- 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: Marksville City Marshals......Breaking two officers charged with murder
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:47 pm to SabiDojo
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:47 pm to SabiDojo
quote:
It's clear they fired into the vehicle without ascertaining whether innocent passengers were inside, otherwise they wouldn't have done it.
So, I'd say firing into a vehicle not knowing what you're shooting at is the equivalent to "wildly firing".
So we ignore the threat to them? They aren't allowed to react to an immediate threat because there might be someone else in the vehicle? What I'm getting out of that is you'd rather have officers die on the off chance there happens to be a child in any pursuit.
6
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:47 pm to Darth_Vader
I still want to know what spurred the pursuit, hope it was worth blowing a 6 year old autistic child's head off
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:48 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Well there is only one of two possibilities of what happened:
1. They fired wildly into the car and accidentally shot and killed a 6 yr old child
2. They saw the 6 year old child in the car and shot them anyway.
These aren't the only possibilities. They are the "only" possibilities for people that have made up their minds without knowing all the facts.
quote:
But those are the only two possible things that happened.
Maybe if you say this enough times, it will become true.
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:48 pm to Strannix
Your hyperbole exacerbates your bias
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:48 pm to bayourougebengal
quote:
You really think there's that much time to think? It doesn't happen in slow motion. This isn't a movie.
Properly trained officers plan for such contingencies.
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:49 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Instead they pulled their pistols and just started hammering away recklessly and with total disregard of who they could hit. Their actions were unprofessional, reckless, and showed a complete disregard for safety. They must be held accountable for that child's death.
Where you there? How in the Hell do you know this? You do know that bullets sometimes pass through people, don't you? If they were shooting towards the driver's door it is totally possible that bullets intended for the driver hit the passenger. Get the frick out of here with your accusations until a thorough investigation has been completed.
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:49 pm to Strannix
Mention that a 6 year old was gunned down, blown away, etc a few more times. Your point should be made then.
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:49 pm to bayourougebengal
quote:
You are a fricking complete idiot. You should really go out and attack a cop or something.
That's what I'm saying. fricking cop blocker over here trying to beat his chest and say the child was killed in cold blood.
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:49 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
What I'm getting out of that is you'd rather have officers die on the off chance there happens to be a child in any pursuit
So they get OUT of their vehicle and start dumping rounds into an unknown target for their safety? These dumbasses are lucky they didn't shoot each other. I don't think it was cold blooded, just a terrible decision that any civilian would catch a murder charge on.
This post was edited on 11/4/15 at 2:51 pm
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:50 pm to Strannix
quote:
blowing a 6 year old autistic child's head off
You keep saying this like it was an intentional killing. IT WAS NOT.
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:50 pm to FlagLake
quote:
until a thorough investigation has been completed.
Why do you think the general public has lost faith in law enforcement and thinks our CJ system is a joke?
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:50 pm to Strannix
quote:
So they get OUT of their vehicle and start dumping rounds into an unknown target for their safety?
The target was known. They were subduing the [person ramming them with a vehicle. Going off your logic, they would also have to open the trunk to make sure no kids were in there before they could protect themselves.
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:51 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
So we ignore the threat to them? They aren't allowed to react to an immediate threat because there might be someone else in the vehicle? What I'm getting out of that is you'd rather have officers die on the off chance there happens to be a child in any pursuit.
If there is a threat, you aim your pistol at that person. You don't just go spraying the general area where they're at. This is not Call of Duty where you can just can "spray and pray".
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:51 pm to bayourougebengal
And all of a sudden the child is autistic. Where are you getting this? First I've heard of it. But maybe that's because I'm not sitting on my arse 24/7 and actually going to work.
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:51 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Why do you think the general public has lost faith in law enforcement and thinks our CJ system is a joke?
Because of dumbasses like OP that try to make situations like this seem terrible without a shred of evidence.
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:52 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
If there is a threat, you aim your pistol at that person. You don't just go spraying the general area where they're at. This is not Call of Duty where you can just can "spray and pray".
Can I ram you with my car at night during a pursuit and see if you can hit inside the 10 ring?
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:52 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
quote:
Well there is only one of two possibilities of what happened:
1. They fired wildly into the car and accidentally shot and killed a 6 yr old child
2. They saw the 6 year old child in the car and shot them anyway.
These aren't the only possibilities. They are the "only" possibilities for people that have made up their minds without knowing all the facts.
quote:
But those are the only two possible things that happened.
Maybe if you say this enough times, it will become true.
What other possibilities are there?
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:53 pm to bayourougebengal
The police chose to spray a vehicle with rounds, the net outcome of this decision is that a child died, thats a bad outcome.
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:53 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
What other possibilities are there?
Too many to even mention, but you've made up your mind. No point in trying to change it.
Posted on 11/4/15 at 2:54 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
So we ignore the threat to them? They aren't allowed to react to an immediate threat because there might be someone else in the vehicle? What I'm getting out of that is you'd rather have officers die on the off chance there happens to be a child in any pursuit.
I don't want to ignore the threat. I want us to in general, not always take cops' word for it that their lives were in danger.
And yes that's what it seems like prosecutors do.
And it seems like the dominant mode of thinking within law enforcement these days is that the most important thing is officer safety.
Page 7 of 54
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News