Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
December 14, 2017, 03:10:37 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 9   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Cowardly Cops  (Read 8343 times)
tu_holmes
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15960


Robot


WWW
« Reply #75 on: February 11, 2013, 09:45:28 AM »

You seem to have a lot of hate.. are you not interested in dialogue or should I just move on and let you rant?

Maybe if you could explain how any of what you said explains shooting 2 women.

Basically you are validating that it was ok to shoot first and ask questions later because of heightened sense of urgency.

Yeah... That is a perfectly valid reason I'm sure.
Report to moderator   Logged
Agnostic007
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 6711



« Reply #76 on: February 11, 2013, 09:52:12 AM »

Maybe if you could explain how any of what you said explains shooting 2 women.

Basically you are validating that it was ok to shoot first and ask questions later because of heightened sense of urgency.

Yeah... That is a perfectly valid reason I'm sure.

No Tu, I was painting a picture of how it could have happened, why I could see it might happen. Nowhere did I ever ever ever say it was okay to shoot first and ask questions later. I think.... if you re-read my posts you will see that not only did I not say that.. I said it was NOT justified. 
Report to moderator   Logged
tu_holmes
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15960


Robot


WWW
« Reply #77 on: February 11, 2013, 10:05:54 AM »

No Tu, I was painting a picture of how it could have happened, why I could see it might happen. Nowhere did I ever ever ever say it was okay to shoot first and ask questions later. I think.... if you re-read my posts you will see that not only did I not say that.. I said it was NOT justified. 

Well the tonality of your email certainly implies that you are finding ways to smooth over how stupid these cops were being.
Report to moderator   Logged
Jack T. Cross
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 4098


Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)


« Reply #78 on: February 11, 2013, 10:21:17 AM »

You shouldn't get do overs on mistakes that big.   

Please explain this statement, 007.
Report to moderator   Logged

Jack T. Cross
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 4098


Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)


« Reply #79 on: February 11, 2013, 10:21:59 AM »

Is it possible to understand why, with a supposed goal that morning to preserve innocent life, the police would egregiously disregard the safety of innocent life?

I'm trying to find a way to believe that the goal was in fact to preserve innocent life, and not, simply, to kill this person.
Report to moderator   Logged

Agnostic007
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 6711



« Reply #80 on: February 11, 2013, 01:55:58 PM »

Please explain this statement, 007.

Sorry Jack, it's pretty self explanatory
Report to moderator   Logged
whork
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 6587


Getbig!


« Reply #81 on: February 11, 2013, 02:38:44 PM »

What I wrote earlier is below, addressing how I could see why it might have happened.




And now we come around to the truck-related shooting. Police have been on the lookout for Dorner's truck, a blue 2005 Nissan Titan, and are urging drivers to call 911 if they see it.
 
But around 5:15 a.m. local time, officers mistook the blue Toyota Tacoma driven by two women delivering newspapers for Dorner's truck and fired on it, the TV station reported. The truck pulled up to a house being guarded by police because that homeowner is on Dorner's hit list.
"

1st.. I don't have all the facts on this so this is just a ball park attempt at trying to paint a picture..

I heard in another report the lights were off on the vehicle as it approached. It was delivering papers... I've seen a lot of vehicles delivering papers in the early hours and they tend to drive a little erratic. In fact, one time I was parked in a residential area about 5 in the morning and I see a car weaving from side to side.... I think "Oh, its the paperman delivering papers"... as the car passes me I see a hispanic male totally drunk off his ass. I get behind him and pull him over. As I open the door to his car he just rolls out of his car onto the ground passed out cold. The point is, paper delivery people often drive like that.

So, I'm a cop sitting outside a residence that I'm guarding because some nutcase listed them on a hit list. This same dude executed some people to include a cop stopped at a traffic light. This dude ain't gonna pull up and announce himself before he opens fire on me. So it's 5am and here comes a pickup looking like the one I'm watching out for.. and the lights are off and it isn't driving like all the other vehicles.. If I wait until I see his face, man I'm dead. He has automatic weapons and I'll never win. Shit.. it's stopping at the house! This is it..

