Re: Angry crowd protests NYPD shooting
Originally posted by PVS
what i find the most disturbing has nothing to do with the man killed. here is what gets me: 50+ shots fired.
I agree 100%. What's the point in unloading your clip, reloading and going back to it....when no one is fighting back?
Another thing I don't understand is why the "stripper's" version is dismissed simply because she's a stripper.
Re: Angry crowd protests NYPD shooting
Originally posted by PVS
what i find the most disturbing has nothing to do with the man killed. here is what gets me: 50+ shots fired. one officer unloads 2 full clips at a whopping 31 shots...surrounding homes hit with slugs...and they hit him with TWO FRIKIN BULLETS? whatever the outcome after the case is settled...irrelevant imho.
the real issue: nypd officers couldnt hit the broad side of a barn. who taught those idiots how to shoot?
Re: Re: Angry crowd protests NYPD shooting
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I agree 100%. What's the point in unloading your clip, reloading and going back to it....when no one is fighting back?Another thing I don't understand is why the "stripper's" version is dismissed simply because she's a stripper.
She worked at a strip club. No need to put "stripper" in quotation marks. And her version is not being dismissed "because she's a stripper"; it's being dismissed because it's ludacrous. "Yeh, yeh, he was just minding his own business when a vanload of cops roared up, rammmed his vehical, and then gunned him down without provication."
By contrast, the cops' version makes complete sense. "He came out of the club and rammed one of us, then started ramming our car. In retrospect, he was probably drunk or high [lots of illegal drugs in that club, I understand; probably why they were there], but at the time, we thought we were under attack, and so we defended ourselves."
So, I believe the cops. Because their statement, you know, makes perfect sense, and doesn't require us to believe that five undercover officers simultaniously decided to gun someone down without provocation.
Re: Re: Angry crowd protests NYPD shooting
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
yet another example of a suspect not cooperating. he had to have done something to warrant 50 shots.
whats funny is how you'll probably go on to say that im irrationally and idiotically bias against the officers, yet keep in mind i pass no judgement since we really have no idea what went down. i just think their firearm skills are for shit, and i am factually correct, unless when they are compared to blind retards.
but then you come in and declare that the cops were justified, knowing jackshit about what happened. congrats 👆
Originally posted by Ushgarak
I dunno why there is all this talk about marksmanship. In an unplanned fight it is a miracle that ANY bullets hit. The numbers given are not remarkable- lower than 'normal', perhaps, but far from extraordinary.
Originally posted by Gregory
In that, if we believe the police officers, they were not expecting to get into a firefight. Unplanned. And of course, the targets were in a moving vehicle, weren't they? Not an ideal situation for marksmanship.
First of all, I'm more shocked that only 20 of the 50 shots hit the van. Forget how many actually hit their human targets, that number should be alot higher. As police officers they have the responsibility to reduce the possibility of civilian casualties, not increase it. 30 stray shots flying into the street and houses and windows is just ridiculous.
On top of that, they are trained officers. I guarantee it's not the first time any of them fired a gun before.
Re: Re: Angry crowd protests NYPD shooting
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Another thing I don't understand is why the "stripper's" version is dismissed simply because she's a stripper.
*Note to any family member or friend who is a stripper*
Strippers, higher class then prostitutes, but lower then belly dancers, aren't taken too seriously because they make a living off of male arousal and sensuality, and they aren't always known to be honest or reliable, maybe good looking and a nice body, but some should retire much sooner then others.
If a stripper dies, gets beat on, harassed, etc., she is going to have a "hard" time getting professional men to take her seriously, esp. the courts. Nothing like having a stripper as an alibi, better just keep receipts.
Originally posted by Gregory
In that, if we believe the police officers, they were not expecting to get into a firefight. Unplanned. And of course, the targets were in a moving vehical, weren't they? Not an ideal situation for marksmenship.
But shouldn't they being police officers always expect to get into firefight or at the very least a physical altercation? Now don't get me wrong (as I'm sure someone will), just because you expect or are prepared to counter something doesn't mean you should act on it directly or immediately. For example, I'm a teacher. I have some rude kids in some of my classes. Being a teacher I expect this. But, that does not mean that I have to act on the contingencies I've but in place to deal with negative behavior and introvertism. Maybe I took the meaning of unplanned in this situation wrong. I mean it's not like police officers and criminals orchestrate shootouts (or do they?). Maybe there's a shootout learning annex where Hollywood directors instruct officers and criminals in 'synchronized firing'. But my point is that officers need always be prepared to deal with unexpected criminal activity, and this does not mean that they need to respond with lethal force or act on their contingency training/plans (if any) until they determine whether or not the perp is a viable armed threat, which I assume is difficult to do. I'm just a man and this is just my very humble opinion.
Re: Re: Re: Angry crowd protests NYPD shooting
Originally posted by PVS
whats funny is how you'll probably go on to say that im irrationally and idiotically bias against the officers, yet keep in mind i pass no judgement since we really have no idea what went down. i just think their firearm skills are for shit, and i am factually correct, unless when they are compared to blind retards.but then you come in and declare that the cops were justified, knowing jackshit about what happened. congrats 👆
Re: Re: Re: Re: Angry crowd protests NYPD shooting
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
cops just dont unload 50 shots lest they feel their lives are in danger.
Oh, of course. Cops NEVER shoot people prematurely. They were completely justified in shooting Amadu Diallo 41 times too, even though he was pulling out a WALLET.
