Black Lives Matter thread

If anyone deserves to be thrown under the bus, it isn't the officers just doing their jobs. As long as they followed procedure, you don't blame them for something going wrong.

Blame their bosses, blame whoever thinks no knocks should exist, blame legislators for keeping a war on drugs going.

YouTube video

Originally posted by cdtm
If anyone deserves to be thrown under the bus, it isn't the officers just doing their jobs. As long as they followed procedure, you don't blame them for something going wrong.

Blame their bosses, blame whoever thinks no knocks should exist, blame legislators for keeping a war on drugs going.

They knocked, it wasn't just a smash and grab. Mrs Taylor got shot because her boyfriend fired at the police first.

Originally posted by Surtur
Get ready for some riots, one cop involved in the broenna taylor shooting was just charged with "wanton endangerment".

Defending the police and system that murdered Breonna Taylor, who was 100% innocent, that is a perfect example of the "boot licking" you often accuse others of.

Originally posted by snowdragon
They knocked, it wasn't just a smash and grab. Mrs Taylor got shot because her boyfriend fired at the police first.

Not according to Taylor's boyfriend who was in the apartment. We'd ask Taylor if they knocked, but she was murdered.

Your suggesting she was shot in another room, from police retiring fire to being shot at, and that the police killed her on purpose? I don’t think you actually know the story.

Originally posted by Robtard
Defending the police and system that murdered Breonna Taylor, who was 100% innocent, that is a perfect example of the "boot licking" you often accuse others of.

Wrong, hugely wrong. As a matter of fact support that statement with proof.

She didn't deserve to be killed and I think there is alot not being said, that said the BF shot first.

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Your suggesting she was shot in another room, from police retiring fire to being shot at, and that the police killed her on purpose? I don’t think you actually know the story.

*you're

I am suggesting nothing, I said she was murdered and she was. She was innocent.

Yes. And her drug dealing boyfriend who had a warrant for his arrest should have shot at the police. She was an innocent bystander.

Except the media narrative is this was a racially motivated shooting.

Originally posted by snowdragon
Wrong, hugely wrong. As a matter of fact support that statement with proof.

She didn't deserve to be killed and I think there is alot not being said, that said the BF shot first.

Facts don’t matter to the left

Originally posted by snowdragon
Wrong, hugely wrong. As a matter of fact support that statement with proof.

She didn't deserve to be killed and I think there is alot not being said, that said the BF shot first.

"Boot licking" refers to subservient behavior to the police and/or those in positions of authority, so yeah, Surt's behavior here falls under that.

Her BF did shoot first, absolutely correct. He was just exercising his Second Amendment rights and protecting himself and his girlfriend from then unknown intruders. From his POV, they were being attacked.

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Yes. And her drug dealing boyfriend who had a warrant for his arrest should have shot at the police. She was an innocent bystander.

Except the media narrative is this was a racially motivated shooting.

They were after her ex-boyfriend, not her current boyfriend who was in the house. You really need to stop listening to QAnon, you fool.

Originally posted by Robtard
"Boot licking" refers to subservient behavior to the police and/or those in positions of authority, so yeah, Surt's behavior here falls under that.

Her BF did shoot first, absolutely correct. He was just exercising his Second Amendment rights and protecting himself and his girlfriend from then unknown intruders. From his POV, they were being attacked.

You sound like you like fiction movies

Drug Dealer home gets raided, Drug dealers fire back, because they have rights😂

Originally posted by Robtard
They were after her ex-boyfriend, not her current boyfriend who was in the house. You really need to stop listening to QAnon, you fool.

I don’t even know what Qnon is

Originally posted by Robtard
They were after her ex-boyfriend, not her current boyfriend who was in the house. You really need to stop listening to QAnon, you fool.

You forgot to mention she was in the arrest warrant

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
You sound like you like fiction movies

Drug Dealer home gets raided, Drug dealers fire back, because they have rights😂

Repeat: The person on the warrant was her ex-boyfriend, not her current boyfriend in the house.

You and your Far-Right news, get your head out of your smelly ass.

Originally posted by Robtard
"Boot licking" refers to subservient behavior to the police and/or those in positions of authority, so yeah, Surt's behavior here falls under that.

Her BF did shoot first, absolutely correct. He was just exercising his Second Amendment rights and protecting himself and his girlfriend from then unknown intruders. From his POV, they were being attacked.

https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/63943132/breonna-taylor-summary-redacted1

That discusses entire conversations admitting Taylor had rented a car with a dead body in it, she handled cash and drugs from her previous bf.

If there is bodycam evidence of the police I def want it because most of this issue isn't about taylor being innocent it's about the police at the scene.

Taylor wasn't innocent.

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
You forgot to mention she was in the arrest warrant

They were not after her. So you need to post proof of this claim. I mean real proof, not QAnon rants off reddit.

Originally posted by snowdragon
https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/63943132/breonna-taylor-summary-redacted1

That discusses entire conversations admitting Taylor had rented a car with a dead body in it, she handled cash and drugs from her previous bf.

If there is bodycam evidence of the police I def want it because most of this issue isn't about taylor being innocent it's about the police at the scene.

Taylor wasn't innocent.

Enter the "There were no angels!" deflection. Par for the course.

Yes, you sure proved your case, a crime she might have committed in 2016 is the reason she was shot now, over a suspected crime of her ex she was not being arrested over.

Listen, if you stole a candy bar back in 2016, that doesn't mean you're automatically guilty of stealing a car in 2019.

Originally posted by Robtard
Enter the "There were no angels!" deflection. Par for the course.

Yes, you sure proved your case, a crime she might have committed in 2016 is the reason she was shot now, over a suspected crime of her ex she was not being arrested over.

Listen, if you stole a candy bar back in 2016, that doesn't mean you're automatically guilty of stealing a car in 2019.

DEERRRRRRR ok sparky, go read the report and the dates of the calls, from 1/20 posting forward.

From April 2016 to Present