What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Cops 2: Pay No Attention to the Rioters Behind the Curtain

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Cops 2: Pay No Attention to the Rioters Behind the Curtain

Slap Shot said:
Did you major or only minor in hyperbole? Has to be major.
Click to expand...

Something tells me you don't watch Fox Snooze. Hannity was defending the McKinney cop so insanely, it was like in his mind, once you have the magic badge, you can do no wrong.
 
Re: Cops 2: Pay No Attention to the Rioters Behind the Curtain

joecct said:
Pat channeling Mary Hopkin

http://m.townhall.com/columnists/patbuchanan/2015/06/12/black-vs-blue-in-america-n2011368
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what Pat's point is. If the newspapers didn't report these stories there would be no problem?

The black perception that law enforcement is used as a tool to keep them down is hardly something they learned from the New York Times and CNN. :p As a pundit, Pat seems to have the self-delusion that the words of pundits are somehow influential. He doesn't seem to realize that these are street movements fed by black neighborhood experience that goes back decades, and they are way, way above Pat's friends' paygrade.
 
Last edited:
Re: Cops 2: Pay No Attention to the Rioters Behind the Curtain

So they captured this guy in New York but he was unarmed and shot in the back twice. What the ****? And they're calling the cop a hero? This is no different than the guy in South Carolina. You can't shoot someone in the back because he's running away.
 
Re: Cops 2: Pay No Attention to the Rioters Behind the Curtain

dxmnkd316 said:
So they captured this guy in New York but he was unarmed and shot in the back twice. What the ****? And they're calling the cop a hero? This is no different than the guy in South Carolina. You can't shoot someone in the back because he's running away.
Click to expand...


Yeah... I'll be up nights all week thinking about the poor guy.
 
Re: Cops 2: Pay No Attention to the Rioters Behind the Curtain

I get that. But you still can't shoot someone because he's running away.
 
Re: Cops 2: Pay No Attention to the Rioters Behind the Curtain

The dude is a fugitive of the law, he broke out of prison and has been on the lamb for some time. Beyond the fact that he is already a convicted murderer (he killed a cop) the cops have no clue if he is armed or not and he is fleeing again. I have zero issue with them shooting him. This is not the same as the other cases we have seen of late because the circumstances are completely different.
 
Re: Cops 2: Pay No Attention to the Rioters Behind the Curtain

Gurtholfin said:
Apparently you can...
Click to expand...

I'm not a LOE (though we have at least one here), but if IINM you actually can shoot a fugitive running away. I guess the theory is a fugitive is by definition in the act of committing a crime.
 
Re: Cops 2: Pay No Attention to the Rioters Behind the Curtain

Kepler said:
I'm not a LOE (though we have at least one here), but if IINM you actually can shoot a fugitive running away. I guess the theory is a fugitive is by definition in the act of committing a crime.
Click to expand...

The bar exam answer is that the officer must reasonably believe they will pose a significant risk to the officer or the community at large. Typically (but not always) that means they have to be armed at a minimum.

The fact that this guy was a fugitive is some evidence of substantial risk, as was the fact that his accomplice had been armed. But the fact that the cop saw him walking along a road and couldn't have seen a weapon on him at that time (since he was ultimately unarmed) is evidence against that risk.

I wouldn't be surprised if there's a lawsuit, but I also would say good luck finding a jury in New York who'd find for the fugitive.
 
unofan said:
The bar exam answer is that the officer must reasonably believe they will pose a significant risk to the officer or the community at large. Typically (but not always) that means they have to be armed at a minimum.

The fact that this guy was a fugitive is some evidence of substantial risk, as was the fact that his accomplice had been armed. But the fact that the cop saw him walking along a road and couldn't have seen a weapon on him at that time (since he was ultimately unarmed) is evidence against that risk.

I wouldn't be surprised if there's a lawsuit, but I also would say good luck finding a jury in New York who'd find for the fugitive.
Click to expand...

You'd have good odds in some sections of NYC.
 
Re: Cops 2: Pay No Attention to the Rioters Behind the Curtain

Kepler said:
I'm not a LOE (though we have at least one here), but if IINM you actually can shoot a fugitive running away. I guess the theory is a fugitive is by definition in the act of committing a crime.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but I'm not sure simply committing a non-violent crime is sufficient to shoot someone.
 
Re: Cops 2: Pay No Attention to the Rioters Behind the Curtain

dxmnkd316 said:
Yeah, but I'm not sure simply committing a non-violent crime is sufficient to shoot someone.
Click to expand...

I guess a convicted killer would be considered a risk, whereas a convicted shoplifter or a suspected killer would not?
 
Kepler said:
I guess a convicted killer would be considered a risk, whereas a convicted shoplifter or a suspected killer would not?
Click to expand...

But he was in honor housing at the pen - that would indicate some degree of rehabilitation, wouldn't it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top