Police kill wedding groom

[getbush]

It really was just an unfortunate series of events that added up to cause this. And then you have officer John Rambo who accounts for 31 shots on his own.

If you take Rambo out of it, the other officers fired an average of 4.75 shots each. Hardly crazy. I mean, if they're gonna shoot, is 4 or 5 too many? But that one guy, damn 2 clips. Adrenaline or craziness or something.

The fact that they shot at all in what might turn out to be a manner restricted by policy is the kicker. Everyone is just screaming 50 bullets omg omg omg.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: getbush
The officer was hit by the car. They drove forward into him. Don't twist it liked they bumped their car and that was it. If a civilian with a CCW was struck in anger by a vehicle I'm pretty sure he would have just cause to light the guy up. A car is a deadly weapon.

And that civilian would be facing serious charges, angry or not. We have a similar situation here where it doesn't look like the police identify themselves at all and they blaze up the car because it hit unmarked police vehicles. Your defense of the officers are weak and I'm sure you know that.

IF you're a cop or know someone who is and is being partial, please admit so so we can comprehend your obvious and irrational bias.

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: rchiu
I am not putting the blame totally on the victim, the police definetly should take the blame for the excessive force. But if the police chief's statement is true, that the victim struct the police with his car first, both party is to blame for the whole incident. At the very least, the victim didn't have to drive the car towards the police. If he did nothing wrong, and didn't have anything to hide, why not just surrender himself, and get a lawyer later if he felt the police stopped him without probably cause?

I can bet if a civilian was rear ended and opened fire on another car and killed a guy they'd be facing murder charges. If it was a marked car that's fine.

Did you just conveniently skip over the part about the guy hitting the undercover cop with his car?

Undercover being the keyword, not hitting.

No, the keyword is hitting, it doesn't matter if they are a cop or civilian, you are not allowed to hit someone with your car.

What if it was unintentional, are you still legally allowed to kill the occupants? What if they wer trying to get away from the location in a hurry? Are you honestly defending the actions of the police in this instance? Do you think they acted appropriately?

Yes I am defending the actions of the Police, until its proven otherwise they deserve the benefit of the doubt. Cops don't just go around shooting random people that are involved in automobile accidents, get a grip.

Before cops fire their weapons, aren't they supposed to identify themselves as police? I don't remember reading that they even did that. If they didn't say they did, which would've helped their case, then I doubt they followed procedure (if that's what they're supposed to do).

I certainly don't trust police officers because the one's I've encountered have lied their way out of trouble. But there was an incident in Queens about 12 years ago when a cop was chasing some suspects and accidently ran over a little black girl. The cop started arguing with the people in the community. Someone killed him right there on the spot. Some people in south-eastern Queens call their borough Cop-Killer Queens

The problem with the police, as someone mentioned earlier is that there really is no one to police the police. These people form the security appartus of the city, they shouldn't have a union or be allowed to have P.A.C.s. Police should be an extension of the military and their punishment should be just as harsh and severe as it is in the military should something go wrong.

Originally posted by: getbush
It really was just an unfortunate series of events that added up to cause this. And then you have officer John Rambo who accounts for 31 shots on his own.

If you take Rambo out of it, the other officers fired an average of 4.75 shots each. Hardly crazy. I mean, if they're gonna shoot, is 4 or 5 too many? But that one guy, damn 2 clips. Adrenaline or craziness or something.

The fact that they shot at all in what might turn out to be a manner restricted by policy is the kicker. Everyone is just screaming 50 bullets omg omg omg.

There's too many "unfortunate series of events" in African American communities involving the police. You see accidents, we see a pattern.

 

[Dean]

I look at it this way. If the cops had their guns drawn and did not identify themselves as such, the groom is totally justified in trying to run them down/get away. In his mind, for that brief second, if he felt he was in immediate danger or going to get killed by assailants, he did the right thing.

On the other hand, if the police did clearly announce who they were, they were justified in removing the danger to them if he did try to ram into them.

There has to be video surveillance of this altercation. Either the club itself or the police should have some sort of official video or audio record of this event.

