RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,286
|
Post by RSM789 on Sept 3, 2020 14:11:46 GMT -8
Sorry VP, in this scenario, good policing is to light the guy up, even if he is not facing you, and keep shooting until the best parts of him are running down the gutter. Which proves you know nothing about police work or how to do it properly. OK Mr policing expert, please tell us what the cops should have done as Mr. Blake began reaching in the car. You lose points if your suggestions lead to the death of a cop. |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Sept 4, 2020 4:28:02 GMT -8
Which proves you know nothing about police work or how to do it properly. OK Mr policing expert, please tell us what the cops should have done as Mr. Blake began reaching in the car. You lose points if your suggestions lead to the death of a cop. Mr. Blake never should have been allowed to reach his car. Mr. Blake should have been taken into custody before he got close to his alleged weapon. Mr. Blake certainly shouldn't have been shot seven times with his kids in the back seat. Any problems with these statements? |
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,814
|
Post by MDDad on Sept 4, 2020 6:21:33 GMT -8
Mr. Blake never should have physically abused a woman multiple times. Mr. Blake never should have violated a restraining order. Mr. Blake never should have raped a woman with her young child in the same bed. Mr. Blake never should have resisted arrest. Mr. Blake never should have tried to hit a cop. Mr. Blake never should have disregarded their orders to stop. Mr. Blake never should have walked to his car and reached inside for a knife.
|
|
Bick
Administrator 
Posts: 6,900
|
Post by Bick on Sept 4, 2020 6:46:10 GMT -8
In order to do what the anti-cops want regarding no lethal force, the cops would have to be SIGNIFICANTLY stronger than ALL the perps, so much so they would not be injured while making an arrest. The threat of lethal force used to be a deterrent to most. By eliminating that threat, the perps have become more emboldened, and that's causing an even greater amount of injuries and deaths. Think about the first Gulf War. The force we presented was so overwhelming, the enemy pretty much gave up without a fight.
|
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,814
|
Post by MDDad on Sept 4, 2020 7:38:20 GMT -8
In order to do what the anti-cops want regarding no lethal force, the cops would have to be SIGNIFICANTLY stronger than ALL the perps, so much so they would not be injured while making an arrest. The threat of lethal force used to be a deterrent to most. By eliminating that threat, the perps have become more emboldened, and that's causing an even greater amount of injuries and deaths. Think about the first Gulf War. The force we presented was so overwhelming, the enemy pretty much gave up without a fight. So if the Avengers and the Justice League were real, we wouldn't need cops. But they aren't. The only real solution is to depower the police unions, weed out the bad cops, and get rid of them. |
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,900
|
Post by Bick on Sept 4, 2020 7:45:48 GMT -8
Agreed. Ironically, the left wants more unions power as evidenced by AB5 here in CA that killed the gig economy for so many.
Bad teachers, police, workers in general are protected, and individual achievement is stymied by unions.
Not all that hard to connect the dots, but that solution is met week crickets from the left.
They'll scream for accountability, but not for anything that will actually deliver it.
|
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,286
|
Post by RSM789 on Sept 4, 2020 9:20:01 GMT -8
OK Mr policing expert, please tell us what the cops should have done as Mr. Blake began reaching in the car. You lose points if your suggestions lead to the death of a cop. Mr. Blake never should have been allowed to reach his car. Mr. Blake should have been taken into custody before he got close to his alleged weapon. Mr. Blake certainly shouldn't have been shot seven times with his kids in the back seat. Any problems with these statements? Yes, the first two assume the police "allowed" Blake to reach his car or that they refused to take him into custody. Those are incorrect assumptions. The last does not answer the question For Gods sake, they had Blake on the ground and were attempting to take him into custody when he broke free. They weren't playing Twister, they were trying to subdue him. You of all people should know that trying to get a grown man to do something that he doesn't want to do is not simple. Are you suggesting they should have knelt on his neck or put him in a choke-hold to subdue him? When you limit what the police can & can't do to subdue a suspect and the suspect is allowed to do everything & anything to escape, then it is no surprise that some suspects will wiggle out of being taken into custody. So, now that it has been established that some suspects will break free as Mr. Blake did, what do you believe the cops should have done as Mr. Blake reached into his car? |
|
SK80
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 7,376
|
Post by SK80 on Sept 9, 2020 6:36:11 GMT -8
Loop this every day on Wisconsin TV.... how could Biden win this state?
