What's left out of that is that he is known to the police in the area and his prior criminal past. If a guy who has shot at a cop before is with a gun again I wouldn't trust anything he says.
Exactly, it wasn't a routine stop, these cops were "hunting".
You have to realize that a cop makes a decision in seconds.
With their overtly hostile tone it's no wonder they are now getting shot at. In fact, unless the high-ups start training these folks on how to approach different situations, I can almost guarantee that police stations will get raided (kind of what used to happen in Harlem during the 60s and 70s) if they keep harassing the population they are supposed to protect.
Personally, I love it when I hear that a cop got shot to death.
Tough.
Fucking.
Shit. Should've been a plumber.
Then it is debated in the courts with expert consultants for months before a decision is made.
Cops are rarely indicted. People just do not want to believe the obvious: That cops are just as bad as the criminals they say they are "protecting" us from.
Police are legally empowered to use deadly force when appropriate, and a 1989 Supreme Court decision concluded that an officer's use of force must be valuated through the "perspective of a reasonable officer on scene rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight."
I think there's sufficient evidence nowadays to seriously put into question the "reasonable" in an officer's perspective.
And do not bring up the "Supreme Court" into this because there's plenty of evidence too, as to how WRONG they've called it in the past. Let's just go on universal law, or do not do onto others what you wouldn't want done onto you.
