Juror#8 Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 (edited) 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. Yes, and its progeny. So what? Are you saying that police officers can shoot people, without "apprehension," because they're police officers. Ipsa facto? Because while you're making your flaccid penis argument around what your experience has been rolling around with "perps" as a law enforcement officer, I'm trying to get to "apprehension." Or do you think that actual "apprehension" and aome "reasonable law enforcement officer" standard around that "apprehension" is extenuated? And if so, do you believe that that removal of actual objectively reasonable "apprehension" has jurisprudential backing? I didn't think so. So let's assume that you're not suggesting that police officers can shoot people without a legitimate objectively reasonable apprehension of danger to themselves and others, and get back to "apprehension" conceptually relative to Mr. sterling. If you take the few proffered witness statements, and the current camera angles that the media has released, and the fact that the gun was in his pocket during the entire altercation, and the fact that no witness (that has spoken up thus far) has said that he tried to or did reach for a gun, and the fact that he was on the ground when he was shot, and the fact that there were two police officers, guns drawn, on either end of his body, the case for "reasonable apprehension such that deadly force was warranted" seems dubious. That's the facts just as we know them now though. My issue is with this entire, "every time a black person is shot people protest even though there may be (and likely is) some legitimate justification for the shooting so any time a black person is shot and someone protests there has to be legitimate justification for the shooting and the officers can't be at fault for excessive force" line of thinking. That's predicated on "cry wolfism" and it's just as bad as the converse. What I see is a guy on the ground, who seems to be repeating some variation of "what did I do wrong officer?" being shot, while seemingly overwhelmed, though not completely still and docile, but with variables there to account for the movement and agitation. No video shows him trying to get up, or reach furtively at or towards police, or reach for his pockets, or do anything except gyrate on the ground and lift his head up and down as 200 pound men are enveloping his body. That's what I see so far. You probably should opt for sleep though. If I had the choice of arguing law with a lawyer or sleeping, I would sleep too. I won't fault you for that bro. Edited July 7, 2016 by Juror#8
Sig1Hunter Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 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.
Juror#8 Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 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? Respond like this to the Sterling situation, and we aren't having a back and forth right now. Though you initially said something along the lines of "reserving judgment," you pretty much called Sterling a piece of **** and said that the officers were justified with incomplete evidence.
Sig1Hunter Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 Respond like this to the Sterling situation, and we aren't having a back and forth right now. Though you initially said something along the lines of "reserving judgment," you pretty much called Sterling a piece of **** and said that the officers were justified with incomplete evidence. 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.
Juror#8 Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 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. Alright bro. Fair enough. I'll toast to that.
B-Man Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 (edited) Hillary ClintonVerified account @HillaryClinton 16m16 minutes ago America woke up to yet another tragedy of a life cut down too soon. Black Lives Matter. Baltimore sees steep fall in police numbers as murder rate soars... ‘Racist cops’ rhetoric tired and predictable, Jim Geraghty adresses it with facts and data http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/437552/another-police-shooting-another-day-news-feels-its-reruns Edited July 7, 2016 by B-Man
MarkAF43 Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 I've only seen the one video so far, but to me it looked like a couple of things happened. The cop seemed to struggle with getting the gun out of the suspects pocket, so it wouldn't appear that was really a threat to the officers, and if you're attempting to arrest the man, why hadn't you turned him onto his stomach? He didn't seem to be resisting too much that they wouldn't have been able to do that. Why did they continue to leave him on his back? Maybe someone in law enforcement could explain that to me. I think there was an issue with the suspect resisting, but from what I saw in my limited viewing and limited knowledge of the situation, the cops handled it excessively.
B-Man Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 Mark KnollerVerified account @markknoller 45m45 minutes ago .@PressSec says Pres Obama “deeply disturbed” by reports of police shootings in Baton Rouge and Minnesota. But cant comment on specifics. Off Topic: Was the President "deeply disturbed" by the killing of a 13 year old girl, a U.S. citizen, by a terrorist last week ? Has the President voiced any "concern" over the dozens and dozens of people killed in his "hometown" last weekend ? The answer is...........................these horrible shootings by the police can be utilized to help get votes, money and power for the democrat party. that is the difference. .
