[CNN] Union: Pistol-whipped detective didn't shoot attacker because of headlines

This is the thinking in D&D lately. It's like watching Fox News. You read through the comments and realize a lot of people are making the case for racism, civil and social injustice and I can't tell if they are just bored trolls or sincerely crazy. The thought that you have to be killed every time you commit a crime is ridiculous. Especially if you don't have a weapon. You hear this a lot why did she have an attitude? As if having an attitude with a cop is a good reason to be arrested or end up dead. You shouldn't end up dead because you have pocket knife, there is no reason to shoot someone without a gun 6 times, none. Travon Martin had a hoody on, no weapon, but the hoody made him look scary so gotta shoot him, it was justified to them.

When I was a teenager I worked at Walgreens. Do you know how many white kids stole from that store everyday? It was a lot but I guess if they got into an argument with a cop and the cop shot them 6 times it's justified because they stole candy or cigarettes from a store several hours earlier. You see people making the victims look guilty. Anything that they've ever done wrong in their life is presented as if to say see they deserved it. They are always protecting bad cops. As if recognizing when a cop does something wrong somehow means that all cops are bad. No not all cops are bad, just the bad ones.

 

I've been through police and Military training that's who the hell I am. And in showing this video all you have managed to prove is that some cops need more training. Even in this scenario, the guy shot the guy walking towards him in the abdomen when he clearly could have shot him in the leg. He also reaches for his gun instead of his taser or ASP. He is not a trained police officer and It's interesting how you think a trained police officer should react in the same way as a man who got to play police officer for a day in a training scenario.

 

I also want to reiterate that there is no reason to shoot an UNARMED man SIX times. I never said there is never a reason to shoot an unarmed man, especially if you are a little guy or gal and you don't have a taser.

 

Yes it was the hoody that made the racist Hispanic domestic abuse neighborhood watchman wannabe shoot the Harvard accepted 13 year old straight A genius honor student carrying a bag of skittles and the American flag.

It was definitely not because of the part where a grown young man was pounding a dude's skull into the pavement.

 

When you give someone a gun expect them to shoot 1 center of mass 2 until there is no longer a threat. If you are not OK with either of these, don't give that person a gun. Your conditions are unrealistic. It is proven that the number of bullets cops shoot is dependent on the capacity of their firearm.

This is just the way it works. If you don't like that, you probably agree with me that cops should not be having guns in the first place.

 

Why were they fighting Dback? Martin didn't rob him, he wasn't a burglar. The neighborhood watchman wasn't a police officer and he was told by 911 not to confront Martin. Again you are having trouble in D&D maybe you should stop posting for awhile.

 

The training is to shoot until the target is no longer a threat. What actually happens though?

Revolvers hold 6 rounds. Service pistols from this era typically held about 7-9. More shots fired because they had more rounds to use.

They hit at a higher percentage AND shot more rounds. This takes away the threat elimination and just leaves how many bullets they have is how many they will shoot.

http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Aveni/OIS.pdf

 

Pepper Spray or a taser would have been just as effective

 

I don't know why you're bringing up these deadbeat arguments that have backfired on obsessed Martin supporters countless times before. Maybe you should familiarize yourself with the original thread first.

And no, I don't completely believe having a gun should give you a license to kill, but I don't make the law in Florida or anywhere else that allows a man to defend himself against an aggressor crushing his skull.

 

Darren Wilson did not shoot and give him a chance to stop charging, he shot and kept shooting. This isn't a video game. It only takes seconds to shoot that many rounds and for someone to go down. He never checked to see if the threat was neutralized after the first or second shot, he fired continuously. There was no reason to shoot him 6 times, Darren Wilson panicked, it's that simple. If you are going to react in the manner that Wilson did there is no reason to be a cop. He isn't a soldier fighting in a war, this was an unarmed guy running toward him who is not a super hero with super powers.

 

No one forced you to reply to me and I certainly didn't ask you too. As a matter of fact I think I suggested the opposite.

 

At least you're giving up early this time.

 

Yes I'm giving up on the belief that you have some sort of brain. Go away scarecrow.

 

How is it that the VAST MAJORITY of citizens don't find themselves in situations where a cop has to make a decision on deadly force?

This is the question that "Black Lives Matter" group never wants to ponder.

Hell, they even practice it themselves. Every single day. Well, most of em anyways.

The ones that don't tend to find themselves 6 feet under.

If a cop is wrong in a shooting, let him face the full brunt of the law against him. But in the meantime, maybe provoking the person with the gun and the authorization to use it is a bad idea. Just sayin.

 

I agree that they all need body cams without the ability to be turned off. I'm not sure that it is feasible in America that you have cops without guns. There are so many guns in America it would make it impossible for them to do their jobs in certain situations. Not sure if true but I heard that in the UK cops aren't allowed to have guns until they have several years of training. I would be OK with that. Most of the problems here seem to be training issues.

 

Except all of these situations where they are dealing with people who don't have guns? Like all of the ones you mentioned. Cops are not supermen. Saying cops should be infallible isn't a solution.

 

This is the type of thinking which troubles me. Proper training should negate the use of a firearms in situations of provocation without a firearm. Unless of course that provoking comes with the threat of death somehow. People have bad days, they get drunk, sometimes people are psychologically unstable, the result of having a bad attitude or making mistakes should not be death.

 

I think it's lack of proper training I honestly do. I also think that everyone shouldn't be a cop. I do agree with the fact that in these cases we are dealing with people without guns. The problem is because we live in America they could possibly have a gun and that's part of the reason some cops are so jumpy. Most cops would not act in the same manner as the cops in these scenarios did. Overall most cops are good or great cops and they need to be able to protect themselves. We need to stop worrying about drugs so much and try to focus on getting all of the illegal guns off the streets.