen..
What would YOU DO?
I think they tried that, and it didn't work.
I could be wrong, but I believe cops are trained that if you gotta shoot you should pretty much empty the gun.
And that seals the deal... He was in the process of obtaining hostages... The officer was justified!The three children in the car with him, if he was trying to ignite a police car chase?if he was reaching for a gun,,,That's what most witness reports said. No, I'm sure of much of anything, except the guy got shot in the back 7 times. I ain't saying it was justified or not, certainly we oughta wait for the official report before making any judgments.
In your estimation, what would justify shooting an unarmed man in the back seven times?
Well, even if he was reaching for a gun (which he wasn't, as there was no gun in the car) the cop wouldn't be in imminent danger until the guy turned around. I know, it sounds silly, but it is what it is. Think about it: If the guy grabs a gun and doesn't turn around and aim it at the cop, the cop's not in danger of being shot.
So. there was no gun, so Blake wasn't reaching for a gun.
What else, then, could possibly justify shooting an unarmed man in the back seven times?
Police can't just let him take 3 potential hostages as he flees arrest.