HereComesTheReignAgain Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 (edited) Cool, now let's move on. What happened in this one ? http://usuncut.com/black-lives-matter/minnesota-police-shooting-traffic-stop/ Without knowing what transpired before the video started playing, I am not trying to determine if the shooting was justified. With that said, the first thing I learned after receiving my CCW is how to proceed when stopped by the police. You DO NOT say that you have a gun unless they ask you that specific question. You simply hand the officer your driver's license with your CCW card. That way you avoid causing a possible panic and overreaction by a jittery cop hearing the G word. I have been pulled over a couple times when I have been carrying a firearm. The officer appreciated the fact that I knew the proper way to inform him of my CCW and simply asked if I had my firearm on me. He did not remove the gun and in both cases I did not receive a ticket. In fact, one of the stops, the officer and I had a conversation about the type of gun I chose and asked how I liked it. Granted, this took place in a small town. Edited July 7, 2016 by chknwing334
Juror#8 Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 (edited) Cool, now let's move on. What happened in this one ? http://usuncut.com/black-lives-matter/minnesota-police-shooting-traffic-stop/ I don't like to jump to conclusions, but it looks like another gangbanger uppity black teacher who was exercising his second amendment rights and had a permit to carry, who announced that he had a weapon, and was shot reaching to get his wallet though the command from the officer was to produce identification. What this man, with no criminal record and in the presence of his girlfriend and daughter, was probably going to do was grab the fire arm that he premptively announced that he had, rather than his wallet, and start shooting indiscrimately in all directions in the presence of his family. This happens all the time to whites who get pulled over and are carrying once they announce that they're carrying. Especially when they're being pulled over for being in high crime and drug infested area in the middle of the night or, equally as suggestive of criminal activity, being pulled over for a tail light being out during daylight hours in a middle class neighborhood of Minnesota. Any outrage in the black community is entirely misplaced because that rush to judgment doesn't take into consideration the volume of white folks who deal with this treatment everyday. Who cries for Chase or Maximillion or Rusty? It's reverse racism. One more monkey gang-banging hoodlum off the street. !@#$ blm. Out of touch liberals and media constructed fervor. Without knowing what transpired before the video started playing, I am not trying to determine if the shooting was justified. With that said, the first thing I learned after receiving my CCW is how to proceed when stopped by the police. You DO NOT say that you have a gun unless they ask you that specific question. You simply hand the officer your driver's license with your CCW card. That way you avoid causing a possible panic and overreaction by a jittery cop hearing the G word. I have been pulled over a couple times when I have been carrying a firearm. The officer appreciated the fact that I knew the proper way to inform him of my CCW and simply asked if I had my firearm on me. He did not remove the gun and in both cases I did not receive a ticket. In fact, one of the stops, the officer and I had a conversation about the type of gun I chose and asked how I liked it. Granted, this took place in a small town. Where I'm at, you have to let them know that you're carrying. If you do a quick search, you can probably find a lot of support around that. Your way is probably better. But the truth is, some state law enforcement ask you to announce that you're carrying upon being stopped. This guy allegedly did that. And if so, he was being compliant and did nothing wrong. Edited July 7, 2016 by Juror#8
LeviF Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 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. If I had a dime for every cop who thought he knew law
DC Tom Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 With that said, the first thing I learned after receiving my CCW is how to proceed when stopped by the police. Wait...what? Wouldn't it be better to learn that BEFORE receiving your CCW?
Joe Miner Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 If I had a dime for every cop who thought he knew law List of people who think they know the law is large, and also inclusive of lawyers. List of people who actually know the law is small, and some of them are also lawyers.
HereComesTheReignAgain Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 Wait...what? Wouldn't it be better to learn that BEFORE receiving your CCW? I should have stated that I learned it after applying for my CCW. That pesky 12 month wait leaves a lot of time to read up on procedures. I highly recommend reading Massad Ayoob's outstanding book, In The Gravest Extreme for anyone that plans on owning or carrying a gun for self defense.
keepthefaith Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 We can't see the right hand in the Sterling video. If the gun is in that right pocket and he's fishing for it, he's writing the police an invitation to draw and use their guns. It sucks that these situations sometimes end this way but in about every case you see a series of events or actions that cause escalation. If I ever find myself in a situation where a police officer tells me to get on the ground or raise my hands or anything similar, I'm doing just that.
HereComesTheReignAgain Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 Where I'm at, you have to let them know that you're carrying. If you do a quick search, you can probably find a lot of support around that. Your way is probably better. But the truth is, some state law enforcement ask you to announce that you're carrying upon being stopped. This guy allegedly did that. And if so, he was being compliant and did nothing wrong. I understand that you have to let a police officer know that you are armed when you are stopped, but if you can do so without saying "I have a gun," you can possibly avoid a bad situation. As I stated before, I am not trying to make any judgment as far as the events before the video started. The guy may have followed the law perfectly.
B-Man Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 What Happened to Philando Castile? ................... Knowns and unknowns https://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2016/07/07/what-happened-to-philando-castile/ OH, THAT FERGUSON EFFECT: Baltimore After Freddie Gray: More Murders, Fewer Cops.
Sig1Hunter Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 If I had a dime for every cop who thought he knew law 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.
IDBillzFan Posted July 7, 2016 Posted July 7, 2016 The upside for liberals is it looks like the Obama WH gets to take federal control of a couple of more police departments. How many is that now?
Recommended Posts