You said it, not me.

explain why it is okay to shoot an UNARMED SUSPECT

I already did. You keep forgetting that you have to actually read other people's posts to have what we call a "conversation".

What, Officer Roach didn't have mace or a nightstick?

If he had his gun out and was attacked without time to do anything but react, he would and should have pulled the trigger.

that sure doesn't give ANYONE the right to shoot someone in the back.

Unwarranted assumption. I've already explained how he could easily have been bodily attacking the police officers while being consistant with the available information.

They'd rather blame the kid for running

Who's done this?

and the blacks for burning stuff down and attacking people

Well, considering that they're the ones doing it, I'd say they should be blamed, wouldn't you?

You hold a group of people down long enough, they're going to explode.

You have no evidence that anyone is being "held down". You have conjecture, theory, and a fair amount of paranoia.

Margaret Mitchell, a homeless mentally ill black woman, was shot by Los Angeles patrolmen in 1998 after she allegedly lunged at them with a screwdriver.

Again, if you've got no time but to react, that's appropriate in the situation.

Amadou Diallo was the African street vendor at whom four of New York's finest fired 41 shots after they supposedly mistook his wallet for a gun.

The one who yelled "gun" overreacted. The rest followed their training.

the victims did nothing to justify the use of deadly force.

In some cases, true, in others not.

Their real crime seems to have been being black in the presence of a cop.

*L*

Since when does attacking a police officer not constitute a crime?

Yes, because we all know you've never said the media was biased to liberals.

I already did. You keep forgetting that you have to actually read other people's posts to have what we call a "conversation".

I did read it. It's still inexcuseable. Why have a gun drawn on an unarmed suspect? A nightstick would be a better choice.

If he had his gun out and was attacked without time to do anything but react, he would and should have pulled the trigger.

So you're no longer contending Roach's finger slipped and pulled the trigger by accident?

Unwarranted assumption. I've already explained how he could easily have been bodily attacking the police officers while being consistant with the available information.

Not to my satisfaction. There are levels of responses to any situation. If Mr. Thomas had a knife, a gun would be a reasonable response. Since Mr. Thomas was unarmed, it is unreasonable. Besides, please post something backing up your claim that Mr. Thomas was attacking Officer Roach. Oh, yeah, you don't have anything, do you?

Who's done this?

First of Two, for one. Of course, people who run deserve what they get. Apparently, some aren't enlightened enough to think that a cop should only use deadly force when being fired upon. If you run from a cop, you deserve to die.

You have no evidence that anyone is being "held down". You have conjecture, theory, and a fair amount of paranoia.

The riot is evidence, Omega. Ask a black man how he feels when he walks by a car and the old white lady locks the doors. Or when they're pulled over for driving a nice car in a nice neighborhood. Pretending that Racial Profiling, or racism by Police Departments (this is the third or fourth time I've brought up the Rampart Division in this thread) don't exist is evidence of ignorance. Well, Omega, you sure are ignorant, and that line above proves it.

The one who yelled "gun" overreacted. The rest followed their training.

And the one who yelled gun should be kicked out of the department. Still gotta wonder why they all felt it so neccessary to shoot him so many times. I mean, there's overkill, and then there's overkill.

In some cases, true, in others not.

And in cases where the shooting is unjustified, do you not agree that the officer(s) doing the shooting should be held accountable? Frankly, the whole fact that the FBI is investigating this shooting makes it look bad for Officer Roach.

Since when does attacking a police officer not constitute a crime?

You didn't read that article, did you? You apparently missed the point.

------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 8.32 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with seven eps posted)
***
"Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!"
-Omega 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001
***
I wouln't say that anyone who has ceased to post every time you rant has "realized that they couldn't win" Omega. It's more like "oh, great he comes Mr. conservative frontal lobotomy boy who only hits one note over and over and over and over..."
-Jay, July 15, 2000

I have a couple of stories for you. These happend in my home town, and trust me I do know what happend

An officer is jumped by the girlfriend of a man he is arresting. Caught off balance he goes to the ground. If not for the arrival of back up the officer would likely have been severally hurt or even killed.

A man has shot a foster parent, taken his kids back, and has been having a running gun battle with police for over 30 miles. With his tires blown out he gets off the freeway and stops at a gas station. He gets out of his car and stands infront of the building with his assualt rifle. Police have him surrounded. The suspect begins to raise his weapon and is fired on by 5 officers each firing several rounds. The suspect is killed.

An officer has come on to the scene of 2 white teenagers, a boy and a girl. They have locked their keys in their car. The officer decides to pick the lock for them to help them out. As he is doing this a call over the radio in his squad car says that 2 teenagers have just escaped from the detention center. The officer doesn't hear this, but the teens do. The boy pulls out a knife and stabs the officer in the back repeated times. The 2 then flee the area and the officer dies.

------------------
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the weaponry to make the difference.

That IS cruel and awful. So it doesn't matter if a suspect doesn't fight back -- if he runs, the cop gets to execute him? Beg your fuckin' pardon? This is the US, not the Soviet Union or China where such things would be viewed as common place. The incident you describe is MURDER, and I'm really saddened that you think it is excuseable.

