On what are you basing that assertion?
I stole it from my sister. She found out about it later but didn’t really care.
So, she’s the poser who bought it? 
Was he at least winning?
What really sucks in all this is that the spokesman felt it necessary to “assuage the Hispanic community,” if in fact that is the case,and if in fact the suspect had already killed a cop and was threatening to kill a civilian. Who the fuck cares where he came from, or what his immigration status was? This was a hostage situation. He had killed and was going to kill again. There is no time to worry about political niceties when shit like that is going down.
I don’t know about the paper that carries The Straight Dope by you, but around here the Chicago Reader is already free.
I don’t know anything about this case (which, of course, does not prevent me from commenting on it) but I used to know a guy whose ex-wife was daughter of a one-time Phoenix police chief (tenuous enough for ya?) who told my friend that their unwritten policy when dealing with biker gangs was to shoot first and, if they got around to it, ask questions later. As a person who is more likely to be the carjackee than the carjacker, it’s nice to see they’ve extended that policy to include murderers who are aiming shotguns at citizens.
Bryan, what I find about that quote is that Gen Hillier says, “and our job is to be able to kill people,” not the blunter, “to kill people,” leaving the option open. Canadian forces have demonstrated many times that they are uncommonly capable of exercising that option, but prefer to not to if they don’t have to.
One bit of language that gets garbled is that the cops have to say things like 'Suspect" and “Alleged” all of the time, even if the guy is now dead.
“We killed the alleged suspected car jacker when he allegedly pointed a gun at someone. That is what we do, we shoot people who point guns in a threatening manner after they have allegedly made themselves suspects by shooting a fellow police officer.”
Cleaning up your language IS part of the job description, but we all can guess that the first mental draft was more like…
“We shot the cop killer, and we are happy he made it easy on us by pointing the gun at someone else. Since he is dead, we saved the city a lot of cash in a trial. Oh, and we would have happily killed the cop killer regardless of race or immigration status.”
On that fact that this being the Dope, when you make a questionable statement such you have, you’ll instantly have 100 people all looking for cites to prove you wrong.
Well, when I see five weirdos dressed in togas, stabbing a man in the middle of the park in front of a full view of 100 people, I shoot the bastards, that’s my policy.
Yet he didn’t say “our job is to kill people”, he said “our job is to be able to kill people.” Subtle difference.
The former is a bit more blood thirsty. “We kill” isn’t quite the same as “we prepare to kill.”
Although I guess it doesn’t mean much in the end. It wouldn’t actually surprise me if I cop, who as had a long day saying the same stuff over and over again misspoke. Shit happens. A “we stop the suspects” can morph into “we kill the suspects” easily enough when you are talking about suspects getting shot, police getting killed, innocent bystanders almost getting shot and killled…
He’s probably been talking half the day and flubbed a statement grandly. If anyone else caught it, I’m sure there would be an official clarification, but it sounds like teh soundbite wasn’t even worth it.
Hard to say when the enemy is invisible to ordinary folks like me. He had his moves down, and was delivering a steady diatribe at his opponents, which is why, perhaps, the other folks walking down Chestnut Street afforded him a wide berth.
I can’t find anything remotely resembling that quote…it certainly hasn’t been in the papers, and believe me, if such a quote happened, in Phoenix, the local Hispanic community would be hitting the roof.
The officer is getting buried today. Sonoran Lizard King, I really, really think you misheard.
I don’t believe I made any ‘questionable’ statements. What I heard disturbed me. When I couldn’t cite my TV, I was exiled to cuckooland.
I don’t need to be a weatherman to know Which way the wind blows.
Rest in Peace, Officer Erfle, I salute you for your service.
Good day, all.
No, what you thought you heard disturbed you. As well it should. However, since no one, including you, has been able to find any evidence that what you thought was said was, in fact, actually said then what does that suggest to you? To me, it suggests you misheard.
Sorry dude, we need a cite. If he actually said that, you should be able to find one. *Since you have not, I have to assume he didn’t say that and you misheard.
- Try Google News.