This case in Atlanta is going to be a watershed moment...
Comments
-
Yup.TurdBomber said:
Prediction: Verdict. Appeal. Bonded out during Appeal. Reversal or vacated verdict. GBA reconsiders re-trial. Cop pleas out to Reckless Endangerment and keeps his Pension.HoustonHusky said:
No way. They will get convicted of something...anything...because the entire legal system will be scared to death of riots and chaos if they don't. They have 0% chance of getting a fair trial.MikeDamone said:My guess is the cops become multi millionaires
Cop unions are ferocious beasts.
-
Snohomish County Precinct Commander told me "center torso" i.e., "kill zone" in 1985.USMChawk said:
The point is, it’s hard enough to hit a moving target when you’re aiming center mass, now you’re saying to shoot him in an extremity. That shot will miss and will most likely take out a bystander. Always aim for the torso.SECDAWG said:
Good God man, does your 13 yo know the difference in anatomy from a liver, lung shot vs a calf or debilitating injury non fatal from a gun shot wound if have to fire involving a fleeing suspect, especially under the current circumstances in the news, which should have no bearing at anytime??!SFGbob said:
That's exactly what my 13 year old kid said, telling.Houhusky said:
Things people say who have little to no firearms knowledge for $1000SECDAWG said:He won’t be convicted(well, maybe in Atlanta) but absolutely no reason to have shot the guy in the back running away. Should have shot in the leg. Or not at all.
Reform needs to happen in this case, like others, involving “deadly force”.
Hell, I’m on your side but fk, can’t see it common sense wise.
Legs, hands, guns? "Only on TV, Kid." -
It's upper torso now. More stuff to damage which causes them to stop doing whatever they were doing to cause you to shoot them. We shoot to stop them not to kill them. If they die that's their problem and they caused it.TurdBomber said:
Snohomish County Precinct Commander told me "center torso" i.e., "kill zone" in 1985.USMChawk said:
The point is, it’s hard enough to hit a moving target when you’re aiming center mass, now you’re saying to shoot him in an extremity. That shot will miss and will most likely take out a bystander. Always aim for the torso.SECDAWG said:
Good God man, does your 13 yo know the difference in anatomy from a liver, lung shot vs a calf or debilitating injury non fatal from a gun shot wound if have to fire involving a fleeing suspect, especially under the current circumstances in the news, which should have no bearing at anytime??!SFGbob said:
That's exactly what my 13 year old kid said, telling.Houhusky said:
Things people say who have little to no firearms knowledge for $1000SECDAWG said:He won’t be convicted(well, maybe in Atlanta) but absolutely no reason to have shot the guy in the back running away. Should have shot in the leg. Or not at all.
Reform needs to happen in this case, like others, involving “deadly force”.
Hell, I’m on your side but fk, can’t see it common sense wise.
Legs, hands, guns? "Only on TV, Kid." -
The prosecutor charging police with pointing a taser at a suspect. Listen to his words. Then look at what he said regarding the police shooting. -
-
How you get shot in the back.
-
He didn't shoot the guy in the back. The guy turned and pointed the taser at him that he stole from the cop. If the cop gets hit with the taser the perp has free access to the cop's gun. The shooting was 100% correct.SECDAWG said:He won’t be convicted(well, maybe in Atlanta) but absolutely no reason to have shot the guy in the back running away. Should have shot in the leg. Or not at all.
Reform needs to happen in this case, like others, involving “deadly force”. -
Recent news is that the cop was hit by the taser and suffered a concussion from the assault.BleachedAnusDawg said:
He didn't shoot the guy in the back. The guy turned and pointed the taser at him that he stole from the cop. If the cop gets hit with the taser the perp has free access to the cop's gun. The shooting was 100% correct.SECDAWG said:He won’t be convicted(well, maybe in Atlanta) but absolutely no reason to have shot the guy in the back running away. Should have shot in the leg. Or not at all.
Reform needs to happen in this case, like others, involving “deadly force”. -
The cop that suffered the concussion wasn't the cop who shot that family man that was just trying to turn his life around.Sledog said:
Recent news is that the cop was hit by the taser and suffered a concussion from the assault.BleachedAnusDawg said:
He didn't shoot the guy in the back. The guy turned and pointed the taser at him that he stole from the cop. If the cop gets hit with the taser the perp has free access to the cop's gun. The shooting was 100% correct.SECDAWG said:He won’t be convicted(well, maybe in Atlanta) but absolutely no reason to have shot the guy in the back running away. Should have shot in the leg. Or not at all.
Reform needs to happen in this case, like others, involving “deadly force”. -
Wasn't specified in the early story I read.SFGbob said:
The cop that suffered the concussion wasn't the cop who shot that family man that was just trying to turn his life around.Sledog said:
Recent news is that the cop was hit by the taser and suffered a concussion from the assault.BleachedAnusDawg said:
He didn't shoot the guy in the back. The guy turned and pointed the taser at him that he stole from the cop. If the cop gets hit with the taser the perp has free access to the cop's gun. The shooting was 100% correct.SECDAWG said:He won’t be convicted(well, maybe in Atlanta) but absolutely no reason to have shot the guy in the back running away. Should have shot in the leg. Or not at all.
Reform needs to happen in this case, like others, involving “deadly force”.
