Shooter was killed by drone !

[Timmy]

wow , this is a first .

Guess he was barricaded . PD sent a robot in wh a bomb on it . Then boom!

Dallas shooter aside , what do people think of this? Normally it's air drone overseas in war zones . Which I back . After all , if technology improves safety of troops/police , why not .

 

[OKTexas]

Yep, he said he wasn't going to give up, so you do what you have to.

 

[Two Thumbs]

kill a murderer by whatever means that protects those involved and those that might get drawn in.



wait, I take that reasonable response back.

you're a racist

if the murdering scum was white they would have gassed him out instead of murdering him.

BLM!

 

[buckeye45_73]

I hope he suffered.....one less piece of trash on Earth....

 

[martybegan]

Yep, he said he wasn't going to give up, so you do what you have to.

Either by bullet or shrapnel, this guy was going down.

I wonder though, if this was an actual shrapnel device or a stun device that killed the guy by concussion, (they can do that if the space is enclosed enough, and/or if the flashbang is close enough)

 

[deltex1]

The guy himself was a drone. A BLM drone. Stfu, Jesse.

 

[OKTexas]

Yep, he said he wasn't going to give up, so you do what you have to.

Either by bullet or shrapnel, this guy was going down.

I wonder though, if this was an actual shrapnel device or a stun device that killed the guy by concussion, (they can do that if the space is enclosed enough, and/or if the flashbang is close enough)

All the Dallas police chief said it was a bomb, I'm sure it will come out eventually.

 

[SixFoot]

 

[JakeStarkey]

Whether droning a terrorist or hostile non-combatant who surrender or a domestic terrorist or bad guy: drones are good, drones are legal.

Check a person very carefully if he opposes them, particularly his known associates.

 

[NYcarbineer]

wow , this is a first .

Guess he was barricaded . PD sent a robot in wh a bomb on it . Then boom!

Dallas shooter aside , what do people think of this? Normally it's air drone overseas in war zones . Which I back . After all , if technology improves safety of troops/police , why not .

Rand Paul filibustered for 13 hours against it.

Rand Paul pulls plug on nearly 13-hour filibuster

 

[Freewill]

wow , this is a first .

Guess he was barricaded . PD sent a robot in wh a bomb on it . Then boom!

Dallas shooter aside , what do people think of this? Normally it's air drone overseas in war zones . Which I back . After all , if technology improves safety of troops/police , why not .

Why not? The almost indiscriminate killing that is what. Trusting a CIA to develop kill lists without oversight, that is what.

 

[saveliberty]

Throwing a hand grenade is a lot cheaper....

 

[Staidhup]

At least no one else was killed. At some point people have to realize there is a consequence for one's actions. Given he was provided a chance to surrender and didn't was justification for the use of deadly force.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

So a Terminator took him out.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Whether droning a terrorist or hostile non-combatant who surrender or a domestic terrorist or bad guy: drones are good, drones are legal.

Check a person very carefully if he opposes them, particularly his known associates.

if someone is against drones they and his friends should have their privacy invaded?

 

[Two Thumbs]

wow , this is a first .

Guess he was barricaded . PD sent a robot in wh a bomb on it . Then boom!

Dallas shooter aside , what do people think of this? Normally it's air drone overseas in war zones . Which I back . After all , if technology improves safety of troops/police , why not .

Rand Paul filibustered for 13 hours against it.

Rand Paul pulls plug on nearly 13-hour filibuster

he was talking about flying drones that could invade our privacy

 

[JakeStarkey]

Whether droning a terrorist or hostile non-combatant who surrender or a domestic terrorist or bad guy: drones are good, drones are legal.

Check a person very carefully if he opposes them, particularly his known associates.

if someone is against drones they and his friends should have their privacy invaded?

Not if they are obeying the laws. You have no right to privacy if a warrant has been approved for surveillance. If in case of war time or criminal activity, no warrant is necessary

 

[Conservative65]

wow , this is a first .

Guess he was barricaded . PD sent a robot in wh a bomb on it . Then boom!

Dallas shooter aside , what do people think of this? Normally it's air drone overseas in war zones . Which I back . After all , if technology improves safety of troops/police , why not .

As long as the piece of shit suffered, don't care.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Whether droning a terrorist or hostile non-combatant who surrender or a domestic terrorist or bad guy: drones are good, drones are legal.

Check a person very carefully if he opposes them, particularly his known associates.

if someone is against drones they and his friends should have their privacy invaded?

Not if they are obeying the laws. You have no right to privacy if a warrant has been approved for surveillance. If in case of war time or criminal activity, no warrant is necessary

but that doesn't jive with what you said.

"Check a person very carefully if he opposes them, particularly his known associates"

no where did you mention the person had a warrant issued, you seemed damn clear that opposing drones is a thought crime worthy of losing your rights.

 

[I amso IR]

wow , this is a first .

Guess he was barricaded . PD sent a robot in wh a bomb on it . Then boom!

Dallas shooter aside , what do people think of this? Normally it's air drone overseas in war zones . Which I back . After all , if technology improves safety of troops/police , why not .

I feel the use of a robot was and is warranted. What would really be icing on the cake would have been that the bomb used was one of the shooter's own IED's which he claimed to have left "all over the place".