Funkyalligator Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 hmmm....the situation in London was a little more involved than you guys seem to be describing....the guy fit the profile of a terrorist....he ran from police into the subway and jumped a turnstile....what a dumbass........I would have shot him myself after what happened the week before... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bird_1972 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Originally posted by Kilmer17 I have, and I agreed with them. You have a problem chom. And a serious one. You think that anyone who opposes your view is an extemist. And then you take huge leaps to compare them with Nazi's the SS etc. It's sad. I have no doubt you are very bright guy. But your ability to grasp two sides of a debate is nil. People like you are responsible for the wedge driving in this country. From time to time, I truly enjoy debating you. But times like this when you come out swinging with Nazi comparison, it becomes old and tired fast. I've seen people on both sides of the issue throw out the "Nazi" card pretty readily as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Originally posted by Destino You are missing my point. If a cop shoots a innocent guy that is posing no threat for running, he deserves to be fired immediately and possibly jailed. Thus a rule saying "you CAN shoot him" is something I am completely and totally against because it allows bad decision making to occur. I agree. And that is PRECICELY what happens now. A trial takes place and if the Cop is found to have acted innapropriately, he goes to jail. Deservedly so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Funkyalligator Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 As for everyone that b*tches about profiling....shut the f*ck up....it is a necessary evil in todays day and age and will help us become safer...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Originally posted by Funkyalligator As for everyone that b*tches about profiling....shut the f*ck up....it is a necessary evil in todays day and age and will help us become safer...... What kind of profiling, the use of race as PART of a profile, or the use of race as the profile? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
36SKINS56 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 AMEN funkyalligator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Originally posted by Kilmer17 I agree. And that is PRECICELY what happens now. A trial takes place and if the Cop is found to have acted innapropriately, he goes to jail. Deservedly so. Then we agree and I've wasted my blow hard quota for the day on nothing. Thanks "buddy" pffft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 This is disagreements. Arguments are 2 doors down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Shoot to kill? Are you f'ng kidding me? The scenario is something that I can see myself in. During the summers early in the morning I may have multiple layers on to drop some fat that I inivetably gain during the winter. My running path takes me up to Loehmans Plaza, where I chill out in front of the 7-11 for a few minutes, go in, get drink, and walk home. There are always 2 cop cars stationed at Loehmans, one right by the 7-11. Now if a cop tells me to stop and freeze, yeah I will definitley do it. But cripes I hope I get a friggin warning first before my brains are on the sidewalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Funkyalligator Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Loemans...I used to live back there on Camp Alger....as for profiling.....it is never just about race..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueTalon Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Originally posted by Kilmer17 This is disagreements. Arguments are 2 doors down. "I came here for a good argument" "No you didn't, you came here for an argument" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Everyone knows what is going on their neighborhood. D.C. or London. If your in a bad neighborhood. If you match the profile If your going to the scene of the crime persay. If your dressed "up" If you can't hear people shouting If you run You are in a position that anything can happen... no blame on anyone as it is a "match" on way too many things... Horrible but a reminder... be aware or your situation right after a catastrophe.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 If an otherwise innocent man (ie the only crime is disobedience) is killed because the cops made a decision based on his actions, then HE ALONE bears the blame for those actions. Kilmer, we don't know what happened. For one thing, the "cops" weren't uniformed officers, they were part of an undercover special team, part of some task force, so it's not like he saw police officers and just bolted from them. Heck, for all we know, he didn't even HEAR the officers and was late for the train. Also, as someone had mentioned in another post, he lived in a bad part of town, and if someone starts to chase you, you don't stop. Second, do we really know he jumped turnstyles? As new story developments have been produced, it was said that he actually use his subway card/pass/whatever, so he didn't jump the turnstyle or any other blocking device. Also, it was first reported that he had "wires" sticking out of his body, then it became evident he didn't. This story has transformed several times, to the point that much of the original story isn't even correct: He wasn't a man, with wires sticking out of his body, running from uniformed officers and bounding over turnstyles. And it's possible that he wasn't even wearing a heavy jacket. He also didn't come from a house that was under watch - his entire block or series of block was under watch. And, finally, if what the police claim took place, wouldn't we have video of the guy? We know they have cameras everyone, and not a single image has been produced to support the assertions of the police. Not a single one - why is that? This article discusses this