When the Police shoot first and question later, it is criminal intent I would
imagine, although, the evidence should be available immediately upon using
one's weapon.Usually and quite commonly, the red flag language of the
stereotypical Cover up is, the guy was beligerent, so lets shoot him, not a
good cause though, still.or he was combative, or he was barricaded
himself in by hiding from dangerous situations or confronting shoot first
trigger happy types.
Ever Notice when the public safety servants decide that de escalating the
situation doesnt work they shoot first to pre emptive ensure they get the drop
on someone even if there is no gun found. glory killings with full bragging
rights. anyone and everyone is at risk with these loose cannons playing warfare
on civilians after they come back with PTSD and a few other issues they cannot
This is just further proof that climate change is real! err global cooling err
global warming err man made disaster err something....just give more money to
"green" feel good companies that make liberals richer....
"Very little information was released Monday night, including whether or not
the man was confirmed to be armed and what led to the shooting. Police said the
man was acting belligerently."Any time one acts belligerently
with the police is not smart, but these days expecially. If this is true,
whether the police acted totally properly or not, this appears to be a case of
the Darwin principal in action with the outcome of increase our collective
@Ryan9 and Elmo Bagggins- with this minute amount of information how could
anyone reach a conclusion of any kind. Maybe wait until the facts come out
before assigning any blame?
"Witnesses at the scene gave varying accounts of the shooting." But hey,
DN, let's give the one that will generate the most controversy and then
treat it like it's the only one.
Was a gun found on the victim. I can only think of what I'd do if 3 cops
have guns pointed at me. My hands would be up in the air, I don't think I
would brake the cardinal rule, don't get them angry.
To follow a piece in the OpEd section, what the convenience store was lacking
was clerks with conceal carry permits and more guns.
Too many unanswered questions in this account of something that happened 24
hours ago: Who was the victim? Why the official silence? Where is the
surveillance video footage of the incident? Where are the witnesses to this
so-called "confrontation?" Who made those "reports?" Why no
tasers? Why deadly force on someone whom the officers NEVER claimed actually HAD
a gun? The two "survivors" were questioned by police. What did they say?
Where's the usual laundry list of "priors," listing the arrest
record of the victim to somehow justify police actions? The police had a yellow
pop-up tent Monday night. Why was the victim lying face-up, uncovered and
visible to this passerby at 11:15 pm? If this man is homeless, lying on the side
of the road, who is his voice?
Don't immediately assume it was 'Cowboy Cops.' Put yourself in
the cop's position. A guy is acting belligerent and waving a gun around,
threatening you. Ok, now what do you do?I'm not saying there is
no such thing as police brutality and/or wrongful police shootings. But many
people they face are not "innocents." Many mean harm and the police are
given the job of stopping them. A policeman has chosen a job where
he earns his living by putting his life on the line every day. Think about it;
do you have to do that? Also try to imagine if they weren't there doing
what they do. We'd live in a society of tribes, ruled by violent warlords.
If you'd like to see how that is, visit Ethiopia or Somalia.
Huh, well maybe it's not a good idea to confront the police with a gun,
just a thought.
Here we go again...it's time to reign in these shoot first cowboy cops!
I hope DN is going to follow up on this event. It sounds like there is a lot of
potential for mistaken identity and the death of an innocent.