Level of outrage = 10. Officers who killed Eric Scott honored as 'top cops'

[billdeserthills]

Again, wrong, but i'm ok with you guys believing it

Well, instead of pointless banter hows about educating the rest of us, if you are privy to some info...

 

[locobob]

I feel it all goes back to the "Us vs Them" attitude I find prevalent on the Police Force. Really unfortunate as I guarantee that most of the people that attitude is being applied to are not criminals, they are Citizens, and should not be treated like criminals, not for one second.

I agree

I've encountered far too many Cops with this kind of attitude - automatically assuming the worst often justified by the blanket term "officer safety". Professionalism and officer safety are all well and good but in my opinion they should always take a back seat to "To Serve and Protect". I think too many Cops have adopted a quasi-military posture and have lost sight of the idea of serving their communities.

 

[dmancornell]

Here's another instance of the cops giving each other awards for murdering innocent people, this time in NY:

Pleasantville Cop Aaron Hess Who Shot And Killed Pace University Student Danroy Henry Named Officer Of The Year « CBS New York

Serve and protect!

 

[billdeserthills]

Here's another instance of the cops giving each other awards for murdering innocent people, this time in NY:

Pleasantville Cop Aaron Hess Who Shot And Killed Pace University Student Danroy Henry Named Officer Of The Year « CBS New York

Serve and protect!

I find this case interesting because in some ways it is similar to something that happened here in Fountain Hills, AZ. A woman was trying to get some oxycontin at a pharmacy with forged scripts, an officer Lovelace shot the woman when she drove her vehicle in his direction. The officer was asked by a judge if he thought that shooting the woman was actually going to make her vehicle stop? Officer Lovelace was fired, alas he never received his "Officer of the Year Award"

 

[All2kool]

I find this case interesting because in some ways it is similar to something that happened here in Fountain Hills, AZ. A woman was trying to get some oxycontin at a pharmacy with forged scripts, an officer Lovelace shot the woman when she drove her vehicle in his direction. The officer was asked by a judge if he thought that shooting the woman was actually going to make her vehicle stop? Officer Lovelace was fired, alas he never received his "Officer of the Year Award"

A Motor Vehicle is a deadly weapon; not that you can stop one with a handgun but it is nonetheless, a deadly weapon. I'd have shot at her too.

 

[mjbskwim]

A Motor Vehicle is a deadly weapon; not that you can stop one with a handgun but it is nonetheless, a deadly weapon. I'd have shot at her too.

Oh eventually it would stop,after a few rounds through the grill or hood.

And I believe I might take a plug at someone trying to run me down.

 

[mjbskwim]

Here's another instance of the cops giving each other awards for murdering innocent people, this time in NY:

Pleasantville Cop Aaron Hess Who Shot And Killed Pace University Student Danroy Henry Named Officer Of The Year « CBS New York

Serve and protect!

WOW,even if he was drunk,he was driving away,so the cop shot him in the back?
He wasn't a threat to Hess any more right? When was it OK to shoot drunk drivers?

 

[Shooter98]

Ok, so since everyone is responding to this thread and MAYBE doesn't understand all the angles let me ask you all a question. Try and just answer the question and not try to dissect it to validate your previous discussions.

If (strong if) you were an leo and an inebriated person, known to be armed (pistol, knife, teaspoon it doesn't matter) was running away from you BUT towards innocent civilians would you shoot?

Remember, the objective is to just answer the question as a keeper and sworn protector of the peace.

 

[All2kool]

Ok, so since everyone is responding to this thread and MAYBE doesn't understand all the angles let me ask you all a question. Try and just answer the question and not try to dissect it to validate your previous discussions.

If (strong if) you were an leo and an inebriated person, known to be armed (pistol, knife, teaspoon it doesn't matter) was running away from you BUT towards innocent civilians would you shoot?

Remember, the objective is to just answer the question as a keeper and sworn protector of the peace.

