The discussion is about police killing civilians, but you cannot talk about the broader impact without pointing out the areas in which the policy is especially egregious. Nor should you ignore those especially egregious areas simply because it gives certain sensitive individuals the vapors. No one focused on it divisively or negatively. That you feel like people talking about race is inherently divisive is just indicative of your personal baggage you bring into the conversation. Leave your baggage behind and understand that while everyone is affected and that is wrong, some people dis proportionally bear the burden - use that injustice within injustice to spur you to affect change rather than letting it paralyze you into inaction.
Noone knows the nature of the call made to the police, that always has a HUGE impact on the way police show up to a scene. Citizens also do not want to be apart of the next tragic shooting in america, this call probably should not have been made in the first place but noone is mentioning that.
Who do you consider intelligent and professional then? Doctors? Engineers? Unless you raise the requirement to be a police and the monetary compensation to make that requirement worthwhile to obtain, you won't be getting "the finest".
Agree. Most police departments only require a two year degree obtainable through a community college or 2 years of military service. Almost any schmuck can obtain this. I say up the minimum requirement to 4 year degrees from at least a relatively selective university. I know in my state, the Mass state police have a relatively difficult selection process and are actually quite competent.
http://www.dailynews.com/general-ne...-milton-olin-no-charges-against-typing-deputy Long story short, he lied twice about what occurred (blaming the cyclist by claiming he swerved into his lane). Cellphone records indicate that he was texting his wife as he was driving also. It's absurd that stuff like this gets reported on a daily basis and there's no outcry from more people.
3: glad you're not black and holding a toy gun while shopping at Walmart. Frankly, I think its pathetic how you'll continually justify the actions of the police. You can justify it today, but will you sit back and justify it while you bleed out after they've shot you? People are outraged because this is becoming more and more common, and it should not be, regardless of how justified apologists like you think it is.
Full of chumps? You are a chump. You are freaking worthless man. The only people who hate cops are usually deviants and people who need to worry about them. You are a ####### idiot bro.
Lower intelligent? LOL!!!! I want to slap you. Yeah my dad is a state trooper, so I will take offense to this. I have been in the real world quite some time, and the people who trash cops are either ignorant, criminals, or just not smart enough to comprehend how important they are.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/7uvyYzjaiyE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Just as a followup, the video has been released and superimposed with the call in this article: http://www.whio.com/news/news/crime-law/special-grand-jury-selected-john-crawford-case/nhRwM/ IDK how anyone could think this shooting was justified. Whoever called the police lied about the gun "being loaded" and "pointed" at people. The man was turned around on the phone while the "gun" was pointed at the floor being held casually. The police literally shot him on sight. A grand jury decided not to indict, and the DoJ is reviewing the case. Given that video I don't see how anyone could excuse this shooting.
Did you carefully watch the video? He was pointing the gun around. He was doing things to it that could easily be thought of as loading. The caller was not BS'ing anyone. It was not pointed at the floor. As has been pointed out, pellet guns are in boxes, not loose like toys. This dead guy was either really dumb or crazy. You can make your own judgement about the police but leave the caller out of it.
There was a clear exaggeration of what the man on the phone was doing by the caller. He wasn't pointing the gun at anyone. "He just pointed it at two children" my ass (4:25 for your reference in case you didn't bother watching the video). The gun is pointed straight at the ground and he's on the phone for the entirety of the duration in which they were in the area. NONE of the shoppers in the footage are threatened by anything he's doing. Just the man inciting the incident on the phone. I don't see how anyone reasonable could honestly believe otherwise. SHOW me where he pointed the gun at other people in that video. He was on the phone with his family. There was *nothing* threatening about the manner in which he walked around. He was shot on sight for that.
YOU said he was pointing it at the ground the entire time. He wasn't. Out of the package, that thing is a gun. Pellet gun, whatever. If it doesn't have a huge red tip on it, it is a gun. If I saw anyone at a range holding a gun like that they would be kicked out. It is irresponsible and deadly dangerous. The caller was scared and saw him pointing the gun around, and doing something to it that could EASILY be mistaken for loading it. No sane person should have a problem with what the caller did.
I agree. It is truly a gun that can cause harm. The deceased was carrying it very casually. It would've been smarter to put it in a shopping cart instead of carrying it how he was. While the caller was mistaken, he doesn't carry any blame for what happened. He was probably spying on the deceased from a distance. He easily could have been mistaken. He does embellish some details to the dispatcher without having solid evidence, though. The true blame lies on the police. They shot on sight and first without ever calling demands to the deceased. I don't see how they were not indicted over that. It's hard to defend the police on this one.
