If this dangerous, selfish, moron wanted to speak to a judge or answer a warrant, he was granted the opportunity. All he had to do was obey the deputy and he would have had an opportunity to be heard by a judge.
Instead he obviously had the same ego that you have and believed that laws do not apply to him. He endangered his daughters and community because he didn’t have to follow the same laws that the rest of us do.
You have some sort of freakish Occupy Wall Street hatred for law enforcement- more power to you. Crank up the ham radio and enjoy your survival rations. I instead will live on earth.
Don’t bother responding. I’m done with your ignorance.
>All he had to do was obey the deputy and he would have had an opportunity to be heard by a judge.
Nothing in the story indicates that was the case. All we really have is a sequence of events, as told by the deputy:
1) There was a crash,
2) There was an unidentified male walking back to the vehicle,
3) There was a command to stop,
4) There was a shot fired.
At first the statement was that the officer was in fear for his own life, then the story changed to in fear for the safety of the children; granted the two may not be mutually exclusive... but only the first case (belief his own safety was immediately imperiled) offers any measure of the justification of the use of lethal force... except that the man was LEAVING.
Now, you may not have heard but generally the law takes a VERY dim view of non-LEOs who shoot someone who is retreating.
>If this dangerous, selfish, moron wanted to speak to a judge or answer a warrant, he was granted the opportunity.
Why do you speak so much ill of the dead; most especially attributing to him character traits that seem so at-odds with everything else reported about his character?
Did you know him?
Furthermore, I ask, WHEN was he granted the opportunity? (I don’t believe there was near enough time for him to do so between the crash and being shot.)
Or, did you perhaps mean to say “He would have been granted the opportunity”?
>Instead he obviously had the same ego that you have and believed that laws do not apply to him.
Where have I said that the laws do not apply to me? Or to him? WHERE?
>He endangered his daughters and community because he didn’t have to follow the same laws that the rest of us do.
Which laws was he disobeying? More importantly, weren’t his children put in more danger being in front of the deputy’s line of fire than by their father’s minor fender-bender?
>You have some sort of freakish Occupy Wall Street hatred for law enforcement- more power to you.
I asked you before: WHAT is it that makes you think I’m a cop-hater?
Seriously; I want to know.