• Police Brutality: Deaf Woodcarver Murdered By Cop In 5 seconds
    296 replies, posted
All i'm saying is that he had no reason to shoot him in the first place but now that hes decided to shoot him he should have only fired one shot and possibly aimed for the leg/arm/etc. [editline]23rd December 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=Perfumly;26917627]aydin please just admit that you are wrong so we can stop making you look stupid[/QUOTE] NEVA! I'm right even when i'm wrong.
[QUOTE=aydin690;26917774]All i'm saying is that he had no reason to shoot him in the first place but now that hes decided to shoot him he should have only fired one shot and possibly aimed for the leg/arm/etc.[/QUOTE] And we have explained at length why that doesn't make sense. You don't get to "sort of" try to kill people. I sure as hell don't want to live in a world where cops are trained to maim suspects with their sidearms.
[QUOTE=aydin690;26917774]All i'm saying is that he had no reason to shoot him in the first place [/QUOTE] We all agree with this [QUOTE=aydin690;26917774]he should have only fired one shot and possibly aimed for the leg/arm/etc. [/QUOTE] While what he did was wrong you should never be attempting to use a firearm as a non-lethal weapon when you have at least two other non-lethal weapons at your disposal in the first place.
[QUOTE=aydin690;26917774]All i'm saying is that he had no reason to shoot him in the first place but now that hes decided to shoot him he should have only fired one shot and possibly aimed for the leg/arm/etc. [editline]23rd December 2010[/editline] NEVA! I'm right even when i'm wrong.[/QUOTE] You should make yourself always right by changing what you say to what is factual.
holding a knife is a crime? can you really call carving brandishing?
Do you what's the main problem here? Guns. Gee, think of how safe we'd be if everyone had a gun! Comes down to this: for some reason, Americans (and almost no one else on the planet earth) think guns "protect" people. No...guns (I'm talking handguns here) have only one purpose. To kill or severely injure people. End of story. If guns protected people, the US would be the safest place known to man. But for some reason, very few people in that country can understand that adding guns to a situation makes it more dangerous and not less. The problem isn't that there aren't enough guns. The problem is that the US continues to produce guns in record numbers. The only solution is to make significantly less of them, and make them extremely hard to get. Pro-gun people argue all the time that law-abiding people "need" guns to protect them from the criminals that have them. Well, what's the solution? Make it harder for criminals to get them. Now of course criminals are going to go to whatever means they need to obtain them. Therefore the only solution is to physically produce less guns. Only by limiting supply (and yes, this will take a long time, given the number of guns already out there) can you get them out of the hands of people that shouldn't have them. But adding guns to a situation never made it any safer, and only increases the chance of someone getting shot. [editline]23rd December 2010[/editline] Not all cops need guns either; Just look at british cops.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GgWrV8TcUc[/media] god I hate abusive cops. the one in this video was fired
[QUOTE=aydin690;26918198]Do you what's the main problem here? Guns. Gee, think of how safe we'd be if everyone had a gun! Comes down to this: for some reason, Americans (and almost no one else on the planet earth) think guns "protect" people. No...guns (I'm talking handguns here) have only one purpose. To kill or severely injure people. End of story. If guns protected people, the US would be the safest place known to man. But for some reason, very few people in that country can understand that adding guns to a situation makes it more dangerous and not less. The problem isn't that there aren't enough guns. The problem is that the US continues to produce guns in record numbers. The only solution is to make significantly less of them, and make them extremely hard to get. Pro-gun people argue all the time that law-abiding people "need" guns to protect them from the criminals that have them. Well, what's the solution? Make it harder for criminals to get them. Now of course criminals are going to go to whatever means they need to obtain them. Therefore the only solution is to physically produce less guns. Only by limiting supply (and yes, this will take a long time, given the number of guns already out there) can you get them out of the hands of people that shouldn't have them. But adding guns to a situation never made it any safer, and only increases the chance of someone getting shot. [editline]23rd December 2010[/editline] Not all cops need guns either; Just look at british cops.[/QUOTE] You wouldn't fuck around if everyone in the room had a gun on them, would you?
[QUOTE=Dr. Freeman;26918251]You wouldn't fuck around if everyone in the room had a gun on them, would you?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=aydin690;26918198] Comes down to this: for some reason, Americans (and almost no one else on the planet earth) think guns "protect" people.[/QUOTE] You must be an American citizen.
[QUOTE=aydin690;26918198]Comes down to this: for some reason, Americans (and almost no one else on the planet earth) think guns "protect" people. [/QUOTE] They can
[QUOTE=Tetracycline;26918411]They can[/QUOTE] I respectfully disagree.
[QUOTE=aydin690;26917774]All i'm saying is that he had no reason to shoot him in the first place but now that hes decided to shoot him he should have only fired one shot and possibly aimed for the leg/arm/etc. [editline]23rd December 2010[/editline] NEVA! I'm right even when i'm wrong.[/QUOTE] when you make the decision to shoot someone you make the decision to kill them. if you aren't prepared to kill someone you do not fire the gun. simple as.
[QUOTE=aydin690;26918422]I respectfully disagree.[/QUOTE] how come
God damn it Hezzy.
[QUOTE=Tetracycline;26918435]how come[/QUOTE] I believe you missed my long ass post.
[QUOTE=aydin690;26917569]Zero but at least i know i can make the shot from 5m away.[/QUOTE] and if you did make that shot you would be the one in prison for irresponsible use of a firearm.
[QUOTE=TH89;26917595]Okay look, let me try to explain this from another angle. Let's say you're a cop. There's a guy getting away who you want to stop, but you don't have any reason to kill him. You pull out your gun and try to shoot him in the leg. Oops! You missed and shot him in the head by mistake. Now he's dead. Do you think people are going to say "oh well that's a shame, but the officer wasn't shooting to kill, so that's alright." Or are they going to say "this is the last straw, these power tripping cops can get away with murder!" Considering how outraged people get over the occasional death from the "non-lethal" taser, I'd guess it'd be something like the latter.[/QUOTE] lol yep people go to police courses for years witch include target practice. Of course they might kill someone by accident. Say I'm a dentist and I'm trying to clean someone's teeth. Woops, I stabbed the poor fucker in the throat by accident and now he's choking to death. It's okay :downs: My years of practice had nothing to do with it :downs:
[QUOTE=Pasalaqcua;26918723]lol yep people go to police courses for years witch include target practice. Of course they might kill someone by accident. Say I'm a dentist and I'm trying to clean someone's teeth. Woops, I stabbed the poor fucker in the throat by accident and now he's choking to death. It's okay :downs: My years of practice had nothing to do with it :downs:[/QUOTE] as a cop you don't kill someone by accident, when you shoot someone you're shooting to kill.
Another day, another reason to never leave your home. Yeah, I'm a paranoid fuck.
That man was probably craving something for a grand-daughter or grand-son for Christmas. He looked like a nice person.
[QUOTE=aydin690;26917487]Dude, i live in CANADA and i know how to use a gun. That's like the most peaceful place in the world.[/QUOTE] what credibility does that give you?
[QUOTE=dustyjo;26919000]Another day, another reason to never leave your home. Yeah, I'm a paranoid fuck.[/QUOTE] I'm with you on this one >_>
"FUCK! that guy has a staple gun, I better pull over and shoot him!" [editline]24th December 2010[/editline] Seriously, since when is a carving knife even a weapon, especially in this context.
[QUOTE=aydin690;26916708]That's just dumb. Instead of shooting him 5 times in the torso he could have aimed at his legs and at least one of those 5 shots would have hit him in the leg (unless he sucks giant balls at aiming).[/QUOTE] You aim for the centre mass of the body for a reason. It's much easier to hit someone in the chest than it is in the leg or arm for example. Recently in Sydney, New South Wales, we had some armed robber attempt to hijack an armoured transport vehicle. Armoured vehicle personnel are one of the few people that can carry a gun in Australia, and in this case, they chose to use them, to protect their cargo. The guard attempted to disable the robber by shooting them in the legs. I'm guessing he missed, because in the 6 shots that he fired off, the bullet hit the ground and ricocheted into someone, who is lucky to be alive today. You just don't shoot someone in the leg or arm - it's too hard.
[QUOTE=Pasalaqcua;26918723]Say I'm a dentist and I'm trying to clean someone's teeth. Woops, I stabbed the poor fucker in the throat by accident and now he's choking to death. It's okay :downs: My years of practice had nothing to do with it :downs:[/QUOTE] Are you saying that since cops have firearms training, it's not possible for them to make a mistake? That's stupid.
Cop's holstering weapons reflect the training mentality, they are semi automatic handguns and they are loaded with hollowpoint rounds, that means they intend to shoot unarmored targets multiple times at close range with maximum stopping power. In a "standoff" scenario, a cop usually is not going to pull out his gun unless he intends to perforate somebody immediately.
no wonder america is the most hated country in the world
[QUOTE=aydin690;26917250]What? What are you even trying to say? He had no reason to shoot him in the first place, let alone shooting him 5 times in the torso. [editline]23rd December 2010[/editline] You still have a higher chance of surviving a leg wound than a shot in the torso because you have more vital organs in your torso. :downs:[/QUOTE] ...No. You don't. Being shot in the leg is HIGHLY lethal. Why are you so thick? All your posts just scream naive ignorant liberal. And no, I'm not right wing at all. [editline]23rd December 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=aydin690;26917774]All i'm saying is that he had no reason to shoot him in the first place but now that hes decided to shoot him he should have only fired one shot and possibly aimed for the leg/arm/etc. [editline]23rd December 2010[/editline] NEVA! I'm right even when i'm wrong.[/QUOTE] Again, wrong. If he had fired JUST one bullet, it would have looked like a fucking execution, as it is, it looks like panic. It's too bad, but still. You're so thick.
[QUOTE=Jiyoon;26918126]holding a knife is a crime? can you really call carving brandishing?[/QUOTE] Well it's not exactly the norm to be walking around with a knife in your hands, most people keep them in their pockets unless they intend to use them. Though as already stated- the cop's a little trigger happy. If I were in the car and I saw him, I'd probably pull up, and ask him what was up and recommend he put the knife away. In Philly it's cool to have a knife on you, just as long as it isn't spring-loaded or powered like a ballistic knife, and as long as it's either displayed or of a certain length.
Knives were orgionally created as tools. I don't see why you shouldn't be allowed to carry a knife around in the open, it's a tool like any other. You could take a reciporcating saw, a device which is easily far more dangerous than a knife, yet nobody would give you second glance were you to carry one of those.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.