It is the responsibility of any LEO to protect innocent lives; there can be no exception to this. If a LEO knows that an armed and dangerous person could endanger the lives of innocent people, he must take whatever measures are necessary to stop that imminent threat.

 

[usmc9705]

you can paint a turd blue, but its still a turd and it smells like crap.

 

[Shooter98]

It is the responsibility of any LEO to protect innocent lives; there can be no exception to this. If a LEO knows that an armed and dangerous person could endanger the lives of innocent people, he must take whatever measures are necessary to stop that imminent threat.

Exactly. Now, can a person be considered armed and dangerous while driving drunk and refuses to stop? Yes, absolutely. More people are killed by drunk drivers refusing to stop than most people know. Imagine if that person sitting at the bus stop on the corner who just got ran over was your wife, son, daughter grandchild. Would you not have found lethal force acceptible to stop him BEFORE he ran them over? Just maybe. This folks, is the reason why America has trials by jury, so no single person who is blinded by their own individual idealisms can decide the fate of any man.

 

[All2kool]

Exactly. Now, can a person be considered armed and dangerous while driving drunk and refuses to stop? Yes, absolutely. More people are killed by drunk drivers refusing to stop than most people know. Imagine if that person sitting at the bus stop on the corner who just got ran over was your wife, son, daughter grandchild. Would you not have found lethal force acceptible to stop him BEFORE he ran them over? Just maybe. This folks, is the reason why America has trials by jury, so no single person who is blinded by their own individual idealisms can decide the fate of any man.

Well said, well said.

 

[evltwn]

It generally (notice I didn't say always) involves several faulty decisions by a person before becoming dead at the hands of a cop. Are there bad cops? Absolutely! Do I wish every single one of them to go home in one piece at the end of their shift? Absolutely, once again.

Before you second guess police, consider why we employ them, and what they go through. Things that we don't, nor would want, to go through ourselves. God bless every single one of them. Oh, and don't forget to call me a moron if you disagree.

 

[dmancornell]

Would you not have found lethal force acceptible to stop him BEFORE he ran them over?

People should be punished for potential future actions? Cops can predict the future? Is that part of recruit training?

I didn't know Minority Report was factual.

so no single person who is blinded by their own individual idealisms can decide the fate of any man.

And yet, any cop on a power trip can execute a man because he saw a "threat". So in America, guilt is decided by jury, except when it's been decided by some bully with a badge and a gun. Hypocrisy much?

By your definition of a "threat", cops should go and murder every mental ward patient because they might snap and kill some wife, son, grandma, or whatever. Cue emotional language to justify raping civil rights for some semblance of security.

The biggest threat to society today is government, and hyper-militarized cops is the right fist of the state.

 

[Shooter98]

People should be punished for potential future actions? Cops can predict the future? Is that part of recruit training?

I didn't know Minority Report was factual.



And yet, any cop on a power trip can execute a man because he saw a "threat". So in America, guilt is decided by jury, except when it's been decided by some bully with a badge and a gun. Hypocrisy much?

By your definition of a "threat", cops should go and murder every mental ward patient because they might snap and kill some wife, son, grandma, or whatever. Cue emotional language to justify raping civil rights for some semblance of security.

The biggest threat to society today is government, and hyper-militarized cops is the right fist of the state.

I'm not so sure where your hatred and anger come from, but it's not good. If by future action you mean heading towards people while driving then yes, I guess not just a cop but ANYONE with what's called common sense will understand nothing good is about to happen ( remember Newtons Law of Physics?). If you think Americas biggest threat today is government and hyper-militarized cops well then buddy you're in luck. In this wonderful land called America, you're free to leave

 

[dmancornell]

I'm not so sure where your hatred and anger come from, but it's not good. If by future action you mean heading towards people while driving then yes, I guess not just a cop but ANYONE with what's called common sense will understand nothing good is about to happen ( remember Newtons Law of Physics?). If you think Americas biggest threat today is government and hyper-militarized cops well then buddy you're in luck. In this wonderful land called America, you're free to leave

Are you referring to the Pace University incident? Because in that particular case, the cop stepped in the path of a moving vehicle, claimed it brushed his leg, then murdered the driver. There's no other people involved. You fail at reality.

