This will be found? Without audio? With obvious proof that there was no medical attention there? Without an autopsy?
Ad populum is a fallacy. As so many others have projected their own wants on the situation, without video from the front, and, audio.
He may just as well have been simply reaching for his wound. Further, with 3 weapons found in his truck, he may actually have been unarmed...and a weapon conveniently found on him later or simply stated to have existed.
His hands were up. UP. They shot him anyway. They murdered this man and intended to in the first place. It’s why they even had someone in the trees.
They shot him in the back.
You go ahead and defend the shoot. You also defended the decision against the Hammonds: the last ranch standing out there-perhaps to be mined for uranium to enrich H3ll, Wyden, and the Governor’s pockets-or even 0bama’s “flexibility.”
You just described the Michael Brown case. Evidence later determined that the shooting was justified. Wait for all the evidence to come out in this one as well.
He may just as well have been simply reaching for his wound. He may just as well have been simply reaching for his wound. Further, with 3 weapons found in his truck, he may actually have been unarmed...and a weapon conveniently found on him later or simply stated to have existed.and a weapon conveniently found on him later or simply stated to have existed.
Tamir Rice may have just wanted to show police it was a toy. John Crawford may just wanted to display that it was a BB gun. Both were shot when they made what the police thought was a threatening move. Both shootings were determined to be justified.
He may just as well have been simply reaching for his wound. Further, with 3 weapons found in his truck, he may actually have been unarmed...and a weapon conveniently found on him later or simply stated to have existed.
Do you have any idea how many unarmed citizens have been shot and killed by police who later said they thought that the victim was armed? A bunch. And how many of those were ruled to be justified? The vast majority of them. These days police only have to suspect you might possibly have a weapon and could conceivable be a threat to them and the shooting is ruled to be justified.
His hands were up. UP. They shot him anyway. They murdered this man and intended to in the first place. It’s why they even had someone in the trees.
The video I've seen shows him lowering his hands to his waistband when he was shot. Police saw it as a threat and acted accordingly.
You go ahead and defend the shoot.
It doesn't need me to condemn it or defend it. In the USA of today police can shoot just about anyone for the vaguest of reasons and they get away with it. Or haven't you been watching the news lately?