I just hope the two injured guys recover enough to be able to give their side of the story also. The police will try to cover their own a$$es 100% of the time.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: getbush
The officer was hit by the car. They drove forward into him. Don't twist it liked they bumped their car and that was it. If a civilian with a CCW was struck in anger by a vehicle I'm pretty sure he would have just cause to light the guy up. A car is a deadly weapon.

And that civilian would be facing serious charges, angry or not. We have a similar situation here where it doesn't look like the police identify themselves at all and they blaze up the car because it hit unmarked police vehicles. Your defense of the officers are weak and I'm sure you know that.

IF you're a cop or know someone who is and is being partial, please admit so so we can comprehend your obvious and irrational bias.

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: rchiu
I am not putting the blame totally on the victim, the police definetly should take the blame for the excessive force. But if the police chief's statement is true, that the victim struct the police with his car first, both party is to blame for the whole incident. At the very least, the victim didn't have to drive the car towards the police. If he did nothing wrong, and didn't have anything to hide, why not just surrender himself, and get a lawyer later if he felt the police stopped him without probably cause?

I can bet if a civilian was rear ended and opened fire on another car and killed a guy they'd be facing murder charges. If it was a marked car that's fine.

Did you just conveniently skip over the part about the guy hitting the undercover cop with his car?

Undercover being the keyword, not hitting.

No, the keyword is hitting, it doesn't matter if they are a cop or civilian, you are not allowed to hit someone with your car.

What if it was unintentional, are you still legally allowed to kill the occupants? What if they wer trying to get away from the location in a hurry? Are you honestly defending the actions of the police in this instance? Do you think they acted appropriately?

Yes I am defending the actions of the Police, until its proven otherwise they deserve the benefit of the doubt. Cops don't just go around shooting random people that are involved in automobile accidents, get a grip.

Before cops fire their weapons, aren't they supposed to identify themselves as police? I don't remember reading that they even did that. If they didn't say they did, which would've helped their case, then I doubt they followed procedure (if that's what they're supposed to do).

I certainly don't trust police officers because the one's I've encountered have lied their way out of trouble. But there was an incident in Queens about 12 years ago when a cop was chasing some suspects and accidently ran over a little black girl. The cop started arguing with the people in the community. Someone killed him right there on the spot. Some people in south-eastern Queens call their borough Cop-Killer Queens

The problem with the police, as someone mentioned earlier is that there really is no one to police the police. These people form the security appartus of the city, they shouldn't have a union or be allowed to have P.A.C.s. Police should be an extension of the military and their punishment should be just as harsh and severe as it is in the military should something go wrong.

Of course you are supposed to identify yourself as a Police Officer, but sometimes thats kind of hard to do, especially when you have just been run over by a car. Common sense works in situations like this. How about this, don't hit someone with your car and you don't have to worry about being shot by an undercover cop.

You have an obviously blind hatred towards Police, all I have seen you come up with is that one time you were staring at Police and they questioned your suspicious behavior and an incident 12 years ago where a cop accidentily ran over a little girl so they killed him, which is disgusting. I bet the people in that community complain if the cops are hesitant to go into that neighborhood too.

Accidents happen, and yes there are some crooked cops, just like in any profession. If you think that no one is there to police the police then you really need to do some more research on that subject. Why shouldn't Police have unions, they need protection more than almost anyone else. And finally, saying that Police should be an extension of the military? Thats ridiculous.

 

[getbush]

Narmer, do you expect us to believe you are an expert on police policies and procedures. Do you think that as an officer is being slammd by a car he must first yell police polie ow ****** police before he can start shooting. I've said it 37 times man, argue the damn policy that is in place instead of reaching for bullsh*t.

Your second story is a tragic one for sure. We have laws. In the situation you cite, guess who is liable for teh girl's death. That's right, the perps the cop was chasing. They are responsible for anything bad that happens as a result of them fleeing arrest. Obviously when a child dies emotions are high but noone should have executed that cop in the street. They made a choice to kill someone and it was wrong.

