[quote]Pretzel Logic wrote:
That was cool. If I remember correctly, wasn’t one of the lessons from that incident in NY when some cops shot a guy who was leaving a strip club and wouldn’t stop his car driving towards some cops that a vehicles being used as a weapon didn’t warrant deadly force? That doesn’t make sense to me. [/quote]
Wasn’t that the one where the guy had more holes in him than swiss cheese when the pi… I mean cops stopped firing at him?
[quote]lixy wrote:
toki123 wrote:
no. no. NO.
Fuck man. Seriously. Are you an officer? I sure as hell hope not.
If you THINK someone is going to pull a weapon on you, you are willing to shoot them? People like you are truly dangerous to this society.
You need to spend some time reflecting on what human life means to you, and how easily you are willing to take it.
When you rationalize bombing a country and killing countless innocents because you THINK they [u]have[/u] weapons, you’ll understand why Mikey and the others are justifying the cop’s actions. I mean, the cop could have really thought his life was on the line. It’s not like the decision to shoot was taken in cold blood or millions of people around the world were protesting to warn him that it was a cellphone. The cop had a fraction of a second to make the decision and nobody warning him of the harmlessness of that 13 years old kid.[/quote]
This from Lixy, the enabler of terrorism in the name of Islam, in order to secure 72 virgins…it’s legitimate self defense of course.
lixy, do you even attempt to see things from the cops point of view?
[quote]Hagar wrote:
lixy, do you even attempt to see things from the cops point of view?[/quote]
Sure. It’s certainly not an easy job enforcing the law in a country where everybody and his sister have guns. I can’t really blame him for not taking a chance with his life. My comment was addressed at Mike’s badly phrased first comment. It’s evidently not sufficient to “think” someone has the intention to harm you. You’d better be positive before using a lethal weapon. The case of the cop is different, and all I did was emphasize the difference. I brought up the non-existing WMDs analogy is because I know Mikey supported the war, at a time when every one knew Saddam was no threat to the USA.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Hagar wrote:
lixy, do you even attempt to see things from the cops point of view?
Sure. It’s certainly not an easy job enforcing the law in a country where everybody and his sister have guns. I can’t really blame him for not taking a chance with his life. My comment was addressed at Mike’s badly phrased first comment. It’s evidently not sufficient to “think” someone has the intention to harm you. You’d better be positive before using a lethal weapon. The case of the cop is different, and all I did was emphasize the difference. I brought up the non-existing WMDs analogy is because I know Mikey supported the war, at a time when every one knew Saddam was no threat to the USA.
[/quote]
OK We have different views but I understand what your saying.
does it matter if the guy pulled a gun? Hell yes, it matters. As for the driver driving away with the officer on the hood, wouldn’t you assume the guy is gonna try to run? He did it a few times before the officer mounted the car.
I guess i missed it, how did the officer end up on the car? was he just trying not to get run over or did he intentionally climb on the car?
sometimes its better to let the stupid punks get away. going 100 mph on those roads could have ended really badly for innocent bystanders. Then the driver got blown away. protect and serve and all that good stuff.
The cop is obviously an idiot. If he wasn’t an idiot, he wouldn’t have been a cop in the first place. UBO7 has a point there. Cops are just a cog in a huge governmental machine they simply can’t understand.
[quote]UB07 wrote:
does it matter if the guy pulled a gun? Hell yes, it matters. As for the driver driving away with the officer on the hood, wouldn’t you assume the guy is gonna try to run? He did it a few times before the officer mounted the car.
I guess i missed it, how did the officer end up on the car? was he just trying not to get run over or did he intentionally climb on the car?
[/quote]
That was my first thought. It seems kind of crazy to get on the hood when you know the guy is going to drive. Then I got to think about some of the situations I’ve been in, and well, weird stuff happens in combat. Oftentimes people do tactically unsound things because their body is thinking faster than their head. Then again, it could have just been something we didn’t see. Perhaps he was being a knucklehead and standing in front of the car when the guy started to drive then jumped on the hood. Who knows? Either way, you’ve got to let that one pass.
[quote]
sometimes its better to let the stupid punks get away. going 100 mph on those roads could have ended really badly for innocent bystanders. Then the driver got blown away. protect and serve and all that good stuff.[/quote]
Now, I can really sympathize with this position. It is actually one that I held until just recently. Then it occurred to me that here in America the right of self defense is being abridged daily. Many states do not allow you to carry a firearm. Most states that do, require you to get a permit. Only a very few, like here in Idaho, allow you your Constitutional right to open carry a firearm without a permit (though you need a permit to conceal). Anyways, my point is, that when the right of self-defense is abridged, then you HAVE to rely upon the police for your protection. When you have to rely on them for your protection, you cannot expect them to let people just get away, unless it is for obviously small infractions. Anyways, I feel ya man.
mike
[quote]UB07 wrote:
I guess i missed it, how did the officer end up on the car? was he just trying not to get run over or did he intentionally climb on the car?
sometimes its better to let the stupid punks get away. going 100 mph on those roads could have ended really badly for innocent bystanders. Then the driver got blown away. protect and serve and all that good stuff.[/quote]
I see what your saying. But to add some balance
If you keep letting them run then how are you supposed to stop them? This will make things worse by giving more criminals the confidence that they can get away.
