Originally posted by StarTraveller
reply to post by pryingopen3rdeye

---

No need to re explain buddy, educated to degree etc

You clearly failed to get my point and the main reason I entered into this discussion.

Fact as Of Now:
Mentally Disabled Man carrying toy Gun shot by Police...

Facts When Incident Happened:
Suspicious Looking Man Carrying Fire Arm seen in vicinity...

The Police, I am sure acted on the information they had at the time the decision was made when the shot/s were fired.

I am sure (despite what some believe) had they had the correct information of 'Toy Fire Arm' and 'Mentally Disabled Man' they wouldn't have fired a shot to kill or even fire any shots at all.

I have no desires at all to 'fall out' with anyone here but what I don't like to read is a Breaking News thread where the OP has made up his mind straight off the bat without giving consideration to ALL those involved and also giving consideration to facts that were at hand at the time of the shot being fired. I little thought would have gone a long way.

The fact is, a person has died who's death could have been avoided had the Police had the information and also had the person been not carrying what can only be described as a fire arm at the precise moment in time, regardless of it being a toy or not.

Thoughts are with the family of the deceased but also with the officer/s that fired the shot after the realisation that it was in fact a toy and not the serious threat of a real fire arm.

Sad but completely avoidable

Originally posted by areyouserious2010
reply to post by pryingopen3rdeye

---

your post said (paraphrasing) that the police where justified to kill a man who appeared to have a gun because he might possibly have a real gun and might possibly do something bad with it, therefor its ok that they killed a disabled man with a toy rifle,

Ok I was trying to ignore you but you are just too rediculous to ignore.

Yes, if someone is walking around in public with a gun (or what appears to be a gun) it warrants immediate police action. If that person is confronted by the police, ordered to drop the weapon and they refuse or point it at the police, the police are justified to use deadly force.

i was telling you that is considered preventative violence, violence used to prevent potential violence,

which is the same logic hitler used to convince his countrymen that it was justified to round up and murder jews,

Your leap of logic is completely rediculous, illogical and irrational. Jews were not roaming the streets with guns threatening people. Hitler lobbied for the persecution of the Jews because of their religious and political views. He made them the scapegoat of the situation Germany was in at the time, namely their economic depression.

Please, stop it.

this is preventative action, the logic for which is the same as the example i posted,

yes i am saying they should not have shot him if he himself had not shot someone,

Originally posted by StarTraveller
reply to post by Flyer

---

Was always under the impression that the Police Serve and Protect - Not Serve and Hide but its apparent we going around in circles so I see no point in my continuing to argue with you.

Originally posted by Dreamwatcher
reply to post by Old77

---

Perhaps it has to do with the 9,146 (Corrected by edit , Thank You thisguyrighthere) homicides by firearm committed in the US in 2009 (stats from earlier are even worse)

edit on 1-9-2011 by Dreamwatcher because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-9-2011 by Dreamwatcher because: Corrected Stat