News conference on Thurman Blevins shooting taken over by protesters

a reply to: schuyler

he will no longer be shooting anyone.

Thurman shot someone?

If not how do you know that he would have?

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: schuyler

he will no longer be shooting anyone.

Thurman shot someone?

If not how do you know that he would have?

No, he was just a drunk fool shooting a gun, then running from police, disobeying their orders and brandishing a gun at them.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: schuyler

he will no longer be shooting anyone.

Thurman shot someone?

If not how do you know that he would have?

He had a gun in his right hand. I'd rather not wait to inquire of his intentions. "Excuse me, sir, but if I could just ask you: Do you intend to shoot anyone with that firearm in your hand? I'll just wait here calmly for an answer." Not

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: schuyler

he will no longer be shooting anyone.

Thurman shot someone?

If not how do you know that he would have?

No, he was just a drunk fool shooting a gun, then running from police, disobeying their orders and brandishing a gun at them.

We can safely assume that Blevins wasn't the one doing the shooting earlier, otherwise the news reports would have specifically mentioned how many rounds had been fired from his gun. The media just says that the police were called because someone reported someone shooting a gun. I'm sure that was reported anonymously, so we'll just have to take the word of the police for that one.

And the video I saw didn't show Blevins brandishing a gun. It showed his hand move towards the area of his gun as he was running.

Blevins crime was not obeying the orders of the police, which we know is a capitol offense in this country, subject to immediate execution.

originally posted by: TheLead
a reply to: Asktheanimals

Honestly, there are enough grievances the population has with law enforcement, continually propping up bad actors as saints only hurts that reality.

That's how I see it too. Protest when there is an obvious unjustified use of force but not when the guy has a gun and has already fired it. There are real problems with police use of force though I don't believe race has anything to do with it, I think it's training and a mindset that everyone out there wants to hurt you.

a reply to: VictorVonDoom

We can safely assume that Blevins wasn't the one doing the shooting earlier, otherwise the news reports would have specifically mentioned how many rounds had been fired from his gun. The media just says that the police were called because someone reported someone shooting a gun. I'm sure that was reported anonymously, so we'll just have to take the word of the police for that one.

This has to be the worst case of rambling dribble on this thread, in an attempt to try and explain his actions away.

Literally EVERY REPORT, directly contradicts EVERYTHING you just stated. Even from the bystanders who witnessed it.

I swear I wonder how some of you make it through the day , with such a rabid inability to grasp simple concepts.

Literally, NOTHING you said is backed up by any facts.

None of it.

originally posted by: Whatthedoctorordered
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

We can safely assume that Blevins wasn't the one doing the shooting earlier, otherwise the news reports would have specifically mentioned how many rounds had been fired from his gun. The media just says that the police were called because someone reported someone shooting a gun. I'm sure that was reported anonymously, so we'll just have to take the word of the police for that one.

This has to be the worst case of rambling dribble on this thread, in an attempt to try and explain his actions away.

Literally EVERY REPORT, directly contradicts EVERYTHING you just stated. Even from the bystanders who witnessed it.

I swear I wonder how some of you make it through the day , with such a rabid inability to grasp simple concepts.

Literally, NOTHING you said is backed up by any facts.

None of it.

Can you show me one report that identifies Blevins as the shooter that the police were called for? A police report that shows Blevins' gun had been recently fired or gunshot residue on his hand? How about a video of Blevins pointing a gun at anything or anyone?

I haven't seen any of that.

a reply to: VictorVonDoom

Can you show me one report that identifies Blevins as the shooter that the police were called for?

Yeah the original report.

A police report that shows Blevins' gun had been recently fired or gunshot residue on his hand?

At that point it really didnt matter, he pulled his weapon.

A simple google search , that takes you know, 10 seconds, shows a plethora of body can videos, clearly showing the firearm, and him pulling it before he was shot.

If you arent aware of the facts, its because youre choosing to actively ignore them, willful ignorance, not out of any desire to know the truth.

The guy was not being aggressive at all, he was running for his life after some under trained cops tried to jump him. In my opinion they committed murder but there is nothing that can legally be done. This same stuff happens to white people too, you just don't hear about it on the news that's why BLM is a racist organization just like the KKK is a racist organization.

My favorite response to this incident I heard was from a local activist.

I believe he criticized the police for responding to a call about a man with a gun, shooting said gun, by saying they didn't need to shoot him by saying they could have "head him off at the pass", as the armed suspect ran from police, while failing to comply, while holding a firearm.......some people really are just that damn stupid.

