As illegal as the VTech shooters gun was. I consider an illegal gun to be stolen, like the M16's that have been stolen by cops. http://www.kcra.com/news/investigates/dod-service-weapons-missing-from-local-departments/29641424 No one is allowed to own those automatic rifles. Not cops, not Class III dealers, not anyone. http://www.kcra.com/news/investigates/dod-service-weapons-missing-from-local-departments/29641424 Good news though, School police have decided they might not need granade launchers. http://www.mercurynews.com/california/ci_26559699/l-school-district-give-up-three-grenade-launchers They plan to keep their 60 M16's though. Until the cops steal/lose them.
All this tragic story proves is that the responsibility is on the individual selling, and the restrictions should not be placed on the person buying, but the individual selling the firearm, an example would be... An individual must use a licensed third party with the means of running a background check to sell his firearm. And although the gun was legally sold, it was still illegal the moment it was placed in Mr. Haughton's hands because of the restriction placed on him. Law abiding citizens should not be punished for the mistakes of irresponsible, individual sellers. The restrictions need to be placed on the seller, they're the ones responsible for the item being sold.
No thanks. He was willing to break the law to get a gun, he said we would throw acid in her face. The failure here was protecting the victim of domestic violence. This was also news when background checks failed to pass in the congress. Ah, good times.
No, but you could institute a policy that a cop must try nonlethal deterrents before deadly force is warranted against an unarmed person.
What's so horrible about having to use pepper spray or a tazer before deadly force is warranted against an unarmed person?
Because, take for example the narrative in the Michael Brown case. If the officer's story is true... While going through non-lethal methods before he could use his gun, officer Wilson could have been dead. An unarmed person is still a threat to your life. People laugh at this for some reason, but it is not that difficult for a strong individual to kill another man with his fists. And if he doesn't kill you, he can at least cause significant damage, such as brain damage, blindness, etc. REQUIRING an officer to use non-lethal force against an unarmed individual FIRST, puts them at serious risk of being overpowered and seriously injured or killed by an assailant.
Some of you live in fantasy land. If someone like Anderson Silva is coming at me like a spider monkey with his fists, should I be REQUIRED to go through the use of force continuum, risking being knocked unconscious, before I resort to pulling my weapon? I guess if I don't care about going home to my family I guess I could just exhaust all of my other options first and pray they work. Voice of reason
Well if the officer observes a safe distance (arm's length) his life won't be in risk. Just like, apparently, if somebody doesn't resist arrest his or her life won't be at risk either.
Is the driver's race relevant? Why is it anytime a black guy gets shot, you guys get all up in arms? Why must it always be about race? I honestly thing that is part of the problem. There is a sector of society that doesn't want to move on, because they can't use their victim status any longer...then there is another sector of society that continues to have hateful feelings towards blacks. It's never changing people. We don't live in a perfect society. There will ALWAYS be racists, bigots, and jerks. They come in EVERY color, EVERY gender, EVERY sexual orientation. This is life. The VAST VAST VAST VAST VAST majority of police interactions are never escalated. Stop cherry picking cases to show a problem that really doesn't exist. PERHAPS one of these recent cases was racially motivated...PERHAPS...there is ZERO, NADA, ZILCH, proof of this. It's all based on the perception of those who live in crappy neighborhoods who deal with police on a regular basis because...wait for it....they live in crappy neighborhoods that they destroy themselves, and then when the police come to try and stop it, they get all pissy. There is nothing about this case that indicates race played any part here. More like an officer who got spooked a little too easily. Why do you ASSUME it's because the guy was black?
. . . . because of Michael Browns' superhuman resistance to pepper spray, mace and electricity. His ability to rend muscle and bone with his bare hands. His Mutant ability to move three times faster than Captain America and is super serum induced body. Micheal Brown's superhuman powers could only be balanced by guns and maybe a bazooka. Rocket River
You are so annoying. Are you trying to be this antagonistic? Do you seriously believe the crap you are saying? A 300 pound man running at a police officer AFTER trying to take his gun...and you want him to attempt to pepper spray him?? At what distance??? Wait for him to get 3 feet from him then spray away and hope it kicks in fast enough to stop him from shooting you this time? Why are you standing up for a criminal? This guy deserved to die. He attacked a police officer and tried to take his gun, AFTER robbing a store. He was a thug. He acted like a thug. He met the end, like a thug. Try picking a worthy case to spew your nonsense about racial disparity in police shooting -- which btw can't be verified by statistics.