Yeah, it's fucked up they shot at a pickup that actually had 2 females in it. Yeah, we expect them not to make those mistakes because they are the police and they are supposed to be better than that. But having been in similar, not quite the exact same but similar circumstances, I can see how it can happen. Doesn't make it okay, but it's a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario a lot of the times.   


Are you allowed to shot criminals on sight with no warning?
Report to moderator   Logged
Jack T. Cross
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 4098


Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)


« Reply #82 on: February 11, 2013, 02:45:29 PM »

Sorry Jack, it's pretty self explanatory

So when you say this:

I can to a certain degree see why it happened

You mean to say how it happened.  Right?
Report to moderator   Logged

POB
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2807



« Reply #83 on: February 12, 2013, 12:24:06 AM »

there are 700,000 cops in the u.s.,i'm sure there are some bad ones,but if you read this thread you would think they're all bad  Roll Eyes

And OJ innocent, I wonder what your comment would be if the photo of the officers was different Smiley Cheesy
Report to moderator   Logged
Agnostic007
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 6711



« Reply #84 on: February 12, 2013, 07:17:09 AM »

Are you allowed to shot criminals on sight with no warning?

Scenario:

You get a call at 1:15P there are numerous reports from Getbig Highschool of a person dressed all in black with an assault rifle shooting students.

As you and 3 other units arrive on scene you see chaos, students running from the school, some bleeding badly. As you and your team enter the school, trained to go to the sound of the gunfire you round a corner and see a subject dressed all in black aiming his rifle at a group of students hunkered down in the corner. There are what appears to be dead bodies in the hallway and lots of blood.

Whork, would you announce yourself and tell him to surrender or would you, if you had a clear shot, take him out?
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 17521


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #85 on: February 12, 2013, 07:21:19 AM »

Scenario:

You get a call at 1:15P there are numerous reports from Getbig Highschool of a person dressed all in black with an assault rifle shooting students.

As you and 3 other units arrive on scene you see chaos, students running from the school, some bleeding badly. As you and your team enter the school, trained to go to the sound of the gunfire you round a corner and see a subject dressed all in black aiming his rifle at a group of students hunkered down in the corner. There are what appears to be dead bodies in the hallway and lots of blood.

Whork, would you announce yourself and tell him to surrender or would you, if you had a clear shot, take him out?

Bullshit - there were no dead bodies at the scene where those piece of shit cops shot at innocent people. 

Those criminals should be charged w attempted murder. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Agnostic007
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 6711



« Reply #86 on: February 12, 2013, 07:29:01 AM »

Bullshit - there were no dead bodies at the scene where those piece of shit cops shot at innocent people. 

Those criminals should be charged w attempted murder. 

pay attention 333333333... whork wanted to know if there was ever a time a cop could shoot someone without giving them an opportunity to give up. Yes, there are..I was giving an example
Report to moderator   Logged
whork
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 6587


Getbig!


« Reply #87 on: February 12, 2013, 03:22:36 PM »

Scenario:

You get a call at 1:15P there are numerous reports from Getbig Highschool of a person dressed all in black with an assault rifle shooting students.

As you and 3 other units arrive on scene you see chaos, students running from the school, some bleeding badly. As you and your team enter the school, trained to go to the sound of the gunfire you round a corner and see a subject dressed all in black aiming his rifle at a group of students hunkered down in the corner. There are what appears to be dead bodies in the hallway and lots of blood.

Whork, would you announce yourself and tell him to surrender or would you, if you had a clear shot, take him out?

Take the shot.

But thats not what happened here.
Report to moderator   Logged
Jack T. Cross
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 4098


Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)


« Reply #88 on: February 12, 2013, 03:40:10 PM »

Had hoped to see some follow-up, involving an explanation from LAPD, but no dice...

As far as I know, these cops are still cops.
Report to moderator   Logged

Jack T. Cross
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 4098


Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)


« Reply #89 on: February 12, 2013, 03:42:10 PM »

To be fair to 007, he was talking about something else (as he said).
Report to moderator   Logged

Jack T. Cross
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 4098


Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)


« Reply #90 on: February 12, 2013, 04:52:51 PM »

If an explanation were not given, and the individuals remained as cops, would you be upset, 007?
Report to moderator   Logged

blacken700
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 11873


Getbig!


