- 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: Cleveland Riots - "bystanders" being attacked
Posted on 5/24/15 at 12:20 pm to tigerbutt
Posted on 5/24/15 at 12:20 pm to tigerbutt
quote:
Soooooooooo, cops don't shoot until the thugs politely exit the car that was speeding over 120 mph and you have confirmation from any witness that can verify the car backfired and not a gunshot. Still could have been a gunshot and they disposed of the gun during pursuit. Why didn't they SIMPLY pull over? If they are that f'n stupid then the world is better off without them.
At exactly whay speed does it become ok to just shoot the speeder? I must have missed this law
This cop should be in jail, this does not however justify riots.
Cops have been glorified for far to long and some of their behavior is begining to show it.
0
Posted on 5/24/15 at 12:27 pm to logjamming
quote:
It turned out that neither Russell, 43, nor Williams, 30, were armed, but Russell led numerous police officers on a 22-mile chase -- sometimes at speeds above 100 mph -- before ramming a police car in a middle school parking lot in East Cleveland, police said.
Ummm, rammed the cop car after 100+ mph chase? I would have shot them too.
Posted on 5/24/15 at 12:27 pm to novabill
quote:
If the cop was on the hood shooting wasn't the vehicle stopped already?
Does the fact that the vehicle was stopped mean that it was unable to be put back in motion? Or that the officers knew definitively that the suspects weren't armed or wouldn't try and ram them?
The suspects were in the act of committing a felony, had plenty of time to stop. They didn't. These aren't stupid teenagers that were out joy riding. These were grown men who gave the police a very strong indication that they were not going to surrender and would flee at all costs at the expense of the safety of everyone else.
Posted on 5/24/15 at 12:32 pm to logjamming
quote:
Does the fact that the vehicle was stopped mean that it was unable to be put back in motion? Or that the officers knew definitively that the suspects weren't armed or wouldn't try and ram them?
The suspects were in the act of committing a felony, had plenty of time to stop. They didn't. These aren't stupid teenagers that were out joy riding. These were grown men who gave the police a very strong indication that they were not going to surrender and would flee at all costs at the expense of the safety of everyone else.
While every single thing you posted is true, not one single bit of it justifies jumping on the hood of a car and killing it's unarmed occupants.
There is a penalty for excessive speed, there is a penalty for ramming a cop car- neither one of which is a death sentence.
Posted on 5/24/15 at 12:37 pm to cave canem
quote:
killing it's unarmed occupants.
So the officers were supposed to know they were unarmed? Had they stopped and surrendered at some point during the 22 mile high speed chase, they would have been afforded their due process rights. They chose to escalate the situation, forcing the police to assume that the situation would not end peaceably.
The Ferguson protester who shot into a crowd will not be subject to the death penalty, because the crime does not call for that punishment. But does that mean that if an officer had confronted him during the crime, he would not be justified at returning fire and killing the suspect? Absolutely not. But just because a crime doesn't call for the death penalty, doesn't mean that police aren't allowed to use deadly force.
This post was edited on 5/24/15 at 12:38 pm
Posted on 5/24/15 at 12:41 pm to tigerbutt
quote:
Still could have been a gunshot and they disposed of the gun during pursuit.
No chance. I am sure the very first thing the coroner did was a GSR test.
Posted on 5/24/15 at 12:43 pm to jbgleason
Oh frick me what's this about?
Posted on 5/24/15 at 12:43 pm to tigerbutt
quote:
I've never broken a law
Ya right! It is impossible to live in America and be able to say that. You may not know you have broken any laws but you 100% have.
Posted on 5/24/15 at 12:46 pm to logjamming
quote:
But does that mean that if an officer had confronted him during the crime, he would not be justified at returning fire and killing the suspect?
Posted on 5/24/15 at 12:47 pm to logjamming
quote:
So the officers were supposed to know they were unarmed?
I hope you are kidding here, you can't shoot people who just because you do not know if they are armed. The presence or lack of a weapon is all the difference in the world.
quote:
The Ferguson protester who shot into a crowd will not be subject to the death penalty, because the crime does not call for that punishment. But does that mean that if an officer had confronted him during the crime, he would not be justified at returning fire and killing the suspect? Absolutely not. But just because a crime doesn't call for the death penalty, doesn't mean that police aren't allowed to use deadly force.
Let me know when you finish building this giant ignorant straw man that has zero to do with the topic at hand.
Posted on 5/24/15 at 12:50 pm to novabill
quote:
I assume you never bream the law?
Please, for future reference, don't use this argument or response. It marginalizes a lot of your otherwise valid points. Everyone has sped at some point, had a few too many to drink and gotten behind the wheel, or done (or still uses) drugs.
However, to equate that to a lot of the situations that result in these shootings is asinine. I say "a lot" because there are incidents (more that many on here would like to admit), where police brutality is a response to a minor infraction. But a 100 mile an hour chase shouldn't be equated to the type of "breaking the law" that you're talking about.
Posted on 5/24/15 at 12:52 pm to novabill
I'm still not sure what you're trying to prove by quoting comments that other people make.
The original topic of this thread is looters are attacking innocent bystanders. You have been deflecting for 5 pages now and have yet to address the topic at hand without "but, but, but, it's the cops fault".
Do you not understand that the people rioting likely didn't even know the deceased, and even if they did, attacking innocent bystanders is not acceptable behavior?
The original topic of this thread is looters are attacking innocent bystanders. You have been deflecting for 5 pages now and have yet to address the topic at hand without "but, but, but, it's the cops fault".
Do you not understand that the people rioting likely didn't even know the deceased, and even if they did, attacking innocent bystanders is not acceptable behavior?
Posted on 5/24/15 at 12:55 pm to logjamming
quote:
These aren't stupid teenagers that were out joy riding. These were grown men who gave the police a very strong indication that they were not going to surrender and would flee at all costs at the expense of the safety of everyone else.
You know how I know that you did not read a single article about this case?
Posted on 5/24/15 at 12:56 pm to Hangit
Im still waiting for someone to answer the question of why they're attacking innocent bystanders?
Posted on 5/24/15 at 1:00 pm to FightinTiga
quote:
Im still waiting for someone to answer the question of why they're attacking innocent bystanders?
Me too.
Posted on 5/24/15 at 1:00 pm to FightinTiga
quote:
Im still waiting for someone to answer the question of why they're attacking innocent bystanders?
Because they are shitheaded thugs and know they will get away with it?
Posted on 5/24/15 at 1:02 pm to cave canem
Is that the only reason?
Posted on 5/24/15 at 1:02 pm to cave canem
quote:
Let me know when you finish building this giant ignorant straw man that has zero to do with the topic at hand.
My point was that just because the death penalty isn't a punishment for a crime, does not mean that an officer is barred from using deadly force to stop the crime itself.
Posted on 5/24/15 at 1:07 pm to logjamming
quote:
My point was that just because the death penalty isn't a punishment for a crime, does not mean that an officer is barred from using deadly force to stop the crime itself.
If you lack the sophistication to be able to differentiate between shooting someone for speeding and wrecking into a police car from standing in front of an officer and firing into a crowd there is no reason to continue this any further.
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News