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

Do you think what the officer did was justified?

  • Absolutely!

  • He had no business drawing his weapon!

  • He should have used a taser!


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Fixed it.
Perfect, thanks.

In that case, Good Citizen Bob would also be justifiable. Unfortunately for Bob, he doesn't have qualified immunity. The mob would likely destroy that poor man's life. He would likely be butchered in a liberal court, I wouldn't want to be Bob.
 
Perfect, thanks.

In that case, Good Citizen Bob would also be justifiable. Unfortunately for Bob, he doesn't have qualified immunity. The mob would likely destroy that poor man's life. He would likely be butchered in a liberal court, I wouldn't want to be Bob.
Agreed.

so anyway.jpeg
 
As one of the people who didn't vote absolutely, I'll say it was definitely a justified shooting but I don't think it was the right call. My take on it is they shouldn't have had to be involved in the first place one of the "Men" that were standing around watching should have intervened. Since they did have to be involved, in the current political climate, they should have used a taser first instead of going straight to their side arm.
Putting myself in the shoes of the 2nd intended victim ... I want that cop to have and use the shotgun. But the sidearm worked, thank goodness. I'm not a fan of trusting my fragile life to the vagaries of a frickin' Taser - those things are way too fininky to suit me.
 
I think the liberals are specifically creating a climate in major cities to allow them to enact a federal police force. Anyone with half a brain cell can look at a lot of these shootings and see the hypocrisy in the narrative pushed by the left and BLM. Minor crimes are no longer prosecuted. Riots are allowed in the streets. Law no longer matters unless it is determined by the mob to be justice. Intimidation and threats of violence is the way the get what they want. The democrats are paving the way. They have a goal in sight. That goal is pretty obvious.
 
I think the liberals are specifically creating a climate in major cities to allow them to enact a federal police force.
Maybe the illogic portion of my brain is underdeveloped, but (1) they were just complaining about federal "troops" last summer and fall, (2) why would a new federal force work when an existing one didn't, (3) same concern for state and city - why would a national force work better?

Leftists (they are not really liberals - I'm a bit of a liberal, in the classic sense) already control local government in those places, what greater degree of control would they garner from this?
 
As one of the people who didn't vote absolutely, I'll say it was definitely a justified shooting but I don't think it was the right call. My take on it is they shouldn't have had to be involved in the first place one of the "Men" that were standing around watching should have intervened. Since they did have to be involved, in the current political climate, they should have used a taser first instead of going straight to their side arm.
Um, apparently nobody in this fluster cluck qualified for that title. Kicking women in the head definitely does not award you the ability to consider yourself a man.

Taser - Countering deadly force with non-deadly force is how innocent people die. Counter deadly force with deadly force is how bad people die.* (*There are of course exceptions, but you train for the most likely circumstances.) What you NEVER see with media is how often officers risk their lives by trying to use less force either successfully or getting injured in the process.
 
I didn't vote because I don't feel anything the general public thinks to be relevant unless they are on the jury and exposed to all sides of the argument and I wasn't there when it happened. We do still have a court system, I think.
 
I didn't vote because I don't feel anything the general public thinks to be relevant unless they are on the jury and exposed to all sides of the argument and I wasn't there when it happened. We do still have a court system, I think.
What
A
Killjoy.

;)
 
If the woke celebrities upset about this and countless other police shootings really wanted to save lives, they would spend time and money educating youth about how to conduct themselves in society instead of tweeting "your next".

At the end of the day, yes it's the individuals responsibility for their own actions, but these kids have been failed on so many levels their whole lives. From their parents, to their teachers to their community and government leaders. They've been taught zero accountability, been told they're a victim of an unjust system, told they deserve to be given the world on a silver platter for being born. It's no wonder they can't seem to make the right choices that seem obvious to the rest of us.
 
Maybe the illogic portion of my brain is underdeveloped, but (1) they were just complaining about federal "troops" last summer and fall, (2) why would a new federal force work when an existing one didn't, (3) same concern for state and city - why would a national force work better?

Leftists (they are not really liberals - I'm a bit of a liberal, in the classic sense) already control local government in those places, what greater degree of control would they garner from this?
1. They were super happy to deploy federal troops during the election at the capital and held them there for way longer than necessary (They like federal troops when it benefits them and doesn't go against their agenda).

2. If it's completely federal and federally ran there will be no need to for sheriffs, city, or state cops. The federal government would have complete control. Control is a thing politicians love and do not give up once they have it (covid 19 scare for example).

3. It's not about it working "better." It's about having complete control over how policing is ran.
 
1. They were super happy to deploy federal troops during the election at the capital and held them there for way longer than necessary (They like federal troops when it benefits them).
Fair, but not really conclusive. Nat Guard isn't a police force.

2. If it's completely federal and federally ran there will be no need to for sheriffs, city, or state cops. The federal government would have complete control. Control is a thing politicians love and do not give up once they have it (covid 19 scare for example).
The US Marshall service was the same initially.

3. It's not about it working "better." It's about having complete control over how policing is ran.
Maybe, but I don't see evidence for this at this time.
 
I am agreeing with you.

Reduction in pay is offset by significantly lower property tax/rent/ purchase price for homes.

You better not mind no car wash /taco bell/ movie theater tho. Lol

We have all that, in a town of 12,500, and one of the friendliest police forces.
 
Wanna know what's weird?
Have you looked at your home's valuation lately???
Lowest price in my hood are low 400's now. But I live in a pocket of old timers and homeowners.
I lucked out on a tiny house - big property deal with the lowest property tax bracket imaginable.
PDX planning czars hate people like me. :)

Well I know what my property tax statement say it's worth! :s0114: But I'm not sure that the homeless folks a block away living in garbage travel trailers, surrounded by rubbish, and don't forget the junk cars with missing tires, wouldn't put somewhat of a damper on the selling price.
 
Status

Upcoming Events

Albany Gun Show
Albany, OR
Falcon Gun Show - Classic Gun & Knife Show
Stanwood, WA
Lakeview Spring Gun Show
Lakeview, OR
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top