« Reply #91 on: February 12, 2013, 06:01:45 PM »

The dramatic manhunt for a fugitive ex-LAPD cop who killed at least four people apparently ended when the rural California cabin he holed up in went up in flames, with ammunition exploding in the inferno and smoke billowing up into the mountain air.
 
Christopher Dorner, who hours earlier had killed one San Bernadino sheriff's deputy and wounded another before barricading himself in the cabin, in the San Bernadino mountains, was believed to be inside. Dorner, who vowed not to be taken alive, had been surrounded inside the cabin since early Tuesday afternoon. It was not clear who set the fire in the Big Bear community where Dorner apparently has been hiding since sometime last week.
 
It was a stunning end to a saga that gripped the nation, and had the nation's third-largest police department on tenterhooks for a week. Dorner, a former Navy man and highly trained marksman, had vowed revenge on the department he believed had wronged him - designating specific targets for death. As flames devoured the cabin, police stood by, confident that there was no escape for Dorner, and no way he could survive the blaze - assuming he had not already taken his own life. One law enforcement source told The Associated Press a single shot was heard inside the cabin before the fire broke out.
 
San Bernardino Sheriff Spokesperson Cindy Bachman told reporters that they will not enter the structure until it is safe to do so.

this is from fox so take it with a grain of salt,hope he's dead

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/02/12/fugitive-ex-cop-exchanges-fire-with-authorities-ap-source-says/#ixzz2KjyBanoq
Report to moderator   Logged
24KT
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Female
Posts: 24470


Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244


WWW
« Reply #92 on: February 13, 2013, 01:11:10 AM »

Can you imagine the pandemonium that will break out if they go in after the fire burns itself out, and they don't find a body? ...Or if upon retrieving a dead body from the cabin, it is determined to NOT be Dorner?
Report to moderator   Logged

w
Agnostic007
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 6711



« Reply #93 on: February 13, 2013, 07:44:50 AM »

Take the shot.

But thats not what happened here.

agreed
You asked, are you allowed to shoot criminals on sight without warning. The answer is yes, in some cases. Obviously what happened on that street wasn't one of them. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Agnostic007
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 6711



« Reply #94 on: February 13, 2013, 07:56:06 AM »

If an explanation were not given, and the individuals remained as cops, would you be upset, 007?

Jack, yes but this is what happens at least at my dept. In every police involved shooting once the shooting is done and the scene secured, calls are made to a special investigations unit, a shooting team comprised of various ranks and backgrounds, an internal affairs unit, and the area commander. The SIU will investigate the scene focusing on criminal violations. The I.A. unit will investigate focusing on Dept Policy Violations, the shooting team will work in conjunction with both units to determine if the shoot falls within state and local guidelines. Then a Grand Jury will get involved to determine to bill or no bill the officers involved based on the evidence. These investigations usually take a couple months to complete. Grand Jury can be a lot longer. Diagrams are done, CAD reproductions are done and the officers are required to participate in recreations that are video taped.

On occasion civilian organizations will demand the FBI do an investigation as well.  So the head honchos are always reluctant to talk about specifics before the investigations are complete because they don't want egg on their face if their perception or early indicators of what happen turn out to be wrong later. They will speak in generalities for the most part. We had a chief at one time who's policy was to never speak to the media about an ongoing investigation. This was stupid because by the time 6 months had passed, the media and citizens who only had the media fodder to play with, had already done so much damage that when the facts came out, it made little difference. The Chief should say "This is an ongoing investigation, but there is indication that ______ may have happened. This may not be born out in the investigation but that's what we're looking at now.

