The definition of overkill. Police keep shooting 26yr old while down and motionless. Pulled over for not having a seat belt the police claim. Situation escalated and the police claim the victim fired first. Police were in an unmarked car.
-
732
-
Did they have a machine gun? They probably thought his body jumping around from all the bullets going into it was a sign of resistance.
1415 -
Article says he had a gun, was wearing a ski mask, and shot one of the officers.
All shootings need to be investigated, but if those things are true, then sounds like justified use of deadly force and I don't think it matters much how many shots were fired.
7111 -
Why does it take 96 bullets to act in self defence against a single assailant - if what they claim is true?
It's either blind panic - which you wouldn't expect in trained law enforcement - or rage - which we can expect from US police officers. Oh, right - he was black. Plenty of Derek Chauvins out there still.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.1262 -
when i read the thread headline i thought "drinking?"
170 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
Why does it take 96 bullets to act in self defence against a single assailant - if what they claim is true?
It's either blind panic - which you wouldn't expect in trained law enforcement - or rage - which we can expect from US police officers. Oh, right - he was black. Plenty of Derek Chauvins out there still.
What's the correct number of bullets?
337 -
poosmacker wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Why does it take 96 bullets to act in self defence against a single assailant - if what they claim is true?
It's either blind panic - which you wouldn't expect in trained law enforcement - or rage - which we can expect from US police officers. Oh, right - he was black. Plenty of Derek Chauvins out there still.
What's the correct number of bullets?
The first assumption is that they needed to kill the driver, even if he had wounded one of them. Their role is to apprehend offenders, not execute them. If they needed to defend themselves one bullet is enough to kill or at least disable. But 96? The offender was incapacitated after the first or second shot. The other 95 have nothing to do with law enforcement. More like what mobsters would do to those they dislike. Well - that's the US police.
1346 -
Why doesn't BLM protest the carnage?
89 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
Oh, right - he was black. Plenty of Derek Chauvins out there still.
You are too dumb to make an informed comment. There are many instances of excessive use of force against black people but did you know that the officer that got shot was black too? Was he a Derek Chauvin?
287 -
tyty wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Oh, right - he was black. Plenty of Derek Chauvins out there still.
You are too dumb to make an informed comment. There are many instances of excessive use of force against black people but did you know that the officer that got shot was black too? Was he a Derek Chauvin?
In a US police officer's uniform it's quite likely he was. It took police over 40 seconds to fire 96 bullets. I'm surprised they didn't back their cars over him as well, to make doubly sure they had finished him off.
1122 -
I thought this thread was going to be about an average shooting night for Kobe Bryant.
191 -
From the story above:
In a letter last week, Andrea Kersten, head of the accountability board, questioned the truthfulness of the officers who fired on Reed and the appropriateness of their response. She recommended that the officers be stripped of their police powers while the board investigates.
716 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
poosmacker wrote:
What's the correct number of bullets?
The first assumption is that they needed to kill the driver, even if he had wounded one of them. Their role is to apprehend offenders, not execute them. If they needed to defend themselves one bullet is enough to kill or at least disable. But 96? The offender was incapacitated after the first or second shot. The other 95 have nothing to do with law enforcement. More like what mobsters would do to those they dislike. Well - that's the US police.
When you make the decision to use lethal force, you shoot to kill
245 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
tyty wrote:
You are too dumb to make an informed comment. There are many instances of excessive use of force against black people but did you know that the officer that got shot was black too? Was he a Derek Chauvin?
In a US police officer's uniform it's quite likely he was. It took police over 40 seconds to fire 96 bullets. I'm surprised they didn't back their cars over him as well, to make doubly sure they had finished him off.
Emotional much? The fact that you are criticizing the police doing their very dangerous job with this much exaggeration shows you to be unhinged. Get some serious professional help.
2313 -
Shoot to kill wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
The first assumption is that they needed to kill the driver, even if he had wounded one of them. Their role is to apprehend offenders, not execute them. If they needed to defend themselves one bullet is enough to kill or at least disable. But 96? The offender was incapacitated after the first or second shot. The other 95 have nothing to do with law enforcement. More like what mobsters would do to those they dislike. Well - that's the US police.
When you make the decision to use lethal force, you shoot to kill
If it took 96 shots and not 1 or 2 it suggests these highly trained professionals have lousier aim than a drunk with dementia.
1117 -
Jzs wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
In a US police officer's uniform it's quite likely he was. It took police over 40 seconds to fire 96 bullets. I'm surprised they didn't back their cars over him as well, to make doubly sure they had finished him off.
Emotional much? The fact that you are criticizing the police doing their very dangerous job with this much exaggeration shows you to be unhinged. Get some serious professional help.
People said that about the George Floyd killing. You haven't read the news story. There are public officials who are concerned at the police response and see it as a likely overreaction to the situation. The "exaggeration" is the officers needing to fire 96 bullets to disable one person. They did so for nearly a minute.
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.715 -
what about this? wrote:
Why doesn't BLM protest the carnage?
For the umpteenth time #BlackLivesMatter was about the centuries of police brutality and the fact that literally only a handful of police officers have ever served any prison time for the murder of over thousands of black people.
When a black person murders another black person, they go to jail and then prison. When a white police officer murders black people they don't 99.9% of the time, even when it's on video. But you already knew that whyt guy.
1124 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
poosmacker wrote:
What's the correct number of bullets?
The first assumption is that they needed to kill the driver, even if he had wounded one of them. Their role is to apprehend offenders, not execute them. If they needed to defend themselves one bullet is enough to kill or at least disable. But 96? The offender was incapacitated after the first or second shot. The other 95 have nothing to do with law enforcement. More like what mobsters would do to those they dislike. Well - that's the US police.
you know the bolded bit how?
124 -
MelRnr wrote:
Article says he had a gun, was wearing a ski mask, and shot one of the officers.
All shootings need to be investigated, but if those things are true, then sounds like justified use of deadly force and I don't think it matters much how many shots were fired.
And you believe that he was driving around wearing a ski mask and shot a cop over a seat belt violation?
89 -
poosmacker wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Why does it take 96 bullets to act in self defence against a single assailant - if what they claim is true?
It's either blind panic - which you wouldn't expect in trained law enforcement - or rage - which we can expect from US police officers. Oh, right - he was black. Plenty of Derek Chauvins out there still.
What's the correct number of bullets?
Zero.
They had no justification to pull him over. The fact that he wS a bad guy awaiting trial doesn't change that.
823
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun