Some US cops? Have you seen policing is most other parts of the world? But yes, US is better than every other country, so we should be held to a higher standard - I agree with that.
Take away the lethal force and you emasculate law enforcement. There's a certain level of deterrence that's lost. Has anybody here ever dealt with someone high on angeldust (not saying this guy was...we don't know yet)? Good luck taking them down with a taser, especially if it's a big boy.
Some US cops? Have you seen policing is most other parts of the world? But yes, US is better than every other country, so we should be held to a higher standard - I agree with that.
I'm not suggesting that lethal force be done away with entirely, just that it not be the first resort in confrontations as it has so recently become. Possessing lethal force as a deterrent doesn't mean that it can be justifiably used anytime that a cop is in a difficult or even frightening situation.
It's alarming that there is a significant percentage of people who seem to think that the shooting in the Crutcher case would be justified by his alleged noncompliance with police instructions, by the possibility that he was high, or by the possibility that he may have had a long criminal record. None of those things should ever be seen as sufficient, whether alone or in combination, to justify resort to lethal force.
I agree with the first part of your post...there's a time and a place.
As for the second, it appears very clear to Crutcher that the cops are drawn with their weapons charged. Do as they say...who's to say whether he was reaching for a ham sandwich, a gun or nothing... You just don't know, and might not find out until it's too late
So, you think non-compliance can (or should) carry a death sentence, particularly if the cop gets scared? What if he wasn't capable of complying (say it's not Crutcher, but a deaf person who can't hear what he's being told to do)? What if he believed he was trying to comply?
What if Crutcher had believed that he faced imminent bodily harm? Should he have the right to shoot first and ask questions later without facing criminal liability?
It's situation-specific
While I vehemently disagree with you, surely if you're going to take that route, you can formulate some sort of bright line to assess when non-compliance is enough and when it's not, right?
And I guess nothing on my hypothetical in which the tables are turned?
just call it a hunch
So its really just up to the whim of the officer, I guess. That's a solid Cons utional rule.
So tired of hearing uncons utional. I think it's time to dump it, obviously this is a whole other world than what it was when all that was written. Why do we need to live our 2016 lives over something written how many years ago?
Yes stop and frisk......absolutely! Why am I not worried about being stopped and frisked?
If Crutcher had been stopped and frisk he'd still be alive today.
At no time, even when I was a kid did I just hang out on the streets. I was either going or coming. What do people do just hanging round, yep, looking for trouble.
Last edited by Avante; 09-22-2016 at 03:45 PM.
I could have stopped at the bold part and said exactly but
1) I took the precaution to write Some to not generalize anything
2) I obviously, as you said it in a sarcastic way in the bold part, don't compare US police with Death Squad police in Rio de Janeiro cleaning up streets of the homeless kids. Now yes I've seen policing in an healthy amount of countries
Just out of curiosity, how wouldn't this infringe upon the very basic Second Amendment right to bear arms that I keep hearing shouldn't be limited in any meaningful way?
Does the Second Amendment not really apply with full force to black dudes?
Just charged her with manslaughter
The right to bear arms was written when ya could walk into a bar wearing a gun. Things aren't like that anymore obviously, imagine if we could still walk around with pistols at our sides.
Having that rifle at home to hunt with, that pistol at home for protection is something different.
Nobody allowed to leave home with a gun. Race a non factor.
So, you don't really care about the Second Amendment?
I don't care about anthing written hundreds of yeas ago about the laws of the land today. We live in a totally different world today....TOTALLY~~~ So we need to live by what makes sense now.
Why dump a president who is doing a great job after 8 years? That make any sense, nope~ As long as people are happy with him why the change?
Every four years, we get a chance ti vote on stay or go.
don't bother he does not even understand your question![]()
You do realize that the 2 term limit thing isn't even 100 years old, right?
Gets right down to it most of the tax laws are completely uncons utional.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/22/us/tul...ged/index.html
Tulsa police officer charged with manslaughter
"Attorneys for Crutcher's family said they were "happy charges have been brought" against the officer and they will be seeking a "vigorous prosecution" of this case that results in a confection. "
I hope for one too
![]()
Don't play that guy, ok? Nothing written that long ago should be effecting our lives today, ya really don't get that?
Yes I do, so why do we have it now? Why mess up a good thing?
Every four years we vote on stay or go? If it's go then others try to win the next election to replace him.
By doing stop and frisk
Found uncons utional because of racial profiling by the federal courts and wildly ineffective in deterring crime.
Gotta love him
you understood nothing about FDWT post... this has nothing to do with stuff written long time ago
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)