Rioting aftermath in Kenosha

  • Thread starter Thread starter AlNg
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Again, black on white, black on black, the number of police officers killed are just as important as this when blacks are killed and police kill more unarmed whites as well.

These BLM and Antifa people are agitators and their agitation has led to people losing their lives, businesses, people’s livelihoods being lost including many minority businesses.
 
Polak said:
Find me one recording of a black man being shot by police when he did everything he was told, didn’t struggle, didn’t try to run away etc. There aren’t any.
Click to expand...
There are recordings of such. Its a little disturbing because the man asks : "Why did you shoot me? I did what you asked!’

"CHARLESTON, S.C. (Reuters) - A former South Carolina state trooper will serve a total of five years behind bars for shooting and injuring an unarmed black driver during a 2014 traffic stop, an incident that added to the debate roiling the country over the treatment of black men by law enforcement officers.

Sean Groubert, who is white, shot motorist Levar Jones after stopping him in Richland County for not wearing a seat belt. Patrol car video of the incident showed Jones with his hands raised as he was shot. "


 
Last edited:
JonNC said:
40.png
blackforest:
Blake was not armed. The AG/DOJ made that clear.
Click to expand...
He had a knife.
Click to expand...
There was one on the floor of his car, and it is not yet clear that the police even knew it was there when they shot him, so that excuse does not fly.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
There was one on the floor of his car, and it is not yet clear that the police even knew it was there when they shot him, so that excuse does not fly.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter if they knew. They are not required to wait until he has the weapon out.
There are specific rules in place. We’ll see if they acted within those rules.
 
If he did what he was told, and did not resist or act in a threatening way, ISTM the officer has no grounds and should be prosecuted, which he was. He was convicted because he violated the rights of an American citizen.
 
Last edited:
You have to reach into a car to get in and start the ignition. Or so I learned in driver’s ed . . .

You know, for someone willing to “wait for evidence” you certainly are jumping to a lot of conclusions.
 
blackforest said:
So they CAN shoot people reaching for their registration?
Click to expand...
I don’t think he was reaching for his registration. Not after the altercation. It’s true, the cops couldn’t have known what he was reaching for. But that goes both ways.

I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle in this case.
 
blackforest said:
You have to reach into a car to get in and start the ignition. Or so I learned in driver’s ed . . .
Click to expand...
You have to be acting in a violent or threatening way, IIRC. Blake resisted arrest. He isn’t trying to flea, however, because he reached in. He didn’t climb in.
blackforest said:
You know, for someone willing to “wait for evidence” you certainly are jumping to a lot of conclusions.
Click to expand...
I’ve jumped to no conclusions. The videos and other released information is all we have.

I said, “There are specific rules in place. We’ll see if they acted within those rules.“
blackforest said:
So they CAN shoot people reaching for their registration?
Click to expand...
Do you think that is within the specific rules? Do you think he wrestled aware from the police because he wanted to show them his registration and proof of insurance?
 
Nepperhan said:
There are recordings of such. Its a little disturbing because the man asks : "Why did you shoot me? I did what you asked!’
Click to expand...
Thank you for responding with an example.

Observations from the article and video you posted.
  1. The cop acted badly. He asked the black man to get his license and registration, so the man seemed to go into his car to get them, and then got shot. The cop’s instructions were terrible. It’s like telling a guy to move back and then shooting him because he moved.
  2. The cop went to prison, so there was justice. The victim did not die and the cop ended up in prison. What more could be asked?
  3. Despite the cop being white and driver of the car being black, as Reuters was keen to point out, there is no evidence of this being motivated by racism. The cop just doesn’t seem very competent. According to the article, he even said during the trial that he screwed up and prayed that one day the man he shot would be able to forgive him.
 
Polak said:
Despite the cop being white and driver of the car being black, as Reuters was keen to point out, there is no evidence of this being motivated by racism. The cop just doesn’t seem very competent.
Click to expand...
It could also be reducible to the militarization of the police in the United States. They are almost instructed to see their routes as occupied territory.
 
StudentMI said:
It could also be reducible to the militarization of the police in the United States.
Click to expand...
I agree that this is a serious part of the problem. Police should never, ever, have military equipment (armored vehicles, automatic weapons, etc.). When organizations have stuff like this, they are always tempted to use it.

If a situation degenerates to the point that military equipment is needed, we have the National Guard. The police can step aside.

Since 9/11 the federal government has spent at least $7 billion equipping police departments with military equipment. There is no way that is a good thing (except for the contractors selling the equipment, of course).

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2020-police-military-equipment/
 
Nepperhan said:
Ex-South Carolina trooper sent to prison for shooting unarmed black motorist
Click to expand...
%#&#!#!!!

Pardon my grawlix, but that was unexpected. But also a case supportive of having “the talk.” Not that it does anything for the injury this motorist suffered, at least there is some justice in this story.
LeafByNiggle said:
40.png
JonNC:
He had a knife.
Click to expand...
There was one on the floor of his car, and it is not yet clear that the police even knew it was there when they shot him, so that excuse does not fly.
Click to expand...
I often get the impression that the statement that one has a knife is to imply the statement that someone is engaged in injurious use of the knife.
 
billsherman said:
Police should never, ever, have military equipment (armored vehicles, automatic weapons, etc.). When organizations have stuff like this, they are always tempted to use it.
Click to expand...
Exactly. In the old days cops used to carry a simple pistol that was hidden under their jacket. They didn’t go flashing it around.
 
Somewhere along the way, the motto, belief, concept of “To Protect and Serve” got thrown into the trash can.

What is your constitutional right or your God-Given-Right if you the civilian believe you are innocent and believe beyond a shadow of a doubt believe that the Cop is going to kill you with Lethal Force?
Do you have the same right to return the same Lethal Force in your own defense?
Or is it a one-way street?
 
ThinkingSapien said:
I often get the impression that the statement that one has a knife is to imply the statement that someone is engaged in injurious use of the knife.
Click to expand...
Only that he could be. Having a knife is as innocuous as having a firearm. Both are legal and fall under protected rights.
It’s the actions of the bearer that determines the threat and actions.
He resisted arrest and went over to his car and reached into the drivers side.
 
RidgeSprinter said:
What is your constitutional right or your God-Given-Right if you the civilian believe you are innocent and believe beyond a shadow of a doubt believe that the Cop is going to kill you with Lethal Force?
Do you have the same right to return the same Lethal Force in your own defense?
Or is it a one-way street?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately it is often a one-way street.

It’s strange, as well, how people can’t see how it affects everyone and not just ‘them’. The Black Panthers, AIM, the militia movement in the 90s. There’s no racial or ideological barrier to such extensive state power.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top