|
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Sept 9, 2020 7:18:18 GMT -8
Mr. Blake never should have been allowed to reach his car. Mr. Blake should have been taken into custody before he got close to his alleged weapon. Mr. Blake certainly shouldn't have been shot seven times with his kids in the back seat. Any problems with these statements? Yes, the first two assume the police "allowed" Blake to reach his car or that they refused to take him into custody. Those are incorrect assumptions. The last does not answer the question For Gods sake, they had Blake on the ground and were attempting to take him into custody when he broke free. They weren't playing Twister, they were trying to subdue him. You of all people should know that trying to get a grown man to do something that he doesn't want to do is not simple. Are you suggesting they should have knelt on his neck or put him in a choke-hold to subdue him? When you limit what the police can & can't do to subdue a suspect and the suspect is allowed to do everything & anything to escape, then it is no surprise that some suspects will wiggle out of being taken into custody. So, now that it has been established that some suspects will break free as Mr. Blake did, what do you believe the cops should have done as Mr. Blake reached into his car? In my opinion, shooting him in the back as the officer had a hold of his shirt was an over-reaction. Hear me out: I am not a trained police officer, but it nevertheless seems to me, the officer should have either yanked him out of the car and to the ground, or backed off several yards with weapon drawn and ordered him out, but wait to see what he came out of the car with. If a gun there is a routine officers are trained on to attempt to disarm, or there are tasers or what not that can subdue him. But 7 shots into the back? That does seem excessive to me. BUT I WAS not THERE, AND I DID NOT just try to subdue him twice, so put my opinion in one hand and spit in the other and see which one fills up first. i don’t disagree with anything Vile Butthead said, but he is as woefully uninformed as I am: No, he SHOULD NOT have been allowed to reach his car, but they tried (twice) and he wriggled free anyway, and his second point is the same as the first: Yes, he should have been subdued... which would have prevented him from reaching his car (duh)... redundant much. And, no, he should not have been shot 7 times with his kids in the car, but his kids being in the car have nothing to do with it: Just another limp attempt to use children to emotionally manipulate the conversation... irrelevant much? see, the one known way to NOT get shot by police is to - Not break the law, but if you do,
- Do not resist arrest, and
- Definitely keep your hands where the officer can see them.
it isn’t difficult.
Maybe Blake WANTED his name on football players helmets and this was the only way he could think to get it.
|
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,814
|
Post by MDDad on Sept 9, 2020 7:59:49 GMT -8
In my opinion, shooting him in the back as the officer had a hold of his shirt was an over-reaction. Maybe I'm just stupid, or maybe I don't understand physics, distance and trajectory, but it seems to me that if a cop is close enough to grab a guy by the shirt, he's close enough to shoot the guy in the arm, or the shoulder, or the leg, or the ass. But not seven times in the back. |
|
SK80
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 7,376
|
Post by SK80 on Sept 9, 2020 8:04:47 GMT -8
In my opinion, shooting him in the back as the officer had a hold of his shirt was an over-reaction. Maybe I'm just stupid, or maybe I don't understand physics, distance and trajectory, but it seems to me that if a cop is close enough to grab a guy by the shirt, he's close enough to shoot the guy in the arm, or the shoulder, or the leg, or the ass. But not seven times in the back. Thats in training whether you believe its right or wrong. Again, when in that situation, at that point, its your life. An officer is not trained at the moment when his or her life is in peril to shoot to wound. Yes its tough to grasp, buts it kill or be killed. |
|
thefrog
Eminence Grise
Posts: 1,819
|
Post by thefrog on Sept 9, 2020 8:16:59 GMT -8
In my opinion, shooting him in the back as the officer had a hold of his shirt was an over-reaction. Maybe I'm just stupid, or maybe I don't understand physics, distance and trajectory, but it seems to me that if a cop is close enough to grab a guy by the shirt, he's close enough to shoot the guy in the arm, or the shoulder, or the leg, or the ass. But not seven times in the back. Doesn’t sound like you’ve ever discharged a weapon before. It ain’t that easy. |
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,814
|
Post by MDDad on Sept 9, 2020 8:21:02 GMT -8
Yes, I have. And even with no police training, I'm pretty convinced I could should a guy in a nonlethal spot when I'm so close to him that I can touch him with the barrel of the gun.
|
|
SK80
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 7,376
|
Post by SK80 on Sept 9, 2020 8:37:15 GMT -8
"pretty convinced" works great in the confines of your home or office while keyboarding!
|
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,900
|
Post by Bick on Sept 9, 2020 9:10:48 GMT -8
Asking pretty much anyone in law enforcement and the military, my answer to the question of "why don't they just shoot them in the leg" was met with the universal answer... The mission is to neutralize the threat.
If he's non-compliant and moving / reaching for a potential weapon, he can acquire it and use it against you.
|
|
