Rodin wrote: » I have a major issue with police brutality. But private gun ownership has a huge role to play in it. But I don't believe it is race-driven as we're being told. Just because two people of differing colour are involved in an incident, it doesn't mean it's about race.
lawrencesummers wrote: » And what does private gun ownership have to do with this situation?
lawrencesummers wrote: » Nope, that’s not it. With 13% of the population black people killed by police makes up 26% of the deaths.
ExMachina1000 wrote: » My favourite was "Sure just arrest him the next day"
Rodin wrote: » Scandalous. I notice he's not black. Will we learn his name? Will his face be put on walls? A major issue in the US is the prevalence of guns in the general population. Gardaí can reasonably presume that someone stopped at a checkpoint does not have a gun nearby. Police in the US have to assume everyone is armed.
Danzy wrote: » America is awash with guns, legal and otherwise, you have to presume everyone is armed.
lawrencesummers wrote: » It’s interesting that your willing to acknowledge that Black people get killed in situations with police that white people dont, but you think BLM is ridiculous. That’s a massive contradiction.
jam_mac_jam wrote: » Maybe white victims should have their names on walls too? Maybe police brutality against all people is wrong and should be fought. Don't blame black people just because white people accept this treatment.
zpehtsfd wrote: » If you had his gun who did you expect was going to kill you? Was he going to take it back off you and then shoot?
NotMOL wrote: » Just leaving this here
lawrencesummers wrote: » Those officers knew he wasn’t armed, they had spoken to him for long enough to establish that, and if they hadn’t established that he wasn’t armed they should have. All of this doesn’t change the fact that the police officer wasn’t in imminent danger when he shot the suspect.
froog wrote: » his criminal record and how good a person he was or wasn't is completely irrelevant. but you know that.
Danzy wrote: » They spoke to him for a half hour, easily long enough to perform an ocular patdown.
the purple tin wrote: » The US police aren't trained like that. If they fire their gun at someone it is shoot to kill, aim for the centre of the chest. All that shooting people in the leg and shoulder stuff is just TV fiction.
john123470 wrote: » https://youtu.be/tlJOgwG2EPc In clip above, a black man tells it as it is. On memorial weekend for Floyd .. - in Chicago, 60 (black) people shot by black people. 9-12 died. One black man in the clip says "they shoulda let Floyd live so we could kill him ! " He asks why we are not talking about the real problem 'black on black' crime Good to have some balance in all this madness. To all the keyboard warriors here who say ' the cop in Atlanta coulda / shoulda done this / that - I guess you would have managed that situation perfectly, right ? This man was parked in a drive thru .. he drove there pissed out of his gourd .. when served his grub, one will assume he drives away. What if he ran over you .. would that be ok ? Why are all the people protesting about police brutality not talking about black on black crime which has an exponentially higher death toll .. where are the protestors when a black man shoots a white man or a white police officer ?? Is that ok ? This is not just about police brutality .. This is a whole other thing
Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: » Wrong! They are trained to shoot centre mass (which is the torso), but the desired outcome is not death. They are trying to incapacitate the person and neutralise the threat. Some officers have been known to deliberately target a person's leg or shoulder rather than more lethal areas... it's not just in movies or TV shows. 3 shots for a guy running away in possession of a non-lethal weapon, is excessive force by a nervous and trigger happy cop. In most other countries, this man would still be alive today... but in the good old USofA... a drunk man who made a mistake is dead. And a child grows up without their dad. Crazy country!
AbusesToilets wrote: » Written as someone who has never fired a gun, let alone in a stressful situation at someone trying to do you harm. Absolute fantasist.
weldoninhio wrote: » It’s not irrelevant if it effected his behaviour. He knew he’d go back inside if booked for DUI while on parole. He took the option to run. You think he would have been sitting at home waiting for the cops the next day??
1800_Ladladlad wrote: » Now you are taking p*ss:eek:
