Was it necessary for the police to shoot?

Was it necessary for the police to shoot?

  • Yes

    Votes: 4 40.0%

  • No

    Votes: 6 60.0%
  • Total voters
    10
monty1 said:
Actually, only in America. In other countries the excuse for killing somebody in self defence is not as easy to claim or rely upon. For that reason many lives are saved of people who didn't need to die.

In other countries the emphasis is on preventing deaths while in American it's more a case of people looking for reasons to justify taking a life. That sentiment has already been clearly echoed on this thread.

It's the mindset of Americans that is the problem and that is what is causing all the gun violence. In order to have the violence the guns must be readily available and that condition is fulfilled due to the radical attitudes relating to the 2nd. amendment.
Click to expand...
blah-blah-blah-o.gif
 
SmarterthanYou said:
do non cops have the right to kill someone when they are trying to kill others?
Click to expand...

In some states.

"A person can use lethal force to prevent the commission of a (forcible) felony, or the death of or gross bodily harm to others."

That is a composite of very diverse state laws that all support use of lethal force by non-cops. It's not the same for each state.
 
Lorca said:
Where were police shooting into a car engaging in a high speed automobile chase? She was barely moving where they initially engaged her. Were they shooting while they chased her? Not that I read.

Have you heard of other police chases where they shot into cars during high speed automobile chases? Do you see this DC case and an epidemic of police chasing and shooting into cars?
Click to expand...

If you want to engage in brain dead stupidity; pick someone else, dumbass.

High speed chases end; this was described as a chase. Since when is it justified for police to fire into a vehicle where the occupant is unarmed?

Just what we needed on the forum; another dipshit inclined to fabricate strawman stupidity. :rolleyes:
 
SmarterthanYou said:
your intense desire to see zimmerman imprisoned for protecting himself from a punk thug trying to be an MMA gangbanger wannabe.
Click to expand...

In your country it has been the race factor that has been the chief consideration in the Zimmerman case. In other countries the simple fact that stand your ground laws are bad laws that encourage killing people would have been the chief consideration.

The Zimmerman case is only one example of many. The police shooting the women in this case is really just more of the same. The emphasis is not on saving lives, it's on finding an excuse to take a life.

That's not important to Americans for the most part and that is the reason why common sense is being objected to so strongly.
 
evince said:
She had a weapon that weights tons and kills people every fucking day you idiot.

she had already ran over a police officer.

trayvon did nothing but try to stand HIS ground
Click to expand...

Wrong again asshat; as the trial proved, Zimmerman was the one standing his ground. Trayvon was a young punk who jumped him and pounded him MMA style like thugs are prone to do; you illogical ignorant asshat.

This woman did nothing other than ram her car into barricades and cars; since when does the police shoot into vehicles for that? Oh that is right, they don't unless SHOT at. This was a case of gross overreaction by the police and should be properly investigated and the officers at the least, reprimanded.
 
the woman ranmmed a barracde and ran over an officer when she was ordered to stop.

she did a high speed chase and then tried to ram MORE barracades so the officers at that barracde shot her.


Having a vag does not preclude you from being pursued and stopped for attempted murder
 
Truth Detector said:
If you want to engage in brain dead stupidity; pick someone else, dumbass.

High speed chases end; this was described as a chase. Since when is it justified for police to fire into a vehicle where the occupant is unarmed?

Just what we needed on the forum; another dipshit inclined to fabricate strawman stupidity. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

As has been pointed out to you....a car is considered a lethal weapon. As far as they could tell, this completely unknown person had just tried to kill cops with it and possibly attack the capitol. They dont know if she's got a gun or a bomb attached to her. THey needed to stop the threat to the public. They did so. Police may also shoot fleeing suspects *if they believe they are an immediate danger to the public.* They had no way of knowing but she had already endangered cops and the public.

As for strawman...I answered your question word for word...dont like it, dont open doors you cant close (the way you would like them closed :-) )
 
evince said:
the woman ranmmed a barracde and ran over an officer when she was ordered to stop.

she did a high speed chase and then tried to ram MORE barracades so the officers at that barracde shot her.


Having a vag does not preclude you from being pursued and stopped for attempted murder
Click to expand...

We get it. You love dead black women and black orphans. You are a sick fuck.
 
why is the right doing this?


why are they trashing the police for doing their jobs yet making sure they have to work without pay ?
 
There's no use even attempting to reprimand the police. The American attitude toward shooting first and asking questions later is the problem and it's most justified of all with the police. First of all, attitudes amongst the ordinary people needs to be changed.

Americans are just incapable of understanding that it's always better to prevent a shooting than to justify one on a claim of self defence. Too many Americans are waiting for the opportunity to use their gun on somebody.
 
evince said:
the woman ranmmed a barracde and ran over an officer when she was ordered to stop.

she did a high speed chase and then tried to ram MORE barracades so the officers at that barracde shot her.


Having a vag does not preclude you from being pursued and stopped for attempted murder
Click to expand...

No one was seriously injured other than the unarmed BLACK female driver who was a mother of a one year old child who was also in the car. Is it police policy to shoot drivers who run through barricades? Please show me where that policy exists?

I am amused by a vulgar leftist asshat like you justifying a police killing of a young unarmed black mother.
 
Lorca said:
As has been pointed out to you....a car is considered a lethal weapon. As far as they could tell, this completely unknown person had just tried to kill cops with it and possibly attack the capitol. They dont know if she's got a gun or a bomb attached to her. THey needed to stop the threat to the public. They did so. Police may also shoot fleeing suspects *if they believe they are an immediate danger to the public.* They had no way of knowing but she had already endangered cops and the public.

As for strawman...I answered your question word for word...dont like it, dont open doors you cant close (the way you would like them closed :-) )
Click to expand...

Because you are an incredible dullard like Evince; here is the video:


Only incredible dullards think that this event ended correctly. The police did not need to fire multiple shots into this car to stop this chase or at the end of this chase and that is not standard procedure.

No cop was seriously injured nor was it evident this was some terrorist or mass murderer.

Dumbass.
 
evince said:
the woman ranmmed a barracde and ran over an officer when she was ordered to stop.

she did a high speed chase and then tried to ram MORE barracades so the officers at that barracde shot her.


Having a vag does not preclude you from being pursued and stopped for attempted murder
Click to expand...
maybe she was actually in fear for her life and was just trying to get away from a man with a gun.
 
Truth Detector said:
Because you are an incredible dullard like Evince; here is the video:


Only incredible dullards think that this event ended correctly. The police did not need to fire multiple shots into this car to stop this chase or at the end of this chase and that is not standard procedure.

No cop was seriously injured nor was it evident this was some terrorist or mass murderer.

Dumbass.
Click to expand...

Still mad cuz you didnt like my answer.....I'm the dumbass? You specified shooting into a car during a high speed chase. If you see any speed at all in that video, I'd like to know what drugs you are on.

Whining that you dont get the answer you want because you cannot articulate an argument? Hmmm. How old do you have to be to post on this forum?

And how much of a 'dullard' to not realize that she had already attempted to kill at least one cop (in their view), and she was ALREADY a threat to the public the way she was driving? If your mother had been on the street there, and hit as she escaped, I bet you'd be singing a different story. (But not writing one because you seem to have issues with clarity there.)
 
SmarterthanYou said:
maybe she was actually in fear for her life and was just trying to get away from a man with a gun.
Click to expand...


so she ran over a police officer ?


how is it you find yourself saying a person who tried to kill police officers and wounded one should have been allowed to just drive away?
 
Truth Detector said:
Because you are an incredible dullard like Evince; here is the video:


Only incredible dullards think that this event ended correctly. The police did not need to fire multiple shots into this car to stop this chase or at the end of this chase and that is not standard procedure.

No cop was seriously injured nor was it evident this was some terrorist or mass murderer.

Dumbass.
Click to expand...


how many bullets were directed at her and how many were directed at disabling the car?


tell us
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top