Richieg150
Regular Member
Idiocy is not a mutually exclusive phenomenon.
I agree with THAT statement 110%
Idiocy is not a mutually exclusive phenomenon.
"Protesters" are not a recognized protected class as is being a cop.My point is that bashing or broad brushing cops is not allowed here, but here we have a cop doing just that to protesters using a site that typically exposes acts of statism. It's just ironic. He's already called them all "animals," among other things. It's a pretty blatant double standard.
"Disparity of force" is not mentioned in the RSMo. It may be a factor in a shoot/no shoot situation, which Mr. Ayoob is a well recognized expert on, but it ain't in the law.http://backwoodshome.com/blogs/Mass...son-was-justified-in-shooting-an-unarmed-man/
Although I doubt some here would even accept Massad Ayoob's assessment of the shooting of Michael Brown...
"Disparity of force" is not mentioned in the RSMo. It may be a factor in a shoot/no shoot situation, which Mr. Ayoob is a well recognized expert on, but it ain't in the law.
Stop making sense... Rioters and cop haters do not want to hear this. Facts or laws mean nothing. Free TVs do.True, however, assault on a law enforcement officer is a felony (at least the second of three Brown committed that day), and while I can't find it to save my life, I'm 99% sure there is a 'LEO specific' section of the RSMo that details authorized use of deadly force by a LEO, and I believe it states that deadly force is authorized to stop or prevent the commission of a felony (Which I think is largely the same as the 'civilian' version), which would include Assault and fleeing or evading arrest (both of which Brown committed). That satisfies the *legal* portion. Then take the disparity of force as outlined by Mr. Ayoob, that coupled with the legal aspect justifies the shoot.
Yea!Nothing changes that the moron invited the attack. There is no other explanation for his incompetence other than he is a moron.
You just have to wonder about the others who either will not admit he is a screw up, or they cannot see it. If they are a LEO and cannot recognize his enormous mistakes then they are prone to making the same mistakes. Darren Wilson was a danger to police officers, his apologists are also a danger if they are not any smarter than him.
Lmao.... Every once in a while David you pull through.see this brilliantanto ?
Nothing changes that the moron invited the attack. There is no other explanation for his incompetence other than he is a moron.
You just have to wonder about the others who either will not admit he is a screw up, or they cannot see it. If they are a LEO and cannot recognize his enormous mistakes then they are prone to making the same mistakes. Darren Wilson was a danger to police officers, his apologists are also a danger if they are not any smarter than him.
How much good do you think it would do the LEO/community relations if every time a LEO were to initiate contact with a suspect, they called all cars and everyone came in guns drawn because the 'suspect' **might** attack?
So basically, what you're saying is anytime a LEO initiates contact with someone, especially someone who fits the description of a perp in a recent crime, he/she is 'inviting attack'. Right
Perps (relatively speaking) rarely launch an offensive attack against a LEO. 99% would flee at most because they don't want the *ss-whooping (and maybe the additional charges) assaulting a cop would likely bring. It would seem Michael Brown was a 1%er. He thought it better to attack and try to kill a cop rather than to bs the cop or just run from the beginning. Had he just run, he probably still would have ended up apprehended, but most likely would not have ended up dead. Heck, had he not been walking down the middle of the freaking street and attracting attention to himself, he may never have even been noticed to begin with and he might have gotten away with the robbery. To use your vernacular, only a moron would do something that would attract additional attention to themselves right after committing a crime.
How much good do you think it would do the LEO/community relations if every time a LEO were to initiate contact with a suspect, they called all cars and everyone came in guns drawn because the 'suspect' **might** attack?
Here is a link to a thread where I posted the current and soon-ish to be effective RSMo that you refer to.True, however, assault on a law enforcement officer is a felony (at least the second of three Brown committed that day), and while I can't find it to save my life, I'm 99% sure there is a 'LEO specific' section of the RSMo that details authorized use of deadly force by a LEO, and I believe it states that deadly force is authorized to stop or prevent the commission of a felony (Which I think is largely the same as the 'civilian' version), which would include Assault and fleeing or evading arrest (both of which Brown committed). That satisfies the *legal* portion. Then take the disparity of force as outlined by Mr. Ayoob, that coupled with the legal aspect justifies the shoot.
Offending post reported.You Madam are a *******!
Must I do this every time or are some of you actually capable of reading the transcript?
Darren Wilson testified that;
He knew the neighborhood was dangerous and a gang haven
He acknowledged that MB was HUGE man, and he was not alone
When DW told MB to get out of the street DW was rewarded with angry profanity
DW recognized that MB fitted the description of a robbery suspect
DW called for backup, it was on its way, and would have been there in a couple minutes
At this point MB was not attempting to get away, not until DW called him to the vehicle
All of the above took place, and DW testified to BEFORE DW called MB to his open window allowing a dangerous large criminal to get within striking distance. DW is a epic fail as a police officer, nobody this damn dumb should have a badge and a gun.
--moderator deleted--