It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by samkent
A woman called the policve after a long fight with her sister.
The same woman was shot twice. Once in the head and once in the chest.
Police ordered her to drop the knife.
She said the police would have to shoot her.
Witnesses said she had dropped the knife and the officer should have used a taser.
The cheif said there wasn't enough time and she still had the knife.
Is it possible that low rent people judge danger differently?
In my world an angry black person with a butcher knife walking towards me is an immediate danger.
In their world the same thing might be one step above spilt milk. No big deal.
Have the low rent types been so desensitized to danger that they live in a different world than the rest of us?
Shot in the head.
At least two witnesses told police Erica Collins shouted to Latzy that he would have to shoot her, just before she advanced in his direction. That’s when police say Latzy shot Collins, once in the upper chest and once in her head. She was pronounced dead on the scene.
In a press release attorney Deters says that "no one was in imminent harm when Erica was shot and killed by a police officer." He goes on to say "When she was shot, she was not near anyone and did not threaten the police officer in any manner."
According to Deters, Collins' sister, who she was originally arguing with, maintains that no one was even close to Erica when she was shot. She and her brother, who witnessed the shooting say that Erica she had complied with the officers demands to drop the knife.
Originally posted by Domo1
Ah there we go. Not having a previous criminal record does not mean she wasn't a dirt bag though and in a situation like this I hesitate to believe the family.
Originally posted by Domo1
Despite ATS popular opinion I have never met a cop (and have met many) that ever actually wanted to use their weapon. I think most regard it as the worst thing they may ever have to do.
Originally posted by loam
reply to post by Domo1
Of course, that's all fine and dandy, but the basic facts are disputed by even the woman who called the police.
Yes, let's ignore the 'presumption of innocence' component to our form of governance. Your approach places that presumption on its head. Sorry, but I will never buy into that.
It seems the fact you use the term "low rent types" is all I really need to understand your perspective.
In my opinion, regardless of your rent designation, involving the police in any situation that involves a potential violation of the law also carries with it a potential death sentence.
It sounds like you are ok with that.
Yes, let's ignore the 'presumption of innocence' component to our form of governance. Your approach places that presumption on its head.
Sorry, but I will never buy into that.
Notwithstanding what the officer said, it sounds like he had time in advance to choose the appropriate weapon.
for the officer?
'presumption of innocence'
Moreover, what ever happened to disabling a perpetrator? Being shot in the chest and head certainly doesn't qualify.