- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 'Bad police work' in Alton Sterling's death, but don't expect a conviction ...
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:17 am to upgrayedd
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:17 am to upgrayedd
quote:
I'm not sure about that, but to base an entire article on the opinions of experts that are forming said opinions based on only partial evidence is very irresponsible. That shows a complete lack of journalistic integrity but, of course, that's never stopped the new owners of The Advocate before.
agreed
they published this article because they knew it would sell NOT because it was responsible journalism
This post was edited on 9/19/16 at 11:17 am
1
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:19 am to upgrayedd
I agree with this. They did the right thing and put a statement in their report they didn't have enough information, but then still endorsed an opinion.
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:19 am to upgrayedd
quote:
Well, what the frick were they supposed to do? Say pretty please?
there are techniques where you can slow play the situation potentially instead of putting your foot on the gas and forcing a volatile confrontation.
without seeing anything pre-stun gun, its hard to say... there have been plenty of good, and bad uses of them.
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:22 am to Will Cover
quote:
But all said that without viewing the large amount of as-yet unreleased evidence —
So these "experts" are are making conclusions without all the facts. I wonder if these individuals will be testifying, or would they even qualify as experts to testify in any judicial proceedings?
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:22 am to Tigeralum2008
quote:
they published this article because they knew it would sell NOT because it was responsible journalism
The Advocate has an extremely vested interest in ensuring that the BR area is in a state of turmoil. It's good for their business.
This is like the fire dept lighting fires so they can respond to it.
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:23 am to NoSaint
quote:
there are techniques where you can slow play the situation potentially instead of putting your foot on the gas and forcing a volatile confrontation.
I'm sure there are, but reports of the suspect not only carrying but brandishing a weapon makes the situation much more dynamic.
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:29 am to upgrayedd
quote:
I'm sure there are, but reports of the suspect not only carrying but brandishing a weapon makes the situation much more dynamic.
it does.
it becomes far more volatile and could justify actions in either direction. the presence of the firearm does not make a stun gun and tackle more or less justified based on what we know.
it does make the decision riskier, but whether right or wrong could go either way.
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:30 am to upgrayedd
quote:Arrogance on a message board, THE HORROR!!!
Your arrogance is astounding and quite pathetic.
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:31 am to lsupride87
quote:You guys ruin the use of that word.
You are absolutely melting
Look at your posts, you started calling me names, but I'm the one that's melting.
Total misuse and just ruining the term.
quote:Do you think they're lying? Paid to answer that way? Those are honest questions, no sarcasm. Why would 4 of the 5 experts agree on that if it's that simple?
Even the worlds biggest expert, how can they infer anything about what led to the tasering?
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:33 am to shel311
quote:Preconceived bias. It is clear they have it. When you give an opinion, after stating there is not enough information yet for an informed opinion, it is clear you are using what you "want to have happened"
Those are honest questions, no sarcasm. Why would 4 of the 5 experts agree on that if it's that simple?
This post was edited on 9/19/16 at 11:33 am
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:33 am to shel311
quote:
Arrogance on a message board, THE HORROR!!!
You still refuse to answer the question posed twice:
quote:
What should the cops have done to properly handle this situation?
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:33 am to Will Cover
That is a horrible article. They have no idea what happened BEFORE the video 'coverage'. They have not seen all of the evidence, so their opinion of 'Bad police work' is premature.
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:34 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:I hear ya. Hell, I do think it's justified from the video. But as I said, the part I questioned, I certainly conceded that first, it could be wrong. And 2nd, I don't blame the cops at all even if were wrong as it's a tough decision either way as they're in such a tough spot there.
I didn't like what I saw either, it looked brutal. I guess it will come down to the fact that they violated protocol or not. I don't think he was "murdered." In fact it might be 100% justified, you just can't tell enough from the videos.
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:34 am to lsupride87
quote:Then they should shoot him.
What if he was going for his gun before the takedown?
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:35 am to shel311
quote:
You guys ruin the use of that word.
Look at your posts, you started calling me names, but I'm the one that's melting.
Total misuse and just ruining the term
Classic melt.
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:35 am to upgrayedd
quote:No, I don't.
Sure you do. You're just choosing to ignore it.
And to prove that you're wrong:
quote:Already answered that.
I'll ask again. What should the cops have done to properly handle this situation?
Nice try. You think you know what I'm thinking AND also think that I'm the arrogant one? That's rich!!!
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:36 am to shel311
quote:In your opinion, is there ever use for a takedown and taser?
shel311
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:36 am to OysterPoBoy
quote:I had already answered his question in another post.
Classic deflection.
So, you're wrong.
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:37 am to shel311
quote:
Already answered that.
Nope. You didn't.
Posted on 9/19/16 at 11:39 am to Will Cover
quote:
Several also questioned why officers fired stun guns and tackled Sterling, moves that potentially put the policemen in far greater danger and left them with no ability to safely retreat.
This is some dumb shite. If the police get a call that someone is armed and they approach that person, who is said to be armed, I would imagine they already approach that person with a heightened sense of self-protection.
Let's not forget, before the police ever showed up he was selling CDs illegally (not only was he not a registered business owner, he was selling pirated material) and carrying a gun, illegally. This guy was a repeat criminal, I know that isn't factored into the equation because he "paid for those crimes", but even if the police didn't do everything exactly the way they were suppose to do it, why is everyone painting a picture as if the cops just shot some guy hanging out at a convenient store?
Every time I see this shite I can't believe how irresponsible the reporting on this is.
Page 4 of 7
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News