I think you're missing the point. The only time it's legal to use deadly force is if an officer is under attack. Now, if the suspect isn't armed and is attacking, then a nightstick or mace might be a better choice of weapon. BUT A RUNNING, UNARMED SUSPECT? Not that you apparently give a fuck. Run from a cop, get a piece of lead in yo' ass. I don't fucking think so. There's no excuse for any officer to shoot an unarmed, fleeing person, and I think it's sad and ignorant that some people on this Board think that it's okay.

As for the other examples, they're different circumstances. Someone, explain to me why it's a-okay to shoot an unarmed fleeing suspect, please?

------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 8.32 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with seven eps posted)
***
"Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!"
-Omega 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001
***
I wouln't say that anyone who has ceased to post every time you rant has "realized that they couldn't win" Omega. It's more like "oh, great he comes Mr. conservative frontal lobotomy boy who only hits one note over and over and over and over..."
-Jay, July 15, 2000

Not in the context of this discussion.

Why have a gun drawn on an unarmed suspect?

Because you don't know that he's not armed. Obviously, Jeff.

A nightstick would be a better choice.

Not if there's any chance that the suspect has a gun.

So you're no longer contending Roach's finger slipped and pulled the trigger by accident?

I am contending that it is a possibility, as it is also a possibility that the victim was attacking the officers. There are an infinite number of possibilities, and you would be foolish to discount any of them until you obtain more information.

There are levels of responses to any situation. If Mr. Thomas had a knife, a gun would be a reasonable response. Since Mr. Thomas was unarmed, it is unreasonable.

Unless, of course, the police officers did not know he was unarmed, in which case any response would be reasonable.

please post something backing up your claim that Mr. Thomas was attacking Officer Roach

Who claimed that? I simply stated it to be a possibility. You are making unwarranted assumptions. In reality, you have a plethora of possible scenarios from which to choose. You simply refuse to see any but the worst, because that's the one that justifies your flawed positions.

Me: You have no evidence that anyone is being "held down".

Jeff: The riot is evidence

No, the riot is evidence that people THINK that they are being held down, not that this is, in fact, true.

Ask a black man how he feels when he walks by a car and the old white lady locks the doors.

Oh, can't offend a black man, now can we? Did it ever occur to you that some people do this when ANYONE walks by their car? I certainly do.

And in cases where the shooting is unjustified, do you not agree that the officer(s) doing the shooting should be held accountable?

Of course. IF you can show the shooting to be unjustified.

Frankly, the whole fact that the FBI is investigating this shooting makes it look bad for Officer Roach.

...so?

The only time it's legal to use deadly force is if an officer is under attack.

Not quite. It's legal if the officer has legitimate reason to think that he, or someone else, is under threat.

Someone, explain to me why it's a-okay to shoot an unarmed fleeing suspect, please?

No one's said it was, Jeff. Read.

Well, except Rob, but then, I don't think he's serious.

No, the riot is evidence that people THINK that they are being held down, not that this is, in fact, true.

Look at the NJ Racial profiling scandal. LA PD's RAMPART problem. This recent thing. Racism exists, and it's being demonstrated by police departments. To pretend that these incidents don't exist is to ignore a cancer. These incidents also, to me at least, prove that it is, in fact, true. Certainly not to the extent it was decades ago, but not nonexistant, either.

------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 8.32 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with seven eps posted)
***
"Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!"
-Omega 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001
***
I wouln't say that anyone who has ceased to post every time you rant has "realized that they couldn't win" Omega. It's more like "oh, great he comes Mr. conservative frontal lobotomy boy who only hits one note over and over and over and over..."
-Jay, July 15, 2000

You really need to get off of the whole "A RUNNING, UNARMED SUSPECT". We know that he was unarmed, that much was proven when he was searched. As for running, when the officer shot him was he still running or did he turn on him. We don't know what happend at this point so stop acting like you do.

As for my stories they, I put them up to let you have a little glimpse at what cops deal with everyday. With their lives on the line they are going to do what they feel is necessary to make it through the day. It is easy for you to sit back and point at all the wrongs, but until you have actually experience the fear that comes with being a cop you really can't say much.

We have explained in as many different ways as possible the situations that could have caused the officer to shoot the suspect. Since you refuse to listen to them stop asking the question, cause you will never get an answer.

------------------
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the weaponry to make the difference.

That's what you said. How is the cop NOT going to win if he doesn't shoot the suspect to prevent them from fleeing, eh? Maybe you need to think about what you type ...

Yes, you certainly provided lots of instances where cops draw their weapons when there is a legitimate threat. Believe me, I'm not the kind of guy to cry about racism when an armed cop shoots a black male holding a knife (an incident which occured a few years back at Lexington Market here).

But when there's a blatant, unjustified shooting, yeah, I wanna see the SOB cop get his sweet reward. Especially when it provokes a violent uprising from the black community!! I'm sorry if you want to ignore today's social problems, but I just can't do that. Now, all the information we have, is that Mr. Thomas was unarmed and fleeing. If you've got contrary evidence, please, share it. As it stands, Officer Roach deserves some jail time.