shooting: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1711303,00.html Was it really just all the Brazilian's fault? God forbid if we now have American officers that have such an incredibly easy reason for shooting someone: "He looked like a terrorist threat." And a reason that now has people like Kilmer even blaming a shooting on the victim. It's amazing. But that is OK, this has been happening for a while - remember that guy in NY that was shot dozens of times as he reached for his wallet? "It was his fault for standing in the way of that bullet." By the way, perhaps if the UK are so keen on killing terrorists, they shouldn't have them working for their government. As it turns out, Rashid Aswat, the "London Master" may very have worked, or be currently working, for Mi-6, which is British military intelligence. This is a video, from Fox News of all places, with a discussion of this tidbit of information. (Video and audio, may not be work safe.) http://www.infowars.net/Pages/Aug05/020805Aswat.html So, what's happening with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Bac, we can "what if" it to death. And still reach the same conclusion. If it turns out that the cops shot him without reason, then they should face punishment for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Bac, we can "what if" it to death. And still reach the same conclusion. That is the whole point - this whole story was a "what if" from the beginning, and many people ate up the details and basically said, "Good, it was his fault for running" without even knowing the whole story. Even earlier, you were blaming his death solely on him, but perhaps you are starting to agree that maybe it wasn't just the Brazilian's fault that he was shot seven times in the head. I have a feeling, though, that nothing will come of this incident. In fact, it wil be used as an example of what police "need to do." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Based on the info I have heard, it was ENTIRELY his fault. I havent heard anything like what you have claimed. IE- that he didnt jump the turnstyle, turn and run when told to stop, etc. If you have that info, please share it. I'll keep an open mind. But at this point, Im basing my conclusions on the info that is out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Based on the info I have heard, it was ENTIRELY his fault.I havent heard anything like what you have claimed. IE- that he didnt jump the turnstyle, turn and run when told to stop, etc. If you have that info, please share it. I'll keep an open mind. But at this point, Im basing my conclusions on the info that is out there. I've already posted one article in my previous post that discusses what the family has said. A few other articles that discusses disputed facts: http://news.scotsman.com/opinion.cfm?id=1707262005 A quote from the article: Initial witness accounts suggested the Brazilian had vaulted over the ticket barrier at Stockwell station, causing further fear and alarm. Police now say he had in fact used his weekly Travelcard to get through. It now appears that the description of someone jumping over the barriers could in fact have been of a police officer in pursuit of his quarry. Also, this Wkipedia article discusses the various disputes in the incident: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Charles_de_Menezes The more recent articles discussing this story usually contain the details that contradict the earlier police story. But to me, the biggest smoking gun is the police's refusal to release security camera footage of the pursuit and shooting. If they had nothing to hide, and their assertions are correct, then they'll simply release the footage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Based on that info, I would think an investigation is needed and possibly a trial. I dont know why they wont release the tape, but I'll hazard a guess. The officers were undercovers, and releasing the tape might blow their covers and hurt on going investigations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Originally posted by Kilmer17 If it turns out that the cops shot him without reason, then they should face punishment for it. Agreed. However, it's a little late for the dead guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Let's play the other "what if" What if he WAS a terrorist? What if he did have a bomb under his jacket, ran when confronted by police, jumped the turnstyle and detonated a bomb killing a thousand people. Do you think the cops would be scorched for not firing at the guy? I know I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 What if he WAS a terrorist? What if he did have a bomb under his jacket, ran when confronted by police, jumped the turnstyle and detonated a bomb killing a thousand people. If everything you said was true, especially if they could see the explosives, then action probably would been necessary. But this didn't seem to be the case in this situation, unless you are suggesting that the police should use extreme measures in any situation because of a "what if." All the "what if's" in the world would kill us all if taken to their ultimate conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 My point entirely Bac. We MUST trust the police to make that call. And if they make a mistake, they should face a punishment. BUt we shouldnt take that right to make the call in the first place away from them. EX- a guy points a gun at a cop and the cop shoots him dead. And it turns out it's not a gun, but a black cellphone. Is the cop wrong for shooting him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 The way this country treats drug offenders, it is highly unlikely people will stop running from the cops anytime soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Also, I thought police weren't supposed to shoot unarmed people in the back!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Nice. Justifying criminals actions. The solution is for people to STOP BEING CROOKS. Not for the cops to change their ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.