Nm

[DaShuckster]

Stuck to the msm strategy of losing an argument.

LOL - Well, lookie at this. When our boy gets called out for his racist garbage, he hides behind the "msm strategy" defense and plays the wide-eyed, innocent, "Who ME!?!??!" game.

If you're gonna have the balls to spew your "he deserved to die" racist filth, why not admit it?

Have you ever stopped to think what most 'domestic disputes' involve? I'd be willing to bet all of them involve some form of physical abuse -- including involuntary sex (yep, it's called third and fourth degree rape if the victim files charges -- which often doesn't happen.) In this case, your "rapist" was getting into a car with the three kids he had with the baby Momma (the alleged victim.) We all know the whole "rapist" thing makes it easier for you to justify your "blow the SOB's head off" attitude. You had to work at it, but you pulled it off.

You and I both know that if this was a domestic dispute involving "Billy Bob," this situation would have played out completely different.

 

[sk8knight]

The fact that he closed ground on Blake tells you that he did not feel that his life was threatened.

I don't understand your logic. To me, it looks like he closes ground trying to physically keep Blake from going into the car in a position where he knew that he'd have to shoot him. You can hear the desperation in the officers' voices as they see Blake moving towards that fateful choice.

The officer doesn't need to personally feel that his life is threatened in order to use deadly force and doesn't need to wait until his life is actually threatened. It's not the same standard for sworn officers as it would be for you and me. Graham v Connor (which came out 4 years after Tenessee v Garner) allows them to use the totality of the circumstances to assess a potential threat and sets the standard at objective reasonableness. The court held that use of deadly force “requires careful attention to the facts and circumstances of each particular case, including the severity of the crime at issue, whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, and whether he is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight.” So by that, you'd have everything they knew about the suspect from dispatch (which could've been nothing or could've been a decent history depending on what the caller relayed), everything they knew from previous interactions (this guy was a frequent flyer so it's possible the officers on scene knew him and had previous interactions), whatever happened since the very beginning of their interaction through the point at which deadly force was used. We don't even have a full video of the interaction, much less any of the rest of that information.

 

[DaShuckster]

I don't understand your logic.

It's "objectively reasonable" to shoot a man in the back?

I love how you spout court cases to justify the use of deadly force in a domestic dispute case that should never have gotten anywhere close to a situation where the man gets shot in the back for goodness sakes!!!

The man was clearly very upset. The best way for these cops to deescalate the situation and 'calm things down' was to....whip out their guns and demand he stand down? Show me where that's standard police procedure?

As I've stated numerous times here, change the race of the angry man and I would bet the farm that this whole thing goes down differently. Why? Because the three white cops treat the angry man differently.

As long as people like you willfully choose to ignore the underlying issue, the problem isn't going to go away.

 

[Crazyhole]

It's "objectively reasonable" to shoot a man in the back?

I love how you spout court cases to justify the use of deadly force in a domestic dispute case that should never have gotten anywhere close to a situation where the man gets shot in the back for goodness sakes!!!

The man was clearly very upset. The best way for these cops to deescalate the situation and 'calm things down' was to....whip out their guns and demand he stand down? Show me where that's standard police procedure?

As I've stated numerous times here, change the race of the angry man and I would bet the farm that this whole thing goes down differently. Why? Because the three white cops treat the angry man differently.

As long as people like you willfully choose to ignore the underlying issue, the problem isn't going to go away.

If someone is walking over to get a weapon that they are going to kill you with, yes, shoot them in the back. Shoot them in the back 500 times if thats what it takes.

 

[sk8knight]

If someone is walking over to get a weapon that they are going to kill you with, yes, shoot them in the back. Shoot them in the back 500 times if thats what it takes.

Why do you bother responding to him if he’s just going to cover his ears, close his eyes, and scream “he was shot in the back” repeatedly like a 4 year old child?

 

[DaShuckster]

Why do you bother responding to him if he’s just going to cover his ears, close his eyes, and scream “he was shot in the back” repeatedly like a 4 year old child?

Says the guy who repeatedly opines that shooting a man in the back was justified.

The notion that that Blake was reaching for a weapon is pure bullshit. It was already established he had a knife. Was he somehow going to stab the officer from behind?

Blake was getting back into his car, period. The cop who shot him made damn sure he wasn't going to drive away.

 

[Crazyhole]

Says the guy who repeatedly opines that shooting a man in the back was justified.