Now, certainly, cops are under a lot of stress. But that's still not an excuse for shooting an unarmed man (although, apparently you think it should be). I'm sorry if you feel otherwise. But I'm not as callous about life as you apparently are. Yes, I have cop friends, and yes, many of them have had to pull their guns on people. One shot and killed a beligerent drunk who came at him with a knife. But these are completely different situations. They all agree that shooting a suspect in the back who is running isn't just bad-police work, but criminal.

------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 8.32 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with seven eps posted)
***
"Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!"
-Omega 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001
***
I wouln't say that anyone who has ceased to post every time you rant has "realized that they couldn't win" Omega. It's more like "oh, great he comes Mr. conservative frontal lobotomy boy who only hits one note over and over and over and over..."
-Jay, July 15, 2000

I am not ignoring todays social problems. I am just sticking to the topic of your problem with the way police handle situations. I am fully aware that there is racism in this country and that blacks as well as other minorities are treated fairly poorly. I'm not disagreeing with any of that. The thing you seem to be forgetting is that cops make mistakes, why because they are human just like the rest of use.

------------------
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the weaponry to make the difference.

When a suspect runs an officer will pull out their gun, not their mace and not their nightsticks. Why because as I have already said when it comes down to it the officer is the one who needs to win.

Can come to any other conclusion that they're advocating shooting fleeing suspects.

We're not TALKING about other situations. I do recognize that cops have to take appropriate actions to end varying situations. HOWEVER I do not believe drawing a gun was the right action in THIS situation. Please read what I'm posting here, 'cuz I'm tired of saying the SAME things over, and over, and over, and over again. You're worse than Omega.

The thing you seem to be forgetting is that cops make mistakes, why because they are human just like the rest of use.

Um. Do you even read ANYTHING I've written? I DO understand this. I DO think Officer Roach made a mistake. The difference is, I think when cops make mistakes of this magnitude, they need to be punished!

------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 8.32 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with seven eps posted)
***
"Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!"
-Omega 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001
***
I wouln't say that anyone who has ceased to post every time you rant has "realized that they couldn't win" Omega. It's more like "oh, great he comes Mr. conservative frontal lobotomy boy who only hits one note over and over and over and over..."
-Jay, July 15, 2000

One of your parents has been taken into hospital for an operation. They die. The doctor comes out and says "sorry, but we made a mistake during the operation." For some reason, I can't see you saying "fair enough. You're only human."

During the "gay" threads, we've had a couple of homsexuals come forward and present their POV. Strange how everyone arguing here seems to be white.

My point on this whole matter is this.
Don't just attack the cops without fully knowing what happend. If you do it makes you no better then the rioters.

I have been reading what you are saying. You believe that from the way you see the situation that the use of the guy was excessive. If it happend that way, yes the use of a gun is excessive. I am saying that we don't know what happend and that the officer may have been given a reason to use his gun.

------------------
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the weaponry to make the difference.

Although I'm sure it is the fun questioning the validity of the methods of the Boot Camp, I was merely referring to it's flagrant act of being TV which is not good.

I can't comment on the actual Boot Camp itself, because I am not in the military. My Dad is not. My Mom is not. I am not married to military personnel (Singular and/or plural), I am not sleeping with a member of the Military, I am not surgically reconstructed into a supersoldier.

And most of all, I do not currently hold the rank of Major. I am not allowed to think of such things until that day.

------------------
"Instructed by history and reflection, Julian was persuaded that, if the diseases of the body may sometimes be cured by salutary violence, neither steel nor fire can eradicate the erroneous opinions of the mind."

-Edward Gibbons, The Decline and Fall of The Roman Empire.

That has got to be the most idiotic statement I've ever heard in my life. And I've heard a lot of stupid stuff.

Did I run into the street and start beating the crap out of a cop? No. Did I walk into police HQ, draw a machine gun, and massacre a couple desk sergeants? No.

I made the simple assertion that it is not very correct to shoot an unarmed, fleeing suspect.

Besides which, my assertion is protected by the First Ammendment. I have not caused physical harm to anyone, although it's possible I've caused emotional damage by demanding that the simple concept that police are not above the law be recongized.

There's a big difference between throwing a TV through someone's window and expressing an opinion on a BBoard.

------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 8.32 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with seven eps posted)
***
"Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!"
-Omega 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001
***
I wouln't say that anyone who has ceased to post every time you rant has "realized that they couldn't win" Omega. It's more like "oh, great he comes Mr. conservative frontal lobotomy boy who only hits one note over and over and over and over..."
-Jay, July 15, 2000

[This message has been edited by JeffKardde (edited April 16, 2001).]

Did that last sentence = Necessary?
W bashing is getting really old. And not matured old, little kid old.

------------------
"Instructed by history and reflection, Julian was persuaded that, if the diseases of the body may sometimes be cured by salutary violence, neither steel nor fire can eradicate the erroneous opinions of the mind."

-Edward Gibbons, The Decline and Fall of The Roman Empire.