Head him off at the pass.....what the hell is this? Some stupid direct to cable movie?

And these people know north Minneapolis is a #hole with several shootings a week.

F'in morons.

Also, the family claims this was "murder" because the suspect couldn't have done anything that would have prevented him from being shot.

Anything, other than complying with responding officers that is. Is having a gun in and of itself illegal? No. But not complying, running from the police while brandishing is something that no one with an ounce of logic would do and not expect to get shot.

Its really sad to see the video, the facts, and then see the fools twisting it into some summary execution of a man because racism and "evil" police.

OK, police officers are NOT sniper certified with a 9mm hand gun. Only in a fairy tail land would you ask those questions listed below.

Edit: a little free info for those people who don't know that police officers DON"T PLAY GRAB ASS because their life is on the line every day.
Don't run from the police.

If you have a gun tell them and follow their commands to the letter and don't run.

If you must run don't have a gun in your hand.

If you can't follow simple and well known information when dealing with the police don't be surprised when you have minor to major problems with the police (getting the piss stomped out of you or worse).

originally posted by: Kharron
When was the last time any of us read something like this -- The police office shot a suspect in the arm/leg, in order to disable them.

Or stop them from running. How about a shot in the arse?

I don't remember the last time I read that. We shoot to kill, no questions asked. It seems the side effect of civilization is dehumanization.

I only saw one video of this incident, don't want to watch this again, but it did look like he was reaching for a weapon, so this is not as bad as some of the more overt assassination style videos we usually see.

But can't they have shot him in the shoulder? A leg?

originally posted by: Whatthedoctorordered
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

Can you show me one report that identifies Blevins as the shooter that the police were called for?

Yeah the original report.

A police report that shows Blevins' gun had been recently fired or gunshot residue on his hand?

At that point it really didnt matter, he pulled his weapon.

A simple google search , that takes you know, 10 seconds, shows a plethora of body can videos, clearly showing the firearm, and him pulling it before he was shot.

If you arent aware of the facts, its because youre choosing to actively ignore them, willful ignorance, not out of any desire to know the truth.

OK, here's an original report dated June 24:

BCA: Gun Recovered From Scene Of Thurman Blevins Shooting

If you can see anything in there that says Blevins was identified as the person who the police were originally called for, please point it out.

Here's the bodycam footage:



It looks to me like Blevins had the gun in his pocket when he started to run. As he was running, he had his hand on his gun to keep it from falling out of his pocket. Eventually, he took it out of his pocket and carried it so he could run faster. I didn't see him turn around and aim it at the police or anyone else at any point. If you see him do that, please point out the time stamp.

The problem is that not all these scenarios are created equal. I hate police injustice as much or more as the next person. I'd be the first one in line to pull the lever at a public hanging. There's a big difference between this incident and another local incident like the officer shooting the unarmed Australian woman in her night gown who CALLED the police. That guy is being charged with murder and I hope he rots I hell. But this is a legitimate shooting of an armed suspect who was refusing to comply with repeated commands to stop and drop the weapon.

When "movements" champion fools like this, they destroy their own credibility while actually worsening the progress we need to make to hold those in powerful positions responsible.

It pisses me off that these people can be that damn stupid.

I haven't seen a more clear cut case of a justified shooting by police on here in a long time.

Idiots protesting the wrong cases.

a reply to: VictorVonDoom

So you mean, ran and pulled a gun on pursing officers.

That gets you shot.

Again, someone pulls a gun, sorry, but im going home to my family that night.

Careful you dont sprain anything with all the mental gymnastics youre doing.

So if this guy was truly a threat why did they choose to confront him in front of that lady and child? It is obvious the cop had every intention to shoot this guy the moment he saw his weapon, waiting for the perfect time to legally shoot him. Minnesota has open carry laws so shouldn't he have calmly asked the man if he had the proper permit instead of acting like a complete psychopath?

a reply to: Kharron

I don't think police go to the shooting range like they used to. Aiming for anything smaller than the chest or back is a lost art.

a reply to: Jdubious

From the not totally useless camera video I saw a person running from the police unarmed (not holding but possessing a gun) at first but the police knew he had a gun. The runner said no. The police gave him several commands to put his hands up, and I will F'ing shoot you.

Then the runner grabs the gun from his shorts and holds it in his right hand. The gun is visible to the police officer. The runner gets shot after many many warnings that he would be f'ing shot.

He got f'ing shot. Don't run from the police and DON'T brandish a gun.

Concealed carry is not a factor in this. A person carrying a legally concealed fire arm tells the police and doesn't run. Seems simple.