This is why more cops should be killed

Lorca said:
And the entire hose it was attached to?

LMAO, that is quite the justification....how far is that stretch, Mars?

Again, giant fail in identifying the threat.
Click to expand...

Odd how you came to the conclusion that there was a hose attached, when there was nothing in any article about a hose being attached.
Unless of course you just decided to attach your own "facts" to the entire situation.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
what I WOULD do in this situation is irrelevant. If I had done what these cops did, i'd be facing murder charges. THAT is the issue, statist.
Click to expand...

Of course you don't want to discuss what you would do and it's because you want to condemn others for exactly what you would have done. The only difference is that the ones you want to condemn wear a uniform and you don't.
 
Lorca said:
I'll make a correction....STY mentioned the hose, not the articles.

It is still a major fail in identifying a threat, as the man was reported to have a gun and the cops should have approached from a position of cover or other means to protect themselves while assessing the situation. A gun is not a magic shield that you can use to pre-emptively protect yourself walking into a situation.

I do not fall on the side of crucifying cops that shoot kids with realistic looking guns that have the orange tips removed. However I think they failed here.
Click to expand...

What positions of cover were available?
Could you please provide the picture or video you're using to make this conclusion?
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
What positions of cover were available?
Could you please provide the picture or video you're using to make this conclusion?
Click to expand...

I didnt say there were, I listed them as one option.

What kind of law enforcement training have you had? I was a park ranger for 13 years and trained with NYPD and the St. Louis PD. While we didnt carry, we did get firearm training. And plenty on assessing threats since we were not armed.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Of course you don't want to discuss what you would do and it's because you want to condemn others for exactly what you would have done. The only difference is that the ones you want to condemn wear a uniform and you don't.
Click to expand...
your assumptions on what I, or anyone else, would do is irrelevant. especially considering that you are most likely coloring it with your own personal actions.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
What positions of cover were available?
Could you please provide the picture or video you're using to make this conclusion?
Click to expand...

since you are unable to be objective, the original article states..... "McDonnell said the officers took positions to observe Zerby, who appeared intoxicated, and believed he had a gun as described by the callers, but focused on setting up containment of the area rather than contacting him."

so, if taking up positions to observe did not include finding any sort of protective cover, then their training is seriously lacking which should definitely make the city accountable.
 
Lorca said:
I didnt say there were, I listed them as one option.

What kind of law enforcement training have you had? I was a park ranger for 13 years and trained with NYPD and the St. Louis PD. While we didnt carry, we did get firearm training. And plenty on assessing threats since we were not armed.
Click to expand...

So basically you were offering an option, without knowing if an option was available.
Did you find the park trees threatening? :)
 
SmarterthanYou said:
your assumptions on what I, or anyone else, would do is irrelevant. especially considering that you are most likely coloring it with your own personal actions.
Click to expand...

How ironic you want to accuse others of using their own personal behaviors as an basis for their comments and yet all you do is use your own personal behavior as a basis for condemnation. :palm:
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
So basically you were offering an option, without knowing if an option was available.
Did you find the park trees threatening? :)
Click to expand...

It was an example of an option...is this concept difficult for you to understand? Do I need to use words of one syllable to try and make it clear for you? Sorry, it's not really worth it.

And since I was a park ranger in Central Park, there were a few other threats.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
since you are unable to be objective, the original article states..... "McDonnell said the officers took positions to observe Zerby, who appeared intoxicated, and believed he had a gun as described by the callers, but focused on setting up containment of the area rather than contacting him."

so, if taking up positions to observe did not include finding any sort of protective cover, then their training is seriously lacking which should definitely make the city accountable.
Click to expand...

In the past you've complained that they don't do enough to protect the public and containment of the area does exactly that; but now, you complain that they should have "contacted" him. By "contact", is it safe to draw the conclusion that you mean "confront".
 
Lorca said:
It was an example of an option...is this concept difficult for you to understand? Do I need to use words of one syllable to try and make it clear for you? Sorry, it's not really worth it.

And since I was a park ranger in Central Park, there were a few other threats.
Click to expand...

An option that you don't even know if it was available. :palm:
By threats, do you mean cleaning bird shit off of the statues?
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
In the past you've complained that they don't do enough to protect the public and containment of the area does exactly that; but now, you complain that they should have "contacted" him. By "contact", is it safe to draw the conclusion that you mean "confront".
Click to expand...
are you really forgetting who it is I am? when have I EVER complained that they don't do enough? for as long as i've been on this board, i've consistently said they are too much, too powerful, and too oppressive. since you seem to have such issues remembering basic things like this, i'll naturally dismiss the rest of your position as nothing more than the police state lover that you are.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
So basically you were offering an option, without knowing if an option was available.
Did you find the park trees threatening? :)
Click to expand...
so basically, you're saying that the cops said it was so, that should be the end of it. those civilian witnesses were likely criminal thugs and family members or cop haters and their opinions are wrong.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
An option that you don't even know if it was available. :palm:
By threats, do you mean cleaning bird shit off of the statues?
Click to expand...

There is always an option for assessing unless you are being ambushed. Not the sharpest tool in the shed, are you?

And dont know the different between maintenance people and park rangers apparently.

You are seriously deficient in many many areas of knowledge apparently.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
are you really forgetting who it is I am? when have I EVER complained that they don't do enough? for as long as i've been on this board, i've consistently said they are too much, too powerful, and too oppressive. since you seem to have such issues remembering basic things like this, i'll naturally dismiss the rest of your position as nothing more than the police state lover that you are.
Click to expand...

So you've never ever implied that you felt they should be doing something BEFORE the crime, instead of showing up afterwards?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
so basically, you're saying that the cops said it was so, that should be the end of it. those civilian witnesses were likely criminal thugs and family members or cop haters and their opinions are wrong.
Click to expand...

So basically, you're saying that the public said it was so and that should be the end of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top