News conference on Thurman Blevins shooting taken over by protesters

Remember when BLM took over the stage at a Bernie Rally? When the county prosecutor was scheduled to deliver a press conference regarding why there would be no charges against the 2 Minneapolis police who fatally shot Blevins, family and community organizers disrupted him and took over the podium. It's getting ridiculous when the authorities can't even maintain decorum in government buildings. It bothers just as much that the MSM decides to give these people air time when they hijack a new conference.

www.kare11.com...

Police were called on an intoxicated man who was shooting a pistol in the air. Blevins ran when cops arrived and after a chase police shot fatally wounding him as he reached for his pistol. The video is available here - abc13.com...

I guess if you can run fast enough you don't have to obey commands from the police. If you don't shoot at them but still have a gun you aren't a threat. The twisted logic going on here is just so over the top. I have no issue with protesting when the police do wrong. It's when the police can never do right I stand on their side. Whenever I start to think it can't get any worse (the reaction to police shootings) - it does.

When was the last time any of us read something like this -- The police office shot a suspect in the arm/leg, in order to disable them.

Or stop them from running. How about a shot in the arse?

I don't remember the last time I read that. We shoot to kill, no questions asked. It seems the side effect of civilization is dehumanization.

I only saw one video of this incident, don't want to watch this again, but it did look like he was reaching for a weapon, so this is not as bad as some of the more overt assassination style videos we usually see.

But can't they have shot him in the shoulder? A leg?

They dont they are trained to to shoot center mass and eliminate the threat, this is for their safety and the general public.

originally posted by: TheLead
They dont they are trained to to shoot center mass and eliminate the threat, this is for their safety and the general public.

Yet, somehow no one feels safer, do they?

originally posted by: Kharron

originally posted by: TheLead
They dont they are trained to to shoot center mass and eliminate the threat, this is for their safety and the general public.

Yet, somehow no one feels safer, do they?

So you would feel safer with them missing the perp and hitting an innocent in the background? Because that is the most likely scenario.

a reply to: TheLead

I'll give you a real reason we shoot center mass -- survivors means lawsuits. And killings are always justified. No loose ends.

If you are in a position to have to shoot an animal or human you shoot to kill, not to wound.

a reply to: Asktheanimals

Honestly, there are enough grievances the population have with law enforcement, continually propping up bad actors as saints only hurts that reality.

originally posted by: Kharron

But can't they have shot him in the shoulder? A leg?

No. He had a gun. You shoot to "stop the threat." Shooting him in an appendage won't do that.

Yet, somehow no one feels safer, do they?

Everyone feels safer from him because he will no longer be shooting anyone.

originally posted by: Kharron
a reply to: TheLead

I'll give you a real reason we shoot center mass -- survivors means lawsuits. And killings are always justified. No loose ends.

No , the real reason is, if you pull a gun on me, im going home to my family, and thats YOUR mistake for pulling it. And I expect officers to do the same.

Virtue signal somewhere else, ill take seeing my kids in the morning over someones feigned sense of "moral superiority"

originally posted by: Kharron
a reply to: TheLead

I'll give you a real reason we shoot center mass -- survivors means lawsuits. And killings are always justified. No loose ends.

My god cry me a river.

You know what, I do feel safe. Of course, I don't flee when I'm pulled over or have attitude about it either.

a reply to: Kharron

When was the last time any of us read something like this -- The police office shot a suspect in the arm/leg, in order to disable them.

Shooting people in an area that will not incapacitate in a deadly shooting scenario with an armed thug is stupid. It is also NOT somehow safer to blow a hole through someone's thigh as oppossed to shooting them center-mass.

Please research how bullets wound.

Or stop them from running. How about a shot in the arse?

This is still deadly force. You don't shoot someone with a weapon designed to make you bleed out as a warning. This isnt a joke.

I wish people who second guess actions like this would bother to research deadly force encounters. Maybe go get some training on how to use a pistol in a fight.

Learn something about how guns and the ammunition work at all stages of operation.

Edit:

I will be happy to help in this endeavor. Legitimately. We Will never come to an understanding unless there is education this subject.

I think a member perfectly summed up BLM with his thread asserting that BLM always picks the wrong people to defend. It's almost like they do it on purpose.

a reply to: Kharron

..... Didn't do so well in anatomy did ya? You know how many major arteries run through those areas?

Despite the fact being a smaller target and more likely to miss and hit someone else.......

I wonder sometimes if people actually think things through before coming up w this stuff........

No offense of course

a reply to: Kharron

Ahhh the why don't Police shoot to wound when faced with a person armed with a gun arguement?

Usually when people pull on a gun on the Police, they are going to shoot to eliminate the threat, that means shooting to kill not wound.

C'mon now. How about don't be drunk shooting a gun then running from Police and pulling your gun?

But that's crazy talk..........

Shoot them in the leg,shoulder,arse!

Somebodies watched too many movies.

..... Didn't do so well in anatomy did ya? You know how many major arteries run through those areas?

Like the femoral artery.

originally posted by: Kharron
When was the last time any of us read something like this -- The police office shot a suspect in the arm/leg, in order to disable them.

Or stop them from running. How about a shot in the arse?

I don't remember the last time I read that. We shoot to kill, no questions asked. It seems the side effect of civilization is dehumanization.

I only saw one video of this incident, don't want to watch this again, but it did look like he was reaching for a weapon, so this is not as bad as some of the more overt assassination style videos we usually see.

But can't they have shot him in the shoulder? A leg?

when was the last time you heard the police killed a black scientist or lawyer or accountant or government official?

the perp pulled a gun.
we can't let mentalist high jack a just and innocently motivated cause.

these people discredit the real fight against the status quo or impartiality towards some minorities.

he died because he didn't want to live

I'm starting to lose count, but seems like every single time there's a big BLM protest around police killing, the suspect was either armed, combative, had just committed a crime or all of the above... And there's always video or audio confirming it.

Yet the Cops are the bad guys.

"Things aren''t supposed to make sense in Mirror-World" - Ed (The Outer Light).

a reply to: Asktheanimals

The gun was in his right hand when he was shot.

Grow up BLM.