South Carolina Officer Is Charged With Murder of Walter Scott

Typical apologist BS. YES, WE KNOW HE USED THE TASER. Sheesh it's like talking to a wall here. WE ALSO KNOW HE CLAIMED THE GUY WAS GOING FOR THE TASER, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY BS IF HE USED IT ON HIM.

Your willful ignorance of anything outside the thin blue line narrative is again, duly noted.

 

Why is that BS, you assume TASER's are 100%? And we see the TASER gun go flying in the air just as they come into frame in the first video. On the second we hear it going off after the officer warns him TASER TASER TASER.

Not the actions of an officer who is just out to murder someone is it?

Really, and of what am I ignorant exactly?

 

You said you 'lost rights'. My contention is that the govt has been peeping into our privacy since at least LBJ and possibly starting with FDR and WWII? Would you not agree?

Ignore those you dislike whether they be religious or otherwise. Now how's that for exercising your freedom?

 

Would you have the same patience had it been a black guy shooting a cop on video in the same manner? I didn't think so. So tell me what mitigates some pig popping a guy in the back 8 times as he flees.

- - - Updated - - -

So the wife deserved to die?

 

Of course not. But what does that have to do with this story? I've said repeatedly that the guy in this story didn't deserve to die. Brown, Garner, and Martin didn't deserve to die either. But what do they all have in common? They broke the law and paid with dire consequences.

 

So who did the wife attack or resist?

 

When you break the law, you risk your life. It doesn't matter what color you are.

 

I'll put you down as being for shooting jaywalkers. Sound good?

 

Not like the NSA is doing and it is illegal for the Government to conduct general spying on citizens.

If you are OK with the NSA reading your emails ... no worries.

None of this changes the fact that his is a right that has been lost regardless of whether it is LBJ, FDR, Bush or Obama.

 

Settle down man. What part of "broke the law" are you not getting? All the people I named either resisted arrest or started fighting someone with a gun. None deserved to get shot. Thousands of people get stopped daily and comply with the police, and are able to carry on about their ways, including jaywalkers. It's the action you take AFTER breaking the law.

 

Of course.

But then I guess you wouldn't would you.

The number of shots does not matter, but anything the suspect said during the struggle such as "I'm going to kill the b**** for turning me in" or "I'll never let you take me alive" or the exact type of resistance he presented since he had already given the officer a reasonable suspicion he had some serious charges against him because of the flight and the fight that ensued.

 

That's not entirely accurate. A lot of people here have been saying, "if a felon is fleeing and poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others, then it is legal to shoot him/her" That is not what the Supreme Court said. They said that such a shooting did not violate the 4th Amendment. That's it. It could still be illegal under state law, and Tennessee v. Garner would have nothing to say about that.

 

Running away from the police (unless you are fleeing a violent felony) is not an offense that allows for the use of deadly force.

Please show the evidence that he took the officer's stun gun? Must not be much if they are charging the guy with murder.

News reports say that Scott had been shot by the taser, and was dragging it. I don't think that fits the defintiion of "taking the officer's stun gun."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/mayor-s...d-with-murder-in-shooting-after-traffic-stop/

 

Why would you guess that? So were you okay with the OJ verdict?

 

Take a hike man. You said law breakers could get shot man. Jaywalking is against the law man. So using your logic, jaywalkers can get shot man. So amend your statement. Do all lawbreakers deserve to get shot or those who present a danger to the cops? Weaver's wife wasn't doing anything.

- - - Updated - - -

So spying was okay until the NSA came along. Gotcha.

Damn right. I don't care about the NSA reading anything I send. I've got nothing to hide. You?

Get over it and good luck finding a country that doesn't spy on it's citizens.

 

What a crock of crap. The number of shots will definitely matter when that pig is asked why he dumped his clip into that man. And stop making alibis for a murderer. Your hero took that guy out for no reason.

 

I never said that. Back to the scummy tactic of making up stuff and attributing it to others.

This is such an uninformed argument. A sad commentary on our education system.

Individual rights and freedoms are not to protect you from Bin Laden. They are to protect you from Government and the Police.

It was not to long ago that the thought police "McCarthy" were digging up anything they could on people "suspected" of having bad thoughts.

Can you guarantee that at no time in the future our Government will not go bad ?

Can you guarantee that Police will not abuse powers of arbitrary detainment search and seizure ?

Once again .. these rights and freedoms are to protect people from the Police State. What protection do folks have if we just give up these rights because "I have nothing to hide".

How do you know you have nothing to hide from those who would do evil in the future ?

Your argument is a mixture of bad and worse.

So to leave you with a quote from Ben Franklin "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary security deserve neither liberty or security"

You must really hate the founders. All those rights and freedoms ... the heck with that you say. You feel we should just completely trust the Police and Government and let them do anything they want.

Yikes.

 

Make up my mind. You;re crying about the NSA as if spying just started with them. It didn't. Have you been whining the last 70 years or so?

My education tells me we have been spied on in one way or another for 7 decades possibly. What were you taught? That it didn't start until 911?

So just what is it that the govt and police are doing to me that has infringed on my day-to-day life?

Please cite for me any anti communist hearings since McCarthy. Thanks.

No. And? Does that justify seeing black helicopters everywhere you look? Your choice.

Some cops commit abuses everyday. And it gets dealt with, not always to the satisfaction of everyone but it gets dealt with nonetheless. I thought this was about the NSA, not the BOR.

One.....more..........time. What have you given up?

I haven't done anything that I would wish to hide from law enforcement. How about you?

Your gripe is a mixture of hysteria and mania.

 

LOL You have no material and so now you have to default to demonization of the messenger because the message makes you look silly.

Your "I have nothing to hide" argument is a joke.

 

I accept your surrender pal.

I doubt it. Let them dig as deeeeeeep as they want. Nothing to see there. I sleep well at night. Do you?

 

I am not the one happily surrendering rights and freedoms that so many fought and sacrificed life for. That would be you. Your denial of history is the basis for your argument... good for you.

 

You have yet to tell me what rights you have lost. You keep chirping about the right to privacy per the govt and I tell you that right never existed. Now, what have you lost?

 

I know he tased him...

 

Yes, if you give the officer a reasonable suspicion your are a fleeing violent felon the officer can use whatever force necessary to apprehend you or to stop you from fleeing.

So the suspect flees after he has told the officer he has no proof of ownership of the car in which he has been stopped, giving the officer reasonable suspicion he is in a stolen car, a felony. He then fights with the officer while resisting arrest, a violent felony. Does not succumb to non-lethal force, knocking the TASER out of the officers hand. And then attempts to flee again.

- - - Updated - - -

You said
"Quote Originally Posted by publican View Post
Would you have the same patience had it been a black guy shooting a cop on video in the same manner?"

I gave you my answer, what does it have to do with OJ who did not shoot a police officer.

And as I noted, you wouldn't would you.

 

Like in the Brown shooting, it doesn't matter how many shots, they are trained to empty the clip.

My "hero" having to resort to assigning emotions to me now for lack of an intelligent rebuttal? I have been quite clear this guy may end up in jail, I just don't make false assertions about it like others here.