HE WAS ARMED WITH A KNIFE! THEY ALREADY TASED HIM! Anyone of us would have died in this exact scenario.
Jacob Blake has done this before
- Thread starter herkyhawk00
- Start date
I've seen too many people claim George Floyd caused his own death.
I believe they did taze him and had him down, but he got up from that. If they didn't, I agree that should be done before shooting. Or why not taze him again? I don't know. I don't think simply tackling him was necessarily an easy option. And, again, I wonder what impact the kids in the car had on the decision.
I'm not ready to convict or acquit the police in this one yet.
People are so quick to judge when your own life is not in danger. Nobody knows what was in the car. I am not assuming anything. The cops had shown incredible restraint up to the point the guy goes to the car and my understanding is that the guy was reaching for something. The guy was previously arrested for guns and ammunition in his car. It is not a terrible assumption that it could have been possible the guy had a gun on his seat. You are correct on one thing, there are too many unknowns. Therefore, it would be best to wait until more information comes out before jumping on the bandwagon that cops are just out to kill black people.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,193
- 190,735
- 113
Here is our fundamental difference of opinion- a cop SHOULD - one might argue MUST - be willing to put their lives in danger in order to protect and serve the citizenry and again, constitutionally, this INCLUDES crime suspects. It is wholly irrelevant if I - Joe Blow Citizen - am willing to do so or not.
This means, yeah, a couple cops may need to risk serious injury or death to unarm a threat with a knife on the scene without resorting to lethal force. Some cops will be hurt, some may be killed. It used to be that that was considered a legitimate downside of having a job in law enforcement. If you aren’t willing to live with that risk and think every cop’s most important job is to make it home safely, then I argue you are in the wrong line of work.
And for the record, I do not view this particular situation as racially motivated. I view it as poor police work. That said, in the current climate, that is a terrible issue to have when responding to incidents in primarily black neighborhoods.
Except no cop SHOULD or MUST use life threatening measures as their first options. Shooting this guy in the back while he was walking in front of the car would be far worse than what they did. Trying to tackle a guy with a knife as a first response instead of trying to get them to comply by threatening lethal force would be foolish.
It may very well turn out that these cops were derelict in their duties. As yet, I've not seen enough evidence to convince me of that.
You are wrong that a cop needs to risk death in order to unarm a person without resorting to lethal force. A cop is not required to do so and shouldn't be. A cop is allowed to defend himself and others from harm just like you are.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,193
- 190,735
- 113
They used to be and they should be again. That is my position and you will not dissuade me.
Man you are like the Joe Biden of HROT. Every opinion you have is wrong.
They should have put their own lives at risk by trying to take down a man with a knife? Whatever bro. You know damn well there is zero chance you'd do that were you them.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,193
- 190,735
- 113
Yes they should. That is the job. Why do you support the pussification of law enforcement?
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,193
- 190,735
- 113
Several times, actually. Floods, tornadoes, fires, riots. And without a gun even!
You have completely lost your mind. This is even crazy for 2020 bizarro logic. Perhaps it’s time to sit this one out.
Im ok with them shooting him. Just based on what I have seen in the videos and nothing else. If you add a knife into the story even more so.
He evaded arrest, did not comply to a lawful order to stop, reached into a car while cops had guns drawn. I know if I did that Id expect to be shot.
It sucks that his actions led to this outcome. It really does. I feel for his children that their dad had such awful judgment. Same with Rayshard Brooks.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,193
- 190,735
- 113
How old are you? I’m almost 50. Know tons of family members and others that were cops in the 60s, 70s and 80s. This notion that police should never be in harms way or face any risk is very, very new. Probably late 90s at the oldest.
So no, not insane and not bizzaro.
Call it nostalgic for a better time when so many cops weren’t afraid to put themselves on the line for public safety.
The public cannot expect that police put their own lives at risk when those officers lives are threatened by a criminal.
Now, if another citizen is being threatened, I agree. It is the officers duty to put their lives at risk to protect and serve the public as they say. You are inaccurately conflating the two scenarios.
You're right that a cop does not "need" to risk death. But if you're a cop, isn't the possibility of violence you should have to accept everyday you're on the job. And yeah, had I been on the scene, i'd have gotten the heck out of dodge - I'm not a violent person.
You've brought up his criminal history multiple times - Question, did the cops know this at the time? If not, then that's totally irrelevant to this conversation.
My criticism of law enforcement is primarily based on the idea that it feels like they have the reputation (somewhat deserved) of resorting to potentially lethal force too early in these situations. I've seen nothing in this video that indicates that guy needed to be shot 7 times in order to be put down.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,193
- 190,735
- 113
Suspected criminal. Under the United States Constitution, all suspects are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. It is not within an officer’s role to determine guilt or innocence or deliver a sentence.
Don’t like the rules? Don’t play the game.
Just being there, they’re putting their lives at risk. No need for them to go recklessly into any situation you so you can feel a little nostalgia.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,193
- 190,735
- 113
We will mark you down as another in favor of the pussification of policing in America.
