Dallas shooting!

a reply to: Shamrock6
My apology. I did not intend to take a shot at you personally---I know that you try to be fair. That's why I said I understand your need to defend police actions in view of the horror of the situation. But you must admit that the story has changed radically and different branches of law enforcement have made conflicting statements.
In this case, we have only one side---surely you agree on that point. So when anyone comes here quoting the DPD as gospel, the only side available to us----saying that they had no choice in the matter---you can understand the reluctance of some to simply accept those statements as absolute truth. If we must wait to hear both sides when the victims are speaking, then we should equally be waiting to hear both sides when the cops speak.
Personally, I'm glad the cops sent him to his reward. But to take at face value something said by an official in a press conference as the absolute truth---well, let's just say I've seen enough officials stand at a microphone and tell tall tales to make me suspicious of all of them. Perhaps the chief was saying what he had been told---I don't know since I wasn't there. That is why you haven't seen me arguing over what color anyone's clothes were or any of that stuff. The emotional side of me knows that I would have snuffed him out if possible. But I'm not a police officer and I don't think there has been a situation even similar to this one since the Dorner episode, a situation where the police were targets. My point is that the actions of the DPD in taking him down in this way simply added fuel to the raging inferno. The law of unintended consequences strikes again.
Again my apology if you thought I was attacking you. That was not my intent. I know that you do your best to be fair and I know this has put a big target on your back. My prayers are with all the cops who try to do the right thing.

a reply to: diggindirt

I can accept that we only have one side of the story, sure.

What I don't accept is the dismissal of the perpetrator's actions as playing a role in the outcome. Nor do I find stories that don't match 100% across multiple agencies and political entities to be all that bothersome. Something as simple as a detective on his cell phone on the side of the road talking to an assistant in the mayors office who's doing three different things can lead to the mayor's office having a different story in one facet than that police have.

I don't accept that, given the totality of the circumstances, there's much likelihood that the perpetrator suddenly changed his mind and wanted to surrender but dangit, DPD just wanted to off him and do it in style. The known facts of the case don't lead one, one who is being objectively reasonable, to that conclusion.

I don't dispute that there is confusion and disparities in the story, but I don't believe the evidence we DO have points to some nefarious plot to ensure the perpetrator didn't get to tell his side of the story. A lack of evidence is not, to me, evidence itself.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: andy1972

Oswald was killed by Jack Ruby and not the police.

The Dallas shooter initiated the incident that led to his own death when he refused to surrender peacefully.

Not wanting to state the obvious, but, who the Fu+* let Jack Ruby into the basement of the DPD headquarters..a pizza delivery guy? No. Someone within the DPD had to have let him in, as he wasn't a member of the press, therefore they're as directly responsible as Ruby, just because they didn't pull the trigger doesn't make them innocent.

a reply to: andy1972

Yet we have no idea how he got in let alone the fact we don't know what entrance he used. As for your assertion DPD officer let him in you seem to ignore the fact the connected municipal building also had an entrance into the DPD. Finally Oswald was killed by Jack Ruby and not the police. Ruby was taken into custody by the police, charged and was tried.

Like the Dallas shooter, Ruby chose his fate when he stopped resisting arrest after the shooting. The Dallas shooter opted to continue the attack.

Both individuals were responsible for their actions and their fates.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: andy1972

Yet we have no idea how he got in let alone the fact we don't know what entrance he used. As for your assertion DPD officer let him in you seem to ignore the fact the connected municipal building also had an entrance into the DPD. Finally Oswald was killed by Jack Ruby and not the police. Ruby was taken into custody by the police, charged and was tried.

Like the Dallas shooter, Ruby chose his fate when he stopped resisting arrest after the shooting. The Dallas shooter opted to continue the attack.

Both individuals were responsible for their actions and their fates.

Yes, and LHO was also the lone gunman on the grassy knoll and responsible for all shots.....whatever floats your boat....

a reply to: andy1972

Your the one who wanted to try and raise a failed point thats not supported. Sorry for pointing it out and bringing us back on topic.

Someone else flag this... It is at 187 which is a police code for homicide.