The guy has a gun in the car. The cop shot the driver 4-5 times. There is something missing between those two comments. And you are criticizing me for not following along your conversation previously. Can you not see that there are a few acts that you fail to offer? See my prior comment about stopping a vehicle.
Two officers shot
- Thread starter PriddyBoy
- Start date
Before you get so damned direct think. The only reference I made to Minn was the distance between the two instances. I don't give a *** about what happened a thousand miles away, there is no justification to use that to explain what happened in Dallas. Can I not make a case that the two actions were not directly related? Don't go too far from what I was saying to exercise your right to burst my chops. Not necessary. Please. Thanks.
Right now we have a verbal account from the girlfriend about what happened. I don't know if there is video of the events that led up to the shooting. I'm not ready to say the cop should be charged, but all indications seem to be that he was pretty quick on the trigger. He only knew there was a gun in the car because the driver, a person with a concealed carry permit, told him there was a gun in the car. There is nothing to indicate that he saw a gun in the car or that anyone produced the gun. There was video starting after the shooting, video shot from inside the car. At no point in that video did I see a gun other than the officer's.
I'll add that it isn't like concealed carry permits are a rarity. I think it's important to inform the officer that the gun is in the car. It's not a legal requirement to do that in Minnesota though. My point is that this isn't likely the first time this officer pulled someone over and was told that there was a gun in the car. Telling an officer that shouldn't be a death sentence.
My son was "locked up" and his car was towed and impounded. His crime.......he was stopped coming home from school because a girl had altered his license plate by using mascara to change the C in SCX to an E.
Again, I never tried to justify the actions of the shooters in Dallas. It sounds as if the shooter who was killed used police shootings of African Americans as his reasoning for killing white cops. He may have tried to justify his actions based on the events of the previous couple of days, but I don't agree that he was justified in his actions. I don't know if the other shooter(s) were of the same mindset as the one who was killed, although it seems very likely that they were. I don't think they were justified either. I don't think I can make that any clearer.
Do you have evidence that there were prior stops where the officer shot someone? That evidence should not be difficult to get. Two survivors watched the incidence - girlfriend and cop. You take the girlfriend's version. Why? Cop has more experience at report writing in all probability. For some reason you seem to take the position - anti-cop. Why? Or am I wrong in remembering.
Don't know, but would assume the situation of a gun being accessible is covered in officer training. As you said, too many permits and occurrences not to be covered and most training classes are to simulate potential exposure on the street.
Are you suggesting the cop has shot every driver he has stopped over his career for having a legal firearm in the car? I hope not. Therefore what actions provoked his firing this time?
We haven't heard the cop's side yet. I'm saying that this shooting is troubling given that the driver was legally licensed to have the weapon in the car. Three survivors watched the incident, the third being the 4-year old daughter of the girlfriend. We have a video of the girlfriend's accounting of how the driver was shot, with the video continuing through her being cuffed at least. I'm reacting to the only version that has been released to this point. I'll reserve my final judgement until the whole story has been told, but I find this shooting troubling.
I didn't say there were previous shootings by this cop. I said that I suspected this wasn't the first stop he made where someone told him there was a gun in the car. The fact that this incident led to the cop firing his gun bothers me more than a little, but I'm reacting purely on my speculation on this particular point. It's possible that he had cause. I don't rule that out. I don't have evidence of it yet though.
If you would share why this particular shooting is so troubling to you, it may be a bit more meaningful to all of us. There is only one side released thus far, and you admit there may be circumstances you don't understand.
I saw a hell of release on TV this AM by the girlfriend - and her lawyer. I suspect their version could possibly be a bit slanted. I am not going to get too deeply into a discussion about what happened when only one side is being discussed.
As to the proximity between the two events, I don't need someone else to explain that to me. For that reason, I only referenced the distance between the two. I did not compare the two events as Minn was not pertinent to my position other that distance.
Hey, there's hope for you yet.....
....But I can tell you this cop DID shoot and KILL the black guy who was LEGALLY carrying in his vehicle.....
Will tell you a little story I have seen in Traffic Court. Young lady only had one head light. She challenged the judge about the responsibility of the operator. She asked if he checked to see if all lights were working properly every day. The judge said that it was his responsibility to keep his vehicle street safe when driving. That was when the exchange began. She challenging every thing she said. He telling her of her responsibility. After several minutes and the girl would not shut up, I think he charged her with contempt of court. The girl was about 17 and the next door neighbor. She knew that the judge did not inspect his car every day, but she did not know or respect the power the judge had.
I left the court before a final disposition. Hell, everybody was about to burst out laughing. He was mad enough to put anyone in jail who disrupted his court, and laughter at that time would have been disruptive. I had seen him put people in jail for less. So, I got out to let things cool. I am sure judge told your son that it was his responsibility. Could probably have gotten a lawyer and negotiated, but there are times to eat crow and move on.
I find it weird how some of you on here are quick to judge or form opinions about how Obama has "destroyed" our nation or how he is helping ISIS by not condemning them under "radical Islam".....YET.....we have cops who shoot two black men and suddenly you guys are "waiting for further evidence" before you form your opinion......hmmm.......how about that......
But that is still only one side. Both sides get to make presentation in our system. Short of cop ending it all, his side will be told. And there will always be hope for you when you can be objective about the situation.
Remember Paul Harvey? His ghost will always be there to tell us........................ .
We are not always entitled to do a comparative between two unrelated issues to make a judgement. If they are unrelated then the other issue should not be brought into the discussion to cloudy the issue and obfuscate.
Last edited:
About like you and how you are with politics, Obama, and Clinton, just to name a few?????