Your 3rd point is something you should bring up with your local representatives. They and you police the police. You vote out your leaders and you let them know why if you want it changed. I'm also not delusional and I see the difficulty in that but that's the way it is supposed to work.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Dean
I look at it this way. If the cops had their guns drawn and did not identify themselves as such, the groom is totally justified in trying to run them down/get away. In his mind, for that brief second, if he felt he was in immediate danger or going to get killed by assailants, he did the right thing.

On the other hand, if the police did clearly announce who they were, they were justified in removing the danger to them if he did try to ram into them.

There has to be video surveillance of this altercation. Either the club itself or the police should have some sort of official video or audio record of this event.

I just hope the two injured guys recover enough to be able to give their side of the story also. The police will try to cover their own a$$es 100% of the time.

I agree, if they drew their weapons before the guy tried to kill them with his car and they did not announce themselves then they were at fault.

"The police will try to cover their own a$$es 100% of the time"

So do most people.

 

[getbush]

Narmer you live in that community, your perception is as skewed as mine. You are inside the box.

I have one question. If the driver of that car had been white, do you think the cop wouldn't have fired? Do you really think it matters to him what color of skin is of a driver who he his perceiving as trying to run his ass over?

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: getbush
Narmer, do you expect us to believe you are an expert on police policies and procedures. Do you think that as an officer is being slammd by a car he must first yell police polie ow ****** police before he can start shooting. I've said it 37 times man, argue the damn policy that is in place instead of reaching for bullsh*t.

Your second story is a tragic one for sure. We have laws. In the situation you cite, guess who is liable for teh girl's death. That's right, the perps the cop was chasing. They are responsible for anything bad that happens as a result of them fleeing arrest. Obviously when a child dies emotions are high but noone should have executed that cop in the street. They made a choice to kill someone and it was wrong.

Your 3rd point is something you should bring up with your local representatives. They and you police the police. You vote out your leaders and you let them know why if you want it changed. I'm also not delusional and I see the difficulty in that but that's the way it is supposed to work.

I have noticed a common theme with Narmer. It is never his fault, and it is never the criminals fault, it is always the fault of the Police.

 

[getbush]

JD50, if it's true that they're prohibited from firing if a vehicle is the only threat, then they're going to be at fault regardless.

If that is the policy though, I think it's pretty dumb. It basically tells officers get out of the way or be run over but don't shoot. It's probably there to stop half blind old ladies from being shot as they careen towards officers at a traffic stop.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: getbush
JD50, if it's true that they're prohibited from firing if a vehicle is the only threat, then they're going to be at fault regardless.

If that is the policy though, I think it's pretty dumb. It basically tells officers get out of the way or be run over but don't shoot. It's probably there to stop half blind old ladies from being shot as they careen towards officers at a traffic stop.

Some departments do have that policy, I believe that it also has to do with how much crazier someone would be driving while they are being shot at, and if they were hit and/or killed the vehicle would go out of control, possibly hurting many more innocent people. Its kind of like the departments that have the "no pursuit" policy because they don't want high speed chases.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: getbush
Narmer, do you expect us to believe you are an expert on police policies and procedures. Do you think that as an officer is being slammd by a car he must first yell police polie ow ****** police before he can start shooting. I've said it 37 times man, argue the damn policy that is in place instead of reaching for bullsh*t.

Your second story is a tragic one for sure. We have laws. In the situation you cite, guess who is liable for teh girl's death. That's right, the perps the cop was chasing. They are responsible for anything bad that happens as a result of them fleeing arrest. Obviously when a child dies emotions are high but noone should have executed that cop in the street. They made a choice to kill someone and it was wrong.

Your 3rd point is something you should bring up with your local representatives. They and you police the police. You vote out your leaders and you let them know why if you want it changed. I'm also not delusional and I see the difficulty in that but that's the way it is supposed to work.

I don't know police procedure that's why I asked a question. But if there was a scuffle, as the cops allege, WTF didn't they identify themselves as police and stop them from entering their vehicles? It doesn't make sense and I think a second of rational assessments would have you coming to the same conclusion.

Originally posted by: JD50
Of course you are supposed to identify yourself as a Police Officer, but sometimes thats kind of hard to do, especially when you have just been run over by a car. Common sense works in situations like this. How about this, don't hit someone with your car and you don't have to worry about being shot by an undercover cop.

