Since they blew up a murderer, everyone is OK with...Without Due Process..no trial, no jury. How about when the line gets blurred, and its a “alleged suspect” next time, and they turn out to be innocent, but dead. What happens to the Constitution here? Are we OK with breaking the Constitution, when its someone we don’t like? This is going to be a whole can of worms within a few years, just like the drones. Someday they will turn them on us.....No witnesses.
“Someday they will turn them on us”
Without a doubt!
Allow the libs to out vote us, and we will go down the same road is Zimbabwe and South Africa.
I have no problem with killing an active murderer mid-crime.
Police sniper is preferable for positive ID at moment of strike though.
Are you for real regarding the killing of Johnson by police in contact? If he had said “uncle” and the still shot/knifed/blew up or drowned him, then I get your meaning. Not before; he was a lethal threat to anyone who appears in his line of fire. Sorry, THAT IS due process in this case and any like it.
This is an excellent point.
What many people aren't realizing is that this action (send in a robot-bomb) was not a police action
— it was a military action. The increasingly disturbing attitude, equipment, and training of police officers is bearing fruit now.
We are becoming a nation occupied by a hostile military force known as law enforcement
, as the last vestiges of peace officer
are shed we can look forward to expediency-through-violence and outright hostility/confrontation from the police.
Dave, he refused to surrender for six hours. How long do you wait? He said he had explosives, do you wait until he deploys those and makes an escape attempt? He had already shot twelve officers and two citizens, at what point do we say we will not risk another persons life for due process?
He made it very clear he was going to keep killing if he had the chance.
The Constitution is not some shield that proven killers get to hide behind, it is not a suicide pact that the innocent have to employ so a mass murderer gets his day court.
The neutralized him without anyone else being killed and I am thankful for that.
Are you our resident ACLU lawyer?
Dave once they decide to kill a perp what difference does it make? Cross bow, LaPua .338 or a pound of C-4. You know what I mean Vern?
...and if he had been shot and killed? What is your objection?
“”””Since they blew up a murderer, everyone is OK with...Without Due Process..no trial, no jury.””””
The guy was actively shooting at cops. They fired back with the weapons they had. He lost. Bummer.
I share your concerns.
Robots. Drones. Both problematic.
However in this case, I would say it was an active shooter situation. If the police were trading gunfire with him, I wouldn’t object if he got shot. So how is this different from trading gunfire? I’m not saying it is or is not; I’m asking because I don’t know the details of the situation and I am still trying to form a fact-based opinion rather than a knee-jerk opinion based on superficial information (like whether I sympathized with one side or the other).
Your argument is the same as the one used anti-gun crowd. And it is ludicrous. The shooter was not going to give up.
So we fried him. Good decision.
< archie bunker voice > Would youse be happy if they used a claymore little girl? < / archie bunker voice >