Yeah...how can I forget....even when the FBI says no indictment, these guys on here who are still "waiting for further evidence" to form their opinions about the two shootings (MN and LA), are saying how corrupt the government is, how the FBI is in on the conspiracy, and how Hillary is guilty.......
Everyone's view is slanted to some degree. I'm sure the cop's is slanted too. I'll say this about the girlfriend - she appeared to be WAY more calm in that situation than the cop - with her daughter in the car and her boyfriend bleeding out beside her in the front seat. She was also extremely respectful to the cop throughout the whole situation.
What troubles me is that this was as shooting of a man who was legally licensed to carry, and the only reason the officer knew of a gun was because the driver told him about his license to carry and the gun. I'm hoping that the police were wearing body cams. That would show us what the officer reacted to. That would be the ideal scenario for the investigation.
Perfect example of issuing something to the discussion to cloud the issue an obfuscate.
The discussion was about the 5 officers assignated in Dallas. To cloudy the issue, a case in Minn. is introduced for comparative even though we only have one side of that case introduced and we do not know the outcome. Now comes Benghazi being introduced totally from left field.
The side issues are entertaining, but not pertinent to the discussion about the what happened in Dallas.
MountaineerWV mentioned how some posters are quick to rush to judgment in some situations while claiming to wait until all the evidence comes out in other situations. I was simply pointing out that some posters were quick to rush to judgment in the Benghazi situation, a situation where all of us had very little information about.
Whoah, settle down there cowboy ... you're not allowed to think both of those things. Either the cop was totally wrong or the "thug" in the car was totally wrong. You have to pick a side here bub.
There are a couple of important things to note that it seems you guys have missed.
In the video, the girlfriend originally claims that the victim was "just trying to get his license and registration." She claimed it was in his wallet, which was what she said he was reaching to get. Yet, at around the 3:45 mark in the video, while the phone is on the ground, she is heard saying "he tried to tell you he was licensed to carry and he was going to take it off."
If "it" refers to his gun, which it seems to mean, it raises a very important question and possible scenario. Was he trying to take it (the gun) off like the girlfriend claimed he was going to do or was he simply going for his wallet like she originally claimed? If the former, and without the consent of the officer to do so, I can easily envision a scenario where the officer saw the victim reaching for the weapon to "take it off" as the girlfriend claimed.
Also, in the video, the girlfriend claims "we only had a little weed in the car." Possession of weed isn't an excuse for lethal force, but it does give a glimpse of character.
In the video, the girlfriend originally claims that the victim was "just trying to get his license and registration." She claimed it was in his wallet, which was what she said he was reaching to get. Yet, at around the 3:45 mark in the video, while the phone is on the ground, she is heard saying "he tried to tell you he was licensed to carry and he was going to take it off."
If "it" refers to his gun, which it seems to mean, it raises a very important question and possible scenario. Was he trying to take it (the gun) off like the girlfriend claimed he was going to do or was he simply going for his wallet like she originally claimed? If the former, and without the consent of the officer to do so, I can easily envision a scenario where the officer saw the victim reaching for the weapon to "take it off" as the girlfriend claimed.
Also, in the video, the girlfriend claims "we only had a little weed in the car." Possession of weed isn't an excuse for lethal force, but it does give a glimpse of character.
So, do you want to discuss Benghazi INSEAD OF Dallas? I am unable to make a correlation between the two or how different people approached the two.
No it doesn't. It shows poor judgment on her part to share that information but having a little weed has no bearing on your character. There are many "moraled" and professional people that take a toke every now and then.
The guy was very well liked and respected in the school and remembered which children had various food allergies and what they were.
It absolutely does reflect on their character. Possession of weed while in the presence of a young child and not caring that she very easily could end up watching mommy and daddy cuffed and arrested for it is a very poor character trait to have.
She never said "he was going to take it off" in the video. Her statement is consistent, she said numerous times he was going for his registration and ID, which was in his wallet.
He was unaware the girls had done it.....how many people check their plates when they get into their car. The police pulled him over and called in other police cars, searched the car,cuffed him and took him to the police station and said they were going to charge him with altering his tag. My wife went down and the police said they were just trying to teach him a lesson. They released him with no charge.
Buying stolen phones reflects poorly on one's character. [laughing] Btw, did you watch the video on that ****** stolen phone?
Although I'm 100% against weed, it is becoming legal in a lot of places. So, trying to use the "judgement of character" isn't going to fly with weed. Heroin, meth, well OK. But a drug that is becoming legal.....nah.
You say you aren't quick to judge.....yet the FBI has investigated and deemed Clinton was reckless but not criminal in her actions. Furthermore, our president is criticized every day for not saying "radical Islam" and people claim THIS is one of the reasons ISIS is growing. So, my point being that people (yourself included) form opinions based on their political teachings and followings. That includes race issues......
If he went to take the gun off to give it to the officer, and the officer didn't know that was his intent, I could see an officer panic and freak.
The officer, upon hearing the man was armed and licensed could have asked the men to exit the vehicle and the office would secure the firmarm.
Just a sad story either way.
I'm not so sure I'd go so far as to say that it reflects poorly on character. I thin it could be considered poor judgement though. I have no idea what the laws are in Minnesota. If it is illegal in all forms (medical and recreational), then you run the risk of getting run in for it. You could also potentially lose the concealed permit for possession - again without knowing the laws in Minnesota.
You're missing the point. Opening the chance that your young child could see mommy and daddy cuffed and put in the back of a police car is a very poor reflection on one's character. Again, here it is:
It absolutely does reflect on their character. Possession of weed while in the presence of a young child and not caring that she very easily could end up watching mommy and daddy cuffed and arrested for it is a very poor character trait to have.