You have an obviously blind hatred towards Police, all I have seen you come up with is that one time you were staring at Police and they questioned your suspicious behavior and an incident 12 years ago where a cop accidentily ran over a little girl so they killed him, which is disgusting. I bet the people in that community complain if the cops are hesitant to go into that neighborhood too.

Accidents happen, and yes there are some crooked cops, just like in any profession. If you think that no one is there to police the police then you really need to do some more research on that subject. Why shouldn't Police have unions, they need protection more than almost anyone else. And finally, saying that Police should be an extension of the military? Thats ridiculous.

It's disgusting when the community exact vigalante justice on an arrogant officer but justified when police kill innocent men, such as Amadou Diallo or the countless other incidents between cops and African-Americans? If the laws are formulated by the community and the individuals whom the community entrusts to carry out those laws abuses it and/or shows disgust towards the community, isn't it in the interest of the community to deal with such an unfit official as they see fit and as efficiently as possible? Or is it better to entrust the policing of the police to other police officers? If that was the case, then police would be able to get away with murder...

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: getbush
Narmer you live in that community, your perception is as skewed as mine. You are inside the box.

I have one question. If the driver of that car had been white, do you think the cop wouldn't have fired? Do you really think it matters to him what color of skin is of a driver who he his perceiving as trying to run his ass over?

If the driver had been white, the police would've been less fearful and I doubt they would've shot at the occupants. In a situation, reason would've prevailed and the cops would've shot the tires after identifying themselves as police.

But I doubt it would've gotten to that point without there being someone on the police side who would've tried to reason with the guy, maybe even call him a cab to drive him home. But no, these people were black so there was a lot of fear in the officers' heart that morning.

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: getbush
Narmer, do you expect us to believe you are an expert on police policies and procedures. Do you think that as an officer is being slammd by a car he must first yell police polie ow ****** police before he can start shooting. I've said it 37 times man, argue the damn policy that is in place instead of reaching for bullsh*t.

Your second story is a tragic one for sure. We have laws. In the situation you cite, guess who is liable for teh girl's death. That's right, the perps the cop was chasing. They are responsible for anything bad that happens as a result of them fleeing arrest. Obviously when a child dies emotions are high but noone should have executed that cop in the street. They made a choice to kill someone and it was wrong.

Your 3rd point is something you should bring up with your local representatives. They and you police the police. You vote out your leaders and you let them know why if you want it changed. I'm also not delusional and I see the difficulty in that but that's the way it is supposed to work.

I have noticed a common theme with Narmer. It is never his fault, and it is never the criminals fault, it is always the fault of the Police.

I'm a realist and I know that many people make mistakes, especially in the A-A community. They should be held accountable for their actions. But it's sickening when people try to justify the actions of the police with little regard or respect for the lives of the poor and the minorities.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: getbush
Narmer, do you expect us to believe you are an expert on police policies and procedures. Do you think that as an officer is being slammd by a car he must first yell police polie ow ****** police before he can start shooting. I've said it 37 times man, argue the damn policy that is in place instead of reaching for bullsh*t.

Your second story is a tragic one for sure. We have laws. In the situation you cite, guess who is liable for teh girl's death. That's right, the perps the cop was chasing. They are responsible for anything bad that happens as a result of them fleeing arrest. Obviously when a child dies emotions are high but noone should have executed that cop in the street. They made a choice to kill someone and it was wrong.

Your 3rd point is something you should bring up with your local representatives. They and you police the police. You vote out your leaders and you let them know why if you want it changed. I'm also not delusional and I see the difficulty in that but that's the way it is supposed to work.

I don't know police procedure that's why I asked a question. But if there was a scuffle, as the cops allege, WTF didn't they identify themselves as police and stop them from entering their vehicles? It doesn't make sense and I think a second of rational assessments would have you coming to the same conclusion.

Originally posted by: JD50
Of course you are supposed to identify yourself as a Police Officer, but sometimes thats kind of hard to do, especially when you have just been run over by a car. Common sense works in situations like this. How about this, don't hit someone with your car and you don't have to worry about being shot by an undercover cop.