I personally believe that people who steal cars and run from the cops should be shot at if the situation allows. If they run for a bit then pull over and surrender then no. I know its not something most would agree with but someone who steels someone’s car is a worthless piece of shit. Unfortunately most of these guys get away with doing little time, and they show little if no remorse for their actions. In fact many are proud of their crimes.
I’m thinking more from the victims perspective. You bust your ass to earn the money to buy a car. That car for most is their livelihood. Some subhuman comes along and takes it. An act of extreme selfishness. Do I care about a person like that??? no.
[quote]Stelman wrote:
The cop is obviously an idiot. If he wasn’t an idiot, he wouldn’t have been a cop in the first place. UBO7 has a point there. Cops are just a cog in a huge governmental machine they simply can’t understand.[/quote]
Well there’s a mature rational perspective.
Please, Stelman…tell us all what profession you are in. I’d be absolutely fascinated to hear what sort of job you have, that has allowed you such razor sharp insight into the inner workings of the “governmental machine”.
Or, perhaps you are just one of those douchebags who suck on the big unemployment tit of America, claiming intellectual superiority while looking down your little bitch nose at those of us who actually work for a living?
Please…by all means…fill us in.
I actually agree with Lixy for once. The cop said “I am going to take him out if I can.” He claimed that the driver tried to ram him when he clearly did not. You can see in the video, all he did was try to escape. Yes, that is illegal, but the cop was just thirsty for blood.
Why do you think he got suspended?
Here is more info.
http://www.officer.com/online/article.jsp?siteSection=1&id=37661
The guy injured two cops with a stolen car. He brought that on himself.
Then there is the thirteen year old who got shot managed to get himself shot. The kid was going around asking to get himself shot. He’s lucky it was the police.
I have to wonder what is wrong with the parents saying they are angry about what happened. If they should be angry at anyone they should be mad at themselves for not raising their kid to have any common sense.
Lixy has the typical European liberals attitude that it is terrible for someone who engages in bad behaviour to suffer misfortune as a result of their bad behaviour.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Here is more info.
http://www.officer.com/online/article.jsp?siteSection=1&id=37661
The guy injured two cops with a stolen car. He brought that on himself.
Then there is the thirteen year old who got shot managed to get himself shot. The kid was going around asking to get himself shot. He’s lucky it was the police.
I have to wonder what is wrong with the parents saying they are angry about what happened. If they should be angry at anyone they should be mad at themselves for not raising their kid to have any common sense.
Lixy has the typical European liberals attitude that it is terrible for someone who engages in bad behaviour to suffer misfortune as a result of their bad behaviour. [/quote]
So that clears it up he deserved what he got.
I don’t see how one could take the drivers side and not the cops in this case. If you still think they were in the wrong then we have completely different hearts.
I’m a psychologist. And I’m not american, I’m european. Many guys here seem to have a fascination with guns. Before you say that a cop deserves to shot someone who tags or steals a car, first think why law is there in the first place. Who the law really serves. Alright, the kid stole a car.
[quote]Stelman wrote:
I’m a psychologist. And I’m not american, I’m european. Many guys here seem to have a fascination with guns. Before you say that a cop deserves to shot someone who tags or steals a car, first think why law is there in the first place. Who the law really serves. Alright, the kid stole a car.[/quote]
So what’s your diagnosis Doc. How do you see such a fascination with guns here? Its just a tool. I’m not getting your picture. Maybe your the one with the fascination for guns? I see most these people fascinated on the actions of the cops and robber. Myself included.
For Heaven’s sake, I passed no judgment on the OP’s story! Heck, I did not even comment on Hagar putting private property above human life.
[quote]Chewie wrote:
I actually agree with Lixy for once. The cop said “I am going to take him out if I can.” He claimed that the driver tried to ram him when he clearly did not. You can see in the video, all he did was try to escape. Yes, that is illegal, but the cop was just thirsty for blood.
Why do you think he got suspended?
[/quote]
He was put on administrative leave, as is normal, not suspended.
[quote]Chewie wrote:
I actually agree with Lixy for once. The cop said “I am going to take him out if I can.” He claimed that the driver tried to ram him when he clearly did not. You can see in the video, all he did was try to escape. Yes, that is illegal, but the cop was just thirsty for blood.
Why do you think he got suspended?
[/quote]
Were you watching the same video I watched? The car did attempt to ram the cop. When he said he was going to try to take him out - I am pretty sure that meant he was going to try and spin him, or use some other maneuver to disable the car.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Chewie wrote:
I actually agree with Lixy for once. The cop said “I am going to take him out if I can.” He claimed that the driver tried to ram him when he clearly did not. You can see in the video, all he did was try to escape. Yes, that is illegal, but the cop was just thirsty for blood.
Why do you think he got suspended?
Were you watching the same video I watched? The car did attempt to ram the cop. When he said he was going to try to take him out - I am pretty sure that meant he was going to try and spin him, or use some other maneuver to disable the car. [/quote]
Same thing I thought. PTO stop (pursuit take out?) where they hit the right rear quarter panel and spin the car out of control.
Simple Darwinian theory at work. Do really stupid things and attack people who have the ability to shoot you and chances are eventually you get shot. Those smart enough not to act that way carry on the species.