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.

 

92 Year Old Woman Goes Out Shooting When Cops Kick Down the Door(Update)

page: 7
3
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer

Originally posted by snafu7700

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
she shot the police. her rights were officially null and void due to this. this is not the idea we are debating, but the competency of the police. please dont try to derail.


so by shooting at armed intruders in her home, her rights are null and void? please show me that law, because i certainly dont ever remember reading it as a georgia resident when i lived there and held a concealed carry permit. nor do i remember the constitution reading that way.


youre arguing a useless point. she might not have known they were police but that doesnt matter worth a damn thing. if i run over a person in my car and dont stop, i should not be taken to jail because i ASSUMED it was a deer? thats the basis of your logic.


I don't know? Did that deer run into your house with a gun pointed at you? Please make your arguments relavent to the situation. That is the most ingnorant analogy I have heard all year. Thank you for offsetting of of your previous posts by making such an absurd statement!!




posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:30 PM
link   
jesus god. the ability of some people to suspend their higher #ing brain functions astounds me to this day. logic like this is the whole reason incidents like this can happen.


you sir simply cannot see the correlation. just because she DID NOT KNOW they were police does NOT absolve her of RESPONSIBILITY FOR HER ACTIONS.

[edit on 11-22-2006 by forsakenwayfarer]



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer

youre arguing a useless point. she might not have known they were police but that doesnt matter worth a damn thing. if i run over a person in my car and dont stop, i should not be taken to jail because i ASSUMED it was a deer? thats the basis of your logic.


it does matter because she was defending her personal residence....your analogy doesnt work. the point is that the cops didnt do their homework. period.



edit: please dont get me wrong i agree fully that this is bull[crap] of the ninth degree and the police should be prosecuted. however, flawed logic and knee-jerk reactions will not save us.


first of all, i'd go back and edit your words real quick before warns start flying. second, how is it flawed logic that she had every right to protect herself and her home. she had a quick trigger finger, but if you lived in that part of atlanta, believe me, you would too.



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by kleverone

Originally posted by holymoley

Originally posted by kleverone
Did they not know going into this that the only person who would be there would be a 92 year old lady, who I'm sure probably didn't live in the safest neighborhood (wasn't this a drug bust). Probably had her house broken into before and therefore purchased a firearm to protect herself. I hear plenty of Morons on here defending the police, but don't you think they should find out the occupants, their age, maybe take some of that into consideration? I dare any of you to place your great grandparent in that situation and continue to defend those officers! How about a little background research before breaking down someones door. I don't care who it is, someone breaks down my door without identifying themselves, there getting blasted! And of course they have to identify themselves, show me where the Supreme Court overruled that!! MAYBE she didn't hear them, that I can believe but to say that they don't have to identify themselves because they have a warrant is the dumbest thing I have heard all day. LMAO. Stop defending police incompetence!!!!! Or you may be next!!!



check this out. www.law.com...
the supreme court is backing off from the 'knock and announce rule'. got anything else you want me to look up for you?




Yeah, show me where they overuled it, easing up is hardly a repeal.


i would think that an obvious hardcore liberal such as your self would understand the way the court system works. liberals love to use it to preach to the masses, however, dont like it when its used for its intended purpose. a warrant is issued by a local criminal court when the police can show enough evidence to support the necessity for one. in turn, once the warrant is served, it is up to the court, in many cases the same judge, to view the evidence and decide if criminal proceedings should commence. keep in mind that the individual(criminal) does not become part of the legal system until a written accusation is made by police or a district attorney. if convicted of a crime, it is up to the legal defense to file an appeal. this is how the case moves up the ladder and in some cases makes it to the supreme court. every supreme court decision started in a local court somewhere. instead of trying to kill the cops who were doing their job, perhaps using the system for its intended purpose would be a lot smarter for the defendants. at least they would live through it. new york state, along with many other states have laws in effect to protect both cops and arrestees from harm. in new york its called the "no sock law" it says that a person cannot resist arrest no matter if the arrest is legal or not. this is to protect everyone involved. bottom line, if the cops are coming at you, comply and have your day in court. oh and by the way "easing up" just means that when a case like this comes before the supreme court, its more likely to go the cops way.



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by snafu7700

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer

youre arguing a useless point. she might not have known they were police but that doesnt matter worth a damn thing. if i run over a person in my car and dont stop, i should not be taken to jail because i ASSUMED it was a deer? thats the basis of your logic.


it does matter because she was defending her personal residence....your analogy doesnt work. the point is that the cops didnt do their homework. period.



edit: please dont get me wrong i agree fully that this is bull[crap] of the ninth degree and the police should be prosecuted. however, flawed logic and knee-jerk reactions will not save us.


first of all, i'd go back and edit your words real quick before warns start flying. second, how is it flawed logic that she had every right to protect herself and her home. she had a quick trigger finger, but if you lived in that part of atlanta, believe me, you would too.



you people astound me, because apparently you failed to read my prior posts before forming your opinion and tyring to prove me wrong. I AGREE WITH YOU. i am simply stating that trying to use her age to protect her from the consequences of her acitons is IDIOCY. plain and simple. SHE SHOT POLICE. just because she did not know she shot police does NOT change the simple FACT. she shot police. therefore my example makes perfect sense. just because i DID NOT KNOW I RAN OVER A PERSON, AND NOT A DEER, DOES NOT ABSOLVE ME FROM THE CONSEQUENCES OF RUNNING OVER A PERSON.



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
you sir simply cannot see the correlation. just because she DID NOT KNOW they were police does NOT absolve her of RESPONSIBILITY FOR HER ACTIONS.


responsibility for defending her home you mean? that's covered in the constitution my friend. the ones who are responsible here are the cops who were too damned lazy to do a little recon before jumping the gun (pun intended). i'm no cop hater, i've got several friends who do that thankless job, but these particular guys were regular keystone type idiots. if they'd just done a little homework and realized that she held a carry permit, they damned well would have entered the situation a little differently.



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:39 PM
link   
[

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer


please dont get me wrong i agree fully that this is bull[crap] of the ninth degree and the police should be prosecuted. however, flawed logic and knee-jerk reactions will not save us.

bolded so maybe you MIGHT read it this time around.



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
SHE SHOT POLICE. just because she did not know she shot police does NOT change the simple FACT. she shot police. therefore my example makes perfect sense. just because i DID NOT KNOW I RAN OVER A PERSON, AND NOT A DEER, DOES NOT ABSOLVE ME FROM THE CONSEQUENCES OF RUNNING OVER A PERSON.


and they SHOT AN INNOCENT OLD LADY IN HER HOME. just because they were too stupid to research the situation a little better so as to KNOW that she held a permit, does not absolve them of fault.



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
jesus god. the ability of some people to suspend their higher #ing brain functions astounds me to this day. logic like this is the whole reason incidents like this can happen.


you sir simply cannot see the correlation. just because she DID NOT KNOW they were police does NOT absolve her of RESPONSIBILITY FOR HER ACTIONS.

[edit on 11-22-2006 by forsakenwayfarer]


Yes it does if she is visually impared!!!!!!! And could not hear? How would she know they were police???? SO if someone breaks into my house and due to cirmcustances beyound my control that prevent me from being able to identify the intruders in my house as police officers than I should just sit back and hope they are?? This is thaty grey area that I spoke of that was the responsibilty of the officers to dertemine before busting into someones house with guns drawn. SHE WAS IN HER HOUSE!!!!!!!! THINKING SHE WAS BEING INTRUDED!!!! IF you lived in the Ghetto of ATlanta and were scared enought that you sat in your living room with a gun on you lap and were 92 years old, what would you do with you gun if several figures busted into your house screaming!!! Factor in the environment she lived in. Are you arguing this for the sake of aruging or do you really believe what you are saying??



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
bolded so maybe you MIGHT read it this time around.


lol...i read it the first time. why do you think i suggested you edit your wording before warns start flying? but in your post, you started with a con-argument, and ended with that particular semi-pro-argument. i disagreed with the con-argument, and not the pro-argument, hence the reason for the post. understand?



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:44 PM
link   
i dont care how "hard of hearing" you are. barring COMPLETELY deaf, there is no way she did not hear "POLICE. GET ON THE GROUND. POLICE." im sure the word POLICE was screamed more than even simple adjectives when entering the home. now never once did i say the police are beyond fault here, and if you would simply read my post and not selectivly decide what you will respond to, you would realise i agree with you the police are in the wrong. but trying to defend her untimely death is a MOOT POINT. she shot a police office. i dont think theres a snowballs chance in hell being 19 i would get off with the same amount of sympathy just because i live in a "bad neighborhood" and i "didnt know they were police" come the hell on.



edit: im playing devils advocate very hard right here, because while there were gross mistakes on the part of the police, you cannot in any way sympathise with this woman because she shot at them.