You have an obviously blind hatred towards Police, all I have seen you come up with is that one time you were staring at Police and they questioned your suspicious behavior and an incident 12 years ago where a cop accidentily ran over a little girl so they killed him, which is disgusting. I bet the people in that community complain if the cops are hesitant to go into that neighborhood too.

Accidents happen, and yes there are some crooked cops, just like in any profession. If you think that no one is there to police the police then you really need to do some more research on that subject. Why shouldn't Police have unions, they need protection more than almost anyone else. And finally, saying that Police should be an extension of the military? Thats ridiculous.

It's disgusting when the community exact vigalante justice on an arrogant officer but justified when police kill innocent men, such as Amadou Diallo or the countless other incidents between cops and African-Americans? If the laws are formulated by the community and the individuals whom the community entrusts to carry out those laws abuses it and/or shows disgust towards the community, isn't it in the interest of the community to deal with such an unfit official as they see fit and as efficiently as possible? Or is it better to entrust the policing of the police to other police officers? If that was the case, then police would be able to get away with murder...

Oh please there are plenty of cops killing white people in situations like these. You only hear about these situations because media hounds like Sharpton and Jackson need to cash in on people's stupidity.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Narmer


It's disgusting when the community exact vigalante justice on an arrogant officer but justified when police kill innocent men, such as Amadou Diallo or the countless other incidents between cops and African-Americans? If the laws are formulated by the community and the individuals whom the community entrusts to carry out those laws abuses it and/or shows disgust towards the community, isn't it in the interest of the community to deal with such an unfit official as they see fit and as efficiently as possible? Or is it better to entrust the policing of the police to other police officers? If that was the case, then police would be able to get away with murder...

Vigilante justice? The cop was chasing a criminal and accidentily ran over a child, you act as if he saw the kid crossing the street and ran her down. There have been plenty of innocent white people killed by blacks, as well as other innocent black people killed by other blacks. Does this give me the right to go around killing black people? You are absolutely absurd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadou_Diallo

I just read up on it for a minute, but it seems like a justified use of force if they thought the guy was going for a gun. But like I said, I have never heard of that guy until now so I don't really know anything about the case.

Just because you might have come across a bad cop, it does not mean that they are all bad. 99 percent of cops are just normal people that want to make the world a safer place, you really need to get over yourself and your prejudice towards cops. Imagine if I start citing all of the innocents killed by black people and showed the kind of hatred towards black people that you show towards Police. You need to open your eyes a little bit, its getting old seeing you play the race card and the whole "vicitm mentality" that you have.

 

[getbush]

The only point I agree with there, is why didn't they speak up and stop the fight. They could have neutralized the whole situation much earlier, and the results would have been much less drastic. Did they want to stay undercover or something? Why not come out. I dunno. In retrospect though they probably should have. It would've been a much better outcome if they had. There are probably guidelines when undercover, I would have no idea about that. I bet some of those officers are asking themself that same question, Why didn't we just put a stop to the situation sooner.
If a cop hears yo go get my gun, why did anyone from that group make it to the car? You can't really draw any conclusions, it's just weird. Bad set of circumstances that ended very badly.

Amadou Diallo was unfortunate and wrong, but is a far cry from executing a man in cold blood in the street.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Narmer


It's disgusting when the community exact vigalante justice on an arrogant officer but justified when police kill innocent men, such as Amadou Diallo or the countless other incidents between cops and African-Americans? If the laws are formulated by the community and the individuals whom the community entrusts to carry out those laws abuses it and/or shows disgust towards the community, isn't it in the interest of the community to deal with such an unfit official as they see fit and as efficiently as possible? Or is it better to entrust the policing of the police to other police officers? If that was the case, then police would be able to get away with murder...

Vigilante justice? The cop was chasing a criminal and accidentily ran over a child, you act as if he saw the kid crossing the street and ran her down. There have been plenty of innocent white people killed by blacks, as well as other innocent black people killed by other blacks. Does this give me the right to go around killing black people? You are absolutely absurd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadou_Diallo

I just read up on it for a minute, but it seems like a justified use of force if they thought the guy was going for a gun. But like I said, I have never heard of that guy until now so I don't really know anything about the case.