Why though? He wasn't approaching any of the cops head-on, there's no reason to think an attack was imminent - at least until he got to the car door and MAYBE was reaching for another weapon.
Your bar on the what constitutes acceptable circumstances for the use of force seems to be far lower than mine.
If that means innocent people go home to their families, go right ahead. Can’t imagine I’m alone on this one.
Restrained? Seems like they were “restrained” right up to the point they shot him in the back.
No reason three cops can’t take one guy down.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,193
- 190,735
- 113
Which is why he wasn’t shot until he opened the door and reached for something.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,193
- 190,735
- 113
You don’t support the Constitution of the United States? Sorry my patriotism offends you.
Oh come on man, now you're just being ridiculous. The cops aren't failing to do their jobs bc a pos perp refuses to comply and is unable to be subdued.
I'm sorry, I can't justify shooting someone because they MIGHT be reaching for a gun. We've seen far too many instances where the cops were wrong in that scenario.
I wish I knew what was going thru this guy's head (aside from the electricity from the Taser).
You really don't have an issue with the cops shooting this guy? We'll just have to agree to disagree I guess.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,193
- 190,735
- 113
They are failures. Three cops couldn’t handle 1 guy and resorted to shooting him in the back. That is total and pathetic failure.
Good fair post. But you’re right we will probably have to agree to disagree but that’s all good.
Has anyone in authority ever said why he was being arrested? Who called the police, and why? It has been said by relatives that two women were fighting. Also been said by them that he broke up that fight. When he drove up were the kids in the car? If there was a gun in the car, where was it.? If if was on the seat, as has been implied then he would be guilty of negligence as far as danger to the kids (can't remember the wording of the law on that).
so much has not been told. But why do police not get trained to shoot, not to kill, but to keep possible perps from doing something. If he were carrying a knife, getting shot in the arm or the foot would have prevented using it. Are police such bad shots that they can't do that? I will say, shooting someone in the back while getting into a car(front seat) does help keep anyone else from getting shot, even those kids, if they were ALL in the back seat. And, gee, maybe they can get him for not having the kids in seat belts or car seats.
WTF? Police are trained to stop a threat. Not shoot to kill, not shoot to wound or scare. Police are trained to aim center mass. Not the arms or legs or even head like you’ve been conditioned to seeing your whole life in movies.
Are police such bad shots that they can’t hit someone in the arm? Yes, to answer your question frankly. There are very few individuals in the world that are that good of shots, under that immense pressure and adrenaline that could aim for an arm and hit it. Not only that, but generally taking out one arm won’t necessarily end the threat.
If Blake wasn’t holding a knife or reaching for a weapon, it’s not going to be justified. Even if he was holding a knife, the officer must articulate they or bystanders were in imminent grave danger. Unless more verified information comes out about a weapon, according to the use of force continuum/reasonableness, current police training and tactics—the shooting was unlawful and the cop is likely going to face charges. It is for the most part immaterial, that they wrestled with Blake 10 seconds prior to the shooting as are the nature of the warrants (fleeing felon rule may apply) for his arrest. According to the law, at the precise moment Blake was no longer a grave threat, deadly force cannot be lawfully applied.
Biden and the Governor of WI are going to look really stupid. Already, the Oregon Governor is walking his stance back on protests. Poll numbers in that state are taking a dive for the Democrats.
Oh well I guess just shoot him 7 times in the back then, Probably deserved it like how old people deserve to die of C19...MAGA!
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,193
- 190,735
- 113
From the link.
"UPDATE 8/26/2020: Please note, court officials told the Racine County Eye that Mr. Blake was not convicted of any of the charges listed in this story. The charges appear to have been dismissed upon Prosecutor’s Motion. The minutes reflect that on 02-20-2018 the prosecutor moved to dismiss the case “due to witness issues and age of the case.” The reason the case is not listed in court records is because of the dismissal they appear to have met the threshold for the cases to automatically be removed from the WCCA website. "
I blame the Jacob Blake shooting on the Prosecutor who failed to uphold their duties and dismissed very serious charges against a violent and unstable individual. He simply did the same thing again and got shot for his trouble.
"UPDATE 8/26/2020: Please note, court officials told the Racine County Eye that Mr. Blake was not convicted of any of the charges listed in this story. The charges appear to have been dismissed upon Prosecutor’s Motion. The minutes reflect that on 02-20-2018 the prosecutor moved to dismiss the case “due to witness issues and age of the case.” The reason the case is not listed in court records is because of the dismissal they appear to have met the threshold for the cases to automatically be removed from the WCCA website. "
I blame the Jacob Blake shooting on the Prosecutor who failed to uphold their duties and dismissed very serious charges against a violent and unstable individual. He simply did the same thing again and got shot for his trouble.
Latest posts
-
-
-
Based on Recent Intel: Who would you rather land out of the portal?- Latest: BigAssTurkeyLeg
-
-