Thread of political debate and discussion

PB Forum :: Pinkbike Groups
Thread of political debate and discussion
Author Message
flag therealtylerdurden
Posted: Jul 18, 2016 at 19:07 Quote
Huh. You *may* have won this round. Damnit.
flag ctmtb98
Posted: Jul 18, 2016 at 20:21 Quote
therealtylerdurden wrote:
harriieee wrote:
photo

bigquotesIn the report of the shooting filed before the video surfaced, Slager said he had feared for his life because Scott had taken his Taser, and that he shot Scott because he "felt threatened".

He ran. That's a felony in and of itself. While I don't know if shooting was called for, or why Slager feared for his life (maybe he felt Walter was running to retrieve a weapon), Walter committed a felony by merely running. Whether or not Slager was justified in shooting, Walter brought this on himself.

My grandpa and dad have always taught me that if you run from a police officer that he has every right to shoot you. I guess some people are raised differently.
flag therealtylerdurden
Posted: Jul 18, 2016 at 20:51 Quote
Your g-pa and dad are/were wise men. Whether it's currently socially acceptable or not for an officer to shoot you while you're running away.. It's a stupid, cowardly act to make, and I'm not going to pity someone who does and pays the consequences for it.
flag trozei
Posted: Jul 18, 2016 at 21:53 Quote
idk I've ran from the cops before.
flag therealtylerdurden
Posted: Jul 18, 2016 at 22:11 Quote
Hahahahahaha cue Iron Maiden 'Breaking the Law'
flag inverted180
Posted: Jul 18, 2016 at 22:29 Quote
ctmtb98 wrote:
therealtylerdurden wrote:
harriieee wrote:
photo

bigquotesIn the report of the shooting filed before the video surfaced, Slager said he had feared for his life because Scott had taken his Taser, and that he shot Scott because he "felt threatened".

He ran. That's a felony in and of itself. While I don't know if shooting was called for, or why Slager feared for his life (maybe he felt Walter was running to retrieve a weapon), Walter committed a felony by merely running. Whether or not Slager was justified in shooting, Walter brought this on himself.

My grandpa and dad have always taught me that if you run from a police officer that he has every right to shoot you. I guess some people are raised differently.

Screw that BS. you guys are f'd. how can it ever be ok to shoot a man in the back? Most cowardly thing I could think of.

Funny how conservatives hate the tyrannical gov't (need those guns to protect ourselves from the MAN) but its ok for gov't employees to shoot an unarmed man, or even a fleeing man. Makes no sense.
flag badbadleroybrown
Posted: Jul 18, 2016 at 22:39 Quote
harriieee wrote:
therealtylerdurden wrote:
He ran. That's a felony in and of itself. While I don't know if shooting was called for, or why Slager feared for his life (maybe he felt Walter was running to retrieve a weapon), Walter committed a felony by merely running. Whether or not Slager was justified in shooting, Walter brought this on himself.

Do you really believe he feared for his life in this moment?

In case you are not familiar with the case – Slager then took out his taser and dropped it by Scott's body. You can find the full video easily. Slager probably would have gotten away this, had it not been for the civilian filming.

Do you agree with BBLB, that cop watching is surplus to requirement?
Incorrect, in reality, on the video you can see the taser get tossed out from between the two of them as Slager draws his sidearm and Scott runs.

Another criminal dead, another cop the victim of media persecution and civilian ignorance. Total bullshit that he's going to have to stand trial. Don't want to be shot by cops, it's really f*cking simple. DON'T BREAK THE LAW, DON'T RESIST ARREST.
flag badbadleroybrown
Posted: Jul 18, 2016 at 22:45 Quote
harriieee wrote:
Scott was pulled over for a broken tail light. Why don't you watch the video, rather than try to guess its contents. It's freely available.

So do you believe that this citizen was doing something surplus to requirement? It wouldn't have mattered if he hadn't filmed this? Do you think it is better that this footage was captured (and an officer of the law was exposed as clearly having lied about the situation in which he shot a man), or does it make no difference to you?

Surely if the police officers have nothing to hide in the overwhelming majority of cases, then there is no problem with cop watching. Correct?
It's funny how you use words you apparently don't understand... surplus to requirement... yes, obviously a civilian filming police is surplus to requirement. No, it wouldn't have mattered at all of he hadn't filmed this. There is no clear lie except your assertion that you know what happened so it's really not better or worse that this video was captured. In the end, a criminal ran and got shot for resisting. No problem.
flag badbadleroybrown
Posted: Jul 18, 2016 at 22:51 Quote
inverted180 wrote:
Screw that BS. you guys are f'd. how can it ever be ok to shoot a man in the back? Most cowardly thing I could think of.

Funny how conservatives hate the tyrannical gov't (need those guns to protect ourselves from the MAN) but its ok for gov't employees to shoot an unarmed man, or even a fleeing man. Makes no sense.
Conservatives hate tyrannical government because it violates our rights... as do criminals. You resist arrest, you deserve to get shot. I don't care of you're Alton Sterling or LaVoy Finicum... don't break the f*cking law, or if you do just be a man and accept the consequences instead of resisting arrest.

See, all these thugs and all you idiot foreigners seem to miss the simple reality that you have no right in this country to resist arrest. You have a right to a fair trial in court, that's all... you don't have a right to a f*cking trial by combat with the arresting officer in the street. Conservatives believe in law and order... we support police and soldiers who uphold that law and order.
flag therealtylerdurden
Posted: Jul 18, 2016 at 23:38 Quote
badbadleroybrown wrote:
inverted180 wrote:
Screw that BS. you guys are f'd. how can it ever be ok to shoot a man in the back? Most cowardly thing I could think of.