Just because you might have come across a bad cop, it does not mean that they are all bad. 99 percent of cops are just normal people that want to make the world a safer place, you really need to get over yourself and your prejudice towards cops. Imagine if I start citing all of the innocents killed by black people and showed the kind of hatred towards black people that you show towards Police. You need to open your eyes a little bit, its getting old seeing you play the race card and the whole "vicitm mentality" that you have.

Everything's fvckin justified in your opinion. If I take out my cellphone and a cop thought it was a gun, is he justified in killing me? That's absurd.

I think white people have killed enough innocent blacks over the past 400 years to pre-empt you from filling out your supposed quota. Hell, black boys have even gotten killed for whistling at white girls.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: getbush
The only point I agree with there, is why didn't they speak up and stop the fight. They could have neutralized the whole situation much earlier, and the results would have been much less drastic. Did they want to stay undercover or something? Why not come out. I dunno. In retrospect though they probably should have. It would've been a much better outcome if they had. There are probably guidelines when undercover, I would have no idea about that. I bet some of those officers are asking themself that same question, Why didn't we just put a stop to the situation sooner.
If a cop hears yo go get my gun, why did anyone from that group make it to the car? You can't really draw any conclusions, it's just weird. Bad set of circumstances that ended very badly.

Amadou Diallo was unfortunate and wrong, but is a far cry from executing a man in cold blood in the street.

At the time of the incident, I'm willing to bet that the cops were too damn scared. Too much fear. Too many blacks around. They were uncomfortable and thought the blackness was going to come out and grab them.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Narmer


It's disgusting when the community exact vigalante justice on an arrogant officer but justified when police kill innocent men, such as Amadou Diallo or the countless other incidents between cops and African-Americans? If the laws are formulated by the community and the individuals whom the community entrusts to carry out those laws abuses it and/or shows disgust towards the community, isn't it in the interest of the community to deal with such an unfit official as they see fit and as efficiently as possible? Or is it better to entrust the policing of the police to other police officers? If that was the case, then police would be able to get away with murder...

Vigilante justice? The cop was chasing a criminal and accidentily ran over a child, you act as if he saw the kid crossing the street and ran her down. There have been plenty of innocent white people killed by blacks, as well as other innocent black people killed by other blacks. Does this give me the right to go around killing black people? You are absolutely absurd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadou_Diallo

I just read up on it for a minute, but it seems like a justified use of force if they thought the guy was going for a gun. But like I said, I have never heard of that guy until now so I don't really know anything about the case.

Just because you might have come across a bad cop, it does not mean that they are all bad. 99 percent of cops are just normal people that want to make the world a safer place, you really need to get over yourself and your prejudice towards cops. Imagine if I start citing all of the innocents killed by black people and showed the kind of hatred towards black people that you show towards Police. You need to open your eyes a little bit, its getting old seeing you play the race card and the whole "vicitm mentality" that you have.

Everything's fvckin justified in your opinion. If I take out my cellphone and a cop thought it was a gun, is he justified in killing me? That's absurd.

I think white people have killed enough innocent blacks over the past 400 years to pre-empt you from filling out your supposed quota. Hell, black boys have even gotten killed for whistling at white girls.

The real question is have Blacks killed enough Blacks to meet the quota? Black on black crime dwarfs white on black crime in this country and certainly in Africa where millions have died in genocides and civil strife.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Narmer


It's disgusting when the community exact vigalante justice on an arrogant officer but justified when police kill innocent men, such as Amadou Diallo or the countless other incidents between cops and African-Americans? If the laws are formulated by the community and the individuals whom the community entrusts to carry out those laws abuses it and/or shows disgust towards the community, isn't it in the interest of the community to deal with such an unfit official as they see fit and as efficiently as possible? Or is it better to entrust the policing of the police to other police officers? If that was the case, then police would be able to get away with murder...