Or shooting a guy on his porch 81 times for throwing a FLIP FLOP.
Or that guy who got shot and killed for holding a CELL PHONE.
You put way too much faith in cops.
Re: Re: Re: Angry crowd protests NYPD shooting
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
were you there? did you see what happened? imthink not. so before you try and tell me not to justify the cops, i tell you not to immediately defend the "victim."
yeah, nice try at yet more lying and strawman bashing which has become so popular at kmc. now go back and quote where i said that the guy was a victim, or that the cops were not justified. i said clearly....CLEARLY that i dont know exactly what went down so i reserve any judgement. do you even read the posts you quote, or are you just having an imaginary argument with my screenname?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
you make a post making me out to be the bad guy, then you pull the same behavior that you claim i did. even nicer, wingnut. _talk_to_the_hand_
where the hell are you getting this from? quote it or shut your lying mouth. this is pathetic behavior....lying like that.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
cops just dont unload 50 shots lest they feel their lives are in danger. i dont know all the facts, i admit that.idiot
funny, you just declared something as fact and then you go on to say you dont know. wow dude, people usually commit a hypocrisy like that a few pages apart, you managed to do it in 2 consecutive sentences 😖
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
do you? please grace us with your infinite wisdom, o wise one. idiot
again, my quote which you posted (which you cant read apparently):
Originally posted by PVS
...yet keep in mind i pass no judgement since we really have no idea what went down.
who do you intend to fool by putting words in my mouth? why dont you try either debating properly or just remain silent, because right now you're just disrupting the topic with lies...
...hey you know what? just ignore that you're blatantly in the wrong, quote this entire post, read none of it, and parrot the same lie. yeah, that should work just fine
Originally posted by Mr. Sandman
Oh, of course. Cops NEVER shoot people prematurely. They were completely justified in shooting Amadu Diallo 41 times too, even though he was pulling out a WALLET.Or shooting a guy on his porch 81 times for throwing a FLIP FLOP.
Or that guy who got shot and killed for holding a CELL PHONE.
You put way too much faith in cops.
Originally posted by Mr. Sandman
On top of that, they are trained officers. I guarantee it's not the first time any of them fired a gun before.
No, they were trained at shooting ranges and such, against paper targets. So you are right. But they also were never in any situation where they have fired a weapon before, at least according to their records.
So although they may have had plenty of weapons training, this was the first actual "live fire" use of their weapons.
I'm not saying that what they did was top-notch, but I'm cutting them some slack for the sub-par shooting since it's one thing to practice and another to play.
Originally posted by Mr. Sandman
Oh, of course. Cops NEVER shoot people prematurely. They were completely justified in shooting Amadu Diallo 41 times too, even though he was pulling out a WALLET.Or shooting a guy on his porch 81 times for throwing a FLIP FLOP.
Or that guy who got shot and killed for holding a CELL PHONE.
You put way too much faith in cops.
And you don't put enough.
I saw the video of the guy with flip-flop. Maybe he should have just laid his ass on the ground, got cuffed, questioned, and either released or jailed.
The guy got shot because he didn't do what he was told, and then flashed something at the cops.
Not a weapon, not with the intention of hurting the cops, but the officers can't really know that, can they? All they know is he ain't obeying instructions. Then he flashes something in his hand. BOOM. Dead.
In the case of Amadu Diallo, it's the same, but more unfortunate. He was told to lay down on the floor, and instead of obeying reached for his wallet to show some ID.
Had he done what he was told, he wouldn't have gotten shot.
I tend to agree with you on that one, the officers needed to be more cautious, but when going to arrest a suspect who may be armed, they must be edgy.
When the said suspect doesn't respond to directions and moves to grab something (shoe, phone, whatever) they are well within their rights to think that he is going for a weapon.
Apparently the jury (which consisted of mostly, if not all African-Americans) agreed as they didn't charge those cops with anything.
I'm not sure of the cell phone incident to which you refer, because I have seen one video like that on Wildest Police Videos or something, but it might not be the one that you're refering to.
Same deal in the video that I saw, in that one, the guy wouldn't go down and get cuffed, tried to run, and turned around and pointed a black cell phone at the officers. At night time.
Surprise, he got shot! (Dee-duh-Dee!)
This is stupid. I'm not gonna weigh in on the NYPD case at hand until all facts are out, but as a rule you shouldn't be giving the cops shit for shooting people who don't comply with directions and then flash something in their hands.
It's not as though the cops are just pulling people over and shooting them, or as though they break into houses and cap people in the head who are watching TV.
These are arrests.
We all know the drill.
License and Registration if you're in a car. If he wants to pull you out and cuff and search you and run your name to check for warrants, then shut the f*ck up and let him (or her as it sometimes is) do it.
If you're walking or at home and are pulled over/arrested, then let them pat you down, run your name, check for gang tattoo's etc... and go on with your day.
Maybe it's just because I have a criminal record and have been arrested a good 5 or 6 times, and been pulled over more than I would care to count, often just walking down the street but I know these simple rules.
If I don't comply with the questioning, then I can be cuffed and have my record searched.
If I resist physically, then I'll be restrained.
If I resist restrainment with force or with a weapon, if I'm endandering the lives of civilians or officers, or.....ignore directions and flash an object at them.....
I have myself to blame for getting shot.
Originally posted by heru
Sounds like the KKK traded in there sheets, for a uniform and a badge.
F*ck off.