The notion that that Blake was reaching for a weapon is pure bullshit. It was already established he had a knife. Was he somehow going to stab the officer from behind?

Blake was getting back into his car, period. The cop who shot him made damn sure he wasn't going to drive away.

If it was your daughter or grandchild in the car you'd probably feel differently. Unless the guy was black, then its racially motivated so let him do whatever. Right?

 

[DaShuckster]

If it was your daughter or grandchild in the car you'd probably feel differently. Unless the guy was black, then its racially motivated so let him do whatever. Right?

Yeah, play the "what if it was YOUR daughter" game. That's always a good ploy when backed into a corner!

 

[firm_bizzle]

If someone is walking over to get a weapon that they are going to kill you with, yes, shoot them in the back. Shoot them in the back 500 times if thats what it takes.

That's not what happened. The officer walks over, grabs him and then shoots him in the back. What's the point of having a gun if you need to walk up to someone to use it?

 

[Crazyhole]

That's not what happened. The officer walks over, grabs him and then shoots him in the back. What's the point of having a gun if you need to walk up to someone to use it?

Should have shot him in the head and put an end to this rapists life. His kids would be better off without him in their lives.

 

[firm_bizzle]

Says the guy who repeatedly opines that shooting a man in the back was justified.

The notion that that Blake was reaching for a weapon is pure bullshit. It was already established he had a knife. Was he somehow going to stab the officer from behind?

Blake was getting back into his car, period. The cop who shot him made damn sure he wasn't going to drive away.

I don't even have an issue with the cop shooting him in the back if he thought that Blake would endanger someone. However, clearly he did not think that Blake would endanger someone because he closed in on Blake.

 

[Crazyhole]

I don't even have an issue with the cop shooting him in the back if he thought that Blake would endanger someone. However, clearly he did not think that Blake would endanger someone because he closed in on Blake.

He didn't think that Blake would endanger someone after being called to a domestic disturbance after a reported sexual assault? The cop knew that there were children in the car that would likely be abused, raped, and possibly murdered. I would have shot the guy in the face.

 

[Crazyhole]

Closing in as he walks to the car for the weapon. Giving commands to stop.

False. As we now know, walking or running away is proof that someone cannot possibly be a threat to anyone.

 

[Crazyhole]

Thought there should have been a head shot given the circumstances.

Every rapist should be shot in the head in front of their children and broadcast for the world to see. That would probably put a swift end to it.

 

[DaShuckster]

If the rapist had only the tip in Shook's wife when he reaches for his weapon as his back is turned...do you 1) ask him politely to finish 2) ask him not to kill you nicely 3) shoot the rapist in the back?

Good one, KNIGHTTIME. Double-down on your crude racist crap with an all-time American classic.

It's certainly been the genesis of many a good lynching over the years.

 

[Crazyhole]

Good one, KNIGHTTIME. Double-down on your crude racist crap with an all-time American classic.

It's certainly been the genesis of many a good lynching over the years.

Shuckster just said that when he thinks of rapists, he sees a black man.

 

[DaShuckster]

Shuckster just said that when he thinks of rapists, he sees a black man.

That's been your line with this story from Day 1.

 

[Crazyhole]

That's been your line with this story from Day 1.

Because it's as transparent as glass. You keep referring to criminals as a racially specific commodity. You just responded to a post about a rapist and invoked race into the conversation.

 

[DaShuckster]

Because it's as transparent as glass. You keep referring to criminals as a racially specific commodity. You just responded to a post about a rapist and invoked race into the conversation.

Bullshit. I simply uncovered the dirty underbelly of this conversation. Your take that the cop should have shot him in the head and put an end to his life was "as transparent as glass," right?

 

[DaShuckster]

A rapist isn't assumed to be black.

Ooooh. So it's just a coincidence that "the rapist" under discussion is Black when you choose to use the label? Is that how it works? Ooookie dokie.

 

[Crazyhole]

Ooooh. So it's just a coincidence that "the rapist" under discussion is Black when you choose to use the label? Is that how it works? Ooookie dokie.

There is no coincidence, this is a singular event that is and should be taken at face value. If you want to connect the sexual assault of a woman to the color of the perpetrators skin that's fine, but don't assume that people who are opposed to rape are racists.

 

[firm_bizzle]

Closing in as he walks to the car for the weapon. Giving commands to stop.

Bad policing. No department is going to teach you to go grab someone and shoot them. One or the other.

 

[goodknightfl]

Being a rapist is simply a sexual preference. Nothing to see here... Just another case of innocent man being shot by police.