There you have it folks: Aggrevated Assault? Kevoooo says ... punishable by DEATH! Burglary and Shoplifting? Kevoooo says ... punishable by DEATH! Being a thug? Kevoooo says ... punishable by DEATH! Acting like a thug? Kevoooo says ... punishable by DEATH! There's a quaint society of like-minded individuals in northern Iraq that you might like ... I heard they're trying to set up a society with punishments similar to the ones you described.
Did this man deserve to die? --> yet he still breathes . . . . .. Only way a victim can get justice .. . is if he is perfect . .. is that your statement and claim? an 18 yr old boy deserves to die behind some cigarillos? Is that your claim? Rocket River
Aggravated assault? Are you talking about the assault and robbery? Or the assault where he attempted to take the gun from a police office, and apparently said he was going to shoot him with that? I call that attempted murder. Burglary and shoplifting are not punishable by death, never said such a thing -- please learn to read. Being a thug and attacking police, yes possibly punishable by death -- are you stupid? Acting like a thug and attacking police -- yes, punishable by death....why is this so difficult to believe? You attack the police and try and take their gun, then bum rush them -- you are going to get shot... duh Comparing this to Iraq? Are you f'ing kidding me?
This guy didn't try to shoot the police, I don't remember exactly how he was captured, but I believe he had put down his weapons and was apprehended behind the theater. Not every case is the same, not every suspect does the same thing...had this guy reached for his gun, or still had been holding his gun, he would have been shot and rightfully so. as for the stupid text in the title -- it's this kind of crap that perpetuates the myth that there is some kind of double standard here. He WAS mentally insane -- the fact that he was white is irrelevant, we KNOW that he was insane. The thug mentality applies to white people too, thug is not indicative of blackness, it's a lifestyle that any person can adopt. Why can't you understand this? Let me spell this out for you in simple terms, since either you're incredibly stupid, or trolling. When you ATTACK a police officer, and REACH FOR HIS GUN, and (no proof other than the officer's claim to this part) tell him you're going to shoot him with his own gun -- THEN YES, YOU FKING DESERVE TO DIE. Had Mike Brown just come from church and done the same thing to the cop, he would have been justified in shooting him. He didn't die because he stole some cigs, he died because he attacked a police officer Understand Rocket? HE DIED BECAUSE HE ATTACKED A POLICE OFFICER, NOT BECAUSE HE STOLE CIGS. However, had he not stolen the cigs, perhaps the officer would not have stopped him in the street -- it was only because he fit the description that he approached Mike Brown.
Witnesses lie. Forensic evidence doesn't. Forensic evidence PROVES that he didn't have his hands up, forensic evidence PROVES that he wasn't running away/shot in the back. Forensic evidence PROVES that he assaulted the officer in the car and reached and fired the officer's weapon. Seriously? Why are you taking this guy's side? If you have the perception that police are dirty racists, than use an appropriate case to make your point. Using THIS as an example makes you look foolish and trollish because you have NO argument to justify Mike Brown's actions. Mike Brown is dead because Mike Brown wanted to act like a thug and assaulted a police officer.
Pretty major assumption, but OK... Seriously? I really do wonder how many police officers have ever been pummeled to death by an assailant. I've honestly never heard of it happening at all. I also haven't heard of many assailants who could shrug off a tazer, or the industrial strength pepper spray that LEOs are issued with the ease you seem to assume (so that would be your second major assumption). Absolutely. And, assuming what we have so far, Brown reached for the officer's gun, putting him squarely outside the "unarmed" category. I completely agree that an assailant trying to wrest an officer's gun from him would qualify for lethal force. Really? Again, I wonder how many people are actually beaten to death with nothing but fists. Somehow, I doubt it happens with the ease you describe. UFC fighters are pretty freaking deadly, but only four of them have died in or as a result of sanctioned matches since 2007. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it isn't possible, but it also isn't anywhere near as likely as you seem to assume (your third major assumption). Not if they approach the situation with the appropriate level of caution. Requiring nonlethal options before lethal force would dramatically change the dynamic of how officers approach these situations. It certainly could lead to them being quicker on the trigger, which wouldn't be nearly as big a problem if the trigger in question was that on a pepper spray canister or tazer. If simply being a large man is justification for using deadly force rather than nonlethal options, then we have allowed our police too much latitude, IMO.
