Actually you’re wrong here.
I really do have to say something if you wish to attribute it to me. Otherwise, by stating what you think I might have meant is pure conjecture and supposition. And that’s sort of weak sauce for any argument.
Reasonable people can make reasonable inferences. You might not think the guy deserved to die, but the fact that you’re more concerned with commenting on his child support issues than on the shooting itself tells us a lot about your sense of priorities.
It’s good to know that you feel discussing this guy’s child support issues is more important than talking about the fact that he was gunned down by five shots to the back. Especially in a thread specifically devoted to encounters between law enforcement and civilians.
[QUOTE=The Nation]
Let’s not “bury the lead” here.
[/QUOTE]
Firstly, it’s “lede”, not “lead”.
Secondly, starting your article by saying “let’s not bury the lede” is itself an act of burying the lede.
Thirdly, you say you’re not going to bury the lede, but then it takes you until the fourth paragraph to get to the lede, and they still don’t say what they think the police did wrong here, besides the vague insinuation that any time a black person is injured by the police it’s because RACISM.
I expect this kind of tabloid journalism from Rolling Stone, not from a magazine that actually gets taken seriously.
No, you said…
emph. mine
When in fact, if you had done your homework, you would have realized how wrong you were in your guess.
These sort of things happen when you shoot from the hip.
And yes, I commented on his missed child support. It must be relevant, as that fact certainly played a part in the case. Anything else you wish to read into that is merely conjecture and supposition on your part.
Are you able to, like, understand these “word” things and how they are used? She says, “shut the fuck up Brandon” while glancing toward the back seat. She is not addressing the constable when she says that. Fail to be a fucking moran.
You accuse me of lacking understanding, and you yourself have put in her mouth two words that she did not say.
Well, it’s a good thing the cop could just pause reality and rewind to review what she said like we can.
The job of the police should be to not escalate a difficult situation. That needs to be the position they start from, not creating hostility and ramping it up to the level of an incident. The adversarial approach seems to have become how we view their involvement in their work, which results in people like Scott fleeing in fear from the expectation that the cops will treat him like shit. Reality shows like Cops or Most Wanted that always depict escalating incidents are not helping.
The cop isn’t responsible for the escalation here. The two brats refusing to follow orders and talking out of their behinds are.
Christian musical group/family has an encounter with police that leaves one of them dead. This is another situation that the cops escalated when they should have been trying to get things calmed down in a reasonable way.
[QUOTE=Your cite]
The redactions make the document difficult to understand in parts, but it said the first Cottonwood officer who arrived at the Walmart parking lot was immediately attacked and disarmed by one of the Gavers.
[/QUOTE]
Yep. Shame on that cop for escalating the situation by letting the suspect attack him and steal his gun!
Yes. All by itself, in a post about his funeral, and in a post that made no mention whatsoever of the actual issue at the heart of the question: the fact that he was shot in the back five times while running in the opposite direction.
Even your first aid comment is not a comment on the outrage of the shooting itself; it’s a comment on the aftermath. Here’s a heads-up for you: he wouldn’t have even needed first aid if he hadn’t be SHOT FIVE TIMES IN THE BACK.
As i said: priorities.
I see, all posts must start with a sentence about outrage over the shooting otherwise that person obviously supports said shooting and has their priorities wrong. Shall we call this the mhendo rule?
No, but this is a thread about encounters between cops and civilians.
What possible contribution can a post about how this guy’s son will feel about the funeral make to the discussion? If it were an add-on to a post that actually addressed the central issues, it could simply be seen as a throwaway line, but the fact that you felt the need to make a separate post suggests that you feel this is somehow important to the topic at hand. The only possible purpose of that post is to make the victim, a guy who was shot five times in the back, look worse by reminding us of his past indiscretions.
Each post does not have to begin with outrage, but posts like yours are the message board equivalent of reminding us to properly organize the deck chairs on the Titanic. I’m not saying you’re not allowed to do it; i’m just letting you know that it tells people a lot about your sense of priorities.
Yes indeed. As I understand it, it is not easy to pull a gun out of a police holster. This suggests to me that the cop already had his gun out. What the fuck? Why is he putting himself in a dangerous situation like that? Why is he pulling his gun so early in the encounter? These officers should approach any situation with questions first, not an attitude of hostile confrontation from the get-go. It is a problem that they need to fix.
So, we’ll amend the mhendo rule to allow “throwaway lines” anywhere in the post provided the appropriate outrage line is included. Outrage line may now be located either at the beginning or the end of the post.
Shall we publish this or do you want to further modify it?
You keep pretending that’s what’s going on here.
So your earlier post was in error but you won’t admit it?
Brat-like Brandon should have obeyed his older sister, but children will be children(*) – too bad the cop couldn’t grasp that.
I can’t blame the sister for resenting the false charge of smoking weed. Or is it your claim, Smapti, that the cop wouldn’t have lied unless he already knew she was a scumbag who deserved the lie?
(* - Yes, in saner days 17-year olds might have been expected to behave almost as adults. But these days I think some of you 40- and 50-year olds act like children.)
She specifically says “Shut up, Brandon.” At around the 5 second mark she also says “You have to comply” to Brandon.
You know, I’m so glad that you chose to take this to the Pit so that this time I can call you a jackass like you deserve. In two separate threads discussing this murder, the only thing that you have found worthy of comment is the fact that the victim was a deadbeat dad. What fucking relevance can you possibly think that has to a goddamned murder? The man was shot multiple times in the fucking back! It’s the height of audacity for you to come back into this thread and play innocent. We all saw what you were doing here. So please, tell us what you really think about the victim here. You obviously have an opinion that you’re just dying to express. And if you’re too cowardly to actually speak plainly instead of hiding behind coy statements and “just asking questions”, then kindly do us all a favour and save us your inane drivel.
Jackass.