- 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: Alton Sterling shooting - discussion thread
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:16 am to cas4t
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:16 am to cas4t
quote:
I think the proof is that he had a gun and was resisting arrest. I personally do not believe a cop is going to yell "he's going for a gun!!" just so he can blast some guy, right in front of all of those people. It makes no sense, especially in today's times. I think it's reasonable to assume the cops thought they were in danger considering they hadn't attempted to use deadly force earlier, even though it was known he had a weapon.
Cops have used voice recordings during confrontations to substantiate their claims many times before. For instance the case in NJ where the guy was assaulted at a traffic stop and was cleared after a responding officer's dash cam showed the cops were the aggressors.
I will say that if they recovered a gun on the suspect I would believe the word of the officer over those defending the actions of a convicted felon.
1) He shouldn't have had a gun. PERIOD.
2) He should have complied with the verbal commands from the officers.
3) He should not have resisted while on the ground.
All of this (except #1) is verifiable by the witness video. He didn't follow the orders of the police. If he had a gun on his person, the shooting is justified.
0
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:17 am to cas4t
quote:i'm not seeing any/ Maybe i glossed over them somehow.
There are definitely some passive racist comments ITT but for the most part people are discussing the facts.
All i'm seeing is people saying he was a violent offender with an illegal firearm and the police were called in because he was pointing it at someone in front of the store.
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:17 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
quote:
COMPLIED ... with the lawful order.
THE END!!!!
A lot of people do not trust the police or government enough to be compliant. This isn't limited to the hood.
Advocating anarchy is not the solution...we have courts and are a nation of laws....irregardless of its imperfections.
Working outside the system....good luck with that. Comply and fight for your rights in court.
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:17 am to RogerTheShrubber
Yea if anything I think it'd be celebrated if someone shot a cop who was attempting to do something illegal or abusing his power.
This post was edited on 7/6/16 at 11:18 am
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:18 am to cas4t
quote:
f Alton Sterling shooting by cas4t
Whether he was going for the gun or not is irrelevant. If they even thought for a second he was, then it's a justified shooting IMO. The guy was resisting arrest while also carrying. It's reasonable for the police to be a little on edge considering they were called in for him threatening someone with a gun, and resisting arrest.
This
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:18 am to crkelly91
Didn't know about this until about half hour ago and just saw the video.
Holy. shite.
If these cops get a Not Guilty it will be worse than Rodney King imo.
Holy. shite.
If these cops get a Not Guilty it will be worse than Rodney King imo.
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:18 am to dagrippa
quote:
Howie was involved in another shooting of a sex offender apparently.
That one was 100% justified.
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:19 am to meauxjeaux2
Early on there were the standard "dindu nuffin" type responses. Pretty transparent. But overall I think people are just trying to debate what we have to work with.
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:19 am to Titus Pullo
quote:
If these cops get a Not Guilty it will be worse than Rodney King imo.
lol no
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:19 am to Titus Pullo
Nah, Rodney King wasn't threatening bystanders with a gun.
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:19 am to cas4t
quote:
Early on there were the standard "dindu nuffin" type responses.
And look at what the media is portraying.
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:20 am to RogerTheShrubber
So are the lines clearly drawn in this thread already?
Side 1 is a bunch of boot licking redneck gun loving racists mindless sheep
Side 2 is a bunch of ignorant cop hating liberal blinded criminal apologists
Side 1 is a bunch of boot licking redneck gun loving racists mindless sheep
Side 2 is a bunch of ignorant cop hating liberal blinded criminal apologists
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:20 am to Jester
Turning the investigation over to the FBI and US Attorney takes the wind out of the sails of the this investigation will be crooked. Most won't notice.
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:20 am to Titus Pullo
quote:
If these cops get a Not Guilty it will be worse than Rodney King imo.
These riots are gonna be lame as frick.
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:21 am to Titus Pullo
quote:
If these cops get a Not Guilty it will be worse than Rodney King imo.
These cops were 100% justified.
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:21 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
And look at what the media is portraying.
Yep, "gentle giant" is pretty much the first step towards "dindu nuffin." Both are pretty much bullshite statements.
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:21 am to LNCHBOX
I don't watch that shite. I tried for a few minutes to watch a press conference but noped out. I usually just find a forum with practical people discussing it.
Reddit, surprisingly, has even been civil and not crucified the cops. I was pretty shocked.
Reddit, surprisingly, has even been civil and not crucified the cops. I was pretty shocked.
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:22 am to Bleeding purple
Why can't side 2 also be racists?
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:22 am to cas4t
quote:
Whether he was going for the gun or not is irrelevant.
Whether or not he was actually going for the gun IS irrelevant to whether or not it was a justified shooting. As you said, it matters what they THOUGHT was happening, not what actually happened or would have happened. I'm perfectly content leaving it at that - what they thought was transpiring. Unfortunately many on this board want to take it all the way to some unequivocal conclusion that he was in fact reaching for his gun.
I don't think the cop lied, but I think it is entirely plausible between his adrenaline and the sight of a gun that he could have "embellished" Sterling's actions. Do I understand how that can happen? Yes, I do. Do I think it is criminal? No, I don't. Do I think it is worth discussing? Yes, I do
ETA: I misread your first line and thought you were suggesting it WAS relevant. Sorry.
This post was edited on 7/6/16 at 11:26 am
Posted on 7/6/16 at 11:24 am to slackster
quote:
Why does it have to be such extremes? Is it not plausible that officers misread his intent? Once again, they could have every right to fear for their life, but it doesn't necessarily mean that Sterling was actually threatening their life. Mistakes happen, particularly in heated moments such as this.
That's my thought here.
Sterling may not have intended to reach for his gun
However the appearance to the officer is that he was. He was continuing to wrestle with the officer and in the process his hand was close to his pocket, where the firearm was. So it appeared he was in fact reaching thus the officer feared for his life.
Really shitty situation to put an officer in.
Page 57 of 168
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News