JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
From an article

Authorities found that the bullets fired by Hankison traveled into the neighboring apartment while three residents were home – a male, a pregnant female, and a child, Attorney General Daniel Cameron said at a press conference after the grand jury's announcement. Hankinson was not charged in Taylor's death, but rather for endangering her neighbors' lives.
 
The way I read it, and don't take the accuracy for granted nor that it's the full story, was that the officer went outside and fired through a sliding glass door that had the blinds drawn. He didn't have line of sight to where he was shooting. What do you see as BS about that being endangerment? I've not been involved in a shooting so I don't know the scenario where this would be necessary

I saw that, I didn't mean that he didn't do it, I mean that they charged someone with something, to make it look like they did SOMETHING. If this wasn't in the public eye, he likely wouldn't have been charged with that IMO.

That's why I said he got charged with a BS charge, none of them got anything serious. You have to assess the whole statement...If you assess the whole statement it reads as, he got charged for show with something minor, none of them including him got anything serious.

You'll note more and more, after a thug shoots at or otherwise attacks police, the state must find something to charge the cops with, even when acting in self defense. Such as the cops in the Atlanta case....or the McCloskey's, or the couple in Detroit at Chipotle...
 
Last Edited:
Was he not under fire himself, was not another officer in fact shot by the douchebag boyfriend?

You are not allowed to defend yourself remember? You must allow yourself or others be killed by drug dealing thugs. If you shoot back, you are in the wrong. Meanwhile, if they kill someone with their shooting, they get to riot in the streets and go looting as well as burn the city to the ground. It's the new America.:rolleyes:
 
I saw that, I didn't mean that he didn't do it, I mean that they charged someone with something, to make it look like they did SOMETHING. If this wasn't in the public eye, he likely wouldn't have been charged with that IMO.

You'll note more and more, after a thug shoots at or otherwise attacks police, the state must find something to charge the cops with, even when acting in self defense. Such as the cops in the Atlanta case....or the McCloskey's, or the couple in Detroit at Chipotle...
Understood, and it's unfortunate. I lived in a city that had a Brady Street, named after Tate Brady. They found out Tate was a racist, so the SJW had an uprising to change the name. Luckily, the city listened and changed the name to.....Brady Street, named after Mathew Brady, a Civil War photographer. But they "did something"
 
Last Edited:
Understood, and it's unfortunately. I lived in a city that had a Brady Street, named after Tate Brady. They found out Tate was a racist, so the SJW had an uprising to change the name. Luckily, the city listened and changed the name to.....Brady Street, named after Mathew Brady, a Civil War photography. But they "did something"


The mob now rules, so one must always do something. Like Costco pulling the cheese of a guy who posted about there not being outrage after two of his friends were murdered, I'll leave it at that.
 
2 officers shot in Louisville:



 
I hear Ted Kaczynski was mostly peaceful. Except when he wasn't. :rolleyes:

How you can make excuses for an organization that has routinely burned cities and executed people is beyond me. I expect a little political bias here and there but this has become downright dangerous.
 
Unfortunately this will continue to the weekend nationwide. The usual left leaning talking heads will give their "social justice warrior" pep talk and play the blame game. The conventional wisdom is to avoid violent crowds and stay away from burning cities, the sad truth is the "bad actors" want to burn everything down. Watch your six and keep your blood pressure in check. Be safe all.
 
Not sure how that would equate to shooting when you don't know where your bullets are going. I'm not a lawyer but I don't think being under fire is carte blanche to be irresponsible with a deadly weapon.
Yeah I guess your right, a convicted felon blazing away at you and your team through a closed door, best to wait until he opens up for you huh? Get out much dude? Remind me not to have you on my QRF..dang.
 
Methinks there might have been just a hint of sarcasm involved...
 

"... these officers created the situation in which [detective] Cosgrove found himself reflexively firing 16 rounds down a dark hallway. When a terrified man had the temerity to defend himself against a bewildering home invasion, Cosgrove and his colleagues responded with overwhelming force, firing a total of 32 bullets. The legal determination that 22 of those rounds were justified ... "

"... Myles Cosgrove, ... detective ...told investigators the incident unfolded so quickly that he was not consciously aware of using his gun ..."




" Cosgrove's description of the incident does not necessarily cast doubt on that conclusion, but it does underline the dangers inherent in the armed home invasions that police routinely use to enforce drug prohibition. Those dangers include not only the well-known risk that residents will mistake cops for robbers but the possibility that police will mistake their colleagues' gunfire for an assault by their targets. In such chaotic circumstances, there is also a risk that police will be injured or killed by friendly fire. "
 

"... these officers created the situation in which [detective] Cosgrove found himself reflexively firing 16 rounds down a dark hallway. When a terrified man had the temerity to defend himself against a bewildering home invasion, Cosgrove and his colleagues responded with overwhelming force, firing a total of 32 bullets. The legal determination that 22 of those rounds were justified ... "

"... Myles Cosgrove, ... detective ...told investigators the incident unfolded so quickly that he was not consciously aware of using his gun ..."




" Cosgrove's description of the incident does not necessarily cast doubt on that conclusion, but it does underline the dangers inherent in the armed home invasions that police routinely use to enforce drug prohibition. Those dangers include not only the well-known risk that residents will mistake cops for robbers but the possibility that police will mistake their colleagues' gunfire for an assault by their targets. In such chaotic circumstances, there is also a risk that police will be injured or killed by friendly fire. "
32 rounds? Those are rookie numbers. There were enough cops there to fire hundreds of rounds. :D

On a serious note, I'm no fan of no-knock warrants but seeing as they did knock and announce and the bad guys shot first, que sera sera.
 
On a serious note, I'm no fan of no-knock warrants but seeing as they did knock and announce and the bad guys shot first, que sera sera.
I don't blame the officers but whoever planned this and the laws that allow no-knock warrants in situations like this are horsecrap. This should have been served by uniformed officers in daylight hours. If the target(s) for the raid were out, all the better, scoop them up at the same time outside the home.
 

Upcoming Events

Falcon Gun Show - Classic Gun & Knife Show
Stanwood, WA
Lakeview Spring Gun Show
Lakeview, OR
Albany Gun Show
Albany, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top