Funny how conservatives hate the tyrannical gov't (need those guns to protect ourselves from the MAN) but its ok for gov't employees to shoot an unarmed man, or even a fleeing man. Makes no sense.

Conservatives hate tyrannical government because it violates our rights... as do criminals. You resist arrest, you deserve to get shot. I don't care of you're Alton Sterling or LaVoy Finicum... don't break the f*cking law, or if you do just be a man and accept the consequences instead of resisting arrest.

See, all these thugs and all you idiot foreigners seem to miss the simple reality that you have no right in this country to resist arrest. You have a right to a fair trial in court, that's all... you don't have a right to a f*cking trial by combat with the arresting officer in the street. Conservatives believe in law and order... we support police and soldiers who uphold that law and order.

Well f*cking said. Agreed 100%, just because we won't stand for tyranny, doesn't mean that we view any laws at all as tyrannical. It truly is easy to not get shot by police. Don't make dumbshit decisions, and you'll probably be alright.
flag iffy
Posted: Jul 19, 2016 at 2:09 Quote
Just my opinion here, but that man shot sombody in the back, it does appear that nobody would really have been hurt if he did manage to get away?

He should face a correct and thorough review of his actions.
Any falsification or omission of facts should elevate this type of incident to murder.

To be a policeman with anything less than 100% honesty respect and dedication for the law is asking for trouble.
Using the privalige of being a law enforcer to protect yourself from your mistakes should be dealt with as very serious matter.
In a strange way it is somehow much worse than someone who breaks the law but does not abuse and pervert it.
If they are not prepared to deal with the responsibility and consequences in an open and completely honest manner they should find another calling.

If they have absolutely no issues dealing with killing civillians, (especially under very dubious circumstances) criminals or not ( and I think you are still innocent till proven guilty), there is no way they should be trusted to use a weapon as part of their job.


Obviously truly life threatening situations are of course quite different, but on the admittedly little I know of this particular incident it just really looks like a cop shooting somebody in the back. Hard to see how his life or anyone elses was under threat by someone at that distance, not facing him and going in the opposite direction?

I can understand why people look upon it with horror.

The couple of people I know that have had the misfortune to be in a life threatening situation and have to kill or be killed on such a close face to face level ( talking about the military here) have had real issues dealing with the memories. And they were confronting generally terrified or manic individuals with automatic weapons and the full intention to use them...

I don't believe any normal sane person can kill somebody and be totally unaffected.

Only that officer knows truly what was in his mind and the fact is he shot and killed someone who was running away in the back is something he will have to live with.



2 cents
flag harriieee
Posted: Jul 19, 2016 at 3:11 Quote
ctmtb98 wrote:
My grandpa and dad have always taught me that if you run from a police officer that he has every right to shoot you. I guess some people are raised differently.

As I said earlier, the Supreme Court decision in 1985 laid down the precedent that the only time when it is legal for a cop to use lethal force against a suspect who is running away is if

bigquotes"the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."

So no, the cop does not have every right to shoot a fleeing suspect.
flag iffy
Posted: Jul 19, 2016 at 5:04 Quote
why didnt they shoot OJ again?
flag inverted180
Posted: Jul 19, 2016 at 6:45 Quote
therealtylerdurden wrote:
badbadleroybrown wrote:
inverted180 wrote:
Screw that BS. you guys are f'd. how can it ever be ok to shoot a man in the back? Most cowardly thing I could think of.

Funny how conservatives hate the tyrannical gov't (need those guns to protect ourselves from the MAN) but its ok for gov't employees to shoot an unarmed man, or even a fleeing man. Makes no sense.

Conservatives hate tyrannical government because it violates our rights... as do criminals. You resist arrest, you deserve to get shot. I don't care of you're Alton Sterling or LaVoy Finicum... don't break the f*cking law, or if you do just be a man and accept the consequences instead of resisting arrest.

See, all these thugs and all you idiot foreigners seem to miss the simple reality that you have no right in this country to resist arrest. You have a right to a fair trial in court, that's all... you don't have a right to a f*cking trial by combat with the arresting officer in the street. Conservatives believe in law and order... we support police and soldiers who uphold that law and order.

Well f*cking said. Agreed 100%, just because we won't stand for tyranny, doesn't mean that we view any laws at all as tyrannical. It truly is easy to not get shot by police. Don't make dumbshit decisions, and you'll probably be alright.

So according to your logic guys, at the next frat party that gets out of hand, when the police arrive and people start fleeing, they should just open fire. Once again your guys are f'd. It's not legal for a police officer to shot someone who is not posing an immediate threat to them or others.
flag abennett219
Posted: Jul 19, 2016 at 8:33 Quote
Shooting people in the back will forever be a cowardly and shameful thing to do unless they are DEFINITELY running toward something that will DEFINITELY kill you. I.e. A bomb.

Hell, people used to get shamed in the military, even the mafia, for shooting fleeing people. And their job, even the criminal one, is killing people.

He didn't even try to give chase before shooting him. Here, if you flee the scene of arrest, you get chased down or, if you get away, tracked down, which in this age of cctv and surveillance is easy enough, and your door gets kicked in by guys with tasers and riot shields. I completely understand the difference in culture with guns etc but we have gangs and carrying other weapons is most probably more common than in the US. From an outside perspective police in the US resort to extreme violence far too easily and reform is necessary.

Oh and before you scream on about me being a fcking liberal tard bblb I am a conservative. Both in mentality and party membership. And I am amongst the more right wing conservatives. So f*ck off.

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.025279
Mobile Version of Website