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.

 

Jacob Blake was justifiably shot by police

page: 2
65
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: face23785




A man is holding a gun to your kid's head. He's counting down from 3. At 1 he will shoot your child. You're behind him with a gun.


This kind of hyperbole and rushes to judgement are why police conduct needs to be addressed on a large scale. I'm sure that the cop that unloaded his gun into Jacob's back had similar fantasies running through his mind.




posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: face23785

It's always best to put SEVEN BULLETS into someone.

Just in case ONE is not enough.

Jesus Christ.




You've never been in a life or death situation, have you...


The cop was retuning fire then ?

Must have missed that bit.



You missed a lot more than that if that's what you think a life and death situation is.



posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: CthruU
a reply to: face23785

So i guess shooting him in say the legs to demobilise him so he couldn't drive the car was out of the question to equally provide said protection for kids and public.


Absolutely zero knowledge of the law. Take a self defense course. Shooting someone in the leg is prohibited by many police departments. Again, movies aren't real life. And people whose sole knowledge about these things comes from movies should really refrain from offering uninformed opinions.

The rest of your comments about the 7 shots and the location of the shots have been addressed.



This pig


Nice one, bigot.

edit on 28 8 20 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Rushes to judgment you say....


I need a glass of water before I choke to death in a fit of laughter.



posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: face23785




A man is holding a gun to your kid's head. He's counting down from 3. At 1 he will shoot your child. You're behind him with a gun.


This kind of hyperbole and rushes to judgement are why police conduct needs to be addressed on a large scale. I'm sure that the cop that unloaded his gun into Jacob's back had similar fantasies running through his mind.



That's not hyperbole. It's a hypothetical scenario. You should study your Debater's Dictionary more closely. You think throwing out words like that makes you look smart, but not if you use them wrong.

You also refused to answer the question because you know the answer destroys your false narrative. As we all knew you would.
edit on 28 8 20 by face23785 because: (no reason given)


(post by CthruU removed for a manners violation)

posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:46 AM
link   
If you all are satisfied with the killing, that’s fine.

What you want is what you want. No one can change that mindset.



posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: odzeandennz

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: odzeandennz
Done case closed.

No more threads. We get it.

If some could get any reasons to kill...

And in the instances where officers don’t shoot?

How do we explain that


Completely unable to address any of the facts. Predictable.

Imagine you know he has warrants for domestic abuse and rape. You know he just committed additional violent felonies at the scene. He attempts to get into a car and flee with your kids. Are you okay with that? And if you're not okay with your kids being in danger, why are you okay with those black kids being in danger?

Go ahead and lie, I dare you. It's what you're good at. Tell us a whopper about how you'd let this violent felon flee the scene with your kids, that you would have zero concern for their safety. Do it.



He had a weapon and retreating.

He already had the weapon if he brought his kids, he didn’t kill them then.

There are protocols for shooting someone right?

You mean you just want a remote reason to say it was ok to pop 7 bullets in the back.

You’ll say whatever you need to, and ask adhom questions all you want.

You’re ok with whatever window of opportunity to kill and get your patriot on

No clue how other police force deal with people running away



No, they're not. Read the OP. This is all addressed. In fact, if the cop just wanted an excuse to shoot him, he could've shot him as soon as he pulled the knife during the scuffle to arrest him. You would've known that if you read the OP, but you're staunchly dedicated to remaining ignorant.

I'm not gonna engage you any further. You're not here to have adult discussion. You didn't even read the OP. You're adamantly opposed to getting informed on the issue, so it's impossible to have informed discussion with you. You're little more than a troll.


originally posted by: odzeandennz
What you want is what you want. No one can change that mindset.



Incredible amount of projection.

edit on 28 8 20 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:48 AM
link   
a reply to: face23785




That's not hyperbole. It's a hypothetical scenario.


A scenario that has absolutely nothing in common with the situation in question, except in your fantastical mind!



posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: face23785




A man is holding a gun to your kid's head. He's counting down from 3. At 1 he will shoot your child. You're behind him with a gun.


This kind of hyperbole and rushes to judgement are why police conduct needs to be addressed on a large scale. I'm sure that the cop that unloaded his gun into Jacob's back had similar fantasies running through his mind.



That's not hyperbole. It's a hypothetical scenario. You should study your Debater's Dictionary more closely. You think throwing out words like that makes you look smart, but not if you use them wrong.