Vigilante justice? The cop was chasing a criminal and accidentily ran over a child, you act as if he saw the kid crossing the street and ran her down. There have been plenty of innocent white people killed by blacks, as well as other innocent black people killed by other blacks. Does this give me the right to go around killing black people? You are absolutely absurd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadou_Diallo

I just read up on it for a minute, but it seems like a justified use of force if they thought the guy was going for a gun. But like I said, I have never heard of that guy until now so I don't really know anything about the case.

Just because you might have come across a bad cop, it does not mean that they are all bad. 99 percent of cops are just normal people that want to make the world a safer place, you really need to get over yourself and your prejudice towards cops. Imagine if I start citing all of the innocents killed by black people and showed the kind of hatred towards black people that you show towards Police. You need to open your eyes a little bit, its getting old seeing you play the race card and the whole "vicitm mentality" that you have.

Everything's fvckin justified in your opinion. If I take out my cellphone and a cop thought it was a gun, is he justified in killing me? That's absurd.

I think white people have killed enough innocent blacks over the past 400 years to pre-empt you from filling out your supposed quota. Hell, black boys have even gotten killed for whistling at white girls.

The real question is have Blacks killed enough Blacks to meet the quota? Black on black crime dwarfs white on black crime in this country and certainly in Africa where millions have died in genocides and civil strife.

You're absolutely correct but that isn't the topic at hand. Don't try to dilute the argument.

 

[getbush]

Originally posted by: Narmer
At the time of the incident, I'm willing to bet that the cops were too damn scared. Too much fear. Too many blacks around. They were uncomfortable and thought the blackness was going to come out and grab them.

You're off your rocker. Get out of NYC before you lose all touch.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Narmer


It's disgusting when the community exact vigalante justice on an arrogant officer but justified when police kill innocent men, such as Amadou Diallo or the countless other incidents between cops and African-Americans? If the laws are formulated by the community and the individuals whom the community entrusts to carry out those laws abuses it and/or shows disgust towards the community, isn't it in the interest of the community to deal with such an unfit official as they see fit and as efficiently as possible? Or is it better to entrust the policing of the police to other police officers? If that was the case, then police would be able to get away with murder...

Vigilante justice? The cop was chasing a criminal and accidentily ran over a child, you act as if he saw the kid crossing the street and ran her down. There have been plenty of innocent white people killed by blacks, as well as other innocent black people killed by other blacks. Does this give me the right to go around killing black people? You are absolutely absurd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadou_Diallo

I just read up on it for a minute, but it seems like a justified use of force if they thought the guy was going for a gun. But like I said, I have never heard of that guy until now so I don't really know anything about the case.

Just because you might have come across a bad cop, it does not mean that they are all bad. 99 percent of cops are just normal people that want to make the world a safer place, you really need to get over yourself and your prejudice towards cops. Imagine if I start citing all of the innocents killed by black people and showed the kind of hatred towards black people that you show towards Police. You need to open your eyes a little bit, its getting old seeing you play the race card and the whole "vicitm mentality" that you have.

Everything's fvckin justified in your opinion. If I take out my cellphone and a cop thought it was a gun, is he justified in killing me? That's absurd.

I think white people have killed enough innocent blacks over the past 400 years to pre-empt you from filling out your supposed quota. Hell, black boys have even gotten killed for whistling at white girls.

The real question is have Blacks killed enough Blacks to meet the quota? Black on black crime dwarfs white on black crime in this country and certainly in Africa where millions have died in genocides and civil strife.

You're absolutely correct but that isn't the topic at hand. Don't try to dilute the argument.

Yes, I forgot from your rantings this is definatley a bash whitey thread.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Narmer


It's disgusting when the community exact vigalante justice on an arrogant officer but justified when police kill innocent men, such as Amadou Diallo or the countless other incidents between cops and African-Americans? If the laws are formulated by the community and the individuals whom the community entrusts to carry out those laws abuses it and/or shows disgust towards the community, isn't it in the interest of the community to deal with such an unfit official as they see fit and as efficiently as possible? Or is it better to entrust the policing of the police to other police officers? If that was the case, then police would be able to get away with murder...

