George Floyd murder / Derek Chauvin guilty of murder

[The Stockport Iniesta]

You took sides when you claimed "blackwashing" of some events.

Blackwash, I haven't heard that word since the West Indies used to thrash England at Cricket.

 

[bert38]

The fact that he was a criminal is neither here nor there. He could have been a serial killer responsible for 100 murders, once he is subdued and restrained, the cop's job is done. All there is left for him to do is to transport him to the precinct. Let's just for argument sake say that George Floyd didn't die, and he just lost consciousness and woke up a while later, kneeling on a person's neck like that, after the suspect is clearly restrained and isn't resisting arrest (remember we've seen the full surveillance video from the shop, at no point does George Floyd resist any part of what the cops asked him to do) then that is still way over the top policing and needlessly overly aggressive.

On your other point I highlighted - if one absolutely has to fire a gun, what happened to shooting to wound? You've painted a picture of America that is incredibly scary. Do you genuinely believe that every time a cop does a traffic stop there is only a 25% chance the cop or the citizen makes it out of that encounter alive? Yeah sure, in the very specific scenario you mention, the cop's fear is understandable, but even then, there is a reason why a cop is a cop - they're meant to be well trained officials who are experts at deescalating and handling a firearm. The whole reason the profession is, in theory, such a well respected profession is precisely because of the dangers they face daily to protect the rest of us.

In the case of Tamir Rice for example, he was waving a toy gun around, so the cops are understandably on edge, but shooting to kill on sight is such a maddening approach. What is the point of putting a cop through all that training if they can't shoot to injure in the heat of the moment. The daily threat they face, as sympathetic as I am to that danger, does not excuse the complete lack of regard for human life in the instances that has been documented over the years.

How do you shoot to wound? In this country police are trained to shoot to stop.

 

[Vialli98]

I am not a cop, but I have federal (FBI/TSA) and state (IL State Police) firearms training.

Your question is far too broad to answer, esp as it relates to use of a deadly weapon. You wrote three or four paragraphs, but from the first few sentences, I could tell that you were not versed in the subject. It’s not my job to provide that learning. I’ve written copiously on this subject, because it’s a UK-USA divide, with many Brits not able to understand both the genesis and evolution of the gun in American society. Just as Americans can’t understand the British notion that a cup of tea helps every situation, or that it is almost an obligatory greeting, so Brits don’t understand how entrenched the gun is in American history and life. It is the SECOND amendment, coming right after free speech and before illegal search and seizure and the right to not self incriminate without bias or prejudice. It is a foundation RIGHT...and that word has SIGNIFICANT meaning to Americans. The Bill of Rights, and it’s Amendments are cornerstone, basic freedoms of being an American.

Fair enough.

It was just a question I thought you might want to answer again, since you're telling me I'm ignorant on the subject matter, cool I guess.

 

[Vialli98]

How do you shoot to wound? In this country police are trained to shoot to stop.

I don't know. Aim for the legs? Surely shoot to kill isn't the one and only option available to a cop?

 

[bert38]

I don't know. Aim for the legs? Surely shoot to kill isn't the one and only option available to a cop?

You can easily kill somebody that way-and what if you miss?

As i said in this country, its shoot to stop.

 

[Bigga]

Fair enough.

It was just a question I thought you might want to answer again, since you're telling me I'm ignorant on the subject matter, cool I guess.

He's not answering properly because 2nd Amendment is abstract in definition

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It could be interpreted a couple of ways. To own a gun in case you have to take up arms against the gov but the latter has been invoked more than the former "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed".

With "Arms" being in plural, it allows people to stock up on weapons legally with a licence.

 

[Sir peace frog]

I don't know. Aim for the legs? Surely shoot to kill isn't the one and only option available to a cop?

police will aim for the body chest area,it is a big target compare to the leg,arm ect,also if you shoot someone in the leg they can still fire their gun, having said that,i have seen a person with a gun having his hand/arm shot so that they dropped the weapon, but this was by a sniper.

 

[Bigga]

You can easily kill somebody that way-and what if you miss?

As i said in this country, its shoot to stop.

That could be anywhere, "shoot to stop".

It's just being savvy with wording.

It's "shoot to kill" in reality.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

He's not answering properly because 2nd Amendment is abstract in definition

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It could be interpreted a couple of ways. To own a gun in case you have to take up arms against the gov but the latter has been invoked more than the former "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed".

With "Arms" being in plural, it allows people to stock up on weapons legally with a licence.

This is not true. “He’s” not answering because the multi-paragraphs started from faulty premise and extrapolated from there. Shoot for the legs? Really? Shows a complete lack of understanding! The end.

Please don’t tell other people what I am and am not saying. My own words speak for themselves, without your interpretation.

As for 2A, it’s meaning is determined by SCOTUS. The end. You can proselytize until the cows come home in what YOU think it means, but it matters not. THEY DECIDE, and they try to understand, from history, what each word means. Some Constitutionalists try to place themselves in the framers position to understand what the intent was, while others see the Constitution as a “living, breathing document” that needs to evolve with the society it is meant to protect. This is one reason why SCOTUS Justices are such prized positions by the different political parties, as they have become increasingly politicized, and why “relative parity” on the court is important. This is also yet another clear reason a Biden presidency is so very important, as two of the more liberal justices want to leave (RBG & Breyer), with RBG having multiple ongoing medical issues.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

That could be anywhere, "shoot to stop".

It's just being savvy with wording.

It's "shoot to kill" in reality.

Neutralize the threat.

Sometimes people get killed by that, sometimes they don’t.