Common sense dictates people shouldn't step in the path of moving vehicles. Last time I checked, Newton's First Law says a 200 pound moron cop cannot stop a moving 4000 pound vehicle no matter how many donuts he chows down, it's called momentum. Also none of Newton's Laws say anything about predicting the future.

 

[Shooter98]

Are you referring to the Pace University incident? Because in that particular case, the cop stepped in the path of a moving vehicle, claimed it brushed his leg, then murdered the driver. There's no other people involved. You fail at reality.

Common sense dictates people shouldn't step in the path of moving vehicles. Last time I checked, Newton's First Law says a 200 pound moron cop cannot stop a moving 4000 pound vehicle no matter how many donuts he chows down, it's called momentum. Also none of Newton's Laws say anything about predicting the future.

Well, I can keep defining to you all day long but I wont. Also another amazing American liberty that you yourself are practicing right now. Freedom of belief and speech. Terrible country eh?

Cheers.

 

[dmancornell]

Well, I can keep defining to you all day long but I wont. Also another amazing American liberty that you yourself are practicing right now. Freedom of belief and speech. Terrible country eh?

Cheers.

LOL, define what exactly? The only definition of a "threat" you managed to come up with is "anyone the cop says" because they can predict the future, then use a bunch of emotional language (wives, daughters, sons, grandmas, prize-winning dog, whatever) to justify any kind of violence committed by the cops against aforementioned "threats". Next you're going to tell me cops man the line to protect my freedom of speech.

Here's a simple thought experiment for you... just pretend if instead of a cop, it was a mere civilian who did the shooting. Or better yet, swap the cop and the victim. If you have a different reaction with respect to the original scenario, ask yourself why you hate America and the Constitution for giving everyone the same civil rights.

 

[Shooter98]

LOL, define what exactly? The only definition of a "threat" you managed to come up with is "anyone the cop says" because they can predict the future, then use a bunch of emotional language (wives, daughters, sons, grandmas, prize-winning dog, whatever) to justify any kind of violence committed by the cops against aforementioned "threats". Next you're going to tell me cops man the line to protect my freedom of speech.

Here's a simple thought experiment for you... just pretend if instead of a cop, it was a mere civilian who did the shooting. Or better yet, swap the cop and the victim. If you have a different reaction with respect to the original scenario, ask yourself why you hate America and the Constitution for giving everyone the same civil rights.

It's simple, and I did define for you, but you choose not to see it is all. Anyways, I'm not sure what you're trying to suggest in your last paragraph. I would never catch myself hating America or our constitution. If I ever did, I would be smart and not a hypocryte and I'd move. It's the same stuff everyday. People hate the police, feds, military whatever but who are the first people you call for when in need (mommy doesn't count).
Respectfully, you're allowed to have your opinion and I wont tell you that you're wrong, I just don't have to agree is all.

 

[billdeserthills]

It's simple, and I did define for you, but you choose not to see it is all. Anyways, I'm not sure what you're trying to suggest in your last paragraph. I would never catch myself hating America or our constitution. If I ever did, I would be smart and not a hypocryte and I'd move. It's the same stuff everyday. People hate the police, feds, military whatever but who are the first people you call for when in need (mommy doesn't count).
Respectfully, you're allowed to have your opinion and I wont tell you that you're wrong, I just don't have to agree is all.

Actually I stopped calling the Po-Po years ago, same time as when they last threatened me. When I want help I call a friend, I can't afford to have a paid killer walking around on my property & you just never know what kind of right's abuser you are liable to wind up with when indiscriminately calling the Police.