Vigilante justice? The cop was chasing a criminal and accidentily ran over a child, you act as if he saw the kid crossing the street and ran her down. There have been plenty of innocent white people killed by blacks, as well as other innocent black people killed by other blacks. Does this give me the right to go around killing black people? You are absolutely absurd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadou_Diallo

I just read up on it for a minute, but it seems like a justified use of force if they thought the guy was going for a gun. But like I said, I have never heard of that guy until now so I don't really know anything about the case.

Just because you might have come across a bad cop, it does not mean that they are all bad. 99 percent of cops are just normal people that want to make the world a safer place, you really need to get over yourself and your prejudice towards cops. Imagine if I start citing all of the innocents killed by black people and showed the kind of hatred towards black people that you show towards Police. You need to open your eyes a little bit, its getting old seeing you play the race card and the whole "vicitm mentality" that you have.

The fact that you defend the Diallo murderers is sickening, and a good example of police always backing police, even when evidence shows blatant wrongdoing.

41 shots

19 struck him, and about half of those hit him AFTER he was lying on the ground, proven by ballistics evidence.

He had poor english skills, and was pulling his wallet out to identify himself.

Yet you call this a JUSTIFIED shooting. Wonderful.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Narmer


It's disgusting when the community exact vigalante justice on an arrogant officer but justified when police kill innocent men, such as Amadou Diallo or the countless other incidents between cops and African-Americans? If the laws are formulated by the community and the individuals whom the community entrusts to carry out those laws abuses it and/or shows disgust towards the community, isn't it in the interest of the community to deal with such an unfit official as they see fit and as efficiently as possible? Or is it better to entrust the policing of the police to other police officers? If that was the case, then police would be able to get away with murder...

Vigilante justice? The cop was chasing a criminal and accidentily ran over a child, you act as if he saw the kid crossing the street and ran her down. There have been plenty of innocent white people killed by blacks, as well as other innocent black people killed by other blacks. Does this give me the right to go around killing black people? You are absolutely absurd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadou_Diallo

I just read up on it for a minute, but it seems like a justified use of force if they thought the guy was going for a gun. But like I said, I have never heard of that guy until now so I don't really know anything about the case.

Just because you might have come across a bad cop, it does not mean that they are all bad. 99 percent of cops are just normal people that want to make the world a safer place, you really need to get over yourself and your prejudice towards cops. Imagine if I start citing all of the innocents killed by black people and showed the kind of hatred towards black people that you show towards Police. You need to open your eyes a little bit, its getting old seeing you play the race card and the whole "vicitm mentality" that you have.

Everything's fvckin justified in your opinion. If I take out my cellphone and a cop thought it was a gun, is he justified in killing me? That's absurd.

I think white people have killed enough innocent blacks over the past 400 years to pre-empt you from filling out your supposed quota. Hell, black boys have even gotten killed for whistling at white girls.

The real question is have Blacks killed enough Blacks to meet the quota? Black on black crime dwarfs white on black crime in this country and certainly in Africa where millions have died in genocides and civil strife.

You're absolutely correct but that isn't the topic at hand. Don't try to dilute the argument.

Yes, I forgot from your rantings this is definatley a bash whitey thread.

No, this thread is me trying to make you understand the situation from the cop's POV and from the Victims POV.

 

[getbush]

Most of this is from the Cop's side of the story, which may be blatent lies. Furthermore, they didn't identify themselves as Cops, did they? If they didn't then they are absolutely in the wrong and should be punished. But history has shown that nothing will happen to them because the victims are black and their lives mean little compared to these fearful animals who think the badge and gun give them the right to slaughter the innocent with no consequences for their actions.

Oh gee thanks for clearing that up I feel so enlightened now. What an interesting POV you have.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: getbush

Most of this is from the Cop's side of the story, which may be blatent lies. Furthermore, they didn't identify themselves as Cops, did they? If they didn't then they are absolutely in the wrong and should be punished. But history has shown that nothing will happen to them because the victims are black and their lives mean little compared to these fearful animals who think the badge and gun give them the right to slaughter the innocent with no consequences for their actions.

Oh gee thanks for clearing that up I feel so enlightened now. What an interesting POV you have.

You're welcome. It's abvious that the cops are most likely lying to cover their asses. I'm simply trying to take you through their thought process and those of the victims.