[edit on 11-22-2006 by forsakenwayfarer]



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
[

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer


please dont get me wrong i agree fully that this is bull[crap] of the ninth degree and the police should be prosecuted. however, flawed logic and knee-jerk reactions will not save us.

bolded so maybe you MIGHT read it this time around.


Oh that completely redeems you ingnorance for playing devils advoacte


Then why are you making arguments in defense of the police? why not say "Hey If this gives police the legal right to blast grandma, then something needs to be changed!
You are simply recognizing that your arguments hold no water and are turning an about face on the matter. Pick a side and defend it. I think that stand for something or fall for anything defines you.

[edit on 22-11-2006 by kleverone]



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
i dont give a damn how "hard of hearing" you are. barring COMPLETELY deaf, there is no way she did not hear "POLICE. GET ON THE GROUND. POLICE."


lol....do you realize how many times a week that "POLICE, GET ON THE GROUND" must be heard in that neighborhood? not to mention "POLICE....RUN!"


i dont think theres a snowballs chance in hell being 19 i would get off with the same amount of sympathy just because i live in a "bad neighborhood" and i "didnt know they were police" come the hell on.


that much i probably would have to agree with. although it would still be wrong if it happened in your own home.

[edit on 22-11-2006 by snafu7700]



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:48 PM
link   
she shot police.








she shot police.







should i type it again? i dont care who you are, how innocent you are, or any other mitigating factor.




i agree fully that this should never have been made to occur if this had been handled correctly. however, i CANNOT fault these men for returning fire. mistakes were made on BOTH SIDES. understand yet?



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:50 PM
link   
Now that I see your true colors, I refuse to entertain you. I believe the above post said what I wanted to say, no need to repeat.

[edit on 22-11-2006 by kleverone]



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
i agree fully that this should never have been made to occur if this had been handled correctly. however, i CANNOT fault these men for returning fire. mistakes were made on BOTH SIDES. understand yet?


oh, i dont fault them for returning fire...that's the automatic response that they are trained in to. i fault them for their imcompetence in allowing the situation to develope the way it did....simply because they were too lazy to research.



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
she shot police.








she shot police.







should i type it again? i dont care who you are, how innocent you are, or any other mitigating factor.




i agree fully that this should never have been made to occur if this had been handled correctly. however, i CANNOT fault these men for returning fire. mistakes were made on BOTH SIDES. understand yet?


No and you will never convince any smart person otherwise!



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:54 PM
link   
they should never have stormed a 92 year olds home. this is a given. this should NEVER have made it to a situation where we should even be having this discussion. I AGREE WITH YOU, WAKE UP.


they should never have stormed a 92 year olds home. bolded, because evidently you have a learning/reading disorder.



now. what i am trying to argue is that IGNORING all the other circumstances of this incident, SHOOTING AT POLICE IS SHOOTING AT POLICE. WHETHER YOU KNOW OR NOT. i FULLY expect these men to protect their lives. i dont care WHO is holding that gun.


edited, as the misunderstandings have been cleared up between us.

[edit on 11-22-2006 by forsakenwayfarer]

[edit on 11-22-2006 by forsakenwayfarer]



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
she shot police.








she shot police.







should i type it again? i dont care who you are, how innocent you are, or any other mitigating factor.




i agree fully that this should never have been made to occur if this had been handled correctly. however, i CANNOT fault these men for returning fire. mistakes were made on BOTH SIDES. understand yet?


Ok so we now see that you view the police as gods who cannot make mistakes gotcha


Sorry I didn't realize that they had already got to you. Ummm this probably won't help you but contrary to what you learned in the first grade, some police officers do make mistakes from time to time. I know, I know deep breaths.... in and out and in and out....... it's hard to accept at first.......


[edit on 22-11-2006 by kleverone]



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer



they should never have stormed a 92 year olds home. this is a given. this should NEVER have made it to a situation where we should even be having this discussion. I AGREE WITH YOU, WAKE UP.



I AGREE WITH YOU, WAKE UP.




[edit on 11-22-2006 by forsakenwayfarer]


[edit on 11-22-2006 by forsakenwayfarer]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join