Sig1Hunter

My original question was directed at ALF's disbelief that Sterling would reach for a gun when he had two cops on top of him. The implication in his/her original statement is that it is much more believable that the cops shot him, while straddling him, without any legal justification. It's easier for some people to believe that two cops (who are equipped with body cameras and are having their every move and statement recorded) would decide to brutually murder an innocent man in full view of their cameras and the public, than a convicted felon who is looking at certain prison time to attempt escape by any means necessary. It betrays common sense. But, if your argument is that the militant black community's position is based on a complete lack of common sense, then we can agree. A position that is based in illegitimacy does not become more legitimate with more fervor, however.

Right, but we are right back to the whole perception versus reality debate. If someone perceives that they are being harassed, and they respond out of this perception without any basis in fact - then we are royally screwed. That's the point that we are at in this country right now. So much is based on how someone "feels", not on the objective truth of this situation. The truth, or the closest that we can get to it, is rooted in our criminal justice system. When people riot, attack innocent people, destroy property, and otherwise act the fool without any basis in fact or truth, they shoot themselves and their "movement" in the foot. And, bolstering your argument of an ongoing systemic persecution of the black community by showing photos from 25, 35, 45 years ago does absolutely nothing.

Can you point to any objective evidence of this "years and years of systemic persecution"? Perceived persecution and harassment, right? Just because I pull you over and you are black doesn't mean that you have been persecuted or harassed. Though, people will still make that accusation. Fact and perception are sometimes completely different things.

Why is it easier for some segments of the public to believe that these two cops set out to murder a man, in broad daylight (figuratively speaking), in front of who knows how many cameras, than it is to believe that a convicted felon would reach for a gun that he wasn't supposed to have? People will do some crazy stuff when they know that they are looking at prison time.

LA, if you have time and a few bucks this entire book is a fantastic read. MacDonald's words will prove to be prophetic. A lot of them, already are.

You are a trip! Yes, warriors are bad. In Dallas, it would have been so much better to see the cops scurrying away from danger like the civilians. Classic example of sheepdogs protecting the flock from the wolf. Only thing is, the sheepdogs weren't immediately aware that the wolf was hunting them, though, instead of the sheep. Bad warriors.

Simple. We go by the rule of law. We don't go taking the law into our own hands. There are systems in place in this country. The are well established systems that are in place to challenge perceived injustices. Agreed. People are free to feel however they want. Feelings are subjective. Facts, on the other hand, are not. I am at work in my driveway. I have a big bullseye on 4 wheels with pretty red and blue lights. If they want us, they know where to find us.

If I'm carrying my gun, I better have my badge with me. My main point was that I'm not hiding or changing who I am out of fear of death. If it happens, it happens. I can guarantee you one thing though - I'm not going quietly. I'm fighting until the last breath leaves my body.

Hell and no. Come and get me.

I'm sad. I'm angry. I'm scared.

Police officers, while protecting the public's right to protest got cussed at, spat on, threatened, and cowardly murdered this morning. Meanwhile, the people who had just moments earlier been protesting against the police are now fleeing for their own lives. The police stood by, trying to keep the protesters safe, watching their friends and colleagues get murdered, wondering if they were next. You know the beauty of a policeman's heart? He will always be there. He will take all kinds of abuse, verbal and physical. But, he isn't going anywhere. He will stay and fight. He runs towards the gunfire, while every human instinct in his body says to run away. RIP heroes.

It is? Dang. Never thought about that. You're right. It is obviously the systemic murder of black males by "the man".

The Washington Post put together a relatively comprehensive breakdown of police shootings in 2015, and so far in 2016. Anyone want to venture a guess which demographic was shot the most by police? And, by a wide margin nonetheless. 468 white males shot by police is 2015 248 black males

If I had a dime for every attorney that wasn't a pompous jerk, I might be able to buy a can of soda. Store brand, though.

I was responding to Ryan's assertion that the cops "are toast". I believe that outcome is highly unlikely, but leave it within the realm of possibility should my presumptions be proved false. Nothing more, nothing less. I then began attempting to back up that opinion when questioned further on it, which may have led to the impression that I am 100% entrenched in it. I'm not. I'm open to new facts that could change it.

Arguing law with lawyers is a favorite past time of mine, actually. Taking bad guys to jail is fun, but I get a bigger kick out of kicking his lawyers ass in court. Figuratively speaking, of course. Highly paid, self important lawyer versus low paid, overtired state employee. Good times, my friend.

From what I can tell, a woman was seated in a vehicle next to a man purported to be her boyfriend. The man appeared to be injured, and a police officer was standing outside of the window with his gun drawn. The woman was apparently so distraught that she live streamed the incident. Other than that, I have no clue. Its entirely possible that the police officer shot the man and was not justified in doing so. It is equally possible that the man was shot after reaching for a gun when he was told not to. Objective, eh? How about we wait for more facts before making concrete conclusions based on incomplete evidence?