 

[DaShuckster]

I need a new scorecard to remember when it's Okay or Not Okay to use deadly force. Let's seeee now....

• It was Okay for Cop-wannabe, George Zimmerman to fire away because he felt his life was threatened. But it was NOT Okay for Trayvon Martin, the kid he killed, to jump the strange guy who was stalking him in the dark with nothing but his bare hands because he was "a thug" (not as bad a "a rapist" but pretty damn close.)
• It was Okay to use deadly force on that Blake dude because he was a "rapist." He was shot seven times in front of his three kids. (Evidently, the Baby Momma of his kids didn't always cry rape.)
• It was Okay to use deadly force on George Floyd because uh,...what did we decide again? Oh yeah, he had fentanyl in his system! Cue sinister music.
• Yes, it was Okay to use deadly force on Elijah McCain who was minding his own business walking down the sidewalk one night last year because he was a dorkish "Urkel" clone who wore a mask before it was fashionable and -- most importantly -- HE RESISTED ARREST!!! Can you believe that lowlife shit? Clearly he got what he deserved!
• It was Okay the police to let the guys go who lynched Ahmaud Arbery (it was self-defense, you know--until the video surfaced.) It was also Okay for the police to tell Arbery's mother that her son died during the commission of a robbery instead of a jog through the neighborhood. She didn't know any different until the video went viral.
• It was Okay for Eric Garner to be choked to death because: a) Good Lord, did you see him? The guy was really overweight; and b) the officers involved certainly didn't mean to do him any harm with their chokehold. So all's good on that one.
• It was Okay for Cop Wannabe, Kyle Ritterhouse to kill two people on the streets and walk past police even though bystanders were screaming at them that this kid killed people. Why? Because he's "a good kid" who wasn't looking for any trouble that night! He drove all the way from Illinois with a friend's AR-15 to protect property from looters and thugs. Geez, when things get crazy on the streets and you're a 17 year old kid carrying an AR-15, accidents happen. Give the kid a break!

How'd I do, guys? Did I score everything correctly?

 

[sk8knight]

Bad policing. No department is going to teach you to go grab someone and shoot them. One or the other.

That’s just an ignorant statement.

 

[Ucfmikes]

I need a new scorecard to remember when it's Okay or Not Okay to use deadly force. Let's seeee now....

• It was Okay for Cop-wannabe, George Zimmerman to fire away because he felt his life was threatened. But it was NOT Okay for Trayvon Martin, the kid he killed, to jump the strange guy who was stalking him in the dark with nothing but his bare hands because he was "a thug" (not as bad a "a rapist" but pretty damn close.)
• It was Okay to use deadly force on that Blake dude because he was a "rapist." He was shot seven times in front of his three kids. (Evidently, the Baby Momma of his kids didn't always cry rape.)
• It was Okay to use deadly force on George Floyd because uh,...what did we decide again? Oh yeah, he had fentanyl in his system! Cue sinister music.
• Yes, it was Okay to use deadly force on Elijah McCain who was minding his own business walking down the sidewalk one night last year because he was a dorkish "Urkel" clone who wore a mask before it was fashionable and -- most importantly -- HE RESISTED ARREST!!! Can you believe that lowlife shit? Clearly he got what he deserved!
• It was Okay the police to let the guys go who lynched Ahmaud Arbery (it was self-defense, you know--until the video surfaced.) It was also Okay for the police to tell Arbery's mother that her son died during the commission of a robbery instead of a jog through the neighborhood. She didn't know any different until the video went viral.
• It was Okay for Eric Garner to be choked to death because: a) Good Lord, did you see him? The guy was really overweight; and b) the officers involved certainly didn't mean to do him any harm with their chokehold. So all's good on that one.
• It was Okay for Cop Wannabe, Kyle Ritterhouse to kill two people on the streets and walk past police even though bystanders were screaming at them that this kid killed people. Why? Because he's "a good kid" who wasn't looking for any trouble that night! He drove all the way from Illinois with a friend's AR-15 to protect property from looters and thugs. Geez, when things get crazy on the streets and you're a 17 year old kid carrying an AR-15, accidents happen. Give the kid a break!

How'd I do, guys? Did I score everything correctly?

No.. you probably can’t even score with your own mutt-faced NGEbraska wife

 

[firm_bizzle]

That’s just an ignorant statement.

Ok, Bert.

 

[goodknightfl]

You can think what the police did with this guy was wrong, and still not be proud of the Rapist law ignoring perp.

