Even one of the union spokesmen said that this shooting may be questionable (apparently, for those who didn’t read the article, the cops in one car felt they had been cut off by the victim’s car, and gave him the finger as they went around him before they stopped him - however, this is the New York Times’ account).
Looking at the other shootings, I think they were all justifiable. But this shooting is probably the one that will give Bloomberg the basis for making the cops go out unarmed as British cops do. Start the body count...
Sorry, but if this driver’s hands were on the steering wheel he posed no threat. This sounds like a case of ROAD RAGE on the cops’ part. I understand their anger but if the guy PULLED OVER AND HIS HANDS WERE ON THE STEERING WHEEL, SHOOTING HIM DEAD was a bit excessive.
Really? Bloomberg does NOT dislike guns per se. He dislikes guns NOT in the hands of the police. If you think he or any other liberal gives a gnat crap about the life of some citizen compared to their beloved thugs in blue, you've been living on a different
bloomers will never do that. his liberal compartmentalization will make him say “They need guns because the criminals are armed.” he doesn’t give a sh1t unarmed civilians are terrorized by the same armed criminals, because his city doesn’t have to pay medical bills, disability and death benefits to dead and injured civilian’s families.
Yes, gunning down innocent civilians at the Empire State building for the fun of it was clearly justified. The cops needed the entertainment.
Police departments have been asking to be stripped of their guns for a long time by training for triggerhappy. The answer may be to promote widespread trained CCW and disarm the police.
Certainly send them out ON FOOT ~