It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cincinnati Campus Cop Kills Unarmed Black Man

page: 4
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: TheWhiteKnight

Far from it. Just someone with common sense.

But hey, let's just have everyone go around having 13 kids. Screw it...have 20 kids!




posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa

Presenting the other side of "good this scumbag needed to die" is not hate.



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: MoreBeer

Yes you know that he broke the law, no one is arguing that.
How do you know the cop needed to shoot him?

Or does it not matter...


How do you know the cop didn't need to shoot him?

I'll side with a cops judgement over a man that has been arrested 75 times.



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: MoreBeer

I don't, just saying you don't know that the guy needed to be shot.

But go ahead and just take the cops word for it, of course he isn't partial.
I bet you would ridicule anyone for taking the word of a witness that he didn't need to he shot.



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: SlapMonkey
You're asking for trouble when you allow campus police who are not fully trained police officers to carry guns and enforce laws off-campus. However as we've seen time and time again, even fully trained officers are trigger happy.


Re-read the links--they are fully trained and certified by the state a law enforcement officers, the same as city police.

Apparently.



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
Please don't jump to ignorant conclusions without all of the evidence; don't let the words "unarmed black man" immediately produce an, at this point, unwarranted bias in your consideration of the possibilities in this case.


Well, so much for me making this plea--it happened by the third non-me person to comment on this thread.

Really kind of pathetic, people.



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: SlapMonkey
You're asking for trouble when you allow campus police who are not fully trained police officers to carry guns and enforce laws off-campus. However as we've seen time and time again, even fully trained officers are trigger happy.


Re-read the links--they are fully trained and certified by the state a law enforcement officers, the same as city police.

Apparently.
...and they can arrest/charge someone for an offence if they don't carry ID, license, insurance documents while driving?
In every state? Am I understanding this correctly?

Sorry to be slightly off-topic but it could open an Aladin's Den of potential abuse, as well as control I would not like here in the UK by our police.



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: MoreBeer

I don't, just saying you don't know that the guy needed to be shot.

But go ahead and just take the cops word for it, of course he isn't partial.
I bet you would ridicule anyone for taking the word of a witness that he didn't need to he shot.


Not at all my friend.

I don't know the guy needed to be shoot but I have zero problems with the shooting from the information that has been released. I'd rather have a dead criminal than a mother and toddler walking on the sidewalk that this maniac could have hit in his attempt to escape a simple traffic stop.

If this guy sat there and acted civilized I can guarantee you he would not have been shot and would be alive today.

I don't automatically side with cops.

I have a strong dislike for law enforcement. I've been arrested more times than most. Every single time I deserved it though and the treatment I got.



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam
Is it standard procedure to shoot someone to death who's driving away from a traffic stop without permission?

I'm not saying he ought not be arrested and charged with flight, DUI and so on, but damn, whupping out the sidearm and blazing away seems a bit of a total overreaction, excessive force, and a needless threat to anyone in the background.


Yeah, the punishment doesn't fit the crime. What's the officer gonna say? Watching him drive away made me fear for my life?



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: MoreBeer

Yes we'd all prefer he was shot than mowing down an innocent mother and her child...

But apart from the appeal to emotion fallacy let's be critical...


The car "rolled for a block" after he was struck in the head...
Which is why it's illegal to shoot at a moving car...
For exactly the same reason you say it's a good shoot...

It couldn't have rolled for a block without already going at a fair old velocity.
Must have been shot while moving then...

Illegal. (In some States, idealistically it should be across the board, but I make no claims to this particular States' current legislation).


Peace.



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Yeah amazing that when people say they don't feel that a man deserves to be shot in the head for a minor transgression of driving away, which happens thousands of times a day across the globe, it is a clear sign that people "HATE" the police.


That's the point...you don't know that your description here is complete or completely factual.

That's what we mean (and why I specifically said it in my OP) to please not jump to ignorance-filled conclusions because all of the evidence is not in, yet.

In the words of Billy Joel, "You may be wrong for all I know, but you may be right."



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
Please don't jump to ignorant conclusions without all of the evidence; don't let the words "unarmed black man" immediately produce an, at this point, unwarranted bias in your consideration of the possibilities in this case.


Well, so much for me making this plea--it happened by the third non-me person to comment on this thread.

Really kind of pathetic, people.


Did you honestly expect different?

"We want video!"

"There is video, we just haven't released it yet."

"Screw your video we're going with what we've got, including our own distortions of quotes and known facts!"




posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: RedParrotHead
Who the eff is training these cops? I am, and always have been VERY pro-cop but this is getting ridiculous. I wasn't there (obviously) but reading the report I just can't see any scenario that required this guy to be killed.


I tend to agree at this point, but that's without video evidence or the officer's report, so at this point, who knows?



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

Sure, they can arrest/charge for an offense, but that's assuming the offender "allows" that to happen. Once possible assaults and fleeing and all of that occurs, there are too many variables about which we don't yet know that can either make arrest an impossibility, or use of deadly force appropriate.

Again...it's a waiting game at this point, assuming you don't just want to jump to an ideological conclusion like many in this thread have already done.



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Yeah amazing that when people say they don't feel that a man deserves to be shot in the head for a minor transgression of driving away, which happens thousands of times a day across the globe, it is a clear sign that people "HATE" the police.


That's the point...you don't know that your description here is complete or completely factual.

That's what we mean (and why I specifically said it in my OP) to please not jump to ignorance-filled conclusions because all of the evidence is not in, yet.

In the words of Billy Joel, "You may be wrong for all I know, but you may be right."


Yes I may be wrong, but I still haven't seen hate filled posts.



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:44 PM
link   
still find it a tad disconcerting that the victim could provide a bottle of alcohol but not a drivers license.



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Excessive force was needed. The man was drinking and driving and the car itself became a weapon which could kill many. The officer should be applauded for his actions. The driver was the one using careless decisions.



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: real_one
Another murder of an unarmed man by the police.


You have zero solid evidence that this was murder...please see my OP where I asked for ignorance to be sidestepped in lieu of waiting for the evidence to come out.



Another thread where people are cheering his death.


Both the people who claim that he deserved it (at this point) and those who call the LEO a murderer (at this point) share culpability in ownership of stupidity.

I know I said I'd be nice...this is me being nice



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Then either you're avoiding reading this thread, you're being "intellectually dishonest," or you have forgotten the definition of "hate."

There are comments of hate directed both at the LEO and the victim in this thread.



posted on Jul, 21 2015 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Ah no, I was more curious about the whole 'carrying documents because the law says I have to' thing.
Alien concept to me in the UK, I'm attempting to author a thread about it so I don't go off topic here.
Interesting thread though, I'm just glad the worst I'll expect from any cop in my area is an extendable baton or a tazer, different nations as I said earlier.
Thanks for the interesting read.




top topics



 
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join