You also refused to answer the question because you know the answer destroys your false narrative. As we all knew you would.


Ah ok. Now you make sense. Words confuse you by syllables.

You’re going to thrive here

edit on 28-8-2020 by odzeandennz because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:49 AM
link   
They should’ve unloaded the whole clip. Screw these thugs, they don’t deserve the cost to taxpayers to get a day in court let alone go to jail on my dime.



posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
They should’ve unloaded the whole clip. Screw these thugs, they don’t deserve the cost to taxpayers to get a day in court let alone go to jail on my dime.


You just echoed what the chief of police said

Merka



posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: face23785




That's not hyperbole. It's a hypothetical scenario.


A scenario that has absolutely nothing in common with the situation in question, except in your fantastical mind!



Explain how it has nothing to do with the situation. You were insinuating it is not acceptable to shoot someone in the back under any circumstances. I explained how that's false. Don't push blatant lies, thanks. I know that's all you guys have, but Jesus at least try.
edit on 28 8 20 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: face23785

I guess they'd rather see a morbid head shot and brains all over the car the kids were sitting in. One that could have easily missed a moving head and ricocheted, hitting a kid instead. Some people always overthink the situation in hindsight and never put themselves in the shoes of the other guy.



posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: CthruU
a reply to: face23785

So i guess shooting him in say the legs to demobilise him so he couldn't drive the car was out of the question to equally provide said protection for kids and public.


Absolutely zero knowledge of the law. Take a self defense course. Shooting someone in the leg is prohibited by many police departments. Again, movies aren't real life. And people whose sole knowledge about these things comes from movies should really refrain from offering uninformed opinions.

The rest of your comments about the 7 shots and the location of the shots have been addressed.



This pig


Nice one, bigot.


Shooting in leg is illegal but pumping multiple rounds into the back is ok.

No wonder the law is a joke and it is just that.

Call me what you like I'll stand firm and never kneel to the fact that cop is a coward and a pig.
Just like a fair majority of his counterparts.

Keep pounding that chest caveman.



posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: odzeandennz
If you all are satisfied with the killing, that’s fine.

What you want is what you want. No one can change that mindset.




You are right about the mindset.

Wonder why people still insist on fighting with the police with so many examples of the possible outcome.



posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Cops should only shoot once and then try to determine the effectiveness of the shot. And perhaps ask the perp how he is feeling. And then, if needed shoot once again and go through the same process. Or the cops could just shoot off the trigger finger of the perp.



posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: odzeandennz

That’s good to hear. Hopefully he/she follows through.



posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: CthruU

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: CthruU
a reply to: face23785

So i guess shooting him in say the legs to demobilise him so he couldn't drive the car was out of the question to equally provide said protection for kids and public.


Absolutely zero knowledge of the law. Take a self defense course. Shooting someone in the leg is prohibited by many police departments. Again, movies aren't real life. And people whose sole knowledge about these things comes from movies should really refrain from offering uninformed opinions.

The rest of your comments about the 7 shots and the location of the shots have been addressed.



This pig


Nice one, bigot.


Shooting in leg is illegal but pumping multiple rounds into the back is ok.

No wonder the law is a joke and it is just that.

Call me what you like I'll stand firm and never kneel to the fact that cop is a coward and a pig.
Just like a fair majority of his counterparts.

Keep pounding that chest caveman.


The funny part is you're actually damaging the cause. Every time you guys prop up a lowlife like Jacob Blake or Michael Brown who was justifiably shot as some kind of "martyr," you turn reasonable people off.

So go ahead, keep standing in the way of progress on this issue. Good job.

I'm gonna bow out of the thread for now. 2 pages, multiple leftists have responded, none could address the main points of the post, none have answered the main question about whether they'd let this maniac drive off with their kids.

Pathetic. You guys are so mad a black man wasn't unjustly shot by police, it's disturbing.



posted on Aug, 28 2020 @ 09:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
Execelant post Mr Face. You make the case clearly. But I wonder why none of the officers couldn’t shoot out the two front tires or put one through the block instead of seven in his back



reply to: face23785




Because this isn't protocol. When a police officer fires his weapon, his intent is to kill. This is what they are taught. Let's say, they shot out the tires. He can still run the police over. Let's say they shot him in the foot. He can still stab someone.

This isn't the movies. This is real life.

Oh, dont get me wrong. I hate the police, I hate them with all my heart. But this dude deserved it.



new topics

top topics



 
65
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join