2020 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - RULES IN OP

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by coachnip13

Didn't miss the quotes. At all.

Could have fooled me...

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by MattDMC

Tell you what. Why don't you go out to a bar tonight and have a couple drinks, go fight with a police officer, steal his taser, point it and shoot it at him while you're running and let me know how it works out for you.

Oh wait you're not going to do that because you're not a complete moron.

Steal a police officers weapon, fire it at the officer, the officer has every right to return fire. And in this instance when the officer returned fire he had to return fire with his pistol because his taser was stolen.

I'm sure the officer would have loved to fired his taser instead of his gun but he no longer had that option since his taser was gone. His gun was now his only weapon to use when the suspect fired a weapon upon him.

My favorite tweets have been the ones that question how you get shot for falling asleep in your car, as though nothing happened in between.

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by GeechQuest

Could have fooled me...

Don't do that. It's lazy and immature. Either make your point or head on out.

Which quotes indicated that we should just shoot every criminal, just because?

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by MattDMC

Tell you what. Why don't you go out to a bar tonight and have a couple drinks, go fight with a police officer, steal his taser, point it and shoot it at him while you're running and let me know how it works out for you.

Oh wait you're not going to do that because you're not a complete moron.

Steal a police officers weapon, fire it at the officer, the officer has every right to return fire. And in this instance when the officer returned fire he had to return fire with his pistol because his taser was stolen.

I'm sure the officer would have loved to fired his taser instead of his gun but he no longer had that option since his taser was gone. His gun was now his only weapon to use when the suspect fired a weapon upon him.

You aren’t aware that the officer that fired the shots had his taser and was using it on the suspect at the time are you?

[Clark]

Originally Posted by GeechQuest

Gotcha!

So in order to show a disregard for public safety I have to knock all those steps off the bingo board first. Makes sense!

Absolutely, raising the stakes with violence increases the risk of death. Gunning down jaywalkers is not the same as someone who exhibits a lack of regard for the public or the justice system.

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by GeechQuest

Could have fooled me...

Every single quote mentioned a criminal putting other people in danger at that time. Your response? "Oh, I guess we should just shoot everyone".

Not a good look.

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by LoveRookies

You're right, shooting him was the only option.

It is, unless you have 48 hours to analyze it and break down the film, like you're doing now.

[LoveRookies]

Originally Posted by coachnip13

It is, unless you have 48 hours to analyze it and break down the film, like we are all doing now.

Fixed it for you

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by LoveRookies

You're right, shooting him was the only option.

You're right, fighting the police, taking their taser, then pointing it at them was the only option.

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by LoveRookies

Fixed it for you

Ah, no stomach for debate. That's too bad.

[coachnip13]

Of the two people we're talking about, I wonder which one would do it differently now if they had the choice.

[MattDMC]

Originally Posted by LoveRookies

You're right, shooting him was the only option.

No no you're right, letting him run drunkingly into the city with a functional weapon he has no training or knowledge of was the only option.

You have a violent individual (as evidence of fighting with the police) running around drunk with a weapon panicking trying to stay out of custody, what could go wrong? He surely wouldn't use that weapon, whether as a taser or even as a blunt object and hit somebody with it to try to stay on the run and out of custody longer.

I'd hate to see the police just give up and let him run off with a weapon that he could easily use on a random civilian as the suspect does what ever he wants/ feels the need to do to continue to avoid being caught. I'm sure you'd love to see your wife or kids out walking on the sidewalk get attacked by a man with a taser who's doing whatever possible to avoid being caught.

The police have no idea what his intent is and have to fear the worst, they can't let someone run around a city with a weapon when he's already shown violent tendencies. The police were put in a bad position but did what they had to keep the public safe.

[LoveRookies]

Originally Posted by coachnip13

You're right, fighting the police, taking their taser, then pointing it at them was the only option.

There is the non sequitur I've been waiting for.

I'm not defending the actions of the guy that got shot. I'm just saying he shouldn't have been shot for those actions.

[LoveRookies]

Originally Posted by MattDMC

No no you're right, letting him run drunkingly into the city with a functional weapon he has no training or knowledge of was the only option.

You have a violent individual (as evidence of fighting with the police) running around drunk with a weapon panicking trying to stay out of custody, what could go wrong? He surely wouldn't use that weapon, whether as a taser or even as a blunt object and hit somebody with it to try to stay on the run and out of custody longer.