 

 
Report to moderator   Logged
Jack T. Cross
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 4098


Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)


« Reply #95 on: February 13, 2013, 08:13:42 AM »

Jack, yes but this is what happens at least at my dept. In every police involved shooting once the shooting is done and the scene secured, calls are made to a special investigations unit, a shooting team comprised of various ranks and backgrounds, an internal affairs unit, and the area commander. The SIU will investigate the scene focusing on criminal violations. The I.A. unit will investigate focusing on Dept Policy Violations, the shooting team will work in conjunction with both units to determine if the shoot falls within state and local guidelines. Then a Grand Jury will get involved to determine to bill or no bill the officers involved based on the evidence. These investigations usually take a couple months to complete. Grand Jury can be a lot longer. Diagrams are done, CAD reproductions are done and the officers are required to participate in recreations that are video taped.

On occasion civilian organizations will demand the FBI do an investigation as well.  So the head honchos are always reluctant to talk about specifics before the investigations are complete because they don't want egg on their face if their perception or early indicators of what happen turn out to be wrong later. They will speak in generalities for the most part. We had a chief at one time who's policy was to never speak to the media about an ongoing investigation. This was stupid because by the time 6 months had passed, the media and citizens who only had the media fodder to play with, had already done so much damage that when the facts came out, it made little difference. The Chief should say "This is an ongoing investigation, but there is indication that ______ may have happened. This may not be born out in the investigation but that's what we're looking at now.

Can you envision a scenario that would absolve these individuals?
Report to moderator   Logged

Jack T. Cross
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 4098


Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)


« Reply #96 on: February 13, 2013, 08:19:11 AM »

Can you imagine the pandemonium that will break out if they go in after the fire burns itself out, and they don't find a body? ...Or if upon retrieving a dead body from the cabin, it is determined to NOT be Dorner?

I have gotten to the point where the media has become absolutely, positively unreliable to me in any way.  I wouldn't trust a single further word about this issue or any other.
Report to moderator   Logged

Archer77
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 14180

Team Shizzo


« Reply #97 on: February 13, 2013, 08:27:17 AM »

I have gotten to the point where the media has become absolutely, positively unreliable to me in any way.  I wouldn't trust a single further word about this issue or any other.

I couldn't agree more.  They knowingly make shit up or present information they know is inaccurate in order to keep people watching.  This is one of the main reason conspiracy theories flourish.
Report to moderator   Logged

A
Jack T. Cross
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 4098


Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)


« Reply #98 on: February 13, 2013, 09:59:52 AM »

I couldn't agree more.  They knowingly make shit up or present information they know is inaccurate in order to keep people watching.  This is one of the main reason conspiracy theories flourish.

As I say, there's definitely "something" about the media.  I'd love to know what it is.
Report to moderator   Logged

Skip8282
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 7004



« Reply #99 on: February 13, 2013, 03:23:07 PM »

The dramatic manhunt for a fugitive ex-LAPD cop who killed at least four people apparently ended when the rural California cabin he holed up in went up in flames, with ammunition exploding in the inferno and smoke billowing up into the mountain air.
 
Christopher Dorner, who hours earlier had killed one San Bernadino sheriff's deputy and wounded another before barricading himself in the cabin, in the San Bernadino mountains, was believed to be inside. Dorner, who vowed not to be taken alive, had been surrounded inside the cabin since early Tuesday afternoon. It was not clear who set the fire in the Big Bear community where Dorner apparently has been hiding since sometime last week.
 
It was a stunning end to a saga that gripped the nation, and had the nation's third-largest police department on tenterhooks for a week. Dorner, a former Navy man and highly trained marksman, had vowed revenge on the department he believed had wronged him - designating specific targets for death. As flames devoured the cabin, police stood by, confident that there was no escape for Dorner, and no way he could survive the blaze - assuming he had not already taken his own life. One law enforcement source told The Associated Press a single shot was heard inside the cabin before the fire broke out.
 
San Bernardino Sheriff Spokesperson Cindy Bachman told reporters that they will not enter the structure until it is safe to do so.

this is from fox so take it with a grain of salt,hope he's dead

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/02/12/fugitive-ex-cop-exchanges-fire-with-authorities-ap-source-says/#ixzz2KjyBanoq





He gave em every reason to take him dead and that's what they did.

And jumping to another jurisdiction I think just further mitigates the conspiracy angle.

Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 9   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!