Nah, the United States Supreme Court is right. Ever hear of Graham v. Connor? And, yes, your witty discourse has drawn me back in. Congratulations. Hopefully, it is merely temporary because I still want that sleep. If I was mad, I would point out your misuse of your/you're. But, I'm not, so I won't.

Ah, yes. The "u mad bro" retort. You may wanna go back and read my posts. I never said I saw him reaching for a gun. I said you can't see that hand at all. I only said that you can see on the video that there appears to be some type of struggle at the pocket just before shots are fired. You are the one who was making assumptions about his hands being completely controlled, when the videos don't even show his right hand. You stop to think how the cops knew immediately which pocket to go to when they removed the gun? Lucky guess? Does "minding his own business" mean threatening a citizen with his gun? Because that's the reason that the cops were there, apparently. You see that man as minding his own business, I see it as him continuing to victimize the society that he lives in. Here's the facts as I understand them. Please, correct me if I'm wrong. Call is made to police identifying a subject with Sterling's description threatening someone with a gun. Uniformed Police officers respond and identify Sterling. Contact is made with Sterling. At some point, a confrontation occurs. Confrontation becomes a ground fight. Sterling physically resists. During ground fight, police identify a gun in Sterlings possession. Police shoot Sterling. Presumptions that I've made based upon my personal knowledge of law enforcement training, equipment, tactics. A taser was deployed, twice, to no effect on Sterling prior to the confrontation moving to the ground. There appears to be a struggle at Sterling's right front pocket with on officer and Sterling, just before shots are fired. Hence, my opinion. The use of force is very likely justified. That's it. No black vs white race baiting narrative peddled by the media and BLM. And, with that, I'll leave the rest of the thread to the nonsensical BS that you seem to like to post. Enjoy! It was a long night at work, and I'm looking forward to some awesome sleep.

Huh? The leeches on society are the convicted felons who keep walking around with guns in their possession and victimizing society - has nothing to do with the color of their skin. You planning on offering any kind of real rebuttal to the points I've made? Or, are you just going to continue along the "you're a racist because that's the easiest explanation" route? Policemen aren't infallible. The people who make it their life mission to point out how cops are wrong generally hang their hats on the wrong cases, that's all. This is the wrong case. I've provided a reasonable, rational response based on real world experience after viewing the videos. At this point, that opinion is based upon some presumption and some fact. It's possible that it could change with the reveal of more facts. But, then again, I'm a close minded, racist cop lover. Nice tie in to raping priests. Because, the two situations are EXACTLY alike.

Yeah, save the date. Just don't know which date.. Lol

Nice. I'll keep you guys updated. We went to both Bills/Pats games together last year. The comments in Buffalo with me wearing my Bills jersey and her wearing her Gronk jersey were pretty funny. Didn't get quite so many comments in Foxboro cuz it was freezing cold and I was covered in layers. Good times!

if you think that the officers had complete control of Mr. Sterling, we have opposing views. They certainly did not have control over him. It is incredibly difficult to gain complete control over someone who doesn't want to be controlled. Extremely difficult. Regarding backup, I suggest you ask Tampa PD Officers Kocab and Curtis how having a backup officer automatically means that a struggle with an armed felon is not life threatening. Oh, you can't. They are both dead. But, keep on with your rant. Let's continue demonizing those that protect us, while canonizing those that leech the lifeblood out of society. This country is so backasswards.

Sadly, the second video does not provide the magic viewpoint of Sterlings right hand either. It does show the officer at Sterlings feet appear to struggle at his right pocket just before the shots are fired. Presuming that they were struggling over keeping Sterling from gaining control of the gun. At which point are they justified in defending themselves after they just warned Sterling? When he gains control of the weapon? When he gains control of it and points it at them? When he pulls the trigger? Are they supposed to question the store clerk into his opinion of the character of Sterling before defending themselves? If....IF Sterling was attempting to gain control of that firearm, this shooting is more solidly justified than Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin put together.

If that is true, and he moved to get that gun...especially after being expressly told not to reach for the gun (or there would be life ending consequences), it's justified all day long. He had already threatened someone with the gun, and now he is moving to get the gun after they told him not to touch it. I believe it is safe to presume that reaching for the gun showed intent to do violence. He wouldn't reach for it to hand it to the cops, especially after they just said "if you go for the gun, we will shoot you" (paraphrase). So, I don't see how anyone in their right mind could call for a murder prosecution...if he had a gun and moved towards taking possession of it. Sure, it "looks bad" because the cop is on top of him and at close range. It's ugly. It has bad optics. I have news for you though, guns fire up just as well as they do down. But, I will wait for all the facts before rendering an educated opinion on whether it is justified or not.