I still feel for the Woman victim in this case, not the thug. If he is now paralyzed he likely wont be raping anyone else. Women lives matter.

 

[sk8knight]

Ok, Bert.

You've already proven that you know next to nothing about police tactics, techniques, and procedures. You have credibility in making an assertive statement that police are taught to either grasp or shoot. Your ongoing comments make it obvious that you have no idea about what police are taught in the academy, in defensive tactics classes, or in regular training.

Yet you respond to the accurate critique of your ignorant comment with snark. And you wonder why no one will take you seriously.

 

[firm_bizzle]

You've already proven that you know next to nothing about police tactics, techniques, and procedures. You have credibility in making an assertive statement that police are taught to either grasp or shoot. Your ongoing comments make it obvious that you have no idea about what police are taught in the academy, in defensive tactics classes, or in regular training.

Yet you respond to the accurate critique of your ignorant comment with snark. And you wonder why no one will take you seriously.

So it is common to grab someone and then shoot them?

 

[DaShuckster]

You've already proven that you know next to nothing about police tactics, techniques, and procedures. You have credibility in making an assertive statement that police are taught to either grasp or shoot. Your ongoing comments make it obvious that you have no idea about what police are taught in the academy, in defensive tactics classes, or in regular training.

Since you an expert (by osmosis I guess since your wife is a cop), are you asserting the police followed proper procedure?

 

[sk8knight]

So it is common to grab someone and then shoot them?

No. It is not common for a suspect to resist arrest. It is not common for a suspect to escape restraint from multiple officers. It is not common for a suspect to walk through a taser deployment. It is not common for a suspect to ignore lawful orders to "stop" and "don't do it". It is not common for a suspect to reach into a hidden compartment in a car after all of those extremely uncommon things happen.

Also, you still ignore the blatantly obvious video that shows the police grabbing for anything they can to keep Blake from reaching into the car and failing to get anything that would actually stop him. I'd say that trying to pull him away from the car is an extra step to keep from having to use deadly force. But unfortunately, they got his shirt and no real ability to affect his actions.

Stop trying to reduce the entire interaction to still frames and then isolate those to create some narrative of improper action. It is deceitful and unhelpful in the grand scheme of things to any cause that you are trying to assist.

 

[firm_bizzle]

No. It is not common for a suspect to resist arrest. It is not common for a suspect to escape restraint from multiple officers. It is not common for a suspect to walk through a taser deployment. It is not common for a suspect to ignore lawful orders to "stop" and "don't do it". It is not common for a suspect to reach into a hidden compartment in a car after all of those extremely uncommon things happen.

Also, you still ignore the blatantly obvious video that shows the police grabbing for anything they can to keep Blake from reaching into the car and failing to get anything that would actually stop him. I'd say that trying to pull him away from the car is an extra step to keep from having to use deadly force. But unfortunately, they got his shirt and no real ability to affect his actions.

Stop trying to reduce the entire interaction to still frames and then isolate those to create some narrative of improper action. It is deceitful and unhelpful in the grand scheme of things to any cause that you are trying to assist.

Resisting arrest is common. Jacob Blake is 5'9" 160lbs. 3 officers were there. Shooting him in the back while grabbing him was superfluous.

 

[Crazyhole]

Resisting arrest is common. Jacob Blake is 5'9" 160lbs. 3 officers were there. Shooting him in the back while grabbing him was superfluous.

Makes you wonder how hard he had to have been fighting them, considering how small he is.

 

[firm_bizzle]

For the record there are legit div 1 football players 160 5'9.

Simple solution...quit fighting cops

Ahhhh, AK speed. Therefore the need for bullets. #hegone

 

[DaShuckster]

It is not common for a suspect to reach into a hidden compartment in a car after all of those extremely uncommon things happen.

He reached into a hidden compartment of his car? WTF? Where did you see that in the video?

When you can't defend the indefensible, I guess you make shit up.

 

[OLearyLastCall]

For the record there are legit div 1 football players 160 5'9.

Simple solution...quit fighting cops

He was walking away and was shot in the back 7 times. Get better cops.

 

[DaShuckster]

He was walking away and was shot in the back 7 times. Get better cops.

Shame on you, OLC!!! You're using common sense again!

 

[Crazyhole]

He was walking away and was shot in the back 7 times. Get better cops.

What was his intent in walking away?

 

[firm_bizzle]

What was his intent in walking away?

Powerwalking.