cop fatally shoots 19 year old through drivers window over some ####### weed

How about this...the kid should have been killed and the cop should be charged with murder. This way we send a double message.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I didn't know there was video for that. Hence, my confusion. (not that confusion is a new thing)

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys
a reply to: network dude

Show me the physics that this is even possible to begin with and I may agree with you.

The physics of what? There isn't an evidence yet. All we have is words. There is a video.
I am NOT saying the cop is innocent. All I am saying is WAIT for the facts BEFORE you grab the pitchforks.

My God, is that not acceptable in today's society?

No we have a 19 year old kid dead because of weed ,something that has bee proven in poll after poll that the vast majority of americans flat out do not give a schit about.

The fact the cops are still spending all that time and money doing undercover stings to get potheads is so effing 80s..

!9 years old, I am outraged he got shot for something that almost everyone except LEOS think should be legal.

a reply to: alienjuggalo

Look, I completely agree with you on that. Even if he just robbed a bank, he didn't kill anyone. I am in no way advocating that "he needed killing". The ONLY thing I am saying is that we (the collective all of ATS) needs to wait for facts to emerge in these cases. A lot of times, it is a bad decision by the cop. But sometimes, it completely different.

When the facts come out, we will all be able to discuss the nuances of the incident. It just makes no sense to get all worked up over something that may not at all be what we are told.

originally posted by: network dude


When the facts come out, we will all be able to discuss the nuances of the incident. It just makes no sense to get all worked up over something that may not at all be what we are told.

And we still may not get the facts because cops lie and other cops protect them.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: olaru12

I thought there was a video. Is that not the case?

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys
a reply to: network dude

Show me the physics that this is even possible to begin with and I may agree with you.

Imagine a car is coming for you.

Now step to the right.

Now put your finger gun out and point at the now-passing driver's side window.

Boy, that was easy.

But that is murder 1 because at the time of the shooting he was in absolutely no danger.

The courts have already ruled many times fleeing is not justification to shoot someone.

So just by fiat it seems very clear it was murder.

a reply to: alienjuggalo

Again, if you and your whip flee INTO or TOWARDS a police officer, they are allowed, in some cases, to shoot you. Learn it. Know it. Live it.

a reply to: olaru12

Or the cop that shot the guy running and lied through his teeth.

Would have gotten away with too if it wasn't for that meddling video!

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys
a reply to: network dude

Show me the physics that this is even possible to begin with and I may agree with you.

The physics of what? There isn't an evidence yet. All we have is words. There is a video.
I am NOT saying the cop is innocent. All I am saying is WAIT for the facts BEFORE you grab the pitchforks.

My God, is that not acceptable in today's society?

I don't understand why you and scientific have such faith in such a banana republic like system.

The dirty cops will cover this up, and the other dirty cops in IA will do an internal investigation where they will find no fault, the murder will get a paid vacation, and kill again.

Maybe next time it will be your kid being dumb and buy the weed that gets them shot, or mine, or my neighbors.

The police should not be able to investigate themselves, it should be 100 percent outside 3rd party.

At least then, the dirty cops couldn't cover for the other dirty cops.

a reply to: Urantia1111

Now if you put your self in front of said car, is it still considered a weapon?
As in they are not going after you, you just decide to try and block it.

I am not saying that is the case for sure on this one, but it I feel like it is in a lot of cases like this.

Just like this other shooting, the officer stuck his arm in the car, which created the danger of him being dragged.

Them creating the danger and then shooting the person over it seems wrong.

a reply to: johnwick

I highly doubt me, or my friends would be shot by the police.

I can't remember the last time Tokyo police shot someone.

a reply to: johnwick

well, the option is to take a few words of a headline, and a brief description of the incident and hang the mother #er.
Is that what you are wanting here? Because that is the alternative.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Urantia1111

Now if you put your self in front of said car, is it still considered a weapon?
As in they are not going after you, you just decide to try and block it.

I am not saying that is the case for sure on this one, but it I feel like it is in a lot of cases like this.

Just like this other shooting, the officer stuck his arm in the car, which created the danger of him being dragged.

Them creating the danger and then shooting the person over it seems wrong.

It is only wrong if you aren't a psychic killer.

originally posted by: johnwick


The dirty cops will cover this up, and the other dirty cops in IA will do an internal investigation where they will find no fault, the murder will get a paid vacation, and kill again.

It's obvious we need an oversight group for LEOs that isn't connected to any police or government entity. What do you suggest? I think we need some fantastic ideas to police the police. No blue line at all. No corruption possible. But we don't need the attitude displayed here. We sure as hell don't need a guilty unless you can find some miracle to save your ass type of group.

That's no better than "them".

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: johnwick

well, the option is to take a few words of a headline, and a brief description of the incident and hand the mother #er.
Is that what you are wanting here? Because that is the alternative.

Or you know, stop training the police that they should shoot at the first sign of danger.

You know, like they are being trained to do right now.

Literally, they train them to shoot first, if they think they are in any danger at all.

That is how people get shot for simple things like reaching for their wallet, or having a phone in their hand.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: johnwick

I highly doubt me, or my friends would be shot by the police.

I can't remember the last time Tokyo police shot someone.

Lucky SOB, I always wanted to visit Tokyo, I have heard it is pretty amazing!!!

I'll be waiting with baited breath for Obama to give his message about this event and send the Justice Department down to get to the bottom of this.

Don't expect any protests or riots over this.
#whitelivesdon'tmatter

Wth, shooting anyone over weed?
ughhhh.....

These are the reasons I posted the South Park clip earlier

Seneca Police Chief John Covington confirmed that the shots were fired into the side of the vehicle.

... In its “Shots Fired” investigative report earlier this year, The Post and Courier found that one in four police shootings in South Carolina involve cops firing at or into vehicles. Officers typically justified their actions by saying the vehicles were heading toward them, causing them to fear for their lives and pull their guns. But the newspaper found that in case after case officers fired into the sides of vehicles as they were speeding away.

From linked source in the OP

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: johnwick


The dirty cops will cover this up, and the other dirty cops in IA will do an internal investigation where they will find no fault, the murder will get a paid vacation, and kill again.

It's obvious we need an oversight group for LEOs that isn't connected to any police or government entity. What do you suggest? I think we need some fantastic ideas to police the police. No blue line at all. No corruption possible. But we don't need the attitude displayed here. We sure as hell don't need a guilty unless you can find some miracle to save your ass type of group.

That's no better than "them".

I think it should be like jury duty, and take a group of randomly selected citizens, along with a lawyer, also randomly chosen to investigate.

They will have authority to fire suspend subpoena any member of law enforcement that does not comply fully, as well as recommend charges for obstruction of Justice, for the duration of the investigation.

The officer is immediately on unpaid leave pending the results.

If he is cleared, and only if he is cleared of all wrong doing, the officer receives full reimbursement of his pay during the investigation.

If he is found at fault but not criminally, his unpaid suspension is his punishment.

If the officer is at fault, it is double the standard punishment, and they are no longer off the hook for punitive damages like they are now.

No more free passes, where the tax payers pay all the money when police mess up.

I believe, these acts are caused by a full lack of any accountability for the police, if they were actually held accountable, they would think twice before perpetrating these acts.