I'd hate to see the police just give up and let him run off with a weapon that he could easily use on a random civilian as the suspect does what ever he wants/ feels the need to do to continue to avoid being caught. I'm sure you'd love to see your wife or kids out walking on the sidewalk get attacked by a man with a taser who's doing whatever possible to avoid being caught.

The police have no idea what his intent is and have to fear the worst, they can't let someone run around a city with a weapon when he's already shown violent tendencies. The police were put in a bad position but did what they had to keep the public safe.

If only they knew other people who did the same job who they could call to assist. Or, God forbid, they used their training to subdue him without using deadly force.

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by LoveRookies

There is the non sequitur I've been waiting for.

I'm not defending the actions of the guy that got shot. I'm just saying he shouldn't have been shot for those actions.

And you're welcome to have a ridiculous opinion.

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by coachnip13

Every single quote mentioned a criminal putting other people in danger at that time. Your response? "Oh, I guess we should just shoot everyone".

Not a good look.

Not everybody, just the criminals. Who knows what they’re capable of? They have no regard for the law and are a danger to the public.

When the cops approached Astros during his DUI stop they showed great restraint. At that point Astros had already put the community at danger by ignoring the laws, so the cops should have played it better safe than sorry. Why give him the opportunity to even flee the scene? Can you imagine the liability if Astros had decided to do that.

[LoveRookies]

Originally Posted by coachnip13

Ah, no stomach for debate. That's too bad.

All of us are breaking down the video we have and analyzing it, not just me.

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by LoveRookies

If only they knew other people who did the same job who they could call to assist. Or, God forbid, they used their training to subdue him without using deadly force.

The guy wasn't barricaded alone inside an apartment. He was running in public with a weapon.

Wait for backup? SMH.

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by LoveRookies

You insufferable moron.

YES!!! I knew I could expose his character in just a few posts.

The guy who turns to insults that quickly is always the guy you want on the other side of the debate. That was way too easy.

[BGT Masters]

Originally Posted by LoveRookies

All of us are breaking down the video we have and analyzing it, not just me. You insufferable moron.

Debating is all good and well but don't stoop to the name calling. Its going to get this thread shut down again.

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by coachnip13

Of the two people we're talking about, I wonder which one would do it differently now if they had the choice.

Hold on one second, let me go ask Rayshard Brooks really quick!

I’m sure officer Rolfe wishes he had his job back. Who knows? Maybe we can ask him too!

[MattDMC]

Originally Posted by LoveRookies

If only they knew other people who did the same job who they could call to assist. Or, God forbid, they used their training to subdue him without using deadly force.

You mean like when they tried to subdue him but he fought them and stole their weapon?

I got news for you, watch the bodycam footage, the cops were 100% professional in their confrontation and were very polite with them. They went to subdue him in a safe and normal fashion and he turned violent on the officers and ultimately stole their weapon that he then used on them. Where in that sentence did I say anything false?

They did attempt to subdue him by the book and without deadly force, he chose to fight them and chose to fire upon them. The police didn't initiate the use of force, the suspect did.

[coachnip13]

Originally Posted by GeechQuest

Hold on one second, let me go ask Rayshard Brooks really quick!

I’m sure officer Rolfe wishes he had his job back. Who knows? Maybe we can ask him too!

Well, you just made my point without even realizing it. I'm guessing Officer Rolfe is going to get another job, somewhere. But when your actions result in your own death, it's not a choice you can really defend.

[LoveRookies]

Originally Posted by MattDMC

You mean like when they tried to subdue him but he fought them and stole their weapon?

I got news for you, watch the bodycam footage, the cops were 100% professional in their confrontation and were very polite with them. They went to subdue him in a safe and normal fashion and he turned violent on the officers and ultimately stole their weapon that he then used on them. Where in that sentence did I say anything false?

They did attempt to subdue him by the book and without deadly force, he chose to fight them and chose to fire upon them. The police didn't initiate the use of force, the suspect did.

I agree with everything in this post, and I have stated as much. I just disagree with the decision to use deadly force. They could've easily called it in, got back up, and taken him into custody. And again, I don't think what they did was criminal, just a negligent use of force.

Remember, these guys signed up for this. They weren't drafted or forced into duty. They signed up for a dangerous job. That doesnt mean they get to use deadly force when they cant effectuate arrest on the first attempt.

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by coachnip13

Well, you just made my point without even realizing it. I'm guessing Officer Rolfe is going to get another job, somewhere. But when your actions result in your own death, it's not a choice you can really defend.

Maybe Rolfe regrets it more than Rayshard? Who knows? I can’t ask one of them. Assuming you have?