Quote:
Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!
He does? This is the guy who said a cop who is being chased by a double murder suspect on video has no legal right to use lethal force. And then calls me uninformed....
Then he makes a bunch of other factual errors as outlined above....and you think he's coming from a position of knowledge? What is that knowledge?
Arg that is not at all what I'm saying. People can and do act however they want. The interpretation of that action is what I'm talking about and that is most definitely not going to be different every time. When it comes down to answering why you shot an unarmed, fleeing, broken signal light suspect in the back at 20 paces, any miriad of personal experiences and interpretations will not help you when presented with the video.
It's not an opinion or rationale. It is actually part of legal precident in the USA. You can shoot a murder suspect in the back when he/she is trying to escape...the logic being, they've already committed murder or grave harm and will likely do so again. You can't shoot a guy with a broken tail light if he is trying to escape.
|
Factual errors because you disagree. Right.
I just don't get it. In the video, the cop doesn't shoot. Yet another cop would. Doesn't that, in itself prove it's not this cut and dry world you live in?
You are uninformed. No two ways about. You search for things that support your argument and post them as if you know what you're talking about. I have given you plenty of reasons for my position. I have offered you ideas to get a better understanding of such encounters. Yet all you come back with is that I am wrong. Maybe that's just the attitude of internet-wiki-forum users these days